Why don't we all just stop?

Do you like war? Do you like killing? Do you like birth defects from radiaton poisoning and taxes and foreclosures and suffering and misery and death? No? Me neither. And I think that probably most other people also don't like these things.

So why don't we stop making these things happen?

It's humans who wage war, it's humans who kill one another, it's humans who use radioactive munitions and foreclose on houses and imprison one another for personal choices that harm no one.

If you're a police officer and you see a teenger smoking drugs, ask yourself...do you make the world a better place by arresting him? If you're a soldier and you see a man you've been told is your enemy, ask yourself, do you make the world a better place by killing him? If you're a loan officer considering foreclosing on a house, ask yourself...would doing so make the world a better place for humans? Oh certainly your corporation may benefit. But who is more important, people, or a fictitious legal entity?

"Oh, but corporate interests would never allow it."

We created corporations. They are artificial people, not real people. Why should we serve them? Corporations have no power other than that which we give them. Why allow them to control us? If humans stopped exploiting humans, corporations would have no power to compell us. Corporations have no power at all. Only people do.

"Oh, but those people over there won't stop killing us, so we need to kill them first."

They probably feel the same way. And I'm addressing those people, too. If you won't stop until they stop, should it come as any surprise that they won't stop until you stop? Why don't we all just stop?

"Oh, but 2012 is coming, and the aliens/Jesus/flying spahgetti monster will save us."

We don't need space Jesus to save us. We can save us.

"You're talking fantasy nonsense. It's all just a dream. It could never really happen."

America was a dream. Human flight was a dream. Getting man to the moon was a dream. All of these things were dreams, and all of them happened. It is the nature of dreams to be realized. That's what dreams are.

It's not dreams that are fantasy nonsense. It's corporations that are fantasy nonsense. Corporations are legal fictions created to allow humans to exploit humans and blame it on non-existant fantasy entities. Show me a corporation. Microsoft? Show me microsoft. The software on this computer was not created by microsoft. It was created by people. What can you point to, to show me microsoft and not people? A building? It's a building, not a corporation. A logo? It's a picture, not a corporation. And both the building and the logo were created by people. This fantasy creation you call microsoft had nothing to do with any of thesethings.

Corporations are not real. Government is not real. Law is not real. No fantasy entity or legal fiction has any power over us whatsoever. People are real. People have power.

Let's stop using our power to serve these fantasy entities at our own expense.

reply to post by LordBucket


Good job with this message LordBucket. My only input is that we may try our best to live in a perfect utopia that you have laid out. Saddly enough this is the inperfect kingdom of NATAS and we can never live perfect like you have written within this kingdom. What you see is a hint of Heaven and that itself is nice to know. All we can do is ride this inperfect kingdom till it fails and await the perfection that lies infront of many of us.... S&F friend.

it would be nice to live in such a world , but man is greedy, bloodthirsty, selfish, and just plan mean. As long as man remains this way, this is what the world will be like, take, kill, rape, burn, and make the weak suffer.

Because I can't convince Joe Average not to.

Because that would be way too freakin easy...it'd be like admitting our world paradigms are just delusional fantasies fed to us from birth. It would mean too much peace, love and cooperation...humans apparently hate those things...in fact, they hate a lot of things...

WAR - You are nothing but a pawn in their game!

PS- S&F, nice thread.

[edit on 17/8/10 by CHA0S]

reply to post by bekod

man is greedy, bloodthirsty, selfish, and just plan mean.

You are man. "Man" is not some vague, external entity. You are responsible, not somebody else. Are you saying that you are greedy, bloodthirtsy, selfish and mean? Do you want to kill people? Do you want suffering and misery and death?

No?

So what makes you think anybody else does?

As long as man remains this way, this is what the world
will be like, take, kill, rape, burn, and make the weak suffer.

If man were really so terrible, we wouldn't need to create these legal fictions to justify our actions. But we do. When was the last time you heard somebody say, "yeah, I'm gonna go kill that guy and foreclose on his house and stomp on his cat and arrest his kids and imprison his neighbors for life. And why? Because I like it."

No, people don't do these things because they want to. They do these things because they feel obligated to. Soldiers kill not because they want to kill, but because they want to serve a higher cause, and to protect their people. Think of how many times you've been told by someone over the telephone, "I don't make the rules, it's not my fault, it's corporate policy, that's just how it is." Do you think that person enjoys or believes in what they're doing? No, they're apologizing for it, because they think it's unfair and feel bad for being involved.

Peace is possible even on a battlefield
Soldiers don't want to kill.
Mankind is more charitable and kind than you've been taught to believe.

So...why don't we all just stop doing the stuff we don't like?


[edit on 17-8-2010 by LordBucket]

reply to post by CHA0S

that would be way to freakin easy

Yes it would be easy. Peace is what happens by default. War is something that requires a great deal of cooperative effort to acheive. To acheive peace, all people have to do is...nothing. If people did absolutely nothing, there would be no war. War is only possible when entire societies work together to make it happen.

it'd be like admitting our world paradigms
are just delusional fantasies fed to us from birth.

Is that really more difficult than mobilizing entire societies and national economies towards the acts of killing and death?

Really?

humans apparently hate those things...in fact, they hate a lot of things...

That's fine if we really want to hate things. But can't we at least be more lazy about hating things? Can't we hate things from the comfort of our own living rooms rather than spending billions of man-hours and dollars and lives towards perfecting the arts of pain and misery and death?

Does anybody really understand how amazingly much effort our species has gone to to make things unpleasant?

I don't want to do that. Do you? Who does? Probably somebody, but whoever it is, why don't we just ignore them and do our own thing instead?


[edit on 17-8-2010 by LordBucket]

Originally posted by LordBucket

If you're a police officer and you see a teenger smoking drugs, ask yourself...do you make the world a better place by arresting him?

i understand how you feel about alot of the statements in your post, and i can relate.

but, T&C, you may want to reword this particular question.

and, yes, individuals in any professional capacity do ask those questions, repeatedly.

i spent 11 years as a firefighter/emt in the usaf. three years in warzones.

soldiers do ask the questions.

as a seargent, on more than one occasion, i did speak my mind to higher ranking officers when their judgment was temporarily distorted.

"sure, it seems it roles down hill, but gravity being what gravity is we can determine it didn't start down here, sir."

reply to post by LordBucket


this isn't fantasy land. In the real world, neither you, nor I, has any say so in what our respective governments do. So we will remain spectators in the stupid ant farm called reality. try to enjoy the ride, you don't have any other choice.

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher

T&C, you may want to reword this particular question.

Not a violation. I'm neither promoting, nor discussing personal use.

Here are the rules.

i understand how you feel about alot of the
statements in your post, and i can relate.

Thank you. I'm glad. If more people think about it, like you have, we can make the world a nicer place.

Originally posted by network dude
So we will remain spectators in the stupid ant farm called reality. try to enjoy the ride, you don't have any other choice.

It's hard to sit back and enjoy the ride when everyday some joker is reworking the track or legislating changes to the car.

Ceasing participation lasts about as long as it takes Tyrant Sam to figure out what you're doing and sends armed soldiers to force your participation at gunpoint.

Sit back and enjoy it when you can. Fear for your life when you can't.

It's situations like this that makes me wish I could have some blind faith in an afterlife of some sort. At least then I wouldnt feel so bitter about my one and only life being spent as some sharecropping idiot for a system that hates me.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


there is very little any one person can do to change anything. An organized group may be able to get a message heard, but still nothing will change. You can dwell on the things that upset you and let them drive you crazy, or you can figure out what part of the big picture you have control over, and work in that area. Make it a better place. Keep your goals attainable.

Live life to the fullest, and don't sweat the small stuff.

Lordbucket, we all get this way at times, but being positive is so much easier to do.

While I appreciate the Utopian dream, it is not attainable.

Duality, I believe, is necessary. For example, you don't know "good" unless you know "bad". Ying doesn't have a definition without Yang. So, you can't have "peace" if you do not know "war".

How would one implement this? It seems very "tune in, turn on, drop out"-ish. You seem, in your example, to be advocating the police officer not do his job. So then he gets fired. How does he support himself and his family? What if all the cops decide not to enforce laws they do not agree with? We then have no police. Who then will protect you when your being stalked, assaulted, etc.? I know your answer:

"If no one hurt anyone, then no one would need to be protected."

Yes, America, flight, the moon were all dreams that became realities when people put their mind to it. Here is the flaw in that logic, though. It did not take the entirity of humanity working together to accomplish those things. It was done by a realtively handful of very dedicated people building on top of the work of individuals who came before them.

It would take the entirety of humanity to fundamentaly change their core in order to accomplish what you put forward.

reply to post by LordBucket
Then why are they still doing there job? have you asked a bill collector why he/she does the job?
killing in the battle field? have you known a full bore marine why he/she does his/her job.
arresting people? do you live in LA? ask one of them "LEO's" if you can, we have WVC that is west valley city "LEO's", even LA does not want them.
not be cause it is there job it is because they like it, no, love it!
i do not know you, nor you me, and i do agree with you.
i was pointing how man kind is, so when i say "man" it is man kind
you have known the "man kind" i have,for they are cruel, mean distasteful people, and i do not believe the way they do, it is just them,and them i avoid as much as possible i do not go to coffee any more because of them.
you seem to be of the, not hurt a fly, live and let live, and let there be no laws or rules, that is not how the world is, can you change a zebras strips?, a leopards spots?, now you can paint it, but it still is what it is.

reply to post by indianajoe77

Duality, I believe, is necessary. For example, you don't know "good" unless you know "bad". Ying doesn't have a definition without Yang. So, you can't have "peace" if you do not know "war".

I think we've had enough war don't you? Isn't about time to get some peace happening? I'm sure there are people who've gone through a large portion of life never experiencing any notable degree of pain or suffering, or witnessing it...how then do they live without the knowledge of mass destruction and death? Does this mean they're incapable of living with others in "mass peace", if you will...I don't think the knowledge of evil means evil has to manifest from that knowledge, we can live in peace with the knowledge. Also, maybe we are born with the intuitive ability to determine when an action will be of a negative karmic value (assuming such a thing exists, which I believe it does).

You seem, in your example, to be advocating the police officer not do his job. So then he gets fired.

No, he's advocating the police officer not do the parts of his job he feels aren't benefiting man-kind, or even disadvantaging us.

How does he support himself and his family? What if all the cops decide not to enforce laws they do not agree with? We then have no police.

No...we then have police which don't follow through on ridiculous laws they feel shouldn't be part of the system. They would be cops to respect IMO.

[edit on 17/8/10 by CHA0S]

el problemo would be getting to the critical mass. i remember a scene from 'Grapes of Wrath' where a neighbor is hired to plow up a guy's farm. he asks him not to--'if no one will plow it they can't foreclose'--and the neighbor says 'sorry, but he's paying me, and if I don't do it he'll get another neighbor.'
if the cop doesn't arrest the doper...he could get fired. would that help things in the larger arena? if ENOUGH cops said they refused to arrest dopers, you'd have something. but it would take a major major to get to that point.

reply to post by CHA0S


On your first point.
The people "who've gone through a large portion of life never experiencing and notable degree of pain or suffering, or witnessing it" usually don't understand that they have lived a "blessed" life because they never experienced the down side. You also make an assumption that people have an inate sense of right and wrong (karma). That's a big assumption.

2nd point.
Not doing all of your job responsibilities, no matter how morally correct you may be in your deriliction of duty, still results in being fired. What then?

3rd point.
"No...we then have police which don't follow through on ridiculous laws they feel shouldn't be part of the system. They would be cops to respect IMO." We then have individuals deciding what is a crime and what isn't and enforcing their own standard at will. Who then decides what law should be part of the system? Isn't that the point of a collective governing body?

I quote Agent K - "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

reply to post by indianajoe77

On your first point.
The people "who've gone through a large portion of life never experiencing and notable degree of pain or suffering, or witnessing it" usually don't understand that they have lived a "blessed" life because they never experienced the down side. You also make an assumption that people have an inate sense of right and wrong (karma). That's a big assumption.

Yes, but they could still witness it at some point in their life, then realize just how good they have it. But we do have knowledge of tremendous suffering and pain...that would allow it to work for our current generations, you may get problems a few generations later though, it could be a very unpredictable scenario if we ever did manage it.

2nd point.
Not doing all of your job responsibilities, no matter how morally correct you may be in your deriliction of duty, still results in being fired. What then?

What then? If you have any self respect you'll look for work where you aren't forced to do things which go against your moral values...

3rd point.
We then have individuals deciding what is a crime and what isn't and enforcing their own standard at will. Who then decides what law should be part of the system? Isn't that the point of a collective governing body?

No, laws are presently manufactured by a minority with hidden agendas. A lot of the time it isn't really the ideas, wants, or needs of "the people"...it's a blatant attempt to manipulate the system and subtly and slowly strip people of their rights and freedoms, until eventually you can't be sure what is legal and what isn't. They aren't making up new laws either, just not following ones they disagree with. I believe every police officer should have that right to question the laws they enforce.

[edit on 17/8/10 by CHA0S]

reply to post by CHA0S


Wow, I feel like I'm back in college again when I first discovered Robert Anton Wilson and we used to discuss this all the time.

Yes, the problem would arise generations later when they question why things are the way they are in their time, not knowing the other side of the coin.

True you would have to find other work, but what if doing anything is personally morally reprehensible? Just another what if.

So change the people who govern? Change the system. Overthrow and replace the stystem. The point being that you need a system just the same or you have anarchy & chaos.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by indianajoe77]

reply to post by CHA0S

I believe every police officer should have
that right to question the laws they enforce.

I was under the impression that enforcement was at the discretion of the officer involved. For example, when pulling someone is pulled over for a traffic violation, it's completely at the discretion of the officer whether to issue a ticket or merely a warning. So far as I know, this is not limited to traffic enforcement, nor even to police officers. District attourneys can choose which criminal cases to pursue, the Supreme Court can choose which cases it hears, etc.

At all levels that I'm aware of, enforcement is completely discretionary. If people simply refused to enforce laws they disapprove of, the entire country could be changed instantly with no time or effort lost to the legislative process.

Really though, these things are discretionary whether or not it's "official" that they're discretionary. That's part of my point. Artificial entities like governments and corporations are incapable of any kind of enforcement. Only people are. If "the law" or "the clergy" of "the government" or "the anybody" says that you have to do something...so what? You can still do what you choose. Yes, you may be fired, you may be imprisoned, etc. But it will not be governments or corporations firing or imprisoning you. It will be people. Which goes back to the original premise: if people choose to stop doing things that nobody likes...they won't happen anymore. "The system" is powerless.


[edit on 17-8-2010 by LordBucket]