Crotch Sniffer says,
Society is artificial
I don't believe so. I think the greatest good would be to acknoledge society as a natural Human harmony.
In ancient times, the human form often was not seen as 'natural'. They would place hooks in the child's eyes to stretch out his eyes so he could 'see better'. They would fasten blocks and boards to women's feet so their feet do not get 'too big'. I'm sure you've heard of these practices on documentaries and such.
We now view them as cruel, awful, and even
barbaric. No one now disputes that Humans have a natural bodily form, written and designed by Nature.
Locke wrote in his Thoughts on Education that the mind is a blank slate (and we can write whatever we want on it). Well, the Human mind is anything BUT a blank slate. Nature has imposed a form for the human mind itself and language and thoughts are often the echo of this form.
Many today view society as artificial. So many think society can be 'changed' and 'altered' into a various assortment of utopias. No, Mankind has outgrown putting hooks in infant eyes or strapping boards to girl's feet. But we have not outgrown putting laws on this or tarriffs on that. People throw themselves at the legislative palace trying to control what gets passed thinking that all of society will be altered to that effect.
This artifiiciality of society is not new. The entire creation of the colony known as
GEORGIA was named after the King of England and was going to be a model for Mankind. The founder (I believe his name was Oligeothorphe) contracted an amazing amount of laws concerning agriculture, families, etc. What happened was that the colony of Georgia decreased and decreased in population (people kept leaving) until Oligeothorpe declared the colony a failure and went back home. Then, all these amazing 'laws' were wiped away and the colony boomed in population and productivity.
The entire concept of
liberty rests on this idea. There are many 'philosophers' who dream up their own perfect Republics. Liberty rejects all systems and embraces society.
The very first line of Common Sense is, "Some people have so confused government and society as to think they are the same, but they are different, and have different origins." The entire whole of Common Sense goes on to say that the King of England is not the head of 'society' and, therefore, independence is quite possible. It was a very clarifying work for the colonies, as everyone knows.
However, something very strange happend in France as it underwent revolution after revolution. They embraced the ideas of
Jean Jaques Rousseau. Now, I've mentioned Rousseau many times in my posts because I belive he is the fountainhead of where feminist and anti-sexuality ideaology takes root on (whether they know it or not). Anyway, Rousseau thought society was completely artificial and saw civilization as a fall from grace. He embraced the
social contract.
The result is that society remains 'artificial' but it is 'moral' for people to remold society as long as there is some form of 'social contract'. This 'social contract' will be remembered as absurd as the 'divine law' was of kings.
20th Century
What happened here? Mass death fills the century.
Intellectuals, seeing themselves as angels flying above Mankind and totally distinct and seperate, wished to 'uplift the world' by transforming society (since society is artifiical).
The results was Nazism, Fascism, Communism, and other such horrific works. All these started with 'grand goals' but their chief error was seeing society as artificial.
Is Sexuality Artificial?
What happens to the world when sexuality is seen as an ARTIFICIAL construct rather than part of the Human being?
It means philoosphy fads will reign over nature creating great unhappiness and harm.
PowerEgo does not seem to understand why I wrote the 'Feminism on Trial' article. It is because Feminism believes sexuality is artificial, that male conspiracy kept women down in every and all scenarios.
Feminism is not against just masculinity. Feminism is against feminity, masculinity, they are ANTI-SEXUALITY to the core!
Feminists believe women were made to wear dresses and have long hair. So they try to create a 'sexless' society (since society is artificial). Male pronouns are declared forbidden from language. Men and women must dress androgenous.
What happens when society becomes more androgenous? The more
sex is emphasized! Your grandmother was right when she complained about the increased fuss about sex. Sexuality must go somewhere. With it being drained from society, the more people will turn to sex (because sex can never be legislated or philosophized out of existence). Sex then shows up in all movies and entertainment because regular sexuality has been drained. Guys will dress like pimps and women like prosititues because of this.
Sexuality will be the great issue of this century. I don't think you guys realize how major this area is going to become. Men, women, courtship, marriage, even
children are set to be analyzed and crushed on the political table.
Go take a look at anything that remains consistant through the ages. For an example, take Shakespeare. We can all agree Shakepseare will be read about centuries from now. But if you look at the commentary, you will notice a profound change. More and more characters of shakespeare are declared 'gay' and modern day politics tries to reflect itself within the plays.
Or take Catholicism. Intellectuals rage at Catholicism of anything to do in the sexual realm, from gays, to contraception, to abortion/pregnancy, to female priests. Yet, they have no problem with the Church's stand on gluttonry or sloth.
The point of these two examples is to show that sexuality is the obvious issue today.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...e=1&u=/usatoday/20031020/cm_usatoday/11910841
Look at this story. What is going on here?
Marriage was always seen as a union of two fleshes into one. Today, we think in Roussau's "Social Contract" frame and, therefore, this one flesh will never make sense. But civil unions, something that can be torn and created at random, do make sense in the social contract mind.
With understanding of sexuality, this union of masculnity and feminity does make sense. But from Rousseau's and modern political view, it never will.
Why do we keep viewing problems in terms of 'wars' or 'weapons'? No, the errors of the 20th century that manifested such horrors was obviously seeing society as an artificial construct.
This error persists for the 21st with all sexual elements of society being seen as artificial. Already, we can see the effects.
Marriages are becoming a joke, especially if they are seen as nothing more than a 'social contract'.
In Europe, the cradles are empty. The Black Plague decreased Europe's population by a third, something the world has never seen. Today, we are seeing it again. The disease is our own misunderstanding of sexuality as Europe's population may shrink by a third (this makes other issues come out like immigration becomes more heated, as does the issue of younger people paying for a larger elderly population).
But the error is not confined there. In every Western Country, the birth rate has fallen
below replacement levels.
And even those that are living, what is the result? An androgenous world of cubicles and corporate drones? A life where all male pronouns cannot exist? A world where marriage has become twisted by stupid feminist law that favors all divorces toward the women? A world that if an unmarried woman gets pregnant, there is no stigma, no, the government becomes her husband. The woman can use a guy to get her pregnant and then, when she is not getting paid more than she needs money for 'childsupport', cast stigma on the guy and say, "Deadbeat dad!"?
The feminists and other intellectuals' view is that society creates the sexuality. I disagree. I say that it is sexuality that creates society.
Society did not create sexuality, families, and men. To the contrary, it was the fact that sexuality, families, and men existed beforehand that allowed societies to exist in the first place.
Now I know I am going well off the reservation on this, that this post here is well beyond the typical 'getting the girl' 'improve your life' we usually go by. But you guys need to look around and notice the perversion.
Don't be sucked into the 'fadness' of it all.
A century ago, the intellectuals thought Nazism, Communism, and Fascism would RECREATE society and the Human Race would be transformed. What they got was two costly World Wars.
Two centuries ago, the intellectuals thought that Frederick the Great or King George III would arise and recreate society. What they got was shattering of nations and disarray on a world scale.
Three centuries ago, the intellectuals thought that if they deployed their philosophies in the New World, they would get the Perfect Societies they all dreamed up. What they got was starvation and death.
IS THERE A PATTERN TO ALL THIS? There is. It is the stubborn error that society is artificial.
When one views society as artificial, one views humanity and the invidividual as articial. The intellectual then views people as a sculptor would his clay to experiment or throw away.
Oh, you miserable intellectuals who wish to reform everything! Why don't you seek to reform
yourselves[i/]? That alone would be sufficient.
