Imagine by John Lennon

[dianaiad]

If the State sends out the Police or mental health authorities because you have morals that diverge from the State's laws, then you have been on the wrong path entirely, for the rule is one must survive.

No. the 'rule' is not about individual survival, but survival, first, of the family, then the community, then ...perhaps, the state, but ultimately survival of humanity. (the 'species') That sometimes involves the non-survival of the individual.

Or weren't you paying attention in evolution class?

individual survival at all costs is a species limiting idea.

That's from one POV.

Survival at the cost of bowing to repression is ALWAYS going to result in misery, death and destruction of family/community/state/humanity. It must always be resisted, even if it means personal non-survival.

Those who are not willing to stand up to such things deserve what the 'state' they are going along with does. And they deserve the condemnation of those who see them do it; for those who acquiesce to oppression are complicit in it.

....and yes, I am fully aware that I just bit on a firmly tongue in cheek remark. At least...I hope I did.

 

[Shantanu]

No. the 'rule' is not about individual survival, but survival, first, of the family, then the community, then ...perhaps, the state, but ultimately survival of humanity. (the 'species') That sometimes involves the non-survival of the individual.

Or weren't you paying attention in evolution class?

individual survival at all costs is a species limiting idea.

That's from one POV.

Survival at the cost of bowing to repression is ALWAYS going to result in misery, death and destruction of family/community/state/humanity. It must always be resisted, even if it means personal non-survival.

Those who are not willing to stand up to such things deserve what the 'state' they are going along with does. And they deserve the condemnation of those who see them do it; for those who acquiesce to oppression are complicit in it.

These are very good points: there are ways to resist State persecution that does not result in the loss of ones freedom.

 

[BSM1]

I've been thinking upon this issue a lot lately, with so much hate, bigotry, racism, and division in America.

I just never did "get it". It makes no sense to me to hate anyone unless maybe they did something to harm you. Then I just let it go afterwards. But to hate a whole group of people for whatever stupid reason, just seems like a senseless waste of time and only does more harm to the hater holding all those negative emotions all the time. Spending one's days venting at protests, vandalizing others property, beating people over their appearance, spewing hateful rants on the Internet, all for what exactly? What a wretched way to live one's life, consuming oneself with such hatred.

I would rather do what I have done my entire life. To spend my days simply enjoying life. To wake up in the morning and have nothing more on my mind but planing out my day. Always spending as much time as I could every day out hiking with my dog and soaking in all of the beauty of the forests, the cloud formations in the sky, sunsets, etc, etc, etc... And just seek the peace and quiet to savor all the beauty of the world around me. And when around people I just see them as other people, all trying to find their way thru this life just like I am, no better, no greater. I could care less about their form or skin color, it makes no difference. Why should it? It never enters my mind to start any kind of strife with anyone, hate hurts my soul, I therefore hate to hate. So I just never will understand why people do so love to hate others for whatever stupid reason they make up to hate them.

Not sure of your age, but what you see today is a cake walk compared to the strife we experienced in the 60's. Much of today's problem is manufactured by groups with agendas that go beyond eliminating the hate and discordance.

 

[dianaiad]

These are very good points: there are ways to resist State persecution that does not result in the loss of ones freedom.

Well, NOT resisting "State persecution" always results in the loss of one's freedom.

........and it's not easy, especially if what the 'state' is doing is a popular, "politically correct' idea. As to whether one can resist state oppression without losing one's freedom, that depends upon just how oppressive the 'state' is. HERE, in the USA, resisting oppression generally doesn't get one thrown into jail, as long as the resistance isn't harming anybody physically. It may get you put out of business or fined heavily, but hey...one takes the consequences of one's choices. This is true for many, if not most, other nations, as well.

In some, however....they charge your family for the cost of the bullet they use to shoot you.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think you're way too kind.

Having lived "back then", I'm convinced that in the U.S. people have "de-evolved". So many narcissistic, hateful, violent, uncaring, cruel, rude, etc, etc, etc... people now. And it seems to be getting worse.

I see progress.
The most cromulent examples are on TV....
Gay & inter-racial couples hawking jeans & mops in endless commercials.
Such mainstream mongering bespeaks general tolerance unheard of 50 years ago.
Criminy...back then, Ricky & Lucy had to sleep in separate beds.
(How on Earth did Little Ricky ever get conceived, eh?)
Now we have Cameron & Mitchell canoodling in the same bed.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

No...actually I'm just tired of those anti-theists who keep quoting "Imagine" as if it were Holy Writ in their constant quest to rid the world of religion, as if their 'imagination' and the elimination of something that if they are RIGHT is a man-made construct. If they are RIGHT, getting rid of religion would not only NOT solve the problems they think it would, history has shown us that forcing the elimination of religion is an extremely nasty and violent thing to do. Democidal. Genocidal.

And people would still go on doing what those anti-theist types are blaming religion for.

"Imagine" seems to be their anthem.

.....and frankly, I don't see that it has motivated anything but people sitting around a campfire alternating 'Imagine' with "Kumbaya." (which is a combination that has always made me go wait...what?) I haven't seen that it has motivated any actual DEEDS of kindness. "Non-violence' is simply NOT doing something, and 'joy' is purely personal. Wonderful, but it doesn't affect anybody ELSE.

Our job in this world, I believe, is not to HAVE joy (though we do get that) but to GIVE joy. Not to simply 'be non-violent," but to protect others against violence. Not to imagine, but to DO. Not to sit around and sing idealistic (with incredibly stupid ideals) but to work to make others well, and happy, and able to have their own joys and peace.

THAT'S what we should be doing. And that's the only thing that will, perhaps, bring peace to the world.

That song? There's nothing about it's ideals that would even begin to accomplish that.

So, not only do you fail to imagine, you also fail to think and empathise or understand.
And never once did he mention force or compulsion.

 

[Father Heathen]

If you wish to survive in this world, you need to obey the laws of the country that you live in.

Not sure how this is supposed to relate to my post, but it does remind me of another great quote:

“One has not only a legal, but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” - Martin Luther King Jr.

 

[Father Heathen]

Doesn't matter if one is 'moral' individually or not, does it...if it works? Me, if the difference between a leader who respects the rights of his people to practice their religion or one who sends police out to arrest those who actually go to church is simply that he is 'spooked into being a moral person," I'll take the spooked one.

It's ALWAYS good for the leader to feel that he is accountable to someone...or Someone...even if that Someone isn't believed in by some others. it's only when that leader does NOT feel accountable that atrocities like...oh...the starvation of the Ukrainians, the mass murders of Mao and Pol Pot, etc., occur.

Yes, theocracies have also been murderous...but not quite to that extent, so efficiently and so...in the millions all at once...and THEY have to take the time to figure out a way to get God on their side first. It's not a huge stumbling block for them, certainly...but it is one and when one must be held accountable by God, one is ALSO held accountable to the priests and believers in that God. Turning all those people to one's purpose takes some politicking and time. One then doesn't have quite as much power and time to do that sort of mass murder, and when one does, one is always in danger of being accused of heresy and deposed. Believers who disagree with their political leadership tend to get irritated.

All we have to do to confirm this is look to the twentieth century and see exactly who it is did the most killing. And no, I am NOT including Hitler in the group to look at.

I still see the argument that superstition is a necessary tool to keep sociopaths in line as a rather weak one, especially when such superstitions are often used to excuse horrid behavior rather than deter from it.

 

[Shantanu]

Not sure how this is supposed to relate to my post, but it does remind me of another great quote:

“One has not only a legal, but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” - Martin Luther King Jr.

The question is does one want one's freedom to live in the Community while still alive? - the state will get a person disobeying the norms of society (not just unjust laws) as nation states are of very rigid constitutions.

 

[dianaiad]

I still see the argument that superstition is a necessary tool to keep sociopaths in line as a rather weak one, especially when such superstitions are often used to excuse horrid behavior rather than deter from it.

If it's stupid (or weak) and it works, it's not stupid or weak.

(paraphrase of a quote from...I can't remember who...but it's not mine)

the problem with sociopaths, though, is that a fear of GOD'S punishment won't deter them. However, the opinion and cooperation of those who do believe in that God are necessary to one if s/he is to have enough political power to kill by the millions. That takes time and convincing that the one who doesn't have to deal with the religious doesn't need to do.

That, in my opinion, is probably why the sociopaths who led states which made religion illegal were so much more...efficient? at killing their own citizens. They didn't have to try to turn a 'superstition' to an excuse for horrific behaviors.

Not that you aren't correct, of course; political leaders have been using religion to excuse their atrocities for, well, ever since there have been political leaders. All I'm saying is that those political leaders who have made religion illegal have been so much more horrific in their genocides, because they don't HAVE to turn religion to their own purposes. They could just get right to it.

As for me, I happen to belong to a religion that would take some considerable twisting to turn it to murder. Not that it couldn't be done, because any belief system can be turned, but hey. I have faith.

..........and probably unreasonable hope, but then you might have gathered that I don't have a hugely high opinion of the human race as a whole.

 

[Ancient Soul]

I see progress.
The most cromulent examples are on TV....
Gay & inter-racial couples hawking jeans & mops in endless commercials.
Such mainstream mongering bespeaks general tolerance unheard of 50 years ago.
Criminy...back then, Ricky & Lucy had to sleep in separate beds.
(How on Earth did Little Ricky ever get conceived, eh?)
Now we have Cameron & Mitchell canoodling in the same bed.

Oh, ok.

But I was talking about real world events. You know, like OUTSIDE in real everyday life.

When I was a child back in the 1950s, in rural America it was common to leave your doors UNlocked, us kids could go and play wherever we wanted without worry, for the most part people tried to work out their differences and took pride in being fair to everyone, most everyone helped their fellow man, were pleasant to each other, etc, etc, etc... But now people won't even respond to a wave or hello when passed on the sidewalk, it would be insane to keep your doors unlocked, or even let your kids outside, people LOOK for ways to start conflicts, everyone wants to do whatever THEY want, and the hell with everyone else, etc, etc, etc... Then on a a bigger scale, there are increasing amounts of bigotry and racist movements all across America, with outcroppings of destruction, beatings, even killings.

 

[Revoltingest]

Oh, ok.

But I was talking about real world events. You know, like OUTSIDE in real everyday life.

When I was a child back in the 1950s, in rural America it was common to leave your doors UNlocked, us kids could go and play wherever we wanted without worry, for the most part people tried to work out their differences and took pride in being fair to everyone, most everyone helped their fellow man, were pleasant to each other, etc, etc, etc... But now people won't even respond to a wave or hello when passed on the sidewalk, it would be insane to keep your doors unlocked, or even let your kids outside, people LOOK for ways to start conflicts, everyone wants to do whatever THEY want, and the hell with everyone else, etc, etc, etc... Then on a a bigger scale, there are increasing amounts of bigotry and racist movements all across America, with outcroppings of destruction, beatings, even killings.

I still leave my doors unlocked when away.
But you're addressing things which seem more about perception than reality.
The news certainly makes things seem more dangerous. For example, even
as wrongful shootings were declining, people here were fearfully complaining
about their increase.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Not sure of your age, but what you see today is a cake walk compared to the strife we experienced in the 60's. Much of today's problem is manufactured by groups with agendas that go beyond eliminating the hate and discordance.

Not sure what "strife" you are referring to. Unless you were involved in actually fighting for equal rights or against the Vietnam war. But in the North East, that was all happening thousands of miles away for the most part.

 

[Ancient Soul]

I still leave my doors unlocked when away.
But you're addressing things which seem more about perception than reality.
The news certainly makes things seem more dangerous. For example, even
as wrongful shootings were declining, people here were fearfully complaining
about their increase.

Whatever. Go back to viewing the world thru your TV set then.

 

[Revoltingest]

Whatever. Go back to viewing the world thru your TV set then.

You should notice that I'm addressing reality in preference for
the picture painted by media. All around me, I see people
being friendly & polite to each other the great majority of the time.
In my town, I see less political violence than in years past. And
I see far greater tolerance towards others....outside of Democrats.