3 ms·
As someone who abandoned rightness/wrongness 9+ years ago (except in the idea of alignment with the cosmos), I can say that "genocidal rhetoric" doesn't necessa
by crawfordcomeaux 1y ago
As someone who abandoned rightness/wrongness 9+ years ago (except in the idea of alignment with the cosmos), I can say that "genocidal rhetoric" doesn't necessarily imply rightness or wrongness. There exist language patterns that indicate a perspective that, when culturally carried and compounded for years, has the effect of cultivating behaviors that lead to extinguishing a people, whether intentional or not. This is genocidal rhetoric.
As for options as to what to do with it, I find this useful for finding more.
https://thenightgarden.substack.com/p/the-story-state-action-model https://thenightgarden.substack.com/p/the-story-state-action...
I'm curious how people think maintaining genocidal rhetoric is aligned with serving life, when it literally serves the destruction of a group.
- dang 1y ago> "genocidal rhetoric" doesn't necessarily imply rightness or wrongness I believe you when you describe your perspective this way, but it's so far beyond conventional usage that it may be misleading to express it in this way. Certainly I didn't understand your GP comment as being anywhere near what you're saying here, and I doubt others would.
- crawfordcomeaux 1y agoIt's true...conventional usage is rooted in addiction to violence, which includes dualistic myths of right/wrong, life/death, like/dislike, belief/disbelief. Perhaps a site-wide call for curiosity when encountering such myths could help spur people to pull themselves out of such ways of "killing" nondual animist views of experience.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]