individual responsibility - was Re: Nationalism vs Globalism

[Mirimir]

On 09/03/2016 02:33 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 01:18:42AM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
>> On 09/03/2016 12:22 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 12:03:56AM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
>>>> On 09/02/2016 11:30 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 10:33:58PM -0600, Mirimir wrote:
>>>>>> On 09/02/2016 09:26 PM, Razer wrote:
>>>>>>> On 09/02/2016 07:01 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 06:06:24PM -0700, Razer wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 09/02/2016 05:51 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> individual sovereignty and anarchism
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Try "individual RESPONSIBILITY to the 'collective' called humanity and
>>>>>>>>> Anarchism" and I'll nibble. Until then it's just Feudal Nihilism by
>>>>>>>>> different means.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nihilism sounds like moral relativism, not very useful.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Feudal nihilism" - I don't understand what that's supposed to mean.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It means you don't care what happens to the shitpile as long as you're
>>>>>>> at the tip of the turd.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do feel some compassion for the shitpile. But playing in shit is just
>>>>>> not very interesting. And change (or even transformation) is at best
>>>>>> illusory.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is not agreeable, nor constructive, although the statement may be
>>>>> provable over specific time periods and at certain levels of analysis.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe not agreeable or constructive to you, but accurate, I believe.
>>>
>>>>> But, for many of us, where "keeping out of it" means not engaging or
>>>>> physically interacting with interesting folk who also exist within "our
>>>>> nation", isolationism is intolerable!
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't mean that at all.
>>>
>>> You're not quite getting this point:
>>>
>>>
>>> One particular issue at hand: DMV issued driver licenses.
>>>
>>> We have the options:
>>>
>>>  - isolate (monastically, or with some friends)
>>>
>>>  - not isolate
>>>
>>> In the case we 'not isolate', and we drive to another 'not-isolationist'
>>> community, we then are presented with two options (amongst others like
>>> "get a friend to drive me", but let's cut to the chase here):
>>>
>>>  - drive by common law/ natural law right/ the blessing/ etc
>>>
>>>  - obtain and drive with a state-issued driver license (eg DMV)
>>>
>>> Mirimir, when you say you choose to 'fly below the radar' or rather 'nod
>>> and smile', what, specifically, are you suggesting in this very real and
>>> current and modern scenario?
>>
>> I have a driver license. My vehicles are certified safe. I have
>> insurance. I drive prudently, avoiding attention. If detained by police,
>> I am calm and respectful. Refusing any of those things is, in my humble
>> opinion, just too fucking stupid for words.
>>
>> It's true that I learned those skills as a drug smuggler ;) But more
>> generally, I fly below the radar when it's workable.
> 
> Got it. Compliance with external authorities for travel (papers please,
> yes sir!), and living your life where it's not confrontational. OK.
> 
> I accept your choice.
> 
> Opposing the state is a very confronting thing to do.

There are many ways to oppose.

> So let's not pretend that compliance with the state is anarchism.

I don't have much use for labels.

> All I'm asking, as I asked above in the thread, is that we speak a
> little more clearly and refrain from disparaging those who DO try to
> improve "the shit pile" by confronting the system in one way or another.
> 
> Is that too much to ask?

I call them as I see them ;)

> Or shall we always receive "you're too damn stupid to fly below the
> radar on some things, and basically comply, so give up on changing
> things at a system level because it's never going to happen"...

Maybe review that in a decade or two :)

>>> (And before you try to sidestep the issue: the properties are 97km
>>> apart, driving and walking are your only means of transport, and you
>>> have to meet in person not video conference, perhaps shipping a few
>>> garbage bags of prime head or juicy tomatoes.)
>>
>> It's only a problem if you're so pigheaded that you need to openly defy
>> authority ;)
> 
> I hold that we can improve the shit pile.

So go for it, dude :)

> I also hold that we should be cautious in dropping a bucket of cold
> water on those who want to try, and be cautious in immediate
> declarations of "it's not possible".

I don't say that it's impossible. Just pretty damn unlikely. And 99% of
those "trying" are just blowing smoke.

> Is it possibly less than 'constructive' to dishearten individuals before
> they've even begun?

So maybe do something, instead of talking so much about it.

> Could doing so, in the context of "fly below the radar with compliance
> with the state" be seen as, I dunno, statist propaganda perhaps?

Are you fucking serious?

> And if you agree with that, can you see why Juan is so vehement in his
> responses to "statist propaganda" ? :) ? ?

Juan is an idiot.

>>>>> Some say the leader of the Zealots was Jesus the Nazarene, the last King
>>>>> of the jews and there is some evidence to this - a book where the author
>>>>> alleges he read the last scroll of the Zealots in person, but was not
>>>>> allowed a copy (can't remember the name of the book right now).
>>>>
>>>> That was a long time ago, and impossible to tell from bullshit.
>>>
>>> Except to the degree one can put credence in time dating and the
>>> contents of an actual scroll at ground zero of the mutual suicide that
>>> occurred at Masada from their self proclaimed (in said scroll) leader.
>>
>> What exactly should I care?
> 
> That's up to you. You said it wasn't possible. Now you say you don't
> care.
> 
> What would you suggest I now say? Perhaps "whatever!"?
> 
> 
>> Far more interesting is the Copiale Cipher.
>>
>> http://www.wired.com/2012/11/ff-the-manuscript/
>>
>> https://scottishrite.org/about/media-publications/journal/article/the-copiale-cipher-an-early-german-masonic-ritual-unveiled/
> 
> Cool. Thanks.
> 
> 
>>> Feel free to only put credence in contemporary internet-accessible
>>> blogs, rather than such scrolls, since it's on the internet it must be
>>> true and all that...
>>
>> Mostly lies, for sure. But that's true for everything :(
> 
> Can we improve on buckets of cold water and absolutes ("impossible to
> tell")?
> 
> (I'm entirely guilty of flashing absolutes around..)
>