LibertyForum post - exact principles or flexible growth?
At http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=mission&Number=4847&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=365&part= in post on Initial Vision John Deere on 12/11/01 said
1. Tired of talking: If we are to have an effect on the policies of this country, we need radical action, radical outreach, radical education, and radical PR. In short, we need a revolution. These forums have the potential to spark that revolution. We may fail or we may succeed. We can't justify not trying.
Here here!!!!! And how far has the forum come in the past 3 years? I’m new to the forum…
8. Independence: I envision our mission as being libertarian, and not Libertarian. Thus, we may choose to present our message as a message of liberty, peace, community, and common sense, rather than as a libertarian message.
Yesterday I would not have agreed. Today I think I do. Yesterday I would have said that the identification of solid principles is required for success and solid principles requires clear definitions and guide-posts of identity. Now I do not believe that. Today I believe that beliefs and ego-identifications limit the creation of our forthcoming ‘libertarian’.. shall I say ‘free’ super-world.
12/11/01 LsJohn said:
I'm afraid it's going to be difficult to achieve OWKs suggestion of enough generality to be inclusive of as many "others" as possible, yet specific enough to have meaning.
Difficulty is irrelevant if the task is worthy. But I don’t think LSJohn meant it in that way. My interpretation of LSJohn’s statement is that for a unified collective advancement of people to grow harmoniously, there must be some guiding beliefs/principles/characteristics, and that for any great advancement of the group, strong ideals etc must be held; which seems to negate the possibility of ‘generally accepted values’.
I perhaps do not want to attempt rationalisations of my thoughts at this time, as these ideas are new to me, but hopefully to open up the dialogue to the forum.
Consider that the very best thinkers and writers up until 25 years ago had a far smaller world than we do now. Communications and Internet have completely totally and irrevocably altered human knowledge.
Take writing for example. A book would have been hand written or typed far more linearly and with far less edits than today’s writings. Books that I have written and am working on have literally gone through hundreds of edits, and the information integration is so much more vast as everything is accessible and manipulatable to me in seconds.
What’s this got to do with a nameless freedom movement?
Well, after all is said and done, what’s left is what one has created.
Reems and reems of idealistic dogma can be constructed, equally in support of ‘libertarianism’ and equally against.
Do we still think that reason wins over irrationality?
Not if we look at history.
It’s almost boring to talk of philosophy and politics unless it directly contributes to something relevant to our instant gratification mode of living now.
What I have found works best for me is to read, learn, discuss, converse, listen, and judge, based on the value creations that I am involved with at that time or on a longer-time scale.
The essence of conscious life is control. To create is the most powerful dynamic of conscious ability.
Yes we want to create a ‘libertarian’ world, but we surely don’t want to talk about it forever.
Yet this is the path of least resistance for most people as they know not which direction to turn, as they are too asfixiated on labels, words, meanings, definitions, principles, concepts, beliefs, ideals, that they can not yet ground themselves into that natural state of creation.
Thus by arguing against the opposite spectrums of philosophy/politics, we actually perpetuate it all.
Aha!
I’ve just surprised myself with the connection between affirming one end of the spectrum of ideas to reinforcing the opposite end of the spectrum by that very opposing affirmation.
Are you seeing that?
I do not profess to have all the answers, but I do profess to see past the static dogma of obsolete ‘libertarian ideals’ as something that will attract the required masses for revolution.
Instead of ‘principled’ objectivism versus ‘wishy-washy’ pragmatism, think pragmobjectivism.
I would rather live in that golden super-world sooner than quarrel with all the ‘great unwashed’ until the cows [Hilary et al] come home in 2008 or 2012.
But ofcourse some of the readers on this forum will not be able to brook these ideas as their entire orientation is hell-bent on the identification of themselves with this notion of libertarian politics, rather than freedom; of anti-big-government rather than laissez-faire business; of political activism rather than prosperous lifestyle creation. Hence they will always return to the brick wall and a bruise the size of their pseudo-ego.
I believe that we are running out of time, but that this lends the greatest leverage of opportunity to finally tip the scales to enduring freedom.
I believe we need to look past our cloaks and daggers of words and beliefs, and instead enter an optimistic life of creativity.
Perhaps you want to read more of my projects via http://supercivilisation.net and http://societal.supercivilisation.net
If you want to read my take on what must be done, I suggest you read all on http://societal.supercivilisation.net/societal_processing_freedom_publications.htm
1. Tired of talking: If we are to have an effect on the policies of this country, we need radical action, radical outreach, radical education, and radical PR. In short, we need a revolution. These forums have the potential to spark that revolution. We may fail or we may succeed. We can't justify not trying.
Here here!!!!! And how far has the forum come in the past 3 years? I’m new to the forum…
8. Independence: I envision our mission as being libertarian, and not Libertarian. Thus, we may choose to present our message as a message of liberty, peace, community, and common sense, rather than as a libertarian message.
Yesterday I would not have agreed. Today I think I do. Yesterday I would have said that the identification of solid principles is required for success and solid principles requires clear definitions and guide-posts of identity. Now I do not believe that. Today I believe that beliefs and ego-identifications limit the creation of our forthcoming ‘libertarian’.. shall I say ‘free’ super-world.
12/11/01 LsJohn said:
I'm afraid it's going to be difficult to achieve OWKs suggestion of enough generality to be inclusive of as many "others" as possible, yet specific enough to have meaning.
Difficulty is irrelevant if the task is worthy. But I don’t think LSJohn meant it in that way. My interpretation of LSJohn’s statement is that for a unified collective advancement of people to grow harmoniously, there must be some guiding beliefs/principles/characteristics, and that for any great advancement of the group, strong ideals etc must be held; which seems to negate the possibility of ‘generally accepted values’.
I perhaps do not want to attempt rationalisations of my thoughts at this time, as these ideas are new to me, but hopefully to open up the dialogue to the forum.
Consider that the very best thinkers and writers up until 25 years ago had a far smaller world than we do now. Communications and Internet have completely totally and irrevocably altered human knowledge.
Take writing for example. A book would have been hand written or typed far more linearly and with far less edits than today’s writings. Books that I have written and am working on have literally gone through hundreds of edits, and the information integration is so much more vast as everything is accessible and manipulatable to me in seconds.
What’s this got to do with a nameless freedom movement?
Well, after all is said and done, what’s left is what one has created.
Reems and reems of idealistic dogma can be constructed, equally in support of ‘libertarianism’ and equally against.
Do we still think that reason wins over irrationality?
Not if we look at history.
It’s almost boring to talk of philosophy and politics unless it directly contributes to something relevant to our instant gratification mode of living now.
What I have found works best for me is to read, learn, discuss, converse, listen, and judge, based on the value creations that I am involved with at that time or on a longer-time scale.
The essence of conscious life is control. To create is the most powerful dynamic of conscious ability.
Yes we want to create a ‘libertarian’ world, but we surely don’t want to talk about it forever.
Yet this is the path of least resistance for most people as they know not which direction to turn, as they are too asfixiated on labels, words, meanings, definitions, principles, concepts, beliefs, ideals, that they can not yet ground themselves into that natural state of creation.
Thus by arguing against the opposite spectrums of philosophy/politics, we actually perpetuate it all.
Aha!
I’ve just surprised myself with the connection between affirming one end of the spectrum of ideas to reinforcing the opposite end of the spectrum by that very opposing affirmation.
Are you seeing that?
I do not profess to have all the answers, but I do profess to see past the static dogma of obsolete ‘libertarian ideals’ as something that will attract the required masses for revolution.
Instead of ‘principled’ objectivism versus ‘wishy-washy’ pragmatism, think pragmobjectivism.
I would rather live in that golden super-world sooner than quarrel with all the ‘great unwashed’ until the cows [Hilary et al] come home in 2008 or 2012.
But ofcourse some of the readers on this forum will not be able to brook these ideas as their entire orientation is hell-bent on the identification of themselves with this notion of libertarian politics, rather than freedom; of anti-big-government rather than laissez-faire business; of political activism rather than prosperous lifestyle creation. Hence they will always return to the brick wall and a bruise the size of their pseudo-ego.
I believe that we are running out of time, but that this lends the greatest leverage of opportunity to finally tip the scales to enduring freedom.
I believe we need to look past our cloaks and daggers of words and beliefs, and instead enter an optimistic life of creativity.
Perhaps you want to read more of my projects via http://supercivilisation.net and http://societal.supercivilisation.net
If you want to read my take on what must be done, I suggest you read all on http://societal.supercivilisation.net/societal_processing_freedom_publications.htm
| Permalink | E-mail this post 
