Hello everyone
>From: "Wim Nusselder" <wim.nusselder@antenna.nl>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>Subject: Re: MD True Libertarians Please Stand Up
>
>MoQites of all nations, unite!
>
>Could we not agree on the following:
>
>1. Fighting government (= social patterns) with guns (= inorganic
>patterns or -according to interpretation- biological patterns) is
>immoral. Change of social patterns should be effected by intellectual
>patterns and ideally does not result in biological casualties.
Hi Wim
I believe the MOQ states that social patterns evolve under their own set of
moral codes and have little to do with intellectual patterns of value.
Robert Pirsig states that many of the social problems we see today are
resultant from intellectually conceived "social programs." On the other
hand, I think you're completely right. Change of social patterns should
never be effected by force or harm to lower patterns of value.
>
>2. Fighting criminals (= biological or low quality social patterns) is
>the task of the highest quality social pattern we have. That is a kind
>of government guided by intellectual patterns that respects
>intellectual and Dynamic potential in every individual and that
>therefore does not harm individuals biologically in this fight. It may
>have to restrict their freedom to organise in low quality social
>patterns or to act insanely, but it never needs to kill them to do so.
>(The highest quality government available may have to use "militia" in
>some circumstances, I don't know. Not in the Netherlands, I think.
>Maybe we don't have the same range of alternative social patterns
>available everywhere, necessitating charging a second choice one with
>fighting criminals...)
Maybe the best way to win a fight is to not fight at all? By this I don't
mean to repeal all the laws but rather look to the preconditions which allow
crime to flourish in the first place. Can the government give tax incentives
to draw more business to the area and allieviate unemployment? Can schools
devise better programs to teach our children values? When we see upwards
towards 80% of the prison population here in the US there for drug
violations or crimes associated with it then perhaps it is time to look to
change the drug laws themselves? I don't have any fast answers but it seems
to me building more prisons and taking a hard-nosed stance towards crime is
not one of them.
>
>maybe even on:
>
>3. No cause (= intellectual pattern) legitimises fighting with
>material weapons (= fighting social patterns by fighting biological
>patterns with inorganic patterns).
This is a tough one. I would like to intellectually agree with you but I am
quite sure in a threatening situation my instinct for survival would
precondition my actions. There would be no thought involved at all. Only
action. And that action would be of a violent nature if that is what the
situation called for, but only upon reflection. At the time it would be just
what I had to do to survive. I think that part of "me" is very old and very
ruthless and it disconcerts me when I look at what we are capable of as
human beings. There is no more dangerous creature on earth. It fills me with
wonder too though. Dynamic Quality is very strange.
>
>I would like to have more arguments for the last one, though. At the
>moment I don't come further (given available time) than the fact that
>I have a vested interest in it, being a Quaker.
Looking forward to reading any comments you or others may have.
Thank you
Dan
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:21 BST