From: C.L. Everett (seaelle@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Aug 25 2005 - 17:39:07 BST
jc--
> Pirsig quote
>
> >
> >The instrument of conversation between society and biology has always been
> >a policeman or a soldier and his gun. (Lila, 24)
> Well I'd like to start a new conversation then.
>
> jc
Sorry to confuse you. My point is that killing for any reason can be
justified, rationalized depending on the angle of viewing, change
angle, change view (Einstein). I believe the *terrorist* can
rationalize his position at least as well as "W" did his, on an
"cultural or societal" level supported by their "belief system", same
as the anglo/xtains do.
However, most Americans were not in a listening "mood", before or
after 911. Most Americans took the attacks personal. (Personally I
saw the attacks as militaristic attacks on the financial and military
power of the US, by rag-tag forces like early American
revolutionaries. I don't think they were trying to kill my grandma.
I do think some of them are tired of being "occupied" and encroached
upon, as were the Native Americans in the US and in Central and South
America, who used similar guerrilla like tactics.)
Not once did a single "loud and powerful" American voice ever say:
"Hey, what's got you all so pissed off? Let's solve this without
further violence." IMO that's the position an intellectually
dominated culture would choose. But then we're not that, are we?
Instead, as a culture we chose to use the strength of biological
tools, guns, tanks, weapons to fight "terror", which is a
psychological condition, BTW, not a physical one. Military weapons
are extensions of biology, not intellect. Intellect develops them in
service of the "saving the skin", nothing else. You can't "save" the
"societal" order with guns, only the physical (biological)
manifestation of that "expression" of order. Ideas cannot be defended
or won with weapons of the physical world, only the ideological realm
can accomplish this.
For Platt:
And for that to happen, we have to be willing to TALK, sort things out
and compromise with our enemies, name calling and labeling only comes
off like schoolyard taunting. The reaction of our own American born
terrorists should advise us away from that kind of behavior, if for no
other reason but it causes a retaliatory attitude.
C.L.
On 8/22/05, jc <jcpryor@nccn.net> wrote:
>
> C.L,
>
> Now maybe I'm confused, but I'd say the only reason biologically to
> kill is because you were real hungry. Maybe wiping out competitors
> for sex could be seen as biological, but since suicide bombers rarely
> breed after their attacks, I'd have to disagree with your conclusion
> about biology being responsible.
>
>
> > Being militaristic (choosing to kill
> > > to win a dispute) on any level, ever, on any side, is a BIOLOGICALLY driven
> >> act. No one gets off here being morally superior, on any level, in the
> > MOQ, in the WEST or the EAST, on the moon or in the sea.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 26 2005 - 02:05:58 BST