Nostr Web Client

I don’t see where society tells people to commit suicide. Some people are legitimately so miserable that they would rather die. Other people don’t see any purpose in living because they are going to die anyway so why does it matter if you die now or later? These are all valid perspectives and they are minority perspectives. Society can’t tell you to do something that it bans and frowns upon.

I agree with a lot of what you’re saying. I agree about the incentives shaping people’s actions. But I don’t agree that they were initially formed with evil intent. What is the incentive to create senseless evil? What is the motivation? I think that if keeping people alive were more profitable than letting them die, the actions would change. Would these same people now be considered righteous saints? I don’t think so. I dont see it as an issue of good vs evil. But we can agree to disagree 🤝

Comte de Sats Germain 11mo ago

Its not necessarily intent. I only take it seriously as a possibility - I'm not asserting that evil was the motivation, only wondering how people could fail to see the terrible consequences of their narratives. I'd give them the benefit of the doubt, that they merely didn't see how their good intentions would have bad effects.

I can't blame someone for skipping all this thinking and going straight to "they're evil" - the effects are obvious enough. Or maybe they've done all the thinking or even gone further, then concluded that the simple word, "evil," actually applies. Maybe such boldness deserves appreciation. Idk.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

MAHDOOD 11mo ago

I think about situations I never experienced and try to imagine what I would do. For example, if a woman got pregnant at 16 and did not want to have that baby then what should she do? Aborting it is “evil” but forcing her to have it is also evil. Forcing someone to have a baby and dedicate their life to raise a child for 18 years requires a police force to ensure she fulfills this unwanted obligation. And the existence of a police force requires taxation, which is theft. So pro life is stopping one “evil” with another. Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. This is why rothbard was pro choice.

Comte de Sats Germain 11mo ago

I think that was the age one of my cousins got pregnant. Her daughter is now one of the most wonderful people in the family... If my cousin hadn't been religious, she would have only heard the message from society, which is "its okay to abort, here, take the easy way out," and the wonderful person who is her daughter wouldn't exist. Which messages we promote have real consequences.

'Free will' assumes that people have all information and perspectives. That's a silly assumption! How much are we influenced by the people around us and the example set by TV and movies? Most people are close to 100% programmed by these things. They aren't their own programmers, so their will isn't actually theirs, so 'free will' is mostly a myth. The only way it can be a real thing is if we choose not to go with the flow, or choose to push a flow different from the mainstream flow.

I'm totally against the police being involved in peoples' choices. If you say we can't use police to enforce a ban on abortions, I agree ; however, look at the other side, where you use police to enforce a ban on a kind of speech. In the UK, you can be thrown in jail for offending someone with your speech. If you tell a woman that abortion is murder, and she feels offended, should you be thrown in jail? Clearly the police are the criminals, as are the people pushing for policy. The policy is the real crime.

IMO, the only real resolution is to do away with policy, which means doing away with government. The existence of a machinery of enforcement is too much of a temptation to people and their agendas. I wonder how many contentious social issues would simply disappear if there was no mechanism of violence to fight over using. That's what it really boils down to - who gets to control the dummies in uniform. I used to be one of those dummies... No matter what uniform you wear, you're basically police, if required. What elections really boil down to is : what are the conditions of the application of violence? For a time, one side is in power, and we inch closer to that side's reasons to murder their opponents. Then for a while the other side is in power, and we inch closer to murdering the other side. The capacity for murder is maintained and built up, and elections matter because the other side might finally use it and you're dead. We approach that in gradations - we'll just surveil people for now, no big deal ; then we'll put people in jail for reasons, no big deal, its not killing ; then we'll increase penalties, have many penalties for one crime, and its no big deal, its just justice and those are bad guys - but there is an endpoint, the final climax of the will of the people, where democracy finally transforms into its transcendent state, and there's no more room to add punishments and loss of liberty, and the state commits genocide. That's what elections and policy are really about. Maneuvering for the final showdown, extermination. Issues like abortion and assisted suicide are foreshadowing and foreplay and rehearsals. All issues are.

MAHDOOD 11mo ago

Interesting perspectives. Idk if I’d agree that the end goal is to exterminate everyone. But ultimately, those in power are trying to make the most of their time in power. I agree that the problem is policy. So in a world without police, how do you stop someone from having an abortion? You can’t. Even with police, people can find ways to still have an abortion. So the best thing to do is try to talk peacefully people out of it. But you will never be able to convince everynr and some babies will always be aborted. It is what it is.

Comte de Sats Germain 11mo ago

I don't mean it's a conscious goal. Its just the direction we move in, like a collective unconscious will. The best intentions, if enacted in policy, only amount to murder.

EchDel 11mo ago

Just a extra thought. Policy makers who push to raise the age for abortion legality are incentivised through big pharma lobbies. Stem cell harvesting and using aborted fetal material in medications and vaccines is very profitable. The biggest debate around abortion legality is age of the fetus and when the developing being should be declared a human with civil rights.