A philosophic conversarion on rebels and rebellion.

[Yourbaker]

This is a topic I both loath and love to discuss.

The days of past rebellions that we have all been educated on seem to fall in a few very distinct catagories.

1. WE rebelled and overthrew someone else and are the good guys (american civil war etc.)

2. WE stamped out the uprising of rabble and thugs, a danger has been averted.

3. THE GOVERNMENT UNLIKE OURS murdered its own people whose only crime was wanting freedom.

4. A GOVERNMENT WE APPROVE OF had to use deadly force to stop riots and regain control.

In all 4 events exactly the same thing happens but we filter it and actively perceive it differently. Being raised in North America my education contains a huge list of both "good" and "bad" rebels and growing up I watched a thousand movies and read as many books where the "rebel" is the greatest hero of them all.

Why has our society (which is based on co-operation) made such a heroic persona ofmthe Rebel?

Children who grow up being Luke Skywalker may find it difficult to join society and feel this role of rebel is real and now.

When is Rebellion Right?

What makes my viewpoint or ours so important we must be not just willing to die for it but also willing to kill?

How do you know the side you find yourself on is right?

Rebellions in the past that have been successful (category 1 Above), have brought change for the people. How do we as a individuals really understand the best change for our society?

Will the people be able to overthrow their governments if the need arises?

Is there a non violent option? Humanity is more connected and far more intelligent as a whole then ever before in history. Despite being almost epicly stupid as well, can we actually discuss this without tearing our world apart. Wouldn't it be cool to make earth more then a game of surviror?

 

[thegreenhand]

I am a firm believer that more often than not, “the revolution will not be televised”.

At least not in the beginnings. A shift in cultural consciousness occurs long before tyrants are overthrown. This is a slow process, often brought about by spiritual-religious revelations. A fundamental change in the ethics we use to raise our children. Those sorts of things are much more powerful than any militia.

 

[iridescentblack]

Rebellion, driven mostly by the outcasts of society, I think is usually fueled by a very deep-seeded desire - specific to the individual - which longs to be seen through much like the Great Work. To have such a view, in mind, that propels one to do great deeds is contrary to that status quo becomes it "appears" as though the individual performed his deeds for two reasons: himself and for the betterment of society. This is much different than the commonfolk, because often their needs are driven by what the collective ego seems to want. This is not, however, to say that the collective is any more or less selfish in their aim.

I have been pretty much a loser my entire life, walking a pretty lonely road where I justify my means of doing things by a code of sorts, but my method for "feeling" that I am on the right side is just this: I feel I'm doing the right thing because my feelings guide me, yet I try not to rely on them - or risk being disillusioned by my own feelings.

 

[Jabberwocky]

I’m wary of anything that involves the formation of a mob. People in mobs tend to lose the better parts of their humanity and quickly get in touch with a bloodlust they would never otherwise be aware they had the potential for. The idea that that the majority of people participating in a rebellion or revolution are doing so rationally in false. Professional revolutionaries since the French Revolution have been well aware of this and the writing of many of them often references the need to capture and direct mob energy. Lenin in particular covered this when he wrote “What is to Be Done”, which has served as the handbook for future revolutionaries. He makes it clear that they will be led by a ‘vanguard’ of ‘intellectuals’ and the bulk of the mob will participate without actually understanding what they are really doing.

More philosophically though, in attempting to justify a revolution, I think you need to have a clear proposition regarding what constitutes human flourishing and be able to demonstrate that your post-revolution vision for society is both plausible and will contribute more to that human flourishing than the present system. You also need to provide some kind of moral calculus showing that under your definition of human flourishing, the death, moral outrages, and destruction caused by your revolution are justifiable on an ends/means basis.

Paradoxically though, if you were able to make such a proposition in a democracy and convince sufficient people of its merits you could probably go a long way towards it by non-violent means by using existing democratic processes.

The simplistic proposition that FREEDOM is the only relevant measure of human flourishing and that the only two valid measures of FREEDOM are RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS and SMALL GOVERNMENT, seems a pretty flimsy measure and a pretty flimsy basis to launch the destruction of any existing State anywhere. Those two things may be velements of a legitimate vision for a post-revolutionary society - but anybody taking up arms purely for those two reasons has not done much thinking about all the other dimensions of human needs and social organisation.

 

[FuckinAcidMan]

you can't make me have this conversation with y'all I'm too fuckin' rebellious

*runs round in circles making airplane noises like a dipshit*

 

[Burnt Offerings]

The rebel is a romantic figure...I think that there's an especial attachment to the archetype in the United States, where there's a deep individualistic streak in a lot of political topics, and an ongoing fascination with the rebel, the outlaw or just the person who will challenge/question ossified systems of power or privilege.

But it's complicated too...just think about the ultimate rebel: Satan. In the Biblical story, not only is he a rebel, but he recruits Adam and Eve to be rebels too! I was always fascinated by that story, about defying the ultimate authority (God) and accessing forbidden knowledge. Just like I've always liked the story of Prometheus, in Greek mythology, another rebel.

However, the rebel is ultimately undone by the inherent contradictions within their own ideology. We all know, after all, of people who are such nonconformists that they end up creating some new conformity. If a rebel is successful and puts their ideas into the mainstream, they risk merely creating a new orthodoxy, a new system of power and control.

I’m wary of anything that involves the formation of a mob. People in mobs tend to lose the better parts of their humanity and quickly get in touch with a bloodlust they would never otherwise be aware they had the potential for. The idea that that the majority of people participating in a rebellion or revolution are doing so rationally in false. Professional revolutionaries since the French Revolution have been well aware of this and the writing of many of them often references the need to capture and direct mob energy. Lenin in particular covered this when he wrote “What is to Be Done”, which has served as the handbook for future revolutionaries. He makes it clear that they will be led by a ‘vanguard’ of ‘intellectuals’ and the bulk of the mob will participate without actually understanding what they are really doing.

I was always fascinated by "crowd psychology" and Le Bon and all that kind of stuff too...it seemed to be more of an early-mid 20th century thing but waned in influence after WW2. Post-WW2 the only country I can think of off the top of my head that was still really into it was Argentina under Peron. The whole demagogue-harranguing-frenzied-crowd thing kinda lost political influence in general though...seemed like it kinda got a bad name for some reason...

 

[Jabberwocky]

There is still work being done in social psychology based on different theoretical approaches including contagion, convergence and emergent norms.

However, I think it’s pretty clear that we still have lots of mob behaviour evident in societies of all kinds. Although convergence theory suggests mobs only demonstrate the aggregate moral characteristics of their members (though amplified), I think they have the capacity to compel people to things they would never do alone. That may be negative in a riot or positive in, say, a peaceful sit-in.

 

[Yourbaker]

The simplistic proposition that FREEDOM is the only relevant measure of human flourishing and that the only two valid measures of FREEDOM are RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS and SMALL GOVERNMENT, seems a pretty flimsy measure and a pretty flimsy basis to launch the destruction of any existing State anywhere. Those two things may be velements of a legitimate vision for a post-revolutionary society - but anybody taking up arms purely for those two reasons has not done much thinking about all the other dimensions of human needs and social ororganisation.

Small government seems highly desirable and achievable and I agree Freedom is great partial measure of thriving, I cannot see how weapons fits in at all though.

I see democracy needs to change so we only have opinions in our fields of expertise. We need to own those fields as a population. We need to blend the elites into the rest of society as far as authority is concerned.

We have literally given authority to money and whoever can control the most is really in charge. Sadly money is a game of slavery gone sideways so no matter Revolution or not we need a whole new financial system. This is kind of good because we can make it center on co-operation vs competition.

To become a co-operative society we need leadership with vision and humanity needs to set some lofty goals. Despite the encroaching tyranny we have never been smarter and never had a greater potential to thrive as a planet, not just a species.

I think we will see lot of revolutions in the near future, or hear of them before the web goes dark. The truth I see is humanity is being enslaved by ourselves and the people in the middle are not sure where they will end up so they are hesitating. I just think burning everything first seems dumb we should just organize.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Small government seems highly desirable and achievable and I agree Freedom is great partial measure of thriving, I cannot see how weapons fits in at all though.

I see democracy needs to change so we only have opinions in our fields of expertise. We need to own those fields as a population. We need to blend the elites into the rest of society as far as authority is concerned.

We have literally given authority to money and whoever can control the most is really in charge. Sadly money is a game of slavery gone sideways so no matter Revolution or not we need a whole new financial system. This is kind of good because we can make it center on co-operation vs competition.

To become a co-operative society we need leadership with vision and humanity needs to set some lofty goals. Despite the encroaching tyranny we have never been smarter and never had a greater potential to thrive as a planet, not just a species.

I think we will see lot of revolutions in the near future, or hear of them before the web goes dark. The truth I see is humanity is being enslaved by ourselves and the people in the middle are not sure where they will end up so they are hesitating. I just think burning everything first seems dumb we should just organize.

I think these kind of conversations are hard, especially on BL. I tend to argue the point from a global historical view - so a bit abstracted though my position is definitely coloured by the relative success of Australia which seems to have relatively big government but fairly high degrees of freedom in many measures and a fairly high degree of human flourishing if you take a broad view of what that means.

It seems natural to think of the West or even just the anglosphere as fairly homogenous, but when you think about it America is an outlier on many measures which seem to contribute to the negative view of Americans here who wouldn’t mind a revolution but also see the US as being the sum total of Western Democracy.

I mean many people have commented on how ‘unfree’ Australians are primarily because of our Covid rules and gun laws. But, depending on your methodology, financial inequality and social mobility are both better in Australia. Poorer people pay less total tax (direct and indirect) here while the size of the economic elite is actually declining as a proportion of the population. Furthermore, there is far less evidence that the political system has been captured by special interest groups via money politics. A great many of our elected politicians come from working or middle-class backgrounds.

Words like ‘enslavement’ just have no meaning in the Australian context. Consequently, it’s very hard to imagine any movement towards insurrection or revolution here that would not rightly be considered illegitimate and invalid as well as plainly criminal and treasonous by the vast majority of Australians. Particularly when, excluding Aborigines in rural and remote areas, income does not vary a great deal between major demographic groups.

That’s not to say that we don’t have something like a permanent underclass. However, any adult in a third-generation welfare family here has to be trying pretty hard to avoid moving up in the world.

I don’t have the lived experience of being a US citizen or ever living there for longer than a few months so I can’t claim to know if civil disobedience trending to insurrection is legitimate at this point in history or trending this way. But I think I can say confidently that people using the case of the US to make larger claims about the need to topple Western political systems more generally are drawing a long bow.

 

[Yourbaker]

I only live near America so my opinion can only be of their news and not truly of America either. I do however feel unsecure having America as our neighbour simply because the internal conflicts may lead to something worse and I do have friends and family living there.

I don't hate on America but if nations have egos theirs seems to be a bit puffed up. You must be able to hold your nation together first. America is like a huge man with Parkinsons. Love you guys but the infighting is scary as hell.

Finding a path to understanding without killing each other seems like a better idea.

The question I see is that by not doing anything I have become a "bad guy" in the eyes of the unquestioning obedient population. My rights have already been slightly removed and I have been threatened with more on the way. By not reacting to the panic demic I am demonized and pushed into a side by others.

Will the very aggressive pro-vaccine movement keep pushing until it becomes rebellion by force? Sides are forming, emails are flying, people are moving about and I see this aggression. Will we be disadvantaged until we become aggressive back? Is the vaccine movement seeking death of millions by violence to save face?

How do we bring people, who want to round us up and force us into a questionable practice that we don't want, to a sane discussion that isn't just the same senseless demand repeated?

There isn't currently a politician I could stomach voting for anywhere, we need a new system but can we do it without killing each other?

 

[Jabberwocky]

Here at least, I think Covid will probably peter out over the next 18 months and well before divisions between pro- and anti- vaccine groups become institutionalised to the permanent disadvantage of the non-vaccinated minority. However, with double-shot vaccination levels approaching 90 % in most states and major population centres I think it unlikely that a rebellion of the non-vaxed could pose much of a threat.

Vaccination is a tricky issue to me for the following reason. In a democracy the guiding principles are majority rules but with respect for pluralistic views. A good example here was the referendum on gay marriage. About 40 % of people were opposed to it but the 60 % carried the day. Subsequently the 40 % mostly accepted the decision and got on with their lives and generally wished the best for the people the change in the law would benefit. They knew there were other laws that benefited them disproportionately in other areas. However, I suspect these principles might be trumped by bodily integrity. I can't see that either majority rules or respect for pluralism applies in questions of what a person may may not be required by law allow to be done to modify their body.

 

[Yourbaker]

I don't think the straight people were forced into gay marriages though were they?

Imagine that backlash, because that's a more correct analogy.

The un vaccinated and the booster refusers are not the aggressors in this. Left alone we would go about our lives. Talk to the aggressors before they cause self defense.

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

i hate being told what to do

 

[Yourbaker]

I find it odd there is not a single sane argument for what is happening right now in the world. Greed has fired up, and some one stirred the pot. Things are sliding sideways in a nuclear capable world where general who knows from whatever side may do almost anything.

We are busy quibbling about vaccines and more people will die from our actions in the end vs the real death count from the virus.

Humanity has been forgotten in the name of safety? Security?

Seems to me we are being herded a lot more than helped and like a bad cow I am making noise so the trusting dull cows will wake up for just a moment and really consider where this happy truck is going.

 

[Jerry Atrick]

I've read each post in this thread but I see that it has come down to vax vs anti-vax.

I'm gonna copy/paste a tweet from Robert Reich I saw today: "Can we please start talking less about the personal freedom to not get tested or vaccinated, and more about the collective freedom to not get sick or die from Covid?"

The reason I post this, and I had a huge blowup with my cousin on facebook about the subject earlier tonight, is because it appears that the anti-vax people tend to always be fixated on themselves and their own personal freedoms. I told my cousin, it isn't about me and you as individuals. Rather it's about all the other people we come in contact with when we walk around unvaxxed, unmasked, and not socially distanced at the local grocery store.

An example, my mom has a compromised immune system from a disorder that began attacking her lungs like 6 years ago. Covid could kill her. And because she is a conservative and hardly believes in science, she went to a NYE party two weeks ago unmasked and actually caught fucking covid. Everyone around her, friends and family, have been vaxxed and wear masks in her presence not for themselves but to protect her. And her own negligence got her infected with something she may not survive. I'm still pissed that she could die and she has no one to blame but herself. If only someone I know had given it to her, then I could channel my anger and frustration toward them. But this is not the case.

Where is the humanity in not caring about your fellow man/woman or neighbor? Where is the humanity in being so self-centered that we would rather infect other people than get a boo boo in the arm? After all, neither polio nor measles ever reached herd immunity. Both were eradicated with vaccines. The difference is, perhaps due to lack of information eg., Alex Jones or Joe Rogan types on the internet spreading misinformation, people back then were happy and appreciative to have the opportunity to get the jab.

So go ahead and start your revolution, whether peaceful or violent. I will sit my vaxxed ass at home, quarantined and safe from all y'alls diseases.

 

[Yourbaker]

I've read each post in this thread but I see that it has come down to vax vs anti-vax.

I'm gonna copy/paste a tweet from Robert Reich I saw today: "Can we please start talking less about the personal freedom to not get tested or vaccinated, and more about the collective freedom to not get sick or die from Covid?"

The reason I post this, and I had a huge blowup with my cousin on facebook about the subject earlier tonight, is because it appears that the anti-vax people tend to always be fixated on themselves and their own personal freedoms. I told my cousin, it isn't about me and you as individuals. Rather it's about all the other people we come in contact with when we walk around unvaxxed, unmasked, and not socially distanced at the local grocery store.

An example, my mom has a compromised immune system from a disorder that began attacking her lungs like 6 years ago. Covid could kill her. And because she is a conservative and hardly believes in science, she went to a NYE party two weeks ago unmasked and actually caught fucking covid. Everyone around her, friends and family, have been vaxxed and wear masks in her presence not for themselves but to protect her. And her own negligence got her infected with something she may not survive. I'm still pissed that she could die and she has no one to blame but herself. If only someone I know had given it to her, then I could channel my anger and frustration toward them. But this is not the case.

Where is the humanity in not caring about your fellow man/woman or neighbor? Where is the humanity in being so self-centered that we would rather infect other people than get a boo boo in the arm? After all, neither polio nor measles ever reached herd immunity. Both were eradicated with vaccines. The difference is, perhaps due to lack of information eg., Alex Jones or Joe Rogan types on the internet spreading misinformation, people back then were happy and appreciative to have the opportunity to get the jab.

So go ahead and start your revolution, whether peaceful or violent. I will sit my vaxxed ass at home, quarantined and safe from all y'alls diseases.

I think this is an excellent example of the issue we face today.

In our society, for everything to function well we need harmony. Each of us can do more by focusing our efforts on singular tasks and our society as a whole can advance.

I shouldn't need to ever question people working in the other branches of society, My food should be safe, water drinkable, road signs shouldn't require me to check to see if they are true. I should be able to trust each different segment of my society.

Because we all are very aware that this isn't true, the question we should be asking is why not?

For me personally I have rarely trusted commonly held beliefs because I was raised in a religious community and learning to think for myself was essential. As time passed it became apparent to me commonly held views were often wrong. When I was a computer salesman I learned people had no clue and was very successful as long as the product I was selling could actually do what it was supposed to. I had to quit when MS-dos arrived, there wasn't enough liquor in the world to wash my conscience clean after selling Unix.

Although switching to baking seemed crazy, after 35 years I am now the old man in this trade. Once again I find the stories being sold to the public about baking are less then correct. Gluten free is not friendly, suddenly in my own field you could not trust the bakers.

So I chose to go work for a gluten free manufacturing plant and learn everything about it. For the most part the whole food industry is in trouble, what you are eating is becoming further and further removed from the food the earth grows in a natural state. This doesn't have to mean it is bad, but if you want to eat healthy you must learn everything yourself, as anyone else will tell you anything, and take your money.

Because I am one single perspective, it is human nature to link our opinions and see how common our held beliefs are. We Guage ourselves in this manner, If we, as individuals, get push back from those around us we may alter course. If we encounter like minds we become a group with a vision for change.

Our society has a new tool, the internet. No matter how nutters I am, I can find my soul mate here. The new problem becomes how do we now truly see the path between right and wrong when we have muddied the water so badly?

Is society doomed to either totalitarian control to stay focused or a never ending sea of lies that we can not seem to get our heads above? Is there a middle ground and can we get to it as a species?

My personal belief is we need a change in how we look at society, one as fundamental as the change copernicus brought when he showed the sun did not revolve around the earth.

I think we are experiencing this highly uncertain state right before a huge fundamental change to human understanding. The crazies would say, we are about to understand we are food or some other terror and act accordingly but I don't see the fears beyond fear of someone else near me reacting badly.

I see a time of change arriving right now and which direction humanity heads is in the wind. Rather than fear this, we need to embrace it and become that generation that found it's footing. I would like to hand this world off to the next generation in better shape and with less hidden agendas. We are becoming a singular society and it is time we took care of each other.

 

[Jerry Atrick]

I think this is an excellent example of the issue we face today.

In our society, for everything to function well we need harmony. Each of us can do more by focusing our efforts on singular tasks and our society as a whole can advance.

I shouldn't need to ever question people working in the other branches of society, My food should be safe, water drinkable, road signs shouldn't require me to check to see if they are true. I should be able to trust each different segment of my society.

Because we all are very aware that this isn't true, the question we should be asking is why not?

For me personally I have rarely trusted commonly held beliefs because I was raised in a religious community and learning to think for myself was essential. As time passed it became apparent to me commonly held views were often wrong. When I was a computer salesman I learned people had no clue and was very successful as long as the product I was selling could actually do what it was supposed to. I had to quit when MS-dos arrived, there wasn't enough liquor in the world to wash my conscience clean after selling Unix.

Although switching to baking seemed crazy, after 35 years I am now the old man in this trade. Once again I find the stories being sold to the public about baking are less then correct. Gluten free is not friendly, suddenly in my own field you could not trust the bakers.

So I chose to go work for a gluten free manufacturing plant and learn everything about it. For the most part the whole food industry is in trouble, what you are eating is becoming further and further removed from the food the earth grows in a natural state. This doesn't have to mean it is bad, but if you want to eat healthy you must learn everything yourself, as anyone else will tell you anything, and take your money.

Because I am one single perspective, it is human nature to link our opinions and see how common our held beliefs are. We Guage ourselves in this manner, If we, as individuals, get push back from those around us we may alter course. If we encounter like minds we become a group with a vision for change.

Our society has a new tool, the internet. No matter how nutters I am, I can find my soul mate here. The new problem becomes how do we now truly see the path between right and wrong when we have muddied the water so badly?

Is society doomed to either totalitarian control to stay focused or a never ending sea of lies that we can not seem to get our heads above? Is there a middle ground and can we get to it as a species?

My personal belief is we need a change in how we look at society, one as fundamental as the change copernicus brought when he showed the sun did not revolve around the earth.

I think we are experiencing this highly uncertain state right before a huge fundamental change to human understanding. The crazies would say, we are about to understand we are food or some other terror and act accordingly but I don't see the fears beyond fear of someone else near me reacting badly.

I see a time of change arriving right now and which direction humanity heads is in the wind. Rather than fear this, we need to embrace it and become that generation that found it's footing. I would like to hand this world off to the next generation in better shape and with less hidden agendas. We are becoming a singular society and it is time we took care of each other.

Released in 1964, I think this song is just as relevant today as it was back then. IMHO the entire album is a masterpiece.



The Times They Are A-Changin'
By Bob Dylan

Come gather ’round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You’ll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you is worth savin’
Then you better start swimmin’ or you’ll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin’

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won’t come again
And don’t speak too soon
For the wheel’s still in spin
And there’s no tellin’ who that it’s namin’
For the loser now will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin’

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside and it is ragin’
It’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don’t criticize
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is rapidly agin’
Please get out of the new one if you can’t lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin’

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is rapidly fadin’
And the first one now will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’

Copyright
© 1963, 1964 by Warner Bros. Inc.; renewed 1991, 1992 by Special Rider Music

 

[Xorkoth]

I think, in America at least, the rebel has attained such a high status because our country was founded by a rebellion. So right from the get-go, rebellion was idealized and raised up as something positive. In fact it's written into the Constitution.

I think this has both good and bad implications. On one hand, the people should feel empowered to band together to overthrow oppression, because the fact of the matter is, the sociopathic power mongers among humanity will always seek to corrupt any system in order to control the masses, and this almost always results in a lower quality of life for the people at the expense of the elite. On the other hand, a healthy society also involves some amount of putting the good of the whole above the good of the individual, and the "rugged individualism" of America has some downsides as well. If we all just do what is best for us personally in the moment, society does not work properly and a lot of people suffer. I do not think we have struck this balance in America, and in fact I don't think many places in the world have, at least for extended periods of time.

 

[iridescentblack]

If we all just do what is best for us personally in the moment, society does not work properly and a lot of people suffer. I do not think we have struck this balance in America, and in fact I don't think many places in the world have, at least for extended periods of time.

I've been thinking about this thread and how it reminds me of the lyrics of famous rapper Aesop Rock. His lyrics are quite controversial, even for East Coast rap.

In one of his songs he repeats the lyrics, "What are you saving? (honestly, honestly) What are you saving?" <the song is referring to "saviors"

Personally I think the savior mentality goes around a lot. People stepping up to the board in Congress, trying to get Senators and whatnot to change their minds about things... I see a lot of the progress going into change things in this country is done rather underhandedly. It's hard to say exactly what guides the rebel or hero archetype in his movement to provide a better life for some, but when I see people trying to overturn issues that seem otherwise immoral, it's almost like they feel the need to stare into the camera lens for their 20 seconds of fame to say, "Yeah, I'm fighting anti-abortion laws"

Recently a term came into conversation with my brother as we were discussing solipsism. A possible antonym to the term solipsism could be called "sonder", a word which means to acknowledge every passer-by as though they have their own unique experience and that experience is as rich as your own.

The problem with gaining renown as one becomes an influential human being is obviously the turn of crowds and I think the general mentality (regardless of social class) is not without a deep fear when that fame could cease at any given moment. Rebellions seem to seep into this deep need that almost supports that a collective unconscious is at work, as if the crowds are all gathered at the thought that their needs will eventually be taken care of based on a simple set of structures (like Maslow's hierarchy).

I sometimes have to wonder if it's some kind of resilience to paranoia that drives people to become heroes like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and work to share in that resilience that leads to other people becoming strong in their beliefs and their strides as a result. This resilience seems to negate the fears projected by the higher social classes and thus the fear of an uprising grows ever near. Those matters that formerly oppressed people and kept them silent seem silent themselves and people both curious and angry come to join to see what is being said.

 

[thujone]

I've read each post in this thread but I see that it has come down to vax vs anti-vax.

I'm gonna copy/paste a tweet from Robert Reich I saw today: "Can we please start talking less about the personal freedom to not get tested or vaccinated, and more about the collective freedom to not get sick or die from Covid?"

The statement insinuates that the only way to protect "collective freedom" (this is a falsehood) is to infringe upon the freedom of the individual who wishes to dissent.

The only reason you agree with this statement now is because you are not among the individuals being discriminated against. But what if you were?

This line of reasoning has already exposed the ugliness of society, as people have openly mused about locking the unvaccinated into camps and denying them participatory rights in society.

Really think about that statement - freedom to not get sick. Knowing what you know about the real world, does this actually sound feasible to you? Do you really think we're on the cusp of immortality, if only we can just get through this one pesky pandemic?

There will always be another pandemic, another disease, another crises. People get sick and die. This is not a social justice issue that can be tackled and fixed, it's just a fact of life.

Let's not lose our heads over it.