 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Hardly anyone could disagree, but say our solution was to realign wealth distribution to make it equal, doesn't that put us in charge of other people's affairs? What authority do we have to compel any human being to do anything?
Just by participating in "the system, we are trying to control others. Maybe we don't need "a system" at all?
Freeski,
When a connection between one person and another person is involuntary the motive behind that connection is probably such that one person takes something from another person, and that type of connection works with as many number of people as are connected in that type of connection.
In other words: How do a few people get control over most everyone else? What KIND of system is at play?
Why blame all systems for the actions of a few systems?
Why blame systems at all; when only people can abuse them?
If liberty, which can include systems, is confused with legal crime (or despotism): one looks as bad, or as good, as the other, so who cares which system is used, when they both are nearly the same thing?
If you don't think that liberty can include a system, then there may be a need to refine the messages that intend to communicate that idea, beginning with a better understood definition of the word system.
If liberty does not include any systems, then how will the liberated people work together to accomplish the necessary things that are necessary in liberty such as the production of life sustaining stuff, and the avoidance of dictatorial, oppressive, criminal, systems?
Is the discovery of accurate threats to human life, and then the employment of that knowledge seeking to avoid succumbing to those threats a process that can be systematic, such as the system known as the scientific method?
When language is corrupted to a point of weakness, can there be a way to communicate effectively?