3 ms·

The "Team America" theory of dicks, pussies and assholes? I flat out don't buy it. It's not like Assange and Snowden are just such mean fuckers out to harm the

The "Team America" theory of dicks, pussies and assholes? I flat out don't buy it. It's not like Assange and Snowden are just such mean fuckers out to harm the poor American public that you have to fight dirty to combat them -- even though you really don't want to. That's laughable. Or that COINTELPRO was just the only way to handle MLK. No, you fight corruption and criminality with integrity. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, the only way to justice and peace, on small and large scales. But everybody just wants to shine light on the their opponents, while believing the stuff they made up about themselves, and made others believe. So there's a lot of half-measures, if even, a lot of lip-service. We want to catch the terrorists who aren't on our payroll, the unpredictable factors, and want to make sure the ones that are don't get caught, the valuable assets. (and it doesn't even matter who says that to whom, this "we" applies to everyone with the means to read this, all nations are equally fucked up in that regard, certainly all the powerful ones). So nothing really gets cleaned up.

pas 3y ago
Integrity is good, but there's no universal law dictating that it will always prevail no matter what. That said - I guess - it's not surprising that most of HN (and hope that most non-ignorant people) would agree that a lot of states are way over the optimum non-integrity point. (For example intelligence and counter-intelligence toward geopolitically important adversarial targets is probably something that makes sense, drone-bombing random groups of people because war-on-something hysteria probably doesn't.)
- pyinstallwoes 3y ago
  Integrity reflects cosmos, thus order. The lack, reflects chaos. Congruent to universal patterns and thus laws one could argue that indeed, acting with integrity is a universal law of good. I’d argue however that better than integrity is what we try to ascribe and describe with the word love. To me it seems when one acts with love then every action is properly constrained, and most importantly acts of discipline; for acts of discipline without love inevitably become acts of abuse. Love is the constraint that trends towards cosmos, integrity, and that which is good.

pas 3y ago

Integrity is good, but there's no universal law dictating that it will always prevail no matter what. That said - I guess - it's not surprising that most of HN (and hope that most non-ignorant people) would agree that a lot of states are way over the optimum non-integrity point. (For example intelligence and counter-intelligence toward geopolitically important adversarial targets is probably something that makes sense, drone-bombing random groups of people because war-on-something hysteria probably doesn't.)

pyinstallwoes 3y ago
Integrity reflects cosmos, thus order. The lack, reflects chaos. Congruent to universal patterns and thus laws one could argue that indeed, acting with integrity is a universal law of good. I’d argue however that better than integrity is what we try to ascribe and describe with the word love. To me it seems when one acts with love then every action is properly constrained, and most importantly acts of discipline; for acts of discipline without love inevitably become acts of abuse. Love is the constraint that trends towards cosmos, integrity, and that which is good.