3 ms·

I do not consent to bring re-presented - I present myself. The whole thing is a slight of hand illusion, without consent or agreement. It is simply the tyrann

I do not consent to bring re-presented - I present myself. The whole thing is a slight of hand illusion, without consent or agreement. It is simply the tyranny we are born into, but we think it is fine, as this is what we have been told. It's quite self-serving when you think about it. 'You want to take 40% of my life's efforts? Take 60%, but make sure you give tax exemptions to the film studios with some of that money!'

hef19898 3y ago
This deeply un-democratic attitude, which seems to be based on pure selfishness combined with a perceived exceptionalism, is really troubling. If you think a democracy, regardless of form, asking for taxes is tyranny you lack even the slightest trace of history or civics. And you show clearly, that you simply are not willing to participate, and take even the smallest responsibility, in modern society. True authoritarians, fascists and wannabe tyranns are happy to use that attitude to erode democracies.
- verisimi 3y ago
  The attitude is not selfish. Standing by nodding while your government provides weapons, propaganda and conducts other immoral actions with their immorally extracted wealth from those all around you, is selfish. Why do you condone theft? You wouldn't think it was OK if those around you stole, or is a corporation stole, but it's OK that the government does it.... How? Which other mafia protection rackets do you like? Put simply, if it is not voluntary, if it is forced, it cannot be justified, regardless of how the party doing the forcing justifies of actions. It doesn't matter how many people are doing the forcing, what they call themselves, how many books they write to justify their actions (law, civics), how must they tell you it's for the greater good, etc. To think it is right is to suffer from Stockholm syndrome - you are justifying your abuser's actions. You wouldn't think it was alright for a husband to take his wife's money, or boss not to pay his workers, or a neighbour to take money from the old couple next door... so why do you think it's OK that government does this? People are confused - this is not a political issue it is a moral one. Politics ought to come after we agree the morals. It is fine for people to form free, voluntary associations, build roads or whatever. It is not right to force this association, and it can never be made right. It is wrong. Stealing, initiating violence, threatening violence is wrong. Might is not right, and can never be made right.
  - whisket 3y ago
    In a vacuum, what you say is true. But, you exist in a society with others. As such, disagreements occur. Sorting this out is an issue. Solutions to this vary, but one solution to it, seeming accepted by Canadians, after a lengthy chain of social argument and negotiation, results in public funding for the arts. You are just one voice. Take a moment to image a world filled with people exactly the same as you, carbon copies. In that world, which ones of you is happy, which one of you is sad, or do you all live a meager solitary existence because of your lack of willingness to accept what the present you accepts as selfishness and so seek out your utopia of the individual.
    - verisimi 3y ago
      I'm glad you see the reasoning in what I say. Political answers are one solution, as you say. Tribalism is another. Neither are right to me. What an actual answer could be like, I don't know. I tend to think that conscious adults do not need to be guided like children. Eg in a social setting you do not need the police - people are capable of managing themselves - in fact they will better manage things without a 'management class'. The self acclaimed authorities are actually the worst of us, parasites on the work of others. The basis of government authority too has no moral basis. Might I point out too, that normalising theft, force and infantilisation of the masses will not lead us to utopia either. Calling immorality 'right' or 'good' while it is plainly not, is also not a right or good action in itself - it is to embrace an illusion. These actions hasten dystopia, right? So, in the first place individuals need to understand what basic morality is (the golden rule: do not treat others as you would not want to be treated) and then live their lives accordingly. It is not what the law, your teacher, a judge, a priest, or whoever says - you know what is right already, innately. Don't initiate violence or harm (eg lying) in others. If more people lived according to their consciences, the change would tranformative. That means police, army, teachers, medical staff, etc would need to reflect on their actions and stop initiating violence and harm. Don't code the dystopian control grid of the future. As I see it, any progressive future change has to come from each individual acting according to their conscience. And in the first place these means that one should not justify immoral acts, even if it is the government undertaking them.

hef19898 3y ago

This deeply un-democratic attitude, which seems to be based on pure selfishness combined with a perceived exceptionalism, is really troubling. If you think a democracy, regardless of form, asking for taxes is tyranny you lack even the slightest trace of history or civics. And you show clearly, that you simply are not willing to participate, and take even the smallest responsibility, in modern society. True authoritarians, fascists and wannabe tyranns are happy to use that attitude to erode democracies.

verisimi 3y ago
The attitude is not selfish. Standing by nodding while your government provides weapons, propaganda and conducts other immoral actions with their immorally extracted wealth from those all around you, is selfish. Why do you condone theft? You wouldn't think it was OK if those around you stole, or is a corporation stole, but it's OK that the government does it.... How? Which other mafia protection rackets do you like? Put simply, if it is not voluntary, if it is forced, it cannot be justified, regardless of how the party doing the forcing justifies of actions. It doesn't matter how many people are doing the forcing, what they call themselves, how many books they write to justify their actions (law, civics), how must they tell you it's for the greater good, etc. To think it is right is to suffer from Stockholm syndrome - you are justifying your abuser's actions. You wouldn't think it was alright for a husband to take his wife's money, or boss not to pay his workers, or a neighbour to take money from the old couple next door... so why do you think it's OK that government does this? People are confused - this is not a political issue it is a moral one. Politics ought to come after we agree the morals. It is fine for people to form free, voluntary associations, build roads or whatever. It is not right to force this association, and it can never be made right. It is wrong. Stealing, initiating violence, threatening violence is wrong. Might is not right, and can never be made right.
- whisket 3y ago
  In a vacuum, what you say is true. But, you exist in a society with others. As such, disagreements occur. Sorting this out is an issue. Solutions to this vary, but one solution to it, seeming accepted by Canadians, after a lengthy chain of social argument and negotiation, results in public funding for the arts. You are just one voice. Take a moment to image a world filled with people exactly the same as you, carbon copies. In that world, which ones of you is happy, which one of you is sad, or do you all live a meager solitary existence because of your lack of willingness to accept what the present you accepts as selfishness and so seek out your utopia of the individual.
  - verisimi 3y ago
    I'm glad you see the reasoning in what I say. Political answers are one solution, as you say. Tribalism is another. Neither are right to me. What an actual answer could be like, I don't know. I tend to think that conscious adults do not need to be guided like children. Eg in a social setting you do not need the police - people are capable of managing themselves - in fact they will better manage things without a 'management class'. The self acclaimed authorities are actually the worst of us, parasites on the work of others. The basis of government authority too has no moral basis. Might I point out too, that normalising theft, force and infantilisation of the masses will not lead us to utopia either. Calling immorality 'right' or 'good' while it is plainly not, is also not a right or good action in itself - it is to embrace an illusion. These actions hasten dystopia, right? So, in the first place individuals need to understand what basic morality is (the golden rule: do not treat others as you would not want to be treated) and then live their lives accordingly. It is not what the law, your teacher, a judge, a priest, or whoever says - you know what is right already, innately. Don't initiate violence or harm (eg lying) in others. If more people lived according to their consciences, the change would tranformative. That means police, army, teachers, medical staff, etc would need to reflect on their actions and stop initiating violence and harm. Don't code the dystopian control grid of the future. As I see it, any progressive future change has to come from each individual acting according to their conscience. And in the first place these means that one should not justify immoral acts, even if it is the government undertaking them.