The Levels
June 30th, 2017Not as in the land but differing tiers, more like terracing. But here I refer to consciousness or turning points in realisation.
First I must clarify that none of the levels are any better, like tomorrow is not better than yesterday just different and seemingly inevitable.
I have this notion of not really wanting much being young and being fed but ere I took my first mouthful and yes not breath I had a taste for for what was to come or what at least what I wanted to come and so my journey on concsious consumer craving grew.
At some point I was all to aware that this warmth had to be obtained and was not just freely given, I had no right to it but the ability to demand it.
Then came the notion that I had to pay for it or work for it and my competitive nature grew. This I was not happy about and hoped to evade by hook or by crook.
It soon became clear that I could not rely for ever on consuming and so death was a way out but before I could reach that end my need for support led to have a family providing not just security in numbers and warmth but justification to make demands.
Slowly as my children grew to emulate all these destructive demands I drew on the knowledge that trying to sustain myself was cruel. The fear that had arose when young and having to cry to get what I wanted just couldn't carry on and there were more people than I could shake a stick at that were crying out to me for warmth and sustenance.
It's clear that I want to reach beyond the need to consume, not just avoid cruelty, but a endless search for fulfilment, the habit of fillking my mind with anything other that the thought of death
Ahimsa : Jainism : Morality
June 14th, 2017Morality is not to be confused with compassion. Although the act of compassion may be the consequence of a moralistic view.
The moral imperative not to consume clearly would amount to non-violence in all matters of survival. Self preservation as a moral being does not include any rights to being on this earth so compassion cannot be for the object of compassion but for the being that consumes.
The non-consumption of an animal, as compassionate as it appears is self compassion in that I wish to cause no harm and practice that in not consuming animals. Logically this would stretch to plants and perversely the conscious body must also be free from harm, so body(self) preservation is relative to other bodies preservation.
The apparent conflict is only a problem when there is no moral view of compassion and that it is for the soul to practice an increasing mediation upon the bodies demands. It is not a concern for the longevity or suffering of any specific other but a general concern that any damage caused to the environment to creature or matter is a denial of morality based on the bodies fear of lack of future comfort and consumption.
Ahimsa is a term meaning 'not to injure'. The word is derived from the Sanskrit root hiṃs – to strike; hiṃsā is injury or harm, a-hiṃsā is the opposite of this, i.e. cause no injury, do no harm. Ahimsa is also referred to as nonviolence, and it applies to all living beings-including all animals-according to many Indian religions . . .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AhimsaAncient texts use ahimsa to mean non-injury, a broader concept than non-violence. Non-injury implies not killing others, as well as not hurting others mentally or verbally; it includes avoiding all violent means—including physical violence—anything that injures others.
Where I draw the line is self preservation. I have no intention of causing harm and consequently those creatures that are weaker than me or dumber than me are usually not a threat. However dumb and small I will not be attacked or bitten by mosquitoes and horseflies etc. As it is counterproductive to run and hide then I will swat them if they are within arms reach.
I have noted Buddhists waiting for westerners to come kill the local pests, do they equally wait for others to build walls for themselves to hide from the wild habitat?
.
Undoubtedly there may be a few people who tolerate pests and prey but even then I wonder if they live next to a hungry tiger or other wanting creatures.
It may also be possible to protect oneself with a cloaking device, some light, sound or smell barrier but that just deprives the hungry from their food.
Self Preservation seems reasonable but when is it recognised. Before the bite, before the flight or during the fight. With the degree of strength in the masses and the manipulation acquired fro intellect, those with a degree of intellect with pre-empt and attack.
Most or many people will not see an impeding call to be violent and consider themselves peaceful and non-violent but whilst a consumer it is only a matter of time, for the space that I dwell in does not belong to me.
However in the ideal mind there can be a moral imperative:
The earliest reference to the idea of non-violence to animals ("pashu-Ahimsa"), apparently in a moral sense, is in the Kapisthala Katha Samhita of the Yajurveda (KapS 31.11), which may have been written in about the 8th century BCE
wikipedia Ahimsa page Jainism section
Pages: 1· 2
PR and OE
June 10th, 2017Just a short intro to my preferences;
I would like a political democracy that is proportionally representative of those the authority claims to act on behalf of, not the protectionist majority system hailed by the Labour and Conservatives. The religious nutters of the so called 'working class' and the status quo campers.
This is inevitably an intellectual and logical exercise and as such the education/indoctrination received and provided go the heart of this matter. My opinions and preferences are as in Otherwise than Education
Otherwise than Education
June 10th, 2017Although Education or Indoctrination seem at odds, like socialism and fascism, they are one and the same thing. The notion that a parent will instil certain traits, genetically or environmentally on their offspring is to be expected. That the same applies to other authoritarian providers is again expected.
So for the parent the option is to relieve themselves of any authority to enable their child's education to be more to their liking if that be their will.
There is no doubt a tendency and concern that such children may be deprived, abused and unfit to integrate with others if they have not had sufficient opportunity to understand the wider environment they will undoubtedly find themselves attracted to.
And whereas I cannot imagine any parent relishing the thought of pulling teeth from their child, if a tooth is badly infected, causing pain and suffering then they may choose to, or to ask a more qualified person to do so. And so with state education.
It has been, and still is, of grave concern to see my children, and others, indoctrinated in the consumer addiction, necessary to further the state and other authorities, being that s it may the parents an din that light myself.
I would therefore define education as something learned by the individual as a consequence of their own choices and actions, which is lawfully those after the age of 18. Until then indoctrination, under the guise of education, whether by state or otherwise should be a decreasing activity.
Education Otherwise than at school Page 2
Education Vouchers
Pages: 1· 2
'dem Lib Lab Cons
June 10th, 2017Democracy in the UK is the management of resources by an elected governing body. The problem largely stemming from the electoral system where there is no proportional representation (PR). It is this fundamental argument that colours both the Conservatives and Labour as fascist parties by arguing against the sharing of power. They both think they are able to run the country without due consideration of others and want an 'absolute' majority; need I say more.
Example 1
In an example of only two parties, the Cons and the Labs. With a population of some 68 million (100%) and an electorate of some 47 million (75%), some 30 million people (50%) are expected to vote.These 30 million elect 650 members to parliament, who's role would appear to be - representing the people to the crown. It is worth noting here that parliament does no such thing but uses this age old notion to justify it's own agenda of maintaining power.
Should each of the constituencies vote by a margin of 1 and all for the same party, lets say the Labs then we would have 650 MPs elected by 15 million and 650 Labour MPs, all toeing the party line, with no opposition. With proportional representation each party would be given 325 MPs and would have to co-operate to manage the resources on behalf of the 30 million that chose to vote.
For whatever the reason the Lib Dems have clearly supported PR which no doubt other so called 'minority parties' do or would be inclined to.
Under PR we are talking approx 1 MPs per <: 50,000 million votes (650 / 32.2 million)
In this last election it would give close to
Cons 273 :: Labs 257 :: Libs 47 :: UKIP 12 :: Greens 10
SNP 19 :: DUP 6 :: PC 3 :: Others :: 35
The prospect of a minority government is clear, although it begs the question why minority. There is only an historic constitutional need to form a government for the queen. The reality is the government has for the last few centuries been for the people and as such it should be proportionally represented, not lorded over by some tossers who use the last vestiges of monarchy as an excuse to dictate to the masses from their high chair.
- In Example 1, above, 50% of the electorate (25% of the population) would govern on the basis of 650 votes with no opposition.
With PR both parties would represent 25% of the population and it wouldn't matter which party got the extra 650 votes- This election sees a government with 42.4 + 0.9 (43.3)% of voters support.
That's some 21% of the population with an opposition of 25% of the population.- In 1983 the Lab and Lib got respectively 8.5 million and 7.8 million votes, yet Lab had 209 MPs and Lib 23. The 1987 results highlight the issue.
- This election sees a government with 43.3 + 0.9 (43.3)% of voters support.
That's some
There is only one good reason to vote for either the Cons or Labs and that is to continually unseat the incumbent and bring about a clear call for change at an electoral level.
There are, to my eyes, policies in each party that elude to PR and are shown by the downgrading of the state monopoly and the acknowledgement of freedoms. Sadly the so called working class party is arguably the worst of the lot and the closest to fascist rulers using social guilt to acquire an army of supporters who become dependent upon their hand outs.
The next page with detail some examples of fascism coated as socialism.
Pages: 1· 2