Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

"Freedom": revenge against those who want order

Still mulling over this comment someone made to me on a forum:

Quote from: Conservationist
Why would you want to limit the ability of a single community to be, say, white, Christian, straight and conservative?

They're not telling everyone what to do -- just selecting what they want to do.

Quote from: Forum Person
Because entitled assholes who are too ignorant and hateful to tolerate people who don't share their exact ancestry or sexual preference do not deserve to get what they want.

It seems to me that "freedom" is a one-way street for the individual to demand the ability to be deconstructive, or do whatever they want regardless of the cost to others, but it does not allow groups to make standards, set up culture, etc.

"Freedom" is inherently against culture and shared values.

Then again, culture and shared values are the only forces that can compete with authoritarian governments or large companies and keep them away.

Could it be "freedom" itself IS our slavery? Or rather, that it creates the disorder that enslaves us? It seems the freest societies leave behind large herds of obese brat-sheep.

The biggest problem with freedom is that most people don't even really understand what it is.  There are two foundational concepts to freedom:
1. Individual Sovereignty
2. Personal Responsibility
Philosophically, these two concepts are inseparable.  So if you lack the ability to understand or take responsibility for your actions, then you are not entitled to make your own decisions.  However, most people want to exercise 1 without being held accountable to 2.  Thus, society collapses.

You might say that because people use the surrounding group to hide from personal responsibility, another agent comes along to manage it for everyone. Control is a market that can be exploited like any other. People give up this market because it requires management, so we get big nanny government.
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

It seems to me that "freedom" is a one-way street for the individual to demand the ability to be deconstructive, or do whatever they want regardless of the cost to others, but it does not allow groups to make standards, set up culture, etc.

"Freedom" is inherently against culture and shared values.

Then again, culture and shared values are the only forces that can compete with authoritarian governments or large companies and keep them away.

Could it be "freedom" itself IS our slavery? Or rather, that it creates the disorder that enslaves us? It seems the freest societies leave behind large herds of obese brat-sheep.

I'm with you 100%. 

I wish I had more time, lately, to keep up with all the threads on the board and offer more thoughts, but I just wanted to check in and say:  thought-provoking and inspiring post.
His Majesty at the Swamp / Black Arts Lead to Everlasting Sins / Diabolical Fullmoon Mysticism / Oath of Black Blood / Privilege of Evil / Dawn of Possession / In Battle There is No Law / Thousand Swords / To Mega Therion


The democatic and socialist are thinking two-dimensional design. Depth is the missing element. Or, a 2D table array vs. a 3D cubic array.
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

I agree with pretty much everything said thusfar. I'd also add that I don't think people even really want (or need) freedom. They think they do, but when they're exposed to real freedom they're impotent and incapable of functioning. Obviously you have to consider varying meanings of freedom for various types of people, but ultimately peoples' minds are finite and they come to a place of feeling free by overcoming relatively small (in the grand scheme of things) but significant obstacles. Who knows, eventually maybe all obstacles can be overcome, but that state of freedom doesn't come from importing freedom into your life or your society, it comes from freeing your mind and life from the obstacles they are already constantly plagued with. The internet is a perfect example of a freedom that people think they want, but certainly don't need. Most people treat the internet like a playground for overloading on stimuli, and the result is that instead of the quality of the stimuli being most important (good music, talented people, intelligent people, good movies), the quantity of the stimuli becomes the focus (how much music, how cheap, how many monkeys spinning how many plates). In reality this becomes life threatening, like the consequences of global warming, whereas I think for all of us our core value systems are based on selectivity by necessity, the things we care about and pay attention to are simply better to us than any other option. Unfortunately there are a lot of people (politicians, corporations, popular media) that profit by deceiving us of this simple fact; we already know what we fucking want, we don't need you to tell us what that is or offer us an unlimited amount of it and/or versions of it. In this case opting for "freedom" really is enslavement.

Most people seem to think freedom means everyone gets the same things, but since people need different things, in order to enforce this you would need to be extremely systematic.  It seems the more "freedom" one gets, the more fascist the state has to become. 


By definition, you are completely free already, and always were.  Free to make your own choices and free to face consequences.  A free ticket to get the same as everyone else is as far from free as you can get, that is, if someone has to enforce the validity of that ticket.

Most people seem to think freedom means everyone gets the same things, but since people need different things, in order to enforce this you would need to be extremely systematic.  It seems the more "freedom" one gets, the more fascist the state has to become. 


By definition, you are completely free already, and always were.  Free to make you own choices and free to face to consequences. 

Reminds me of:
Quote
"Have courage to use your own reason! -that is the motto of enlightenment"
                                                                                                                        ~Kant



A free ticket to get the same as everyone else is as far from free as you can get, that is, if someone has to enforce the validity of that ticket.

The best illustration of this is the Dutch university placement system. University = by its nature elitist, requirements must be met to gain entry. To pretend this isn't the case, places are dished out via a lottery system, so that your elite placement is wholly down to chance. "Surely that must be better for everyone?" they argue.

The "Left-Right" spectrum is only part of the political story.

There's also an "Authoritarian-Anarchist" spectrum, making political tendencies a point on a plane and not just a point along a spectrum.

A lot of people who I might otherwise agree with 100% are extremely authoritarian.  We agree on the problems but their solutions always seem to involve extreme authoritarian measures and it makes me suspect that the entire agenda is not solving problems but is in fact authoritarianism.

A lot of what are apparently left-right disagreements are really excuses for change on the authoritarian axis.  In fact it always seems to be that way.  And usually the changes are toward more authoritarianism.
You got faith in the end... but you can't fucking see!

A response to the Liberty Borg Units: your freedom is at war with our collective need for a society of quality and a world of wilderness. Your liberties oppress others.
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

db

@Conservationsist

I had exactly the same experience when debating a liberal. I proposed the notion that parts of society should be free to set up self sufficient sub-communities without harrasment from bureaucracy or other society members. Needless to say what I recieved in return was a barrage of ad-hom slurs and name calling.
Why is it that some topics and areas of discussion are shut down prematurely by Liberals when they dont like the sound of them?

Quote
Why is it that some topics and areas of discussion are shut down prematurely by Liberals when they dont like the sound of them?

Because your views are absolutely incompatible with theirs. 
You got faith in the end... but you can't fucking see!

Quote from: db
Why is it that some topics and areas of discussion are shut down prematurely by Liberals when they dont like the sound of them?

To put it simply, they are slaves to knee-jerk emotional reactions.  Drug abuse and spoiling children, which are both prevalent amongst liberals, are both known to cause the retardation of emotional development.  So basically, most liberals are as emotionally developed as a twelve year old anorexic emo girl.  Any questioning of their deeply held views results in the shitting of their pants.

Quote
Drug abuse and spoiling children, which are both prevalent amongst liberals, are both known to cause the retardation of emotional development.

Of course, the same is even more true of alcohol which also causes brain damage. 

Child abuse is very common among conservatives.  Hitting children causes deepseated psychological damage and may cause frontal lobe damage if the child is very young or the abuse repeated or severe.
You got faith in the end... but you can't fucking see!