words on weak but pure freedom

[minuspace]

Liberté, égalité, fraternité:  some of the most dangerous words.  We all have some contention with at least one of them, regardless, their efficacy has been proven.  These words, synthetically, in various permutations, have given rise to modern revolution.  Context and events may have been different, but the ideas are the same.

I want to focus on freedom, and have a discussion about how it is relevant to "change change".

By this I mean not the false token you might give to charity, with inauthentic auspices of hope.  I mean the constraints we put on freedom need to be changed.  Freedom has been materialized as a commodity of exchange, with the strict but strong definition of having the possibility to do otherwise.  This gives the illusion of a strong sense of freedom with respect to how we identify our action or decisions as having originated from our independent agency.

It does not take long to find strong arguments against this form of radical freedom: socio-biological, ethical-aesthetic, meta-physical etc.

So by change now I mean making a difference, and freedom the possibility to do so.  The condition on the possibility of being free IS freedom in the fist place...  Does that make any sense to anyone?  

[Doktor Howl]

You mittened your own post?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

You mittened your own post?

Might as well, I'm not sure the post will be clear enough to anyone else to mitten it...

[Elder Iptuous]

 
has that ever been done?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

has that ever been done?

Weltburger did it.

[Captain Utopia]

I support this idea!

[Requia ☣]

Liberté, égalité, fraternité:  some of the most dangerous words.  We all have some contention with at least one of them, regardless, their efficacy has been proven.  These words, synthetically, in various permutations, have given rise to modern revolution.  Context and events may have been different, but the ideas are the same.

I want to focus on freedom, and have a discussion about how it is relevant to "change change".

By this I mean not the false token you might give to charity, with inauthentic auspices of hope.  I mean the constraints we put on freedom need to be changed.  Freedom has been materialized as a commodity of exchange, with the strict but strong definition of having the possibility to do otherwise.  This gives the illusion of a strong sense of freedom with respect to how we identify our action or decisions as having originated from our independent agency.

It does not take long to find strong arguments against this form of radical freedom: socio-biological, ethical-aesthetic, meta-physical etc.

So by change now I mean making a difference, and freedom the possibility to do so.  The condition on the possibility of being free IS freedom in the fist place...  Does that make any sense to anyone?  

What we call rights have become privileges, because they can be taken away, and a small number of rights is better than a large number of privileges.  Do I have you right?

If so, Dok already rants about that on occasion.

[minuspace]

I want to focus on freedom, and have a discussion about how it is relevant to "change change".

By this I mean not the false token you might give to charity, with inauthentic auspices of hope.  I mean the constraints we put on freedom need to be changed.  

What we call rights have become privileges, because they can be taken away, and a small number of rights is better than a large number of privileges.  Do I have you right?

If so, Dok already rants about that on occasion.

Just looked through my post and it did not seem as though my biases in thought implied any sense of what is "right".  Beyond the aesthetic or moral, i think there is a structural formulation to freedom that is more basic and compelling.  To address you response, however, a "right" is something that cannot be taken away unless we consent to so doing.  In which case you can rightfully call it a privilege if it behooves you give away your freedom and responsibility.

Remember.  You walk on holy ground.  There is no order, therefore, anything is possible.  Do as thou wilt for it is the law.

[Requia ☣]

Too late, other people already consented.  They just gave up access to lawyers, and I'm pretty sure that was the last one.

[minuspace]

In the end, habeas corpus will not be denied.  I'm trying to focus on the forgotten habeas mentem. 

[minuspace]

Potential freedom is greater than actual freedom?

[Requia ☣]

In the end, habeas corpus will not be denied.  I'm trying to focus on the forgotten habeas mentem. 

I find it really disturbing that thats an actual term and not a pun.

[minuspace]

In the end, habeas corpus will not be denied.  I'm trying to focus on the forgotten habeas mentem. 

I find it really disturbing that thats an actual term and not a pun.

True, like the colors Red and Blue?

[Doktor Howl]

In the end, habeas corpus will not be denied.  I'm trying to focus on the forgotten habeas mentem. 

I find it really disturbing that thats an actual term and not a pun.

True, like the colors Red and Blue?

You so zany.

[minuspace]

In the end, habeas corpus will not be denied.  I'm trying to focus on the forgotten habeas mentem. 

I find it really disturbing that thats an actual term and not a pun.

True, like the colors Red and Blue?

You so zany.

Away To saY iT, fanny