<quote name="Stuart Jansen" date="Tue, 16 Nov 2010 at 14:57 -0700"> > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 14:43 -0700, Von Fugal wrote: > > <quote name="Stuart Jansen" date="Tue, 16 Nov 2010 at 14:39 -0700"> > > > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 14:33 -0700, Jessie Morris wrote: > > > > Violence and damage are two very different things. It does not always > > > > require violence to cause damage. > > > > > > I sincerely doubt that Von was referring to weaving his own shirts or > > > marching to the sea to make his own salt. > > > > You consider that damaging? Heaven forbid anyone should be self > > sufficient!! > > I can understand not catching a reference to Dr. Strange Love, but > missing a reference to Gandhi? > > It is exactly my point that I don't consider peaceful non-cooperation > damaging. It isn't what you were insinuating earlier when you said the > democracy was not enough to quiet your anger.
Yet you continue to misunderstand me and misrepresent my ideas despite all my best efforts to make it clear to you. No, I was not referring to Ghandi. I was referring to damage. I am not threatening it. I wouldn't even feel comfortable or justified in joining an uprising at this point and likely many years into the future on current trajectory, let alone starting one! That doesn't mean it could not happen. I don't want to see it happen. This whole subthread is in response to bringing up the social contract as a justification for imposing certain measures on people. That only works (the social contract itself only works) so far as people remain willing to abide it. If an uprising were to happen, what are you going to do, take your "social contract" and show it to them? "Look, you have to obey this contract!" If people are revolting it is because the contract has already failed them. Small rebellions can be quelled and are, but they are bloody nonetheless. The social contract, like anything, is two sided. Contracts are only entered into when beneficial to both parties involved. If you take away the benefit of a sufficient number of people, you will have problems. That is all I mean to say. I am not threatening. I'm not going to be the one to bring those problems to your doorstep. Please stop reading preconceived notions about me into this philosophy. Originally, I asked, wouldn't it be better to keep a contract amicable and therefore in force, than to suffer uprising, rebellion, or simply non-compliance and disorder? Well, would it? -- Von Fugal
pgp7QbLn5zob7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
/* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
