The Growing Lack of Personal Responsibility.

[A-Unit]

"Compliance will kill the competitive spirit of America."

My uncle, who is a tech salesman, word's on Easter as I griped about growing "compliance." Not only compliance, but the requirement of people/businesses to handle MOST, if not all of the responsibility of a person's choice.

One instance that made my blood boil involved a person who overheard specific, private information at sportsgame amongst viewers sitting in front of him, acted on the information in a financial capacity, and ended up losing money. Well, what about the invasion on these guy's conversation? What about the fact that he DID NOT have to act, nor did the person "chatting" about said information, tell this gentleman to do so? Where's the responsibility to listen, hear the advice/information, and choose or NOT choose to act?

Are we to belief we can sanitize life, wash it clean, and make it so utterly perfect, no one shall be harmed? That EVERYTHING will be perfect, and safe, with no loss? And do you know what this requires of the consumer, employee, employer, customer, etc? Nothing, absolutely. You do not have to be educated. You do not even have to care, just be stupid enough to change a chance then find a young lawyer wanting to vault his career to the stratosphere and SUE whoever wronged you. Because, after all, financial means can replace any emotional suffering you incurred!! (Please not sarcasm).


-------------------------------

You see, there's a massive conspiracy to make this world LIKE a utopia, washed out clean, under the guise of "big brother." It began with the entire epidemic of political correctness and equality of people, to where men and women are not different, not even biologically. To where we can be interchangable. And in some respects, this is good, when people TAKE responsibility. However, the personal utopia sought by many AT the top of the pyramid of conformity do so to wash the world of unpredictability, to make it safe, and wash away aggression.

See: Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Easily prescribed.
See: Doctors that do not know anything about nutrition, but only about curing problems AFTER they occur.
See: School systems that want to turn children into economic units for future foder for corporations.
See: Corporations drowning in swamps of compliance requirements (i.e. most important COMPLY) that require all things to BE THE SAME.
See: How boys are seen as bad, and girls are GREAT!
See: How aggression is something to be swallowed, not expressed.
See: How the gov. is trying regulate the internet.

My tirade is very real, and each day I grow closer and closer to figuring a way to jump head first at making a change, at effecting change, at going more than researching and speaking, but in being a public part of the process, good or bad. I already take pains to "enlighten" people on 9-11 (though I won't go political to not look at LEAST at the facts purported is to remain ignorant).

It's endless. Rulers NATURALLY want people to comply. They want safety. They do not want people with such personal autonomy that they can be free, do as they please. It's EASY to see people try to drain the uniqueness of the individual. It makes those who comply SCARED, because they're taught that NON-compliance is dangerous. Which is also something the AFC is afflicted with. But more important, the school systems around the world, and even the military teaches you that authority reigns, and your level of knowledge is based upon your rank, your arbitrary role in society.

Such thinking indoctrinates the individual into a mental schema that ALWAYS has him question himself BUT NEVER authority above or around him. He always seeks outside approval, because from early on THAT IS WHERE HE is taught to get it. That if you rely on you, THAT IS UNSAFE, BAD, and WRONG. And it continues. That SOMEONE elses idea is BETTER. Is this reality? Is the real pinnacle of society? Is that what we're meant to think, or be? You're kidding me, right?

--------------------------

You need more examples? We train kids in school that if they get bad grades, they're in trouble, won't likely succeed in life (according to SOMEONE elses idea of success, which is normally great grades and the ability to follow someone elses orders...works well in the corporate world and in the military, but not so well when you need to survive on your own).

Businesses are built on those who THINK inside the box. Rarely do we allow people as smart or smarter to be our "wing", because it might SHOCK or kill the ego. Why do you think the corporations LOVE hiring military graduates? BECAUSE THEY LISTEN THE BEST! They follow orders, they are organized, they are aggressive, they don't question the norm. VIRTUAL robots. So well trained. Their overall intelligence might not be any higher than mine or your's, but corporation does not want a person of high intelligence around, or asking questions. They want a person who can fill a certain role, for the least cost, but the highest benefit. And that's ok. It makes this person happy, because they are needed, for a time being. And their ego is safe and secure. So all is well.

----------------------------------

There's no questions hard work isn't valuable and worthwhile. However, were someone to tell me that the purpose of my existence, was to be born to support society, I would suggest that I was dead upon birth. If my existence and its purpose was outlined as a necessity to fulfill some role amongst the stage of society, I choose to be exiled. I choose independence. I choose life, or better yet, death in life. Not following the norm. Not supporting the wrong social structure.

To me, we're all crazy, clamoring to play SOME role in the social scheme of life, never FULLY autonomous. Always suckling at the teat of society, our neverending belief WE NEED it. But it needs us MORE. It needs us to CONFORM, because according to the MANTRA, the greater good supercedes the individuals right. And, "look at all the great innovations we have!" Yet, we're just slightly more evolved than apes, learning to use BETTER tools, but no more REAL humane to one another, still seeking more through out life. Isn't there more?

If a fantastic storm ripped your "things" apart, what would you REALLY be concerned about? What would you miss? What would you wished to have done? We're a bunch of egos, never acknowleding that we, 6 billion strong of us, LIVE on the same rock, and that no one person is more important than another accept by the willinglyness of his/her force to take more than they need/consume during their duration in life.

--------------------------

All told, it's sad. Most, if not all, plugged into the GIANT super computer of society, cluttered with its ideas, fighting based on SEPARATE definitions; christian, jew, black white, asian, hispanic, wealthy, rich, elite, hot, fat, dumb, stupid, skinny, big boobs, afc, pua, don juan, video gamer, jock, blah, blah, blah. Aren't these just masks we wear in an ever-changing world? Are you the same YOU of 1 year ago, or 5 years ago, or 10, or more? So why do we judge and label like "this person is this an plays this role in life." As if we never change, and won't. Yet the only thing separating us are those DEFINITIONS and what meanings we attach to them. That's it. Even in Boston, when you hate on Yankees, some vehemently HATE on them. But it's only a preference of their's. Or even muslims who hate on the US, is this true, or are they just hating the idea?

We live an die for ideas, because control/power is in the mind, not in the body world. In a Conan movie, a villain asked what is more powerful than a powerful sword? Flesh. The body. Ie. the mind. This man, the villain had control of the person's mind, and could direct thousands of swords, while Conan the Barbarian could direct but his own. And today, the world is filled with people VYING to control your mind, and thereby control life to their favor, or against your's. Today, even a recent post here notes how some MAJOR companies want to OWN what is essentially SPACE. Are you kidding?

Forget anti-competition, but it would totally preclude the existence of this site, if companies OWNED internet space. Not to mention corporations are trying to copyright/trademark the decoding of the human genome, so that in the future, they can sell fixes or even upgrades to those strands. When did life get so commercialized? Everything is controlled, regulated, and for sale. At the right price.

--------------------------------

I truly believe, since swallowing ALL the pills some years ago, you have to view BOTH sides of life. You have to live in the positive, protect the positive, but realize it will always be under the attack of the negative. And if you get too complacent, or pollyanna like, then you'll be happy, just locked up in an insane asylum because the world went to crap, all the while you lied about how happy it was. By then, you didn't conform, and wallah, you're in a straight jacket.

Even Jim Rohn said, you have to house clean. Protect the garden from the weeds. Hate like a father, love like a mother. Protect. It's a neutral quality. A neutral viewpoint. Just that, it's evidenct, people are asleep.



A-Unit

 

[Egoist]

Dude, if you think that anything has changed over the past 10,000 years you are sadly mistaken.

The world will always consist of haves and have-nots, or, as Nietzsche put it, the "master class and the slave class". And it has nothing to do with good or bad or evil or whatever. Some people are perfectly content being a part of the masses and following the leader, and others want to do their own thing.


I am sure you would like people to join you and proclaim how much more matrix-like this world has become, but the truth is we enjoy unprecedented standard of living, freedom and opportunity in the world today. If you are smart enough, driven enough, you will do well regardless. And that is all that matters. But then again, it's been true throughout the ages, except that today, especially in our society, we have to worry a little less about survival and basic needs and have more opportunity to create our own destiny.

In short, world has always been unfair and clustered, no point whining about it, the best thing anyone can do is live out their life to the fullest and to fulfill their own destiny, their personal legend.

 

[Shiftkey]

You should write a book A-Unit

Check your inbox.

 

[A-Unit]

Re:

Nothing has changed in 10,000 years?

Was the purpose of America not to effect change in life and destiny?
To create/follow your own stars, so to speak?

Prior to the known history of America, we were a feudal world, where land and wealth was passed only via inheritance. Where marriages were arranged. Where religion was the motivating belief for usurping land, and people, and wealth, and women. (Is it any different today?)

I care not for who follows me. I care enough that my actions are right. Today, tomorrow, and always, so that my impact has a ripple effect of positivity. However, I do not think life was always like that. And maybe it's futile, but so what? Society, life, the world, has always had the engines of men that pushed the boundaries.

The patriots that desired to formulate a new country.
The womaen who wouldn't move to the back of the bus at the behest of the prejudicial bus driver.
A tall lanky man who believed ALL people should be free, ordained by LIFE, from the creator, not by any special rights or priviledges. And he made it possible, while people still had to fight for centuries to come to level the playing field.

However, its a blaise attitude that ALLOWS the dissolution of life, not society. The thought-from dissolves, and so, too, does the construct. Matrix? Matrix is thought form of control. Even the attempt to escape one is trying to use one matrix to battle the other.

-------------------

What's more to say that things cannot change? Or should not change? Guys come here hoping for a change, and as stated before, some will, some won't, and realistically, some want to ACT like they are, or want to, but never well. These guys aren't even key board jockies, they're guys who PLAY like they're in the field to feed their ego, but don't effort enough progress on a different level.

See...if people honestly felt that nothing can change, to me it appears they haven't been impacted yet. They're not a falsely accused college student on bail under charges of rape. Or a guy who was falsely sued for any number of things today. Or a company that was ridiculously sued for hot coffee, or their food making them fat. Or girls who randomly blast off that they're having your baby. It isn't that the world is BAD, because the world is merely 2 sides of 1 coin. And whatever you allow your mind to give attention to, is what you see in reflect in life.

However, the idea of big brother, of safety, of all that, has made people lazy. Not to mention, it has fostered the mentality of BLAMING SOMEONE OUTSIDE yourself. It's MORE common place NOW than before.



A-Unit

 

[Pimp101]

Great post, A-Unit.

I think the real question is whether or not this can be changed. Are people hard-wired to act the way they do? Is freeing the masses from conformity a real possibility?

Take religion as an example. When Christianity was first concieved, it was very different to how it is today. But as soon as it became mainstream, it changed. All the life lessons contained in it became nothing more then another idea for people to worship. It has become just another label. (I'm not talking about the teachings themselves - I think there is a lot of wisdom in them, but rather about the effect of religion on society). How many "religious" people strive for enlightenment? How many have achieved it? How many "religious" people truly believe what they follow? How many of them have actually questioned their faith and still follow it because they found it to be bullet-proof? Not many. Most follow it because thats how they were brought up. Because it has become habit.

When even divine concepts such as religion crumble into bullsh!t and ignorance when introduced to the masses, what chance do we have of changing the world? Would changing it really change anything? The change, the new paradigm for society, would become just another hollowed out idea for everyone to accept. People, instead of conforming to the things they conform to now, would conform to something else.

To borrow from the teachings of the 5% Nation of Islam, the population can be split up like so (thnx @ wikipedia) -

* The 85%, who are the humble masses, mentally deaf, dumb, and blind to the truth about themselves and the world in which they live.

* The 10%, who understand much of the truth but use it to their advantage to keep the 85% under their control through religion, politics, entertainment, economics, and other methods.

* The 5%, who are the enlightened divine beings, having repossessed knowledge of the truth regarding the foundations of life and of oneself, and seek to liberate the 85% through education.

Although, as I have already asserted, I don't believe that the liberation of the 85% to be possible. If a movement for change started and reached critcal mass, then the majority would ofcourse follow since it would be considered the new trend to conform to. This would look like real change, like a liberation, but in reality it would just be the majority conforming to another idea. The ratio of conscious to non-conscious people would stay the same. It is in human nature to follow. The majority are destined to be slaves to the ideas imposed on them since birth. They will never step outside of their social programming.


If you want to change the world, start by changing your self.

 

[WaRpEd]

"If you want to change the world, start by changing your self."
Amen :rockon:

 

[A-Unit]

Re:

Here's a moral dillema, once heard from Mike Litman, a well-known marketer, mostly on the internet.

Do you give to give, or do you give only when you have resources to do so, provided you are giving to someone who's poorer than you? How do you know when to give? Do you give if the person to whom you're giving has intentions of using it for ill will, such as providing money that buys a bum booze, thereby furthering his spiral of persistent poverty?

It isn't a clearn position. However, Litman spoke on saving yourself first. Stop the bleeding. If your goal was to be rich, or successful, or happy, or all the above, you can't be draining your financial resources forever on 1 friend, hoping that the good-tidings pay off in a massive return. I had many friends like that, whom were musicians, and would ask for money, or favors, or whatever. But then it became a question of...does my existence subsidize the existence of another? Does my birth come with liens and debts attached to it (those who read Rand will recognize that) ?

The fact remains, it depends. It depends on your chosen destinty, your outcome in sense. Conversely, people who focus on now, the power of intention, and other such spirituality, would say to focus on now, the process, not progress. Do the process perfectly and you'll get a wonderful outcome. Do the process poorly and the outcome is terrible.

We can only take care of ourselves, and influence other's in that way. Ultimately, if I sought to provide secret information, and you changed your opinion because I appeared to be a "guru", then I have only propagated this problem further. It does not behoove me to influence you, or otherwise I'm doing what I precisely dislike, complain, or have hatred for.

With imperfect access to just and truthful information, people will be swayed by someone else's agenda. The uneducated that CANNOT get on the internet, or the senior citizens that cannot find alternate sources of information regarding our country, cannot be ENLIGHTENED, or at LEAST provided differentiated information to make an informed, personal decision. If you control the information, whatever basis do we derive facts?

If everything surrounding 9-11 tells you it was terrorrists, regardless of what logic MIGHT provide just by observing with your eyes, then your reality says it was terrorists, and the idea of anything else CANNOT be possible. Moreover, if the source of this info was reputable, then you're less likely to change your REALITY.

----------------------------

If soceity, life, within what is known as a wonderful country, the attitude of fostering PERSONAL responsibilty for choices MUST be taken. It must. It operates with an inherent fallacy BECAUSE of this "lean on me" mentality. Well, like a poor horror movie, with not enough leaders and too many followers, nothing gets done, many people die, and the evil wins the day. With TOO many followers, creativity declines because nobody questions anything. With TOO many followers, the leaders agenda wins out, even if it isn't in the best interests of those FOLLOWING.

People are BORN independent, for the most part, within their world. But they ARE trained to be helpless, to be needy, to follow and not lead, because it's DRILLED out of them. Knowledge is taught that it's BEYOND their comprehension. Beyond their fragile mentality. That cannot be learned or done by the average person. Too often I hear I CANNOT. NO! You can, given enough time. In the confines of forced schooling, you might not learn in 3 months, but you certainly COULD learn if you had to or wanted to. Right? If given enough passion and drive, or you were required, you would access mental faculties that would etch it right onto your brain pan.

Followers follow because they're NOT taught how to THINK, and not given sufficient information to provide contrasting sources to do so.

-------------------------

Even the mentality toward riches, or poverty is one of information sources. If you're born to poverty, and lack resources, then alone, it takes drive to WANT more. It takes a passion to look beyond that. The greatest heros of change had that. Their external state was NOT to be dictated by anything but what they knew or thought at that moment. Just because they're born into poverty did not mean they could not find happiness somewhere.

Even in the movie "the greatest game ever played," which I nearly cried to, Francis Ouimet changed his stars and won the Us Open which was held near his town. It was an unbelievable story. However, his father of poor descent and means nearly had him believing life was about poverty, working a job, and paying dues. However, he, Francis Ouimet believed differently, and would have died proving it so, because it was that process of passion that kept him going. It was his genetic/spiritual imperative.

Yeah, I've taken personality tests that define me as IDEALIST, in other words, I'm a perfectionist, or as close as I can get. It certainly has its good and bad points, but who cares? I'm of the mindset that every person and trait has its purpose. Has its drive. Its' the sum of the world. It might not be a realistics expectation given the state of affairs on the planet, but I'd rather be an Idealist, rather than a Sociopath, Sadist, or Masochist.


A-Unit

 

[Rovalier]

You should read up on Marshall McLuhan's works. You would be surprised the stuff he says 30 some years ago and how relevant they are today. He makes an interesting point that the Collectivist East is slow drifting and becoming the Individualistic West. However, West is drifting and becoming the Old East - a collectivist society.

Are you familar with the Maslov Pyramid, how very few people "self actualize"? I think that holds true to this day. Reading many of Pook's posts there is a thematic consistency, he is - in simple terms - telling you to self-actualize. Maximizing and fullfiling your potential and dreams really.

Self-actualization can vary upon person in definition but in general I think it means accumulating a lot of knowledge, making use of the knowledge on a practical realm i.e. getting your **** together financial/knowledge/health wise. Thereon in, with this power, you can either do nothing as a bitter cynic, manipulate it to your advantage or try to encourage others to do this.

Nietszche called self-actualization "the ubermensch".

EDIT

I will explain the connections later.

 

[Dimebag_Darrell]

Dude, we're f*cking humans. We were meant to destroy everything including ourselves:rockon:

DRINK CROWN ROYAL:rockon:

 

[diplomatic_lies]

The world is the same as it was 100,000 years ago, and will be the same 100,000 years into the future.

Why? Because our motivations have never changed. 100,000 years, we were horny, greedy, hungry, and egoistic. Today, we have those same motivations. 100K years in the future, we will too.

The 5%, who are the enlightened divine beings, having repossessed knowledge of the truth regarding the foundations of life and of oneself, and seek to liberate the 85% through education.

Isn't that an act of EGO? You educate others because you feel superior to them, and feel that your way of life is superior

Sorry, but we're all slaves to our emotions. Nothing we do or want will ever drive away our emotional needs.

 

[Nocturnal]

There's no questions hard work isn't valuable and worthwhile. However, were someone to tell me that the purpose of my existence, was to be born to support society, I would suggest that I was dead upon birth. If my existence and its purpose was outlined as a necessity to fulfill some role amongst the stage of society, I choose to be exiled. I choose independence. I choose life, or better yet, death in life. Not following the norm. Not supporting the wrong social structure.

This is the heart of it. What is comes down to is people being choosing to live by their own standard and thus, accept responsibility for their choices and actions. It's easy to shift the blame for your mistakes to someone if you're just following their directions, but in the end, you're still just following directions and you are living out arbitrarily-determined goals which will, at most, give you short term, unfulfilling pleasure.

However, the people that will eventually recognize this anyway are the only ones who are going to be listening to you. The rest of them will either never understand, or will understand but will be too scared and will hate themselves too much to act on it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with promoting your ideals and defending them with every ounce of strength you have, but to allow yourself to get frustrated with the world is to waste your own energy and attention.

The world is the same as it was 100,000 years ago, and will be the same 100,000 years into the future.

Why? Because our motivations have never changed. 100,000 years, we were horny, greedy, hungry, and egoistic. Today, we have those same motivations. 100K years in the future, we will too.

The things you describe, "horny, greedy, hungry, egoistic," there is nothing wrong with any of those things (except for an exception, which I will get to). The things you have described are the fuel to the motor of the world. If, in this sense, they never change, then it would be all for the better. Try encouraging a man to learn to fish when he has no hunger. Show me a successful business man who is not greedy. Show me a single person who has reached fulfillment who has no ego, which means he has no self esteem. It doesn't happen. "Horniness," in the sense that I believe you have implied, is not a motivation, it is the erroneous result of the emotional motivation from which love stems.

The world is most definitely not the same as it was 100,000 years ago. If men even existed 100,000 years ago, they most certainly did not have the momentum that we have today. Men are certainly more principled today than they were so long ago (more is a relative term), and are certainly beyond merely meeting requirements of physical survival.

Isn't that an act of EGO? You educate others because you feel superior to them, and feel that your way of life is superior

Being egotistical is not equivalent to being arrogant. A man with real self esteem, with a solid ego, does not have to consider how well he satisfies other people's standards.

Sorry, but we're all slaves to our emotions. Nothing we do or want will ever drive away our emotional needs.

This is a sorry excuse for not taking control and responsibility for one's life. Yes, there are certain emotional needs, but those are what motivate us to take action in life. The emotions you're talking about are the ones we have to fight along the way because they contradict our long term goals. Some people prefer to use the excuse that they cannot be fought, so that there is no point in trying to control them (the naturalist school of thought). In that case, you have no free will, so you can have no self esteem, and your values and choices must be arbitrarily determined because you don't have control over them anyway.

 

[Rovalier]

What I am saying is, if everyone is not holding themselves accountable, hold yourself so STILL. One of our responsibilities if you realize something is wrong is to aim for the ubermensch Nietzsche was talking about. So you can SO something about it.

The American society is moving away from individualism (individual responsibility) and rights to more of a group or collective. One way the East managed to stabalize this problem of responsibility in a collective environment is that if one person screws up the ENTIRE GROUP screws up and is looked down on. Everyone within the group looks at you in shame. The west is transitioning towards more collectives, largely due to the increase in communication and transportation.

 

[Egoist]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with promoting your ideals and defending them with every ounce of strength you have, but to allow yourself to get frustrated with the world is to waste your own energy and attention.



The things you describe, "horny, greedy, hungry, egoistic," there is nothing wrong with any of those things (except for an exception, which I will get to). The things you have described are the fuel to the motor of the world. If, in this sense, they never change, then it would be all for the better. Try encouraging a man to learn to fish when he has no hunger. Show me a successful business man who is not greedy. Show me a single person who has reached fulfillment who has no ego, which means he has no self esteem. It doesn't happen. "Horniness," in the sense that I believe you have implied, is not a motivation, it is the erroneous result of the emotional motivation from which love stems.

The world is most definitely not the same as it was 100,000 years ago. If men even existed 100,000 years ago, they most certainly did not have the momentum that we have today. Men are certainly more principled today than they were so long ago (more is a relative term), and are certainly beyond merely meeting requirements of physical survival.



Being egotistical is not equivalent to being arrogant. A man with real self esteem, with a solid ego, does not have to consider how well he satisfies other people's standards.

I wuv you

 

[Egoist]

Nothing has changed in 10,000 years?

Was the purpose of America not to effect change in life and destiny?
To create/follow your own stars, so to speak?

Prior to the known history of America, we were a feudal world, where land and wealth was passed only via inheritance. Where marriages were arranged. Where religion was the motivating belief for usurping land, and people, and wealth, and women. (Is it any different today?)

History - A-Unit
A-Unit - History

I don't believe you two have met.

Everything that makes America great - democracy, private ownership, code of laws, freedom of religion and expression - has existed for thousands of years. Obviously you somehow chose to ignore it.

I am not really arguiing and telling you that you are wrong, I am just trying to get you away from an absolutist "sky is falling", "good old day" bul****ting.

The world isn't any better or worse off than it was thousands of years ago. We are still the same rational animals. Aristotle and Socrates are still as true today as they were over two thousand years ago. Nothing has changed. Everything has changed.

 

[Egoist]

The American society is moving away from individualism (individual responsibility) and rights to more of a group or collective. One way the East managed to stabalize this problem of responsibility in a collective environment is that if one person screws up the ENTIRE GROUP screws up and is looked down on.

thats fvcking horrible, scary and idiotic.

If anything has the potential to ruin mankind and the civilized society, its collectivism.

"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Nietzsche

 

[A-Unit]

Re:

Wait, wait, wait, democracy has been around forever? Some how that flies in the face of history. Were it to have a 1000 year old birth date, it wouldn't be such a feat to become an American citizen. The birthdate of democracy is 1776, though the forefathers had slaves, so personal rights for blacks become official with the 14th Amendment, though they battle the social aspects of gaining equal rights. And women really never gained the equal rights they wanted, hence the feminist movement still on full steam. The other body of life given power was the Corporation. It gained EQUAL rights with blacks once the 14th Amendement was passed, absolving the shareholders, managers, chief officers, and presidents of wrong doing in most circumstances. Moreover, corporations had a limited life and direct purpose for existence, prior to the 14th Amendment. I'll leave this up to you to determine if it's a wise move, to liken a corporation to a person deserving of equal rights.


------------------------

MUCH of england's land is still owned by a VERY small % of the total populace. In the US, ownership of land is common and encouraged. 200 years ago, owning land was not much of a reality, because as a student of history will point out, most people worked on someone else's land, owned by nobles, the king, the church, or anyone ordained by someone OTHER than your personal rights.

One purpose of Estate Taxes is to prevent the accumulation of wealth over generations, resulting in the SAME EXACT situation England experienced. However, it also penalizes MOST those estates right on the threshhold of paying the exhorbitant tax bill, sometimes 50% or more, depending on the estate.

------------------------

Codes of laws are constantly changing. Some for the better, some for the worse. Years ago we didn't have the dramatic presence of terrorism the media wants the public to feel, nor did we have the Patriot Act which enables the President to circumvent the Bill of Rights and basic personal freedoms ALL in the name of terrorism. That's in general terms. Also, it requires near full disclosure of your personal information to most companies, particularly health and financial status, two very sensitive and personal sections of information.

When you read it, you realize how scary it is, and that 9-11 was the event that triggered it, and basically had the large % of the populace say "protect me please." And yes, people felt a little safer. Why not? We were checking everybody, ESPECIALLY Muslims! Wow, wonderful. And we can brush this off and say that "well it happened to the Irish when the arrived, and we as Americans killed off many of the American Indians, so it's somebody elses time." Wonderful, such improvement.

-------------------

Freedom of religion is better than it was, though religion itself has been perverted into a form of control, or mind control.

And as far as expression, that will always be a battle of identity. It isn't 100%, which is sad. It really is. This shouldn't be THAT hard. It shouldn't be that hard to protect our rights and exist/live on a "live and let live" theory. But people attach so much meaning to how people dress, how they lead their sexual lives, how they choose to exist, BECAUSE they place no control over their own LIVE, CHOICES, and even EMOTIONS.



A-Unit

 

[Rovalier]

thats fvcking horrible, scary and idiotic.

If anything has the potential to ruin mankind and the civilized society, its collectivism.

"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Nietzsche

They have been doing it for ages. It's scary I know, but we are heading down that path. I am not a huge advocate of it, I had a taste of it before actually. It's either through collective shaming or everyone run around irresponsibly in a chaotic manner.

The hope is that instead of fracturing into large group, more smaller groups is better. If people start following Huntington's idiotic clash of civilization approach to the world, that is going to be deadly because it will become a self-fullfilling prophecy. Unfortunately a lot of people are starting to suscribe to this idea. Smaller but greater amount of groups at least balance each off and offer greater plurality. The ability to agree to disagree. The bigger the group conscious, the more potent and authoritarian it is but at a high cost. Look I don't care for Bush nor do I want to bash him (I think he gets scapegoated a lot), but I loathed when he said "your either with us or against us".

I like the individualism, I prefer individual rights and privacy, I prefer the right to access info freely, I prefer the ubermensch approach of Nietzsche. But times are changing, look at the court systems, instead of valuing rights people are trying to "trade/sell" their rights for lower sentences. Look how prevalent plea bargaining is in North America. In Europe they RARELY USE PLEA BARGAINING. Plea bargaining for those unfamilar means, pleading guilty for a lighter sentence as oppose to going to court and risking the time and resource of a trial. Often times some innocent people DO plead guilty for the ease of it.

Right now, instead of worrying about all the chaotic changes in the world, maximize your potential so when **** hits the fan you are fully prepared for anything. Owning some properties both in Europe and especially China would be a pretty sound idea as well. China is going to be the USA of today in a couple of decades, the superpower of the world. Almost every major academic is predicting that.

 

[Egoist]

Wait, wait, wait, democracy has been around forever? Some how that flies in the face of history. Were it to have a 1000 year old birth date, it wouldn't be such a feat to become an American citizen. The birthdate of democracy is 1776, though the forefathers had slaves, so personal rights for blacks become official with the 14th Amendment, though they battle the social aspects of gaining equal rights


......


A-Unit

Uhm. Look into the history of ancient Greece - the true birthplace of democracy. Look into the history of Rome - the true birthplace of republican democracy. It might be fun for you to discover that the founding fathers were such fans of classical politics thats there is a reason why we have "senators" today.. There are more examples throughout the history as well.

Most of the property and common laws today have also evolved from the western european codes of laws and specifically the english law system, which, in turn, borrowed heavily from the Greek and Roman systems.

Seriously, like look up the origin of words democracy, republic, senator, citizen, etc.. We didn't invent any of it.. LOL..

 

[Egoist]

The hope is that instead of fracturing into large group, more smaller groups is better. If people start following Huntington's idiotic clash of civilization approach to the world, that is going to be deadly because it will become a self-fullfilling prophecy. Unfortunately a lot of people are starting to suscribe to this idea. Smaller but greater amount of groups at least balance each off and offer greater plurality. The ability to agree to disagree. The bigger the group conscious, the more potent and authoritarian it is but at a high cost. Look I don't care for Bush nor do I want to bash him (I think he gets scapegoated a lot), but I loathed when he said "your either with us or against us".

Huntington. Hmm.. Man, he has a lot of valid points, but at the same time its enough to look at the Sunni/****e divide or Conservative/Liberal divide to see that the civilization view fails on many levels. However, it is still important to understand, because a lot of times his theory bears powerful implications.

That said, collectivist approach vs. the individualist approach is still very complex. Its a ying-yang thing, man, both of those matter. Memes and "tribes" still play a huge role in our history, but don't necessarily discount the power of individuals.

There is actually a really cool book called "The Lucifer Principle" that talks about the role of groups in our history and the development of humanity, the role of violence/wars and so on. Read it if you still have not.

 

[BrotherAP]

Dude, if you think that anything has changed over the past 10,000 years you are sadly mistaken.

Nothing has changed in the past 10,000 years!? That's absurd! The entire world has changed, and it's man that has changed it. Human nature may be the same, the but the environment we live in is completely different. Modern life presents challenges to mankind as a whole and individuals that have never existed in history. How many caveman had the option of walking on the moon? Who, 10,000 years ago, saw the bottom of the ocean, travelled faster than the speed of sound, or died in an atomic blast? Our technology is extremely powerful, and while man hasn't changed, we've put ourselves in circumstances that no other life in the history of the Earth has experienced.

I am sure you would like people to join you and proclaim how much more matrix-like this world has become, but the truth is we enjoy unprecedented standard of living, freedom and opportunity in the world today. If you are smart enough, driven enough, you will do well regardless. And that is all that matters. But then again, it's been true throughout the ages, except that today, especially in our society, we have to worry a little less about survival and basic needs and have more opportunity to create our own destiny.

So many statements here lack any support or qualification from you - can you not see the social programming prevalent in your own words. Tell me, based on what is the 'standard of living' higher? Did you know that 100,000 years ago the average man spent 4 hours working a day, and the rest of his time was leisure (or so researchers suggest)? What makes modern life so much better. Is it our toilets and our TVs? I tend to believe that life has become less satisfying with the introduction of technology. How do you measure that? Standard of life means nothing, because it isn't based on measures of happiness. Just what we'd like to think makes people happy.

And how free are we? Our society restricts us, even in the United States - which may be 'free' compared to many oppressive societies that came before, but certaintly we're bounded by laws and social rules. When you want to measure how free you are, don't list what you can do. Try to think if there's anything you'd like to do that you can't. I certainly don't think living in the USA makes a person free. You'll never be free as long as you accept your existing condition as 'free'.

Everything that makes America great - democracy, private ownership, code of laws, freedom of religion and expression - has existed for thousands of years. Obviously you somehow chose to ignore it.

How about this? I completely reject the ability of the government to 'grant' me ANY freedom, because freedom is mine inheritably. Therefore, a goverment that even operates from the assumption that it can grant or withold a freedom is operating under a false pretense. The freedoms that are god given can be taken by no man or government. Our modern world operates from an axiom of control. They tell us every day that we are the most free people in all of history - but is it really true?