Makes me wonder

**klaatu** · 07-31-2006, 05:22 PM

The first paragraph of

The Buddhist Idea of a Perfect Society
- Ajahn Sumedho

"We can imagine a perfect society and have a model of it to use as a guideline, as something to aim for. But we shouldn't expect society ever to be perfect and to be continuously the way we would like it to be, because part of the perfection lies in the fact that everything changes; nothing can remain the same. Just as a rose reaches its perfect fullness, perfect form, perfect fragrance and then changes; so societies reach peaks and then they degenerate. This is the natural movement of all conditioned phenomena. Any sensory condition follows that pattern."

Man..this makes me wonder if America has reached the pinnacle .. we were the Rose in full bloom.. and we are now withering away .....

**AnyOldIron** · 07-31-2006, 05:34 PM

Utopianism, Klaatu, you old idealist.

Utopia is a perspective, not a reality. One man's utopia is another's disutopia.

Imagine Brent's Utopia....

**Adam Weinberg** · 07-31-2006, 06:32 PM

No. We simply had a revolution, and while it was never perfect, it was certainly deserving of the title: "Revolution".

Now the revolution has passed, and can't be remembered by anyone alive, and it will take a lot of vigilant citizens to ensure that the republic never strays too terribly far from the principles of that revolution.

**AnyOldIron** · 07-31-2006, 06:37 PM

Now the revolution has passed, and can't be remembered by anyone alive, and it will take a lot of vigilant citizens to ensure that the republic never strays too terribly far from the principles of that revolution.

It is dangerous to be dogmatic to ideals.

***Damocles*** · 07-31-2006, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by AnyOldIron

Now the revolution has passed, and can't be remembered by anyone alive, and it will take a lot of vigilant citizens to ensure that the republic never strays too terribly far from the principles of that revolution.

It is dangerous to be dogmatic to ideals.

I agree even to the "ideal" of political correctness couched in a "fariness doctrine"...

All things are not equal.

**klaatu** · 07-31-2006, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by AnyOldIron

Utopianism, Klaatu, you old idealist.

Utopia is a perspective, not a reality. One man's utopia is another's disutopia.

Imagine Brent's Utopia....

Brents Utopia is a reactionary vision .. just as AlQueda and Hezbollah. Reacting to what they are conditioned to ....
I will always believe that inherent autonomy is the intrinsic nature of the human condition. The basic need for freedom and living in a harmonious state. Am I an idealist ...? Of course it is within my constitution.

**AnyOldIron** · 08-01-2006, 06:08 AM

Brents Utopia is a reactionary vision .. just as AlQueda and Hezbollah. Reacting to what they are conditioned to ....

Do you think it is reactionary? To me it is idealism, corrupt utopian idealism. I doubt somehow that Brent has been brought up in a left wing environment for him to react against.

Brent's fascism, along with religious fundamentalism and Communism are all akin due to their utopian idealism.

I will always believe that inherent autonomy is the intrinsic nature of the human condition. The basic need for freedom and living in a harmonious state. Am I an idealist ...? Of course it is within my constitution.

Yes you are an idealist (in this statement), though the distinction is that your fondness of the concept of freedom would restrict you from the desire to enforce your idealism. You have the (unattainable) ideal of harmonious freedom.

I'm an idealist, in degrees. I live by the ideal that all should have the opportunity to reach their potential. There is nothing wrong with idealism provided you are willing to try to persuade towards reaching the ideal rather than force....

Harmonious freedom is also an oxymoron (although difficult to see)

The absolute of freedom is for humans to return to their natural state (as Rousseau would describe 'natural freedoms') and there is little harmony in existing in our natural state. It entails everyone working entirely to their own personal will. I doubt you would really enjoy natural freedoms. Whilst you are free to do whatever you are capable of, you have freedom, the world you live in will be far from harmonious. Harmony is only found when humans adopt 'social freedoms', but then harmony itself is an unobtainable ideal, short of existing in a thought-controlled Orwellian world.

We have to be pragmatic and adopt a point between the two that makes us feel collectively comfortable. Enough freedom so that we don't feel overly-restricted but not so much we can't exist harmoniously.

**AnyOldIron** · 08-01-2006, 06:11 AM

All things are not equal.

No, they are not. You are right. Equality is another unobtainable ideal.

**klaatu** · 08-01-2006, 06:30 AM

anyold: "Do you think it is reactionary? To me it is idealism, corrupt utopian idealism. I doubt somehow that Brent has been brought up in a left wing environment for him to react against.

Brent's fascism, along with religious fundamentalism and Communism are all akin due to their utopian idealism.

No .. I think Brent (I assume) has been brought up in a strict fundamentalist environment and he reacts in extemist fashion against outside forces. Such as you see in these forums. Thats why he keeps changng.. if you notice he is always changing from one degree of theocratic fascism to another, he does this I believe out of a impulse, Reacting to liberal idealism. So, he is not reacting against his upbringing, he reshaping and reacting to outside forces that threaten his conditioning.
But this does not mean that Brent does not have the basic need for freedom and living in a harmonious state of being. I believe he does, just as I believe members of AlQueda and Hezbollah do ... it is in their nature, they ..like any member of a fascist brainwashed cult... must be deprogrammed.

**klaatu** · 08-01-2006, 06:33 AM

anyold "We have to be pragmatic and adopt a point between the two that makes us feel collectively comfortable. Enough freedom so that we don't feel overly-restricted but not so much we can't exist harmoniously."

Of course, thats where security comes in. We've known this all along. But.. ufortunately there is always someone who wishes to use Security Forces as a means of control.

**AnyOldIron** · 08-01-2006, 06:42 AM

No .. I think Brent (I assume) has been brought up in a strict fundamentalist environment and he reacts in extemist fashion against outside forces. Such as you see in these forums. Thats why he keeps changng.. if you notice he is always changing from one degree of theocratic fascism to another, he does this I believe out of a impulse, Reacting to liberal idealism. So, he is not reacting against his upbringing, he reshaping and reacting to outside forces that threaten his conditioning.

The common factor, apart from being extreme, is his concept of society, his utopia, an authoritarian religious society. Liberalism is merely the opposing force to that idealist utopia, that he attacks liberalism with extremism is a side-effect of that.

Being reactionary is far from the prima factor.

**AnyOldIron** · 08-01-2006, 06:47 AM

Of course, thats where security comes in. We've known this all along. But.. ufortunately there is always someone who wishes to use Security Forces as a means of control.

If security forces are the only method of maintaining a balance between freedom and harmony then the society is innately weak. It requires coercion to exist.

The balance has to be made by mutual acceptence, people have to be persuaded to accept the balance.

**klaatu** · 08-01-2006, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by AnyOldIron

Of course, thats where security comes in. We've known this all along. But.. ufortunately there is always someone who wishes to use Security Forces as a means of control.

If security forces are the only method of maintaining a balance between freedom and harmony then the society is innately weak. It requires coercion to exist.

The balance has to be made by mutual acceptence, people have to be persuaded to accept the balance.

I think President Eisenhower said it best~ "Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

What do I get out of this quote? Education. Starting at the roots ..from early childhood. Growing into the state of mind where Security, Peace and Freedom all mesh together. Its hard for Children today to grasp the idealism of Peace when all they hear about is War. Its like smoking and then trying to teach your children how bad it is. The most reckless part of whats going on in the world today may be what it is doing to the hearts and minds of our Children. This where it all begins, this is why AlQueda and Hezbollah react the way they do.. they were taught these ideals from the beginning... they know nothing else.. but in their hearts they know that killing is wrong.... just as Brent knows that fascism is wrong, just as a child knows that smoking is wrong ..... it is all in the conditioning of the mind.. breaking the barriers of Cultural dependence. You may call it nationalism. Security will always be a neccessity .. if only to guard against the negative side of human nature. Yin-Yang.