If everybody do their thing then they all get what they deserve: nature's result of each single individual's action. If some want to cooperate they should be free to do so, if some don't they should be free to not do so. As long as no one stops another from doing their will things work smoothly. If people e.g. want to be part of the Mammon scheme of capitalism, which gives the structured ability to trade globally, they should be able to do so freely, and if some people don't want to play in that sandbox but e.g. in the anarchy sandbox they should be able to do so freely. Isn't that simple and neat enough for everybody?
No! There are some people who put themselves above others in right and wrong, because the demon of Mammon has them! They are fooled into thinking that they actually own the world itself, having laid claim to things they originally snatched from everybody else who may have wanted it and who in fact had the same right to it, only they didn't want it at the moment the specific persons snatched them for their very own. That was when greed entered and wars started. The demon of Mammon already had them all in her grasp and secretly whispered to them that they needed to evolve materially (but said nothing about spiritually/philosophically), so they had to find some other way than to simply go back to when things worked out fine. That was when totalitarians entered the scene. They tried in two major ways to lay claim to what was the right idea and fought it out against each other. When the fogs of war faded and millions lay scattered in heaps of dirt, they decided finally, having found the right result by means of Darwinism (the winner must've been best prepared, so they must have had the rightestest idea), that one side was correct and the other was wrong. The only thing that resulted in was that the loosing side mounted up against the winning (because the forces were about the same inherently) so the winning side had to counter, and that was how terror balance entered the scene.
Not until the two sides had become so afraid of each other - because reports came in about the power of the other side's war machinery all the time, but at the same time, they knew practically nothing about each other - that they finally blew each other up, and only a tiny piece of humanity was left to wave a white flag, did they all realize that the best way to make things work was to live and let live, because in accepting the coexistence of the opposite side, the own side could easily help it find and point out its flaws because of its differences, and the opposite could do the same, so that both sides of the equation could meet in unity and exceed in understanding, which they realized was better than knowing, because knowing implied that claims of the unknown was best conducted by the own side and not the opposite and understanding didn't imply anything at all, other than acceptance, which they soon realized was the main factor of peace and prosperity. And so they lived happily ever after.
The end.
15 Aug 2006, 11:42 am
...there are alot of people who find thinking painful and uncomfortable..."Give me convenience or give me death"....The revolution maybe televised but everyone will be watching "Desperate Housewives"...How can we motivate people do "fight the system"when we cant even get Americans(flag waving ,Americas number one,stock car watching Americans)to get off their asses to even vote...Even the Iraq people who thought the elections were "fixed" and far from a represintitive of a full Democracy,risked their own lives to vote.Even I,who believe this countries choices of canadates(don't represent me)represent more of a Plutocracy then a true democracy....I still vote,granted,not for who I want but for the "lesser of evils"...Now,if someone as cynical,social phobic and driving phobic, can get my ass to the poles to vote....what excuss do the flag waving folks have for not voting?
