Just another stupid political thread (formerly Year of the Rat #5).

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Where have my people gone?  

Perhaps you can help me, if I describe them to you.

They are those that see the filth and the scum that washes the streets and the boardrooms every day, but they are untouched by it.

They liked it so much, they burned down the company.

They are unfazed by the safety Nazis and the parking goons and all the other pimps and hustlers and authority freaks.  They say they like politicians, but couldn't eat a whole one.  They sure as hell don't worry about foreign terrorists, and they laugh at the ones in their own government.

They know that the smallest, pettiest injustice is equal to the largest and most egregious.  

They may be classified, but they will not change their behavior to fit your classification more closely.  They don't give a shit what you and I think of them.

Your approval is not required.

They're armed.

They've had enough of your shit.

And they are not afraid.

Or kill me.

[Sepia]

I'm framing it and putting it on the wall.

[Triple Zero]

i like it!

can you perhaps elaborate on this statement:
> They know that the smallest, pettiest injustice is equal to the largest and most egregious.

?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

i like it!

can you perhaps elaborate on this statement:
> They know that the smallest, pettiest injustice is equal to the largest and most egregious.

?

Easy.  When any injustice is permitted, then there is no rule of law.  Once that has been established, any injustice is possible.

That's what the Jingoist yahoos of this nation do not understand, as they argue the cause of torturing suspected terrorists, or of selective suspension of habeas corpus...as if any such selectivity were possible.

Once you allow injustice on ANY scale, your own rights revert to mere privelege.  There is no moral difference between the smallest, pettiest shit (such as on a BBS on the internets, or a Jew being turned down for country club membership due to race, etc) and the largest offenses perpetrated  by the government.

Justice is not a flexible, malleable thing.  Neither are rights; nor is truth.

They either are, or they aren't.  Scale is meaningless.

[Triple Zero]

okay, so it's about a "sliding scale" and/or "grey area" idea .. that's interesting.

i remember one time when i argued with a friend [i forgot about what, exactly], and said "just the fact that there's a grey area between these two things, doesn't mean you can't draw a line arbitrarily somewhere in that area", and he pwned me HARD on that statement.

i forgot exactly how, but it probably was analogous to what you just said, with "who is going to draw that line then" added into the mix.

it was one of those late-night philosophical discussions, that really only seem to happen with a certain amount of alcohol.. i just remember i was wrong about it

[The Good Reverend Roger]

okay, so it's about a "sliding scale" and/or "grey area" idea .. that's interesting.

i remember one time when i argued with a friend [i forgot about what, exactly], and said "just the fact that there's a grey area between these two things, doesn't mean you can't draw a line arbitrarily somewhere in that area", and he pwned me HARD on that statement.

i forgot exactly how, but it probably was analogous to what you just said, with "who is going to draw that line then" added into the mix.

it was one of those late-night philosophical discussions, that really only seem to happen with a certain amount of alcohol.. i just remember i was wrong about it

The person drawing the line is automatically inflicting an injustice on those who fall beneath his arbitrary line.  The only thing that angers a free person more than injustice is the inability to seek redress for that injustice.  Being told that the injustice done to that person "is too small/silly to warrant action" is the same as that person being told that they themselves are of no consequence.

[Triple Zero]

okay. his argument was not about freedom, however. i meet this guy this week, i'll ask him if he can reiterate his stance about the "grey area" and post it here (if you're interested).

i have a bunch of other questions, though. it's because personally/instinctively i have always valued the pragmatic, case-by-case judgement as a good thing, though in my time on these forums, i have begun seeing there are also some things very wrong with this approach [the big problem being that pragmatic judgements usually end up being made by persons in an artificial position of power].

"the law" (as written down by the legislative, interpreted by the judicial and upheld by the executive branch of a government--sort of), versus "the rules" (as we witness them made and upheld on forums, by the moderators admins or members). in a sense of scale, one is much wider and bigger than the other.
but on the other hand, it's often easier to influence "the rules" and try to make them more "fair", than with "the law".

and about "the law", there are surely a few rules out there that you are very certain we would be better off without, or perhaps modified in some way. if you say you can't really draw such a line, how do you decide which letters of the law to follow and which not? [it's kind of similar to the christian that claims to follow the bible as law, but still they arbitrarily choose to follow certain parts and others not]

i had some other questions but i stopped typing this post halfway and a few hours later forgot about them.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

okay. his argument was not about freedom, however. i meet this guy this week, i'll ask him if he can reiterate his stance about the "grey area" and post it here (if you're interested).

Sure.

i have a bunch of other questions, though. it's because personally/instinctively i have always valued the pragmatic, case-by-case judgement as a good thing, though in my time on these forums, i have begun seeing there are also some things very wrong with this approach [the big problem being that pragmatic judgements usually end up being made by persons in an artificial position of power].

Pragmatism is nothing more than injustice cloaked by a supposed need.  In a lifeboat, this is excusable.  In day to day life, it is not.

and about "the law", there are surely a few rules out there that you are very certain we would be better off without, or perhaps modified in some way.

Certainly.  "Law" and "justice" are two entirely separate things.

[Doktor Howl]

Bump, because Eris wants no sissies.

[BadBeast]

 
[/quote]

Certainly.  "Law" and "justice" are two entirely separate things.


[/quote]

Law is what they try and palm you off with when Justice is abolished.

[Adios]

Justice is imaginary. It doesn't exist. Law is determined by your bank account. Both are moot points.

[Jasper]

Not all abstract concepts, though imaginary, aren't worthwhile.  One thing I've learned is that, even though ideas like justice and absolute truth are imaginary, disregarding them completely will never end well.  Justice may not exist in pure, concrete form, but it still follows the law of supply and demand.  People want it very badly, and although those in power know how to use that desire to their ends, the sentiment is not worthless in itself.

[Adios]

I never intended to say the concept of justice was worthless. In it's present form it is far more dangerous than worthless. "Justice" is mostly reserved for those who can afford it or by position are shielded from it and it is called justice for that class. Think of an unrequited love for instance. In some cases it can utterly destroy a life while in others it is eventually dropped by the side of the road. I reject the dangling carrot of justice and choose to take my own justice as I can. In the cases where i can't I drop it by the side of the road.

It's a matter of removing the blinders and seeing as much of the big picture as you can.

[Doktor Howl]

I never intended to say the concept of justice was worthless. In it's present form it is far more dangerous than worthless. "Justice" is mostly reserved for those who can afford it or by position are shielded from it and it is called justice for that class. Think of an unrequited love for instance. In some cases it can utterly destroy a life while in others it is eventually dropped by the side of the road. I reject the dangling carrot of justice and choose to take my own justice as I can. In the cases where i can't I drop it by the side of the road.

It's a matter of removing the blinders and seeing as much of the big picture as you can.

You are confusing "justice" with "the American legal system".

[BadBeast]

Once you start to let Injustice slide, then it sanctions all the other Injustices that will follow it.
Small things, if looked at as seperate events, but they are not seperate at all. Because even in the most established of totalitarian systems, that very first little injustice, is still there, festering away, under the mountain of "other" Injustices that rode in on it's coat tails.

These wrongnesses do not go away. If they are not addressed, by us all, wherever we find them, they spread like a cancer, into every aspect of our lives. We are still suffering from the symptoms of the injustices that our Great Grandfathers let slip past them. They have insiduously coiled themselves around the pillars of our established institutions, our Legal systems, our Political processes, and are viewed, by most as "just one of those things" or as as a problem for somebody else to sort out.

People prefer, these days, to look at things as a "bigger picture".  But this outlook just magnifies all the things we feel we are powerless against. A self defeating viewpoint, it means that the "Smaller picture"
of our own day to day lives, gets lost.

This smaller picture however, is the only place we have any personal power. It is the Base of the Pillar. How can we ever hope to address the huge injustices that we focus on in the "bigger picture", if we have lost sight of our own sphere of influence?

The answer lies in studying the nature of Injustice, and how it spreads. Just as it started with a small, seemingly insignificant action, so must any viable redress begin. We should all know, how on even the bleakest, greyest of winter days, when the cold and damp seems to seep into our very bones, something as simple as a smile from a stranger can reverse the polarity of our whole day, allowing us to step right through the encroaching walls of low intensity despair. Spiritually, it's like the sun breaking through the grey skies.
And small acts like this acceptance of a smile, purely on it's own merits, can be viral. You pass the smile on, maybe by just smiling at some other random person, who seems lost in the Prison, or by some other, small act of kindness. These are the Apple seeds.

Just as the first injustice sneaked past our Ancestors, the Dynamics that overthrow the hugest Injustices and vindicate some of the mistakes of the past, all originate in some small act of altruism, or kindness.  A simple smile, can be the Butterfly of Chaos Theory.  A current of viral potential. The whole Eristic principle, originating from the oldest of power bases. The Base of the Pillar, long hidden under the brush strokes of the "Big Picture" affirming it's rightful importance. And we become conduits for the fundamental Principles we thought we had lost.

As we all should know by now, the fight never ends. That is the whole point. We don't fight for the illusory dream of decisive victories, or the eradication of our enemy. We fight wrongnesses, not to put another victory notch on our swords, but because it is a wrongness. Because we may be all there is to
recognise this small thing for what it is. No injustice is insignificant. Roger is spot on here. The Base of our enemies Pillar is also in our sphere of Influence.
And so we fight.