Home Politics & Debate

Some points I'd like to make

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
So I lay in bed thinking last night, and probably because I was reading a novel that features war / soldiers (as some part of it, not the main bit) it brought a thought to me which I thought about and came up with some bits:

Terrorists
Are no more terrorists than we are. A soldier, is just a man (or a woman or child) who has killing as their vocation. The enemy is dehumanised, either as crazed terrorists with bombs strapped to them who want to eat babies, or western infidels who seek to spread moral corruption around the world.

But in reality they're all just the same, on different sides of a war, but if there was no politics and no beliefs there's nothing to say they wouldn't get on. It made me remember that Christmas football match on the Western Front in 1914 or something. 'Clever' people realise that there's no difference between the soldiers, it's a numbers game really, if you're better equipped and have more men you win. So they have to use propaganda to convince us that the enemy is subhuman, that they're not the same as us.

Different century, same old game.

Propaganda
I was shocked when I was thinking about it, that the basic truths of humanity, equality, freedom and that are just illusions. The government gives us an illusion of freedom by not imposing immediate restrictions on us. For example, we don't need to apply for a licence to have a baby, but in a way it makes sense in order to make sure the population works smoothly. The government tries to let us believe that we are free to choose, but with taxation, the need for job security, etc. -> there is no real choice. Just as effectively as cold iron chains forced people to do the leaders bidding in Roman times, the need for money forces us now.

I have no choice, if I want a better life for myself. I must go to university, must train myself to be a productive member of society, and then must get a well paid, competitive job, in order to support a family one day, and a car, and a house.

Now, I can't remember how I got to this thought, but it came up

Law
So, if a lot of what we are taught is just nonsense to make us work in 'the system' then does it apply to laws too. In fact, what is so inherently wrong with murder, for example? Of course, if we believe in a soul and a spirit, and heaven then we are damning ourselves and someone else - but if we go back to basics and we are all just chimps, then it's survival of the fittest, and death is a part of life. Where was the law written into our genetic code that it is wrong to slay another human, or animal without good cause? It's been brainwashed into us that even trying to think that there's no real reason it's wrong feels wrong. But it's just to protect society, as two individuals, then it wont send you to hell, because hell likely doesn't exist. Although that comes down to your individual beliefs.

I dunno, it was much more lucid last night when I was thinking through it. Of course, I'm not going to go out and kill people, I'm not even going to stop paying my taxes. But was just thinking, in this enlightened day and age, we're not really any better off with regards to freedom etc. - we are the ants, the plebs, peasants, whatever you want to call it - than we ever were.

It's still us giving up our lives to fulfill our lords wishes, whether that means toiling the fields for meagre gains or literally throwing our lives in the line (150,000 US soldiers have been significantly injured in Iraq i.e. that are claiming injury pension / whatever they call it in US), for something we believe is right, but really is just how some clever people have manipulated us to think, knowing what makes a human reaction, knowing that seeing a human body in pain causes us to automatically empathise, we see so many of our fellow 'western' humans pained by everything that happened with terrorists, but we never see the other side.

And what does it all boil down to at the end? My final thought before I went to sleep, was that life seems futile. No matter what we do, there is no way to 'win'. There's no 'last boss' like in a computer game, maybe we have a better life for certain things, or worse for other things, but at the end of the day we will die, still in servitude, paying taxes to a group of people we never chose to join, and the servitude will continue with our children, and our children's children, and their children too.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So, if a lot of what we are taught is just nonsense to make us work in 'the system' then does it apply to laws too. In fact, what is so inherently wrong with murder, for example? Of course, if we believe in a soul and a spirit, and heaven then we are damning ourselves and someone else - but if we go back to basics and we are all just chimps, then it's survival of the fittest, and death is a part of life. Where was the law written into our genetic code that it is wrong to slay another human, or animal without good cause? It's been brainwashed into us that even trying to think that there's no real reason it's wrong feels wrong.
    Not true. Certain animals, including humans, have a natural instinct to live and work as part of a team, for the good of the entire group. And as such, they are genetically predisposed to not commit any acts that might fuck this up, which includes things like killing others, stealing, and otherwise hurting other members of the group. And you'll find that the more intelligent the animal, the bigger the number of animals that can be included in such a community (obviously humans aren't quite that intelligent to work out how to do it with the entire species). Not all morals come from religion or brainwashing. Do you think that the idea that sleeping with your sister or mother is wrong comes from religion, or nature, considering the increased risk of genetic problems? Do you think the idea that sleeping around is wrong comes from religion, or the fact that sexually transmitted diseases existed long before condoms? Often, if something is considered "wrong" in law, it is merely an extention of natural human instincts.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Until the sun crashes into the earth.

    Rich, how the fuck can you sleep with all of that going round in your head? :chin:

    Pretty well done though :thumb: I've come to realise that through the powers that be, that we are here just to keep the wheels turning.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I see a slight resemblance of my own reflections! I'm always like this, calling it philosophical or not. But really, we all have one thing in common, don't we? Don't we all share the same rudimentary qualities? How do you define something which is wrong, rather than defining it in terms of society's perspective? In the end, drifting into religion and cosmology, we are given our morals. We have a rudimentary set of ethics, we all have. How would we have gotten our complex sense of thinking today? From nothing? We get it from our ancestors, we pass it on. But in the beginning, the most simple things were apparent. You shall not cause pain. Why? It's obvious, we have no wish to feel pain. There is such a thing as living and showing solidarity. Why? Because it is most beneficial to all parties. This is where our sense has originated from.

    Brainwashing and propaganda are very effective. Where do we draw the line? I feel affected by the media and propaganda frequently. just like you're saying, terrorists are condemned by a lot of us, in many cases, rightly so. If we have to call this 'propaganda', I'll call it founded propaganda. Terrorists, most of them, are brainwashed by their government's propaganda and the people around them. Their religion, which in this case is preached by the, we might say, 'terrorist fraternity', blinds them from their own free will. They are blinded by this wrong, or should i say, different and wrong to ME and many people around me, interpretation of the scriptures.

    In the end they have no choice, they abide by the rules they are provided, how could they resist? Why would they want to resist? To them, it is the truth. The absolute truth.

    How could you resist martyrdom, if you have been sat down in a dark, locked room for days, watching videos to be 'enlightened' of martyrdom, salvation and all that bullcrap. In their minds they percieve this as the truth, nothing more, nothing less. They are indifferent to the pain they inflict, it does not matter. I find it incredibly sad that this interpretation is so commonplace in the Middle East and that there has developed such a stark contrast between the West and the East... side. :)

    But aren't we all individuals? Don't we all have are unique stories to tell? We all have different morals. We all behave differently and that's what makes us breathing individuals. Our free will. There'll always be the soldiers who want to kill, with greater barbaric tendencies than the rest. We get our morals from society -- in the end, this isn't my problem. The morals i've gotten from the people around me have originated from our nature. Everytihng around me is a reflection of my race. My morals. My ethics. My priorities - all of these in a rudimentary sense. The morals i get, brainwashing or not, have come from ourselves, the only difference is the development and the hygiene :D. To me, you can't decide what you think. You can't control what your mind naturally thinks and believes in. You're stuck with the beliefs you get when you grow up, hum. Free will? I say that's a luxury. :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    we don't need to apply for a licence to have a baby, but in a way it makes sense in order to make sure the population works smoothly.
    tbh i think that would be a good idea. i think, however right wing it might sound, i think potential parents should have to prove that they would make good parents to a child. and i think there should be restrictions imposed on this. i mean, i am all for free will and freedoms and basic huamn rights etc - but i do think its important to draw lines in society - i could get into arguments all day about who and why should anyone have the right to draw those lines, but i won't. i mean we have so many teenage pregnancies and unwanted births all the time and we set children up for shit lives from the moment of birth in some cases. peoples lives do need to be regulated to a certain extent, and we do live in a nanny state, but when that can ensure fairness, if not freedom, between people / behavior / laws / etc then imo its worth it.
    philosophically speaking i can see where you are coming with a lot of your ideas. a lot of people do blindly accept the world and society as it is presented to them. not everything about it is equal or free, but, where standards are maintained and regulated it is fair play.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Not true. Certain animals, including humans, have a natural instinct to live and work as part of a team, for the good of the entire group. And as such, they are genetically predisposed to not commit any acts that might fuck this up, which includes things like killing others, stealing, and otherwise hurting other members of the group.
    true. you could argue altruistic theory. but then it does little in terms of evolution. any community whether animal / human / other will always have members who commit such acts whic will ''fuck it up'' - often though it only serves to increase their fitness in their community.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How could you resist martyrdom, if you have been sat down in a dark, locked room for days, watching videos to be 'enlightened' of martyrdom, salvation and all that bullcrap. In their minds they percieve this as the truth, nothing more, nothing less. They are indifferent to the pain they inflict, it does not matter. I find it incredibly sad that this interpretation is so commonplace in the Middle East and that there has developed such a stark contrast between the West and the East... side. :)
    Terrorists commit terrorist acts because they believe it will lead to some greater good. Bush and Blair engage in a war which they know will kill thousands of innocent civilians because they believe it will lead to some greater good. The difference that is always mentioned is the fact that terrorists deliberately target civilians, whereas professional armies don't (although I'm not sure how much difference there is between committing acts you know will kill lots of civilians, and committing acts with the purpose of killing lots of civilians). It's easy to criticise anothers methodology though, when you're sat behind one of the most advance weapons and targeting systems in the world.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    otter wrote:
    true. you could argue altruistic theory. but then it does little in terms of evolution. any community whether animal / human / other will always have members who commit such acts whic will ''fuck it up'' - often though it only serves to increase their fitness in their community.
    And to be fair, we're not exactly a perfect design, so you will get people who break the 'rules' in an attempt to increase their social status, or for some form of gratification. And there are plenty of situations where two needs, desires of natural instincts are in conflict with each other.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Terrorists commit terrorist acts because they believe it will lead to some greater good. Bush and Blair engage in a war which they know will kill thousands of innocent civilians because they believe it will lead to some greater good. The difference that is always mentioned is the fact that terrorists deliberately target civilians, whereas professional armies don't (although I'm not sure how much difference there is between committing acts you know will kill lots of civilians, and committing acts with the purpose of killing lots of civilians). It's easy to criticise anothers methodology though, when you're sat behind one of the most advance weapons and targeting systems in the world.

    I still wouldn't go as far as saying that the armies of the West are share the same culpability for their acts as terrorists. They are different, the armies of the West share a goal which is for the good of everyone. certain means are required for certain aims. However, im not saying every leader is as altruistic as you'd like them to be, some decisions have led to such bloodshed i wonder if they're any better than suicide bombers. :(
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I still wouldn't go as far as saying that the armies of the West are share the same culpability for their acts as terrorists. They are different, the armies of the West share a goal which is for the good of everyone. certain means are required for certain aims. However, im not saying every leader is as altruistic as you'd like them to be, some decisions have led to such bloodshed i wonder if they're any better than suicide bombers. :(
    In who's opinion? In Osama Bin Laden's opinion, islamic law would be good for everyone, so how is that any different?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If you look at Iraq though:

    - Iraqi 'insurgents' are defending their country against Western hostile invaders who cluster bomb neighbourhoods killing hundreds of innocents, putting a puppet government in place to execute the legitimate ruler

    from the other side of the coin...

    - Western soldiers sent in to take control of weapons of mass destruction and to sever the chain of command in order to prevent weapon attacks, then in order to prevent chaos they install an interim government to uphold the law whilst trying to promote peace by tackling insurgent attacks on police stations and government buildings

    But put a naked american soldier next to a naked Iraqi soldier and look at them. They're both exactly the same. Maybe both have families they want to defend, both think they're doing the right thing, at the end of the day soldiers give their lives to the sovereign / leaders for no direct reason, it just turns into a game like command and conquer. The fact soldiers believe they're doing the right thing is obviously just good propaganda.

    Then we say, 'ok, lets look at this from a neutral point of view, who's *actually* in the right'. I can't answer that question. I can't say we were justified in invading Iraq anymore than I can say they were justified for kicking the shit out of Iran, or massacreing their own people. Maybe Saddam would argue:
    the armies of the West share a goal which is for the good of everyone. certain means are required for certain aims.

    Just makes me think, that's all. What's the point in sending men thousands of miles to kill someone they've never met and never offended them? The same with all wars, really. Fill them with illusions of glory, rewards and excitement and they'll follow you.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just makes me think, that's all. What's the point in sending men thousands of miles to kill someone they've never met and never offended them? The same with all wars, really. Fill them with illusions of glory, rewards and excitement and they'll follow you.
    All humans value abstract ideas though. Be it things like religious ideas, political ideas, their country, wealth (or the idea that you can actually own something), or any number of other things. All humans do it, so I think it's unfair to say that they have somehow been 'tricked' into fighting for such things. God this is getting horribly pretentious. :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    God this is getting horribly pretentious. :p

    Who are you addressing ?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just makes me think, that's all. What's the point in sending men thousands of miles to kill someone they've never met and never offended them? The same with all wars, really. Fill them with illusions of glory, rewards and excitement and they'll follow you.

    And if everyone thought like that, Miss World`s dream of world peace would come true.

    You have reminded me of my favourite Muhammad Ali quote
    "I ain't got no quarrel with those Vietcong,no Vietcong ever called me ******."

    He recognised that any threats to him where a little closer to home.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    All humans value abstract ideas though. Be it things like religious ideas, political ideas, their country, wealth (or the idea that you can actually own something), or any number of other things. All humans do it, so I think it's unfair to say that they have somehow been 'tricked' into fighting for such things. God this is getting horribly pretentious. :p

    My point is though, that although all humans do it, it's peculiar how its a few ones who use it to manipulate many for their own aims. But I'm not trying to condemn anyone, just saying that we try to make the world so 'just', 'fair' and 'free' when I'm not sure what the definition of any of them are, and if we think we have any it turns out to be just smoke and mirrors to keep us happy.

    No way we could survive without the nation though. Maybe humanity is overgrown? I just can't help but feel sorry for the majority of the earth's population who are born with nothing and are promised everything in exchange for being a good citizen, but end up where they started - with nothing.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No way we could survive without the nation though.
    Only because people value power and social status, so if there was no such thing as a nation, then there would always be someone (most likely several competing people or groups of people) trying to make one. Otherwise somewhere like Somalia would be paradise by now. That is why the majority believe that the idea of nations is a good one.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No way we could survive without the nation though.

    Why do you say that ?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    seeker wrote:
    Why do you say that ?

    60 million people living on a landmass the size of the UK without cooperating?

    China - over a billion people

    The fact is there are too many people for everyone to support themselves. People can barely afford to buy their own home these days, even with taking out a loan of money they pay back over 25 years.

    We need to have industrial scale farming to provide enough food, an established and widespread police force to stop 'bandits' so to speak, coal, trees and oil to keep people's fires burning etc. etc.

    I think really, we'll need to look at asteroids for raw materials in the next 100 years. One the small size of a moon could be blasted / towed and then massive machines could carefully extract metal ores and even ice if we run out of water.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote:
    60 million people living on a landmass the size of the UK without cooperating?

    What has any number of people cooperating got to do with an abstract notion of "a nation" ?
    ShyBoy wrote:
    The fact is there are too many people for everyone to support themselves. People can barely afford to buy their own home these days, even with taking out a loan of money they pay back over 25 years.

    That may have more to do with the banking system and how it is enforced.
    ShyBoy wrote:
    We need to have industrial scale farming to provide enough food, an established and widespread police force to stop 'bandits' so to speak, coal, trees and oil to keep people's fires burning etc. etc.

    Again, what does anyone`s apparent needs necessitate "a nation"( excepting the "need for a nation" obviously) ?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    seeker wrote:
    What has any number of people cooperating got to do with an abstract notion of "a nation" ?



    That may have more to do with the banking system and how it is enforced.



    Again, what does anyone`s apparent needs necessitate "a nation"( excepting the "need for a nation" obviously) ?

    Well, by nation, I meant a country such as the UK with a centralised government organising the running of the country. If you tried to opt out, how would you survive?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote:
    Well, by nation, I meant a country such as the UK with a centralised government organising the running of the country. If you tried to opt out, how would you survive?

    So, you mean you have to accept the notion in order to avoid the consequences rather than the notion in and of itself being a "need" ?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    The thing about that is that every fifteen year old going through a vaguely philsophical phase could work out that of course nations don't actually exist, except in our imaginations. Then you reach an age where you no longer think that to point that out makes you really deep and insightful, because it's rather obvious and banal. Sadly, some of us never seem to grow out of it.

    Would you not say that it was "insightful" to point it out when there are some who are advocating murder in the name of it ?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    Not really. People advocate murder in the name of various fictional deities too, and there's nothing particularly deep or clever or insightful in pointing out that they don't exist. It just stifles debate about what is to be done about the fact that there are wars and conflicts and violence over certain things, because you're so busy stroking your chin pretending to be oh so intelligent and incisive because you've noticed, shock horror! Nations don't really exist! Look at pictures of the earth from space, there aren't any boundaries! Yes, well done. Any ten year old can tell us that. Now can we move on?

    If you'd read the thread from the start, I was merely wanting to open a debate on how morals / laws etc. are all brainwashed into us, in fact we're completely brainwashed. I think it's quite rude in a politics and debate forum to belittle a whole thread. So, do you not think it's off how we think ourselves superior and yet we brainwash young men and send them off to their deaths in some foreign land? And what's it all for in the end?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote:
    If you'd read the thread from the start, I was merely wanting to open a debate on how morals / laws etc. are all brainwashed into us, in fact we're completely brainwashed. I think it's quite rude in a politics and debate forum to belittle a whole thread. So, do you not think it's off how we think ourselves superior and yet we brainwash young men and send them off to their deaths in some foreign land? And what's it all for in the end?

    Are they the brainwashed ones or are you?

    After all most of the media coverage is pretty negative and you'll find even right-wing sources in the UK hardly have a good word for Bush and Blair, so perhaps you've been brainwashed into thinking something...

    Or perhaps different people have different views. The blokes out in Iraq or Afghanistan aren't out they're fighting for some nebulous concept of 'freedom' or for 'God, Queen and Country' but because it's there job and for their mates.

    Most soldiers are much more critical thinkers than civilians give them credit for...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    It just stifles debate about what is to be done about the fact that there are wars and conflicts and violence over certain things, because you're so busy stroking your chin pretending to be oh so intelligent and incisive because you've noticed, shock horror! Nations don't really exist! Look at pictures of the earth from space, there aren't any boundaries! Yes, well done. Any ten year old can tell us that. Now can we move on?

    Quite an (insulting ?) sentence :eek2: :eek2:

    You have got me stroking the chin thinking you can`t see the wood for the trees. (And by saying that you may think I`m being insulting and personal ?).

    Such is the way of misconceptions.

    How about a scenario ?

    ====================================

    Doctor : The patient`s dead.

    Next of kin : What treatment would you recommend ?

    Doctor : I`m sorry, the patient is dead.

    Next of kin : Any ten year old can see that, but what about the treatment ?

    Doctor(stroking chin): The patient is dead.

    Next of kin : Stop stroking your chin pretending to be oh so intelligent and incisive because you've noticed, shock horror! The patient is dead.Now can we move on? You are stifling debate about what is to be done.

    ===================================
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Or perhaps different people have different views. The blokes out in Iraq or Afghanistan aren't out they're fighting for some nebulous concept of 'freedom' or for 'God, Queen and Country' but because it's there job and for their mates.

    So they are murdering for money and their mates ?
    Most soldiers are much more critical thinkers than civilians give them credit for...

    Critical about what ?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah, we all know that nations don't exist blah, blah, blah. But the issue is, do you believe they are a positive or negative thing for the majority of people within them (and by within them I mean.......ah well, you know, pay taxes, entitled to benefits etc etc etc)? Or even you personally?

    In other words, is the concept of a country a useful one?
Sign In or Register to comment.