Everyone who wants to justify whatever he wants to do anyway tends to preach that God loves everyone and therefore endorses everything. Of course, this is unprincipled, anarchic insanity. Still, what should one expect of those who, for years upon years, have justified doping their way through reality? Some libertarian dopers do manage to earn livelihoods beyond the dole. Believing self justification is the highest value, they tend to believe all problems are solvable merely by applying proper economic principles. They want their trade to be as free as their self justification.
However, is decent society sustainable merely by preaching and promoting free trade? Does free trade encompass the free hiring of serf labor in order to rot out the non-serf competition? Does free trade encompass the free importation and camouflauging of jihadists for the enforcement of crazed religous rules that reduce half the population to subhuman status? Does free trade encompass the free monopolization of media by gangs of international corporatists for the purpose of mesmerizing and controlling all who are most easily reduced to moral zombies? Just how is it that any intelligent person should believe that the good life would rain down on everyone if only all would adhere to a universal creed based purely on everyone justifying his economic interest?
How is it that putting lipstick on a creed of kill or be killed should be deemed decently civilized? How is it that any pretended believer in moral empathy should adopt as a moral pose a notion that there is no reconciling source of morality above individual self interest? Should even familes, as the basic unit of civilization, teach that there is no higher basis for inter-familial empathy, beyond "Make your best deal?" Should "marriage and "family" be redefined as meaningless, the better to pave the way for gangs animated by nothing higher than pure self advancement to divide and rule?
Unfortunately, we are beset by a mudstorm of post modern philosophy for deconstructing America, Marriage, and God. If we lose our grip on those guideposts, the philosophy of pure economic self interest that replaces them will collect and usher us to a polar opposite of utopia. The cure to collectivist hell is not pure economic self interest. The cure is enlightened respect for America, Marriage, and God.
@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag.
2 comments:
If the Golden Rule (he who has the gold makes the rules?) of civilization is found only in the justification of individual economic self interest, then on what principle should any such an advocate hinder those who join gangs of corporatists or unions in order to promote their agendas? Everyone who wants to justify whatever he wants to do anyway tends to preach that God loves everyone and therefore endorses everything. Of course, this is unprincipled, anarchic insanity. Still, what should one expect of those who, for years upon years, have justified doping their way through reality? Some libertarian dopers do manage to earn livelihoods beyond the dole. Believing self justification is the highest value, they tend to believe all problems are solvable merely by applying proper economic principles. They want their trade to be as free as their self justification.
However, is decent society sustainable merely by preaching and promoting free trade? Does free trade encompass the free hiring of serf labor in order to rot out the non-serf competition? Does free trade encompass the free importation and camouflauging of jihadists for the enforcement of crazed religous rules that reduce half the population to subhuman status? Does free trade encompass the free monopolization of media by gangs of international corporatists for the purpose of mesmerizing and controlling all who are most easily reduced to moral zombies? Does free trade encompass disloyalty to country in order to sell it out? Just how is it that any intelligent person should believe that the good life would rain down on everyone if only all would adhere to a universal creed based purely on everyone justifying his economic interest?
How is it that putting lipstick on a creed of kill or be killed should be deemed decently civilized? How is it that any pretended believer in moral empathy should adopt as a moral pose a notion that there abides no reconciling source of morality above individual self interest? Should even familes, as the basic unit of civilization, teach that there is no higher basis for inter-familial empathy, beyond "Make your best deal?" Should "marriage and "family" be redefined as meaningless, the better to pave the way for gangs animated by nothing higher than pure self advancement to divide and rule?
Unfortunately, we are beset by a mudstorm of post modern philosophy for deconstructing America, Marriage, and God. If we lose our grip on those guideposts, the philosophy of pure economic self interest that replaces them will collect and usher us to a polar opposite of utopia. The cure to collectivist hell is not pure economic self interest. The cure is enlightened respect for America (individual freedom, opportunity, and dignity), Marriage, and God.
Some chortle that there are no values that should supercede anyone's self interest. Are they not incoherent, when they advocate that there should be no value higher than the preservation of each particular gangster’s turf within a tribe, union, race (La Raza!), pack, oligopoly, or oligarchy? Necessarily, they are advocating an inconsistency: that the self interest of some persons and gangs should supercede ("be more equal than") the self interest of others, the supercession to be determined only by the might of the fittest (law of the jungle). Behind fine words, they are advocating mayhem as morality.
In such an incoherent, unprincipled way, godless and nationally disloyal Dino unionists, racists, and entitlement-mongers are united in a pathologically grim war against decent society. In the same way, godless and internationally corporatist Rino oligarchists are also united. Thus, godless Dinos and Rinos alike tend to be united against any ideal of a decent nation or civilization. Whether turf is governed by international communist union thugs or international corporatist owners of government, the result will feature a sameness: the subjugation of everyone who is not a member of the ruling gang (especially everyone whose primary loyalty is to a notion of assimilation to higher, encompassing values). In the same way that a pack of wolves may admire the professionalism of a pack of hyenas, this is why Dinos and Rinos are more respectful and tolerant of Islamic subjugationists than are traditional Americans.
Among those who are practiced in the incoherent foundation of such philosophy, tolerance and respect of turf among thugs is easily reconciled with power-mongering that sees human civilization as differing from the law of the jungle only in pretense. Indeed, the notion of Allah is that of a supreme gangster, no less than Big Brother, raised to rule a hierarchy of gradations of favorites over all. Why should practitioners of such thuggery be respected as conveyers of coherent truth, rather than as gangsters of opportunism who are pathologically opposed to decent society? Godless Dinos and Rinos have killed much of the idea of America (individual dignity, the family as the basic unit of civilization, an assimilating source of higher values), throwing all earthly hope back to the jungle. Can Truth disinfect the dark hole out of which godphobes and godthugs alike have climbed?
Post a Comment