|
Is "equality" the new idol?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Arbiter |
I think it is.
The herd believes in it blindly, as they do all idols. But they do not understand it, for it is lying to them. It has been said that all men are created equal, but as we know that creation is a lie, so too is their equality.
Every individual creates himself or herself, and recreates again and again every day. Are we to believe that each of these manifestations is equal to one another? And equal to all the manifestations of all other individuals? Only in perhaps the narrowest sense might this be true: they are all human and human equals human.
Equality, too, is a liar and a demagogue - an ideal in bad faith, as are all idols. Equality tells the rabble that they neednīt improve themselves, for they are as good as any other, and thus they priase equality for it feeds the ego. Equality tells us that it is a breaker of barriers, but in reality it encases us in the tiniest of cells. It poisons the language with equivocation and inspires blind faith in the weak: for they would love to believe themselves equal.
It is high time this equality is recognized for what it is: a religion - even a cult. And it is a dangerous cult, both to its adherents and those who reject it. As with all idols, itīs strength flows from the belief in it, and thus the sane are labeled: bigots, ignorant, hateful. It is a peculiar sort of McCarthyism which targets not he who possesses a belief, but he who rejects one. It also harms itīs adherents, perhaps even more so: for it is a manifestation of stagnancy, and it encourages even greater stagnancy. If equality is a foregone conclusion, then to improve oneself is not only pointless, it is futile. But we know that this is a lie.
So let us spit back in their face the lies of the preachers of equality, for we know why they preach this thing: because they are really the lesser. The greater would not spout such nonsense, nor would they tolerate being referred to as merely equal. It is high time we rejected this failed religion and move on. Only in this way shall we all better ourselves. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
All righty then!
What exactly do you think equality is and why do you think that it is a bad thing to strive for?
Do you think we have equality now? |
|
|
| trancaholic |
Arbiter: I agree (except for the two "but we know it is a lie"-statements - you cannot *know* that). However, you must acknowledge that the proportion of the human race, who has something to win by rejecting equality as an idol, is much smaller than that of those who benefit from it. As such, I think that investing a lot of effort into converting the "flock" might not be an optimal course of action - you are bound to be defeated.
If you would be victorious, though, what would you gain from others accepting that humans are not created nor should be treated equal? |
|
|
| emander |
| Probably sounded great when you wrote it Arbiter, but not so great when you sobered up, huh? LIke, WTF, bottom line up front please. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
is that who won American idol?
I have to be honest, I completely didn't watch this season at all.
Aside from that Hung guy hes funny. |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by emander
Probably sounded great when you wrote it Arbiter, but not so great when you sobered up, huh? LIke, WTF, bottom line up front please. |
I really cannot believe that I am actually replying to one of your posts, but I fail to drum up the stoicism required for letting this one pass:
So far, every post of yours that I have read have failed to add *any* substance or perspective to the discussion in the thread in question. I suspect that your main objective is to stir , rather than engage in sensible discussions, but please prove me wrong.
If you really are sincere (here goes nothing :p), let me hear your latest thoughts on life... oh wait, they're probably not important - let's keep zombieng our way through life. It got GWB somewhere...
If you're a pathetic loser intent on stirring and nothing more, then please find some other forum. Arbiter seems to be one of the last PFRs who ventures into the philosophical venues. He (?) should be applauded - not mocked. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
I really cannot believe that I am actually replying to one of your posts, but I fail to drum up the stoicism required for letting this one pass:
So far, every post of yours that I have read have failed to add *any* substance or perspective to the discussion in the thread in question. I suspect that your main objective is to stir , rather than engage in sensible discussions, but please prove me wrong.
If you really are sincere (here goes nothing :p), let me hear your latest thoughts on life... oh wait, they're probably not important - let's keep zombieng our way through life. It got GWB somewhere...
If you're a pathetic loser intent on stirring and nothing more, then please find some other forum. Arbiter seems to be one of the last PFRs who ventures into the philosophical venues. He (?) should be applauded - not mocked. |
To be perfectly honest Trancaholic, Arbiter's post was a load of bull that he himself probably has no idea what he was bangin on about! |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
To be perfectly honest Trancaholic, Arbiter's post was a load of bull that he himself probably has no idea what he was bangin on about! |
Why? Because you disagree? I would concede that the post is in a somewhat exotic language but that doesn't invalidate the points on why equality is not to be the object of blind pursuit. If you have any good arguments as to the opposite then I (for one) would like to read them - I think it is a fascinating topic. |
|
|
| arctic |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
Why? Because you disagree? I would concede that the post is in a somewhat exotic language but that doesn't invalidate the points on why equality is not to be the object of blind pursuit. If you have any good arguments as to the opposite then I (for one) would like to read them - I think it is a fascinating topic. |
Precisely, quite frankly George, I'm getting increasingly exasperated at your inflammatory posting style whereby you launch a tirade of insults and ad hominems, rather than addressing the point at hand.
I happen to disagree with Arbiter (I'll try and get a reply written up if possible, although due to being disturbingly busy - I can't guarantee it), but that doesn't mean that I automatically dismiss his post as 'a load of bull !' and announce that he doesn't even know what he's actually proposing. What is achieved by simply insulting someone? Does it help to further the quality of discussion around here? No, it doesn't. Say why you think his post is a 'load of bull ' rather than just simply saying that it is.
Ugh, now that I've got that out of the way, I'm off to get some much needed sleep. :o |
|
|
| Yoepus |
Ok, now after realizing we aren't debating the new American idol, let me post my thoughts:
Arbiter, when you mentioned "All men are created equal" this statement does not apply broadly. It does not mean I'm equally as smart as you, and it does not mean I'm equally as beautiful as hmm... err... who shall I name... ehh Tahti? :eek:
What All mean are created equal is about, and only about is our political equalities. What that means is that even though we might not be physically or even mentally equal to one another, I have the same rights as anyone else - these rights are based upon the natural law which are basically an expanded version of the golden rule.
This I do believe, that almost all people are capable of obeying and participating by the natural laws. Although I might agree with you that equality in all other realms should not be strived for, in the political realm it is demanded - it is the enforcer of liberty a greater virtue then equality. The question is when equality in the political realm moves into a different realm.
Since all men are created equal - we shouldn't allow women to have the vote (something very unpopular yet, that I support... I'm glad there are never any women on this forum ;)) But which line do we cross when we give women the vote? Apparently none... as Men these days means Men and Women. How about gays? We give them the vote, does this cross any line however? How about a serial killer? We don't give him the vote (assuming he has been captured) or a lunitic, we don't give them a vote. But what is the criteria?
That is the only problem I can see with the strive for political equality, it becomes murky in new fields. Of course today giving the slaves equality is a no brainer - it has become common acceptance, but when it happened it was on the fringe. One couldn't really know if it was in the political realm or another realm...
I think that is the only problem with equality.
Equality should be strived for in the political realm, not in our other realms... but if we grant it in one realm how can we make sure it doesn't spread into the others? We can't, the question is how we draw the line - and we haven't been able to do that either. |
|
|
| emander |
| I think God creates them all equal and society sorts them out. |
|
|
|
|
