|
Edited on Fri Jul-31-09 06:58 PM by RandomThoughts
But there is a point he made that relies on a perspective.
He seems to think authoritarian established systems as order.
revolution as destruction of those systems.
His speech makes a common presumption of what is authority. and then agreeing with it, assigns what is destruction and what is order, based on that presumption.
I would believe in authoritarianism if it was not opposite of the other moral judgements he measured.
Authority for leaders is important, structure is important, but only when that authority builds up society for better things.
I concluded that real authority was not in a structure that was doing bad, that authority was the destroyer. It increased poverty, removed systems of caring, tries to remove empathy and feeling, it strives for self gain even at a cost for many others. It hides behind saying it is authority. And it uses deception for its own gains to maintain power.
The status quo claims to be the authority, and calls those trying to change things as the destroyers of that authority.
I say the status quo is the destroyers, look at what their actions have wrought to so many people. I say the authority is actually in the hands of those that do good works. And just like structures of power with many small groups interconnected, people from many small groups interconnected make up the systems of those that do good works. But the status quo has claimed the label of having authority without properly exercising that authority.
The 'authority' claim of staus quo is only a claim by perspective. Why are people that have systems to enrich themselves considered to be authority? Because by making that statement they can make a self righteous statement based on order being good. The very structure of a status quo that leads to revolution is the disorder that is chaos. It is not the people that cause the chaos it is unjust rule by leaders. Chaos is a flawed status quo for self reasons.
Bush administration created chaos justice system by shredding constitution and removing enforcement of laws equally. If people react in a lawless way to establish a system they are acting on their authority to establish the other factors of morality, justice, compassion and order.
The perception that the staus quo is 'order' is broken by their very own attachment to law of the jungle, and by their breech of social contract. But because of those things they must create an illusion of order and get people to follow them and for them to claim to have authority.
I also make the claim that the system of inclusive privilege destroys itself also, for as it claims privilege it stops thinking in its role as stewards. In a perception of being privileged, then self gain is justified, simply by that claim. And over time, a separation occurs until the role of that group is to create more self privilege, and the destruction of an ordered society. The downward spiral of control needed to maintain a privilege class leads to more oppression which leads to chaos. It is the status quo claim of privilege that is the chaos.
Any system of privilege not earned leads to people without justifiable claims to defend that privilege against those that actually earned it, so any status quo, or system that does not prove its value continually becomes the cause of chaos. And those in our system that do earn their position are not always those in the status quo, because they challenge the claim that they are privileged, even if not asking for privilege just justice. In status quo fear of 'rise of level of expectations' any freedom or equality given may lead to more loss, driving to them losing control. But they have no claim to control, if they did society would support them without them needing deception. See the problem, it is a mindset of some that they deserve to rule. Many even use claims of religion outside of that religion to try and justify their claims.
Many that think they should be masters claim that if they loose their self proclaimed status of control over other people they become slaves. They only see a slave and a master system, they do not think that their can be systems with the leaders as stewards and the slaves as equals. Even without total equality, there can be working towards justice and compassion. Instead of hording and need for control.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(576 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
