Questions on the Ethics of Stealing and Survival.

[go2]

I think the forum did an admirable job of objective feedback and I offer my comment in the spirit of examining de-tached's ethical dilemma in the larger abstract context of how can we or can we live ethically in a world of stealing and lying.

Wouldn't that distract from the focus of this thread right now? Isn't this about helping de-tached see himself in his specific situation? Seems to me that discussing a larger abstract context would just muddy the waters in this instance.

I usually understand a dilemma when I see it in the larger context. De-tached may see himself within the larger community and context of ideas and become more aware and responsible. This has been my antidote to self centered attitude*. The specific situation or individual is never without context. The question of seeing ones self and ones behavior is not the result of narrow focus, but to place narrow focus in the larger context. I see your point m, but is focus without context a waste or a danger? It may be too soon, but I though three pages of focus could stand a little larger context.

Edit:

Either an 'off-grid' existence or alternatively one which involves participating in the 'world-corporate-game' for survival, can in both cases be parasitic OR potentially something else, and it depends on the individual's approach and attitude (and on the presence and orientation of a conscious aim), and also their level of understanding of these dynamics and of themselves.

Yes, I agree completely...... Nomad and others make the point more eloquently and accurately than I did.

Edit: *perspective changed to attitude as more accurate

 

[Brewer]

They call people like this bludgers in Australia.

 

[Joe]

I usually understand a dilemma when I see it in the larger context. De-tached may see himself within the larger community and context of ideas and become more aware and responsible. This has been my antidote to self centered attitude*. The specific situation or individual is never without context. The question of seeing ones self and ones behavior is not the result of narrow focus, but to place narrow focus in the larger context. I see your point m, but is focus without context a waste or a danger? It may be too soon, but I though three pages of focus could stand a little larger context.

I understand what you are saying Go2, but in this specific case there is enough, I think, to come to a conclusion and any reference to the larger picture or focus would only serve to distort the specifics. De-tached is not talking about theft in the broad picture sense, like for example anyone who buys from Starbucks is technically stealing from coffee bean growers in S America, or any British citizen who pays taxes, for another example, is technically guilty of crimes ancillary to genocide. Here, as far as we understand, are talking about straight up theft of the goods of another person.

 

[domi]

Looking at the profit margins of the corporate, international supermarkets I steal from, their profit margins have all been steadily increasing, if not skyrocketing. Considering the figures and that I don't take much, I sincerely doubt that anyone's losing their jobs or that prices are increasing due to theft. If they increase, it's for more profit for the retailers, not the suppliers who are paid outright by through the "higher ups" of the retailers regardless of the retailer's profit/ loss margin.

When I read the above it reminded me of some lines in the movie "The Big Chill":

Michael: I don't know anyone who could get through the day without two or three juicy rationalizations. They're more important than sex.
Sam Weber: Ah, come on. Nothing's more important than sex.
Michael: Oh yeah? Ever gone a week without a rationalization?

Unless you can show me some real data that supports what you claim above, it is just a rationalization in your mind.

 

[ana]

You should forget about morality. Conversations about morality are simply empty talk. Your aim is inner morality.
Aphorisms 1924 G. I. Gurdjieff

I think true ethics or morality are the expression towards life coming from the inside of beings.
It cannot be teached, not acknowledged trough rationalizations with others, it is a deep sense of what is needed to be done in each circumstance based on our hability to perceive the reality as objectively as possible according to our level of being.

Is “stealing” wrong? Where does one draw the line of distinction of acceptable reasons if it is not always wrong?
Do codes of conduct apply to countries, as well as individuals?

It is not about stealing wrong/right, it is about, What I am going to do, is it going to make things change from the inside to the outside, or is it going to add more chaos?

Furthermore codes of conduct may be necessary for machines but as I see it real men whom have not lost their inner conexión with the rest of men and enviroment trough empathy, just need to look inside themselves and make use of their common sense. Maybe this is the reason why the only hope is to free ourselves from the mechanical chains.
A true change is only possible if it starts in the inside and flows to the outside, if not destruction trough to much chaos added is inevitable. Osit

I usually understand a dilemma when I see it in the larger context. De-tached may see himself within the larger community and context of ideas and become more aware and responsible. This has been my antidote to self centered attitude*. The specific situation or individual is never without context. The question of seeing ones self and ones behavior is not the result of narrow focus, but to place narrow focus in the larger context. I see your point m, but is focus without context a waste or a danger? It may be too soon, but I though three pages of focus could stand a little larger context.

Actually i think trying to change things outside without looking first inside is one of the most arrogant acts of ego.

 

[Bernhard]

You should forget about morality. Conversations about morality are simply empty talk. Your aim is inner morality.
Aphorisms 1924 G. I. Gurdjieff

I think true ethics or morality are the expression towards life coming from the inside of beings.
It cannot be teached, not acknowledged trough rationalizations with others, it is a deep sense of what is needed to be done in each circumstance based on our hability to perceive the reality as objectively as possible according to our level of being.

Much of detached's rationalizations sound like buffers as described by Gurdjieff in ISOTM:

G. began one of the following talks with the fact that we forget about the difficulties of our position.
"You often think in a very naive way," he said. "You already think you can do. To get rid of this conviction is more difficult than anything else for a man. You do not understand all the complexity of your organization and you do not realize that every effort, in addition to the results desired, even if it gives these, gives thousands of unexpected and often undesirable results, and the chief thing that you forget is that you are not beginning from the beginning with a nice clean, new machine. There stand behind you many years of a wrong and stupid life, of indulgence in every kind of weakness, of shutting your eyes to your own errors, of striving to avoid all unpleasant truths, of constant lying to yourselves, of self-justification, of blaming others, and so on, and so on. All this cannot help affecting the machine. The machine is dirty, in places it is rusty, and in some places artificial appliances have been formed, the necessity for which has been created by its own wrong way of working.These artificial appliances will now interfere very much with all your good intentions.

They are called 'buffers.'

'Buffer' is a term which requires special explanation. We know what buffers on railway carriages are. They are the contrivances which lessen the shock when carriages or trucks strike one another. If there were no buffers the shock of one carriage against another would be very unpleasant and dangerous. Buffers soften the results of these shocks and render them unnoticeable and imperceptible.

Exactly the same appliances are to be found within man. They are created, not by nature but by man himself, although involuntarily. The cause of their appearance is the existence in man of many contradictions; contradictions of opinions, feelings, sympathies, words, and actions. If a man throughout the whole of his life were to feel all the contradictions that are within him he could not live and act as calmly as he lives and acts now. He would have constant friction, constant unrest. We fail to see how contradictory and hostile the different I's of our personality are to one another. If a man were to feel all these contradictions he would feel what he really is. He would feel that he is mad. It is not pleasant to anyone to feel that he is mad. Moreover, a thought such as this deprives a man of self-confidence, weakens his energy, deprives him of 'self-respect.' Somehow or other he must master this thought or banish it. He must either destroy contradictions or cease to see and to feel them. A man cannot destroy contradictions. But if 'buffers' are created in him he can cease to feel them and he will not feel the impact from the clash of contradictory views, contradictory emotions, contradictory words.

'Buffers' are created slowly and gradually. Very many 'buffers' are created artificially through 'education.' Others are created under the hypnotic influence of all surrounding life. A man is surrounded by people who live, speak, think, and feel by means of 'buffers.' Imitating them in their opinions, actions, and words, a man involuntarily creates similar 'buffers' in himself. 'Buffers' make a man's life more easy. It is very hard to live without 'buffers.' But they keep man from the possibility of inner development because 'buffers' are made to lessen shocks and it is only shocks that can lead a man out of the state in which he lives, that is, waken him. 'Buffers' lull a man to sleep, give him the agreeable and peaceful sensation that all will be well, that no contradictions exist and that he can sleep in peace. 'Buffers' are appliances by means of -which a man can always be in the right. 'Buffers' help a man not to feel his conscience.

 

[de-tached]

[quote author=Odyssey]
The bottom line is that you are taking what does not belong to you and by doing so you are creating an imbalance.
[/quote]

Yes, this "taking" feeling is basically what makes me question stealing because I understand, fundamentally speaking in a vacuum, lack of reciprocity creates an imbalance- thus is "wrong". Just like killing is "wrong", fundamentally, although conditions (like WHO I take from and the ways I give in turn) create justifications/ rationalizations (depending on one's opinion of the situation).

The way I see it, there is ALREADY an imbalance in the world affecting everyone, created by those who have inherited the power to perpetuate profiteering systems of control, and there is NO way to "balance" the world or the microcosm (my life and those around me) through operating by conventional means.

A conventional life of "taxes and a credit rating" is not a possibility for me. I have much student loan "debt" and I don't file for taxes. I decided I could not abide by these regulations in good conscience, contributing and giving credence to those who are massively destroying the good, the true, and the sacred in this world. I would do the best I could with what I had without it, even if it meant MINDFULLY and CONSCIENTIOUSLY breaking laws and living under the assimilation of paradox- using predation to fight predation, humility and self-confidence, conflict and peace, receptivity and resistance to influence, to possess nothing and to command everything, lightening speed and circumspection, caution and courage, freedom and loyalty, indifference and love. There is no rational closure to make sense of the entire spectrum of creation in this "reality". The only way to make sense of life, as far as I understand it, is through the creative and mindful assimilation of paradox.

Just as killing a killer is justified under the correct circumstances, I feel stealing from bigger stealers is also justified under the correct circumstances; in my instance- since I do it not merely for the essentials of food nor because I feel it is my due but also because it enables me to help others in various ways in a consistently ethical and moral way, abiding by my justifications (or rationalizations depending on your position).

Okay.... Let's say I stop shoplifting, because it IS stealing.

As I write this, I'm in a public library using electricity and wifi access. Since I don't pay taxes, am I stealing? Even though taxes -illegitimate, imaginary, debt-based "money"- go into the black hole of the national debt (or pockets of bankers & politicians), and the library is REALLY funded on loans from other countries and the unconstitutional, privately owned Federal Reserve? I take the knowledge I have attain here and apply it everywhere I go to contribute to a better society.
Is this right or wrong?

Does this imply it is "right" to go to the IRS and "fall back in line" for back taxes and unpaid student loans to the labyrinth of socially subversive and destructive banking oligarchies?

How about downloading music, pictures, and videos which I didn't create, but use as a means to share with friends, enhance creativity, and use as motivation for other productive things? Is that sufficiently "giving back" in the general sense, or is it rationalization because I'm not DIRECTLY contributing toward the artist?

How about picking a lilac flower from someone's "property" and using it to adorn a home? The "owners" of the lilac bush were technically "using it" for aesthetics. A bee might have used it for food. Technically it's stealing and perhaps trespassing (if the bush isn't next to the sidewalk), but is it "wrong"? According to whose ethics?


[quote author=Brenda86]
The store won't want to see its profits decline, so it will probably lay a person or two off instead to make up for the reduction of profit. So you may not be hurting the store, no, but what about the people who work there? What if it's franchised and you are hurting the owner who happens to just own that one store?
[/quote]
[quote author=Domi]
Unless you can show me some real data that supports what you claim above, it is just a rationalization in your mind.
[/quote]

Nobody owning/ managing a publicly traded Whole Foods Market, Inc. (WFMI on the stock exchange) franchise in west LA is hurting. Here's your proof.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704804204575069511609696540.html
http://www.flex-news-food.com/pages/28544/Food/Whole/whole-foods-profit-beats-shares-jump-view.html

Secondly, speaking from experience and friends in retail, they just jack up prices if they feel a cramp in profits (even though their prices are jacked up enough with an existing roaring demand). Hiring and firing people is generally inefficient (lots of paperwork, time, training, and resources), hurts morale, and unstabilizes things so, again, I doubt people are being frantically thrown overboard due to an infinitesimal decrease in their profit/ loss margin.


[quote author=Brenda86]
it doesn't seem that bad in light of the things you contribute, which YOU have deemed to be important enough to outweigh the possible ramifications of your actions.
[/quote]

Isn't that what everyone does in their own way? Everyone takes from others in a multitude of ways, even if vicariously supporting others who have to do the dirty work FOR them, because life feeds on life. And in doing so, people just create their own "justifications" or "rationalizations" depending on what their demand or understanding or conditioning is.

[quote author=Aidylsun B.]
Money, food, clothing, a pencil or postage stamp for work; time - When has stealing ever been okay? And who really pays?
[/quote]

[quote author=spyraal]
The setting is there to provide for any kind of excuse. But a man with integrity is the one who does what is right even when he is on his own, and no one is watching. And by extension, a man with integrity is the one who does not use a situation and/or the deeds of others as an excuse for his own doing.
[/quote]

[quote author=Brenda86]
...it doesn't really cut into the profits of these huge, corrupt corporations. This may be true, but what if you and 100 other people who shop at the same store have this same idea?
[/quote]

How about this...
"To live comfortably and conveniently to my culturally conditioned preferences, I'm going to live in an industrial civilization that relies on perpetual expansion and consumption of natural resources."

Well, this may be okay on a small scale, but what if you and 100 other people have the same idea? 1,000? 100,000? 100,000,000? It will destroy entire ecosystems and displace indigenous naive populations.

"...Well, that's okay as long as we have the receipts for it."

TALK ABOUT A RATIONALIZATION!

Stealing, in many forms, has been a justified and accepted way of life for the majority of human history, and we all pay AND contribute in many ways. To displace responsibility and judgment with and exchange of money, voting, or even silent acquiescence does not remove all accomplices and contributors from culpability.

[quote author=spyraal]
A freedom to start walking aimlessly without obligations, without fear, without worries about tomorrow, without watching their back every single moment, without owning to anyone. It is a freedom i admire and for which they are paying a price. This is actually a kind of strategic enclosure. What De-touched calls freedom in his life, is not what i would call freedom in the above sense. I guess it is better to have a clean face and soul and fly through the radar of Law stealthy and with minimal "signal return", rather than trying to fly constantly UNDER the radar of law and be obliged to maneuver all and in any given time, always ready to divert from where you were going to avoid detection.

[...]

...his lifestyle is not one leading away from the system, nor it is fighting the system, nor it is a life of freedom and independence. How can it be when you might have to hide, to pretend or to flea at any given moment?
[/quote]

I think you'd be hard pressed to find ANYONE with that sort of freedom: without obligations or concerns. Regardless of whether we are complicit to a destructive system or working outside of it, we all sacrifice our "freedom" in some way. What makes the lifestyle YOU choose the morally righteous one with "a clean face and soul"? In response to your assertions to the type of lifestyle, I've never had to divert a destination to avoid detection, I've never had to hide, pretend (aside from generally "fitting in" and the unemployment thing), or flea, probably because the system has far greater concerns than lil' ol' me.

Looking back on life, if I had made the choices to "play it safe" staying on the radar, I'd still be in Wisconsin probably drinking beer from a box, while watching a box, while sitting in a box, filling out boxes on endless regulatory government paperwork delivered in boxes, while keeping my brain in a box, until I can be buried in a box....Yeeeeah... No thank you.

I know it's been mentioned that looking at the larger context would detract from the focus of this thread, but in order to remain objective, by definition we MUST consider the larger context. And I am seeking objective consistency, not preference by democratic consensus.

[quote author=Nomad]
Either an 'off-grid' existence or alternatively one which involves participating in the 'world-corporate-game' for survival, can in both cases be parasitic OR potentially something else, and it depends on the individual's approach and attitude (and on the presence and orientation of a conscious aim), and also their level of understanding of these dynamics and of themselves.
[/quote]

Agreed. Well said. I contend, concluded by concensus of relationships thus far, that my life, as with all lives, is parasitic in some ways but primarily contributory to others. My aim is to be as contributory as possible to those who wish to progressively create and learn to escape corrosive, entropic systems and tendencies...

This being said (here's where those who are frustrated might breathe a sigh of relief for progress)- I have had a few realizations of my own entropic tendencies (not that these tendencies are "wrong" by any means, but perhaps lazier and less creative than I would generally advocate and wish to aspire to. ).

Perhaps shopliting, while a quick, easy solution, in a way holds me back from creatively formulating a more innovative and far-reaching solutions, which may take more time and effort but will ultimately help more people by working on a larger scale.

Holding on to notions of an impending inevitable economic disaster and collapse of social systems is, in a sense, keeping me in a linear thought constraint. My reliance of being around the neotenizing (“Neoteny” is the retention of juvenile characteristics in to adulthood, primarily used to describe animal behavior.) convenience I've come to loathe, which is the exact same thing I dislike, is it's holding me back from using the challenge to focus my intent and abilities on creating a larger solution to help more people.

Ana, I especially appreciated your post. Well put. Thank you. :)

I suppose the other question remaining is regarding consistency. Should I stop downloading media content, stop using publicly funded institutions, stop giving flowers to people, and just turn myself in to the government????

... Hmm... Maybe I'm making progress, or maybe I'm just pissing off people with my Virgo-rising tedious affinity for detail... Either way, I'm very grateful for all the time and effort you've all put into helping me resolve this. Thank you very much!

 

[anart]

The way I see it, there is ALREADY an imbalance in the world affecting everyone, created by those who have inherited the power to perpetuate profiteering systems of control, and there is NO way to "balance" the world or the microcosm (my life and those around me) through operating by conventional means.

So, you feed into the imbalance. Instead of becoming what the world should be; instead of BEING the change in the world around you, you use the fact that the world is already obscenely unbalanced as justification to do what you want to do.

Can you stop, for just the smallest moment, and realize this is your life. This is your current lifetime and the energy you expend affects not only the progress and learning of your soul, but your environment as well.

Your life is a reflection of you who are.


This is fact. Your life right now is a reflection of the justification of entropy (specifically of 'taking', contraction and 'the tramp' in Gurdjieffian terms).

At any moment in time, you may find yourself in 5D realizing all you did not do - all you could have done - in this environment; in this very unique time line. When that happens and you look back and see monumental justification for doing what was easy and what you wanted to do - will that bring you to your knees?

Every single choice, every moment of every day, feeds either creativity or entropy; fear or faith; love or hopelessness.

Let me make this a little more clear in a more general way - and this is not to pick on you specifically because it is an epidemic issue. Time is not theoretically running short. Time IS running short. We, as individuals striving to awaken and striving to make a difference in and for this world, have a very, very limited number of hours in which to do that. Dress rehearsal is over. Practice is behind us. We either take this seriously and realize we are instrumental - the battle is through us - or all is lost.

If everyone with the potential to impact the future of this planet in this time line would fully realize for only 20 minutes a day that every single choice they make affects everything, everything would change. Nobody is a nobody. Apologies for the rant - it has been a very difficult couple of weeks and time is running short.

 

[aragorn]

Anart, your "rant" was a necessary reminder, at least to me, of how the situation is very real. The death of Martha Rose reminded me also of this, really turned my stomach upside down. I'm reminded of how this what we are doing here is not about chatting on a forum, finding juicy conspiracy theories or contesting in who's the best researcher or "esoteric warrior". As you say, the rehearsals are over-this is the real thing, fasten your seat belts...

Sorry, maybe I'm ranting too.

 

[Bernhard]

I don't see it as a rant. It was a good reminder of why we are here and what we must DO. So thank you, anart! It reminds me of something Krishnamurti said a while back:

To bring about peace in the world, to stop all wars, there must be a revolution in the individual, in you and me. Economic revolution without this inward revolution is meaningless, for hunger is the result of the maladjustment of economic conditions produced by our psychological states; greed, envy, ill-will and possessiveness. To put and end to this sorrow, to hunger, to war, there must be psychological revolution and few of us are willing to face that. We will discuss peace, plan legislation, create new leagues, the United Nations and so on; but we will not win peace because we will not give up our position, our authority, our money, our properties, our lives. To rely on others is utterly futile; others cannot bring us peace. No leader is going to gives us peace, no government, no army, no country. What will bring peace is inward transformation, which will lead to outward action. Inward transformation is not isolation, is not withdrawal from outward action. On the contrary, there can be right action only when there is right thinking and there is no right thinking when there is no self-knowledge. Without knowing yourself, there is no peace.

An Ideal is merely an escape, an avoidance of what is, a contradiction of what is. An ideal prevents direct action upon what is. To have peace, we will have to love, we will have to begin not to live an ideal life but to see things as they are and act upon them, transform them. As long as each one of us is seeking psychological security, the physiological security we need; food, clothing and shelter, is destroyed.

Some of you will nod your heads and say, "I agree", and go outside and do exactly the same as you have been doing for the last ten or twenty years. Your agreement is merely verbal and has no significance, for the world's miseries and wars are not going to be stopped by your casual assent. They will be only stopped when you realize the danger, when you realize your responsibility, when you do not leave it to somebody else. If you realize the suffering, if you see the urgency of immediate action and do not postpone, then you will transform yourself.

The way I see it, there is ALREADY an imbalance in the world affecting everyone, created by those who have inherited the power to perpetuate profiteering systems of control, and there is NO way to "balance" the world or the microcosm (my life and those around me) through operating by conventional means.

So basically what you are doing is consciously feed entropy/imbalance because you think/say it's "just the way it is already", almost in a way like "if you can't beat them, then join them" attitude, although you are not aware of that, because it is hidden behind your buffers of self-importance and "nobleness". I don't think you see how you are actually becoming what you "fight" against or oppose, nor do you seem to see how you feed imbalance even more, osit.

Just as killing a killer is justified under the correct circumstances, I feel stealing from bigger stealers is also justified under the correct circumstances; in my instance- since I do it not merely for the essentials of food nor because I feel it is my due but also because it enables me to help others in various ways in a consistently ethical and moral way, abiding by my justifications (or rationalizations depending on your position).

That sounds like self-importance to me based on the "noble" image you seem to have of yourself. I wonder how you "help" when you are at the same time feeding entropy/imbalance. How does stealing groceries (which you obviously could buy as well since you do have money, based on what you wrote before) help others truly? Are they starving and asking you to steal food for them? I also wonder what kind of "mentoring" and "helping" can come from someone who doesn't see how he is contributing to entropy/imbalance and justifying it. Looks like you think you are acting STO, when essentially it is STS, osit.

As I write this, I'm in a public library using electricity and wifi access. Since I don't pay taxes, am I stealing? Even though taxes -illegitimate, imaginary, debt-based "money"- go into the black hole of the national debt (or pockets of bankers & politicians), and the library is REALLY funded on loans from other countries and the unconstitutional, privately owned Federal Reserve? I take the knowledge I have attain here and apply it everywhere I go to contribute to a better society.
Is this right or wrong?

Does this imply it is "right" to go to the IRS and "fall back in line" for back taxes and unpaid student loans to the labyrinth of socially subversive and destructive banking oligarchies?

How about downloading music, pictures, and videos which I didn't create, but use as a means to share with friends, enhance creativity, and use as motivation for other productive things? Is that sufficiently "giving back" in the general sense, or is it rationalization because I'm not DIRECTLY contributing toward the artist?

How about picking a lilac flower from someone's "property" and using it to adorn a home? The "owners" of the lilac bush were technically "using it" for aesthetics. A bee might have used it for food. Technically it's stealing and perhaps trespassing (if the bush isn't next to the sidewalk), but is it "wrong"? According to whose ethics?
[...]
Looking back on life, if I had made the choices to "play it safe" staying on the radar, I'd still be in Wisconsin probably drinking beer from a box, while watching a box, while sitting in a box, filling out boxes on endless regulatory government paperwork delivered in boxes, while keeping my brain in a box, until I can be buried in a box....Yeeeeah... No thank you.

Much of what you write seems a bit like black and white thinking or Formatory Thinking:
fwiw....

 

[vinny]

my impression, for what it's worth, is that you (de-tatched) do not see yourself as you truly are. You are living in comfortable illusion about yourself. And if you did see your true nature it would be a real shock.

This is the standard condition of ALL mankind, as Gurdjieff goes to great pains to explain. It is something that we all have to face (those who truly wish to BE and to DO), that generally requires enormous shocks before we can see it, and when we do see it, it is an earth shattering revelation.

It is also what Anart is addressing in her response, and what various other responses here have been giving you the opportunity to see in your personal situation. But it is somewhat like the scene in John Carpenter's 'They Live' (highly recommended, by the way) - where the protagonist has to get into a (completely hilarious over the top) fist fight with the other guy to persuade him to 'put on the magic glasses'. We do not WANT to see ourselves as we truly are, in fact we resist it with all our mechanical might. But unless we can penetrate that incredibly strong internal boundary, we can do nothing. And now is not a time for doing nothing. So when the pedal hits the metal, what's it gonna take?

 

[Nienna]

Let me make this a little more clear in a more general way - and this is not to pick on you specifically because it is an epidemic issue. Time is not theoretically running short. Time IS running short. We, as individuals striving to awaken and striving to make a difference in and for this world, have a very, very limited number of hours in which to do that. Dress rehearsal is over. Practice is behind us. We either take this seriously and realize we are instrumental - the battle is through us - or all is lost.

If everyone with the potential to impact the future of this planet in this time line would fully realize for only 20 minutes a day that every single choice they make affects everything, everything would change. Nobody is a nobody. Apologies for the rant - it has been a very difficult couple of weeks and time is running short.

Very well said, anart, as usual. And for me, the above is the crux of the matter here. It is the choices we make every second of every minute of every day that is so very, deeply important.

The battle is, indeed, through us as the Cs have said. And this battle does define who we really are. By the choices we make, we are either aligning with entropy or creation. Rationalization does not fit into the picture.

And we are getting right down to the wire. If we all live and make choices based on fitting in with the entropy that is already in place, then that is what will continue to be.

Your whole last post, de-tached, was nothing more than rationalizing why you have chosen the side of entropy. And until you can really understand this, until you can get over your self-importance, your right man syndrome you will be going down the path of entropy.

This forum is for those of like mind, that want to create a better world and to do this the most important thing is working on ourselves, cleaning our machine, making the choices that will lead us to create this new world. Maybe we all need to look at the choices we have made lately, set aside our self-importance and buffers and really look at who we really are. As anart said, time is running out, we need to make some choices and decide just which way we want to go.

Thank you, anart, for your "rant". It is greatly appreciated.

 

[theos]

Thank you, anart, for your "rant". It is greatly appreciated.

Here, here! Just what the doctor ordered.

 

[Zaphod]

I realise I may be paraphrasing some replies to an extent, but I feel the need to write my own piece to this one

I think it's become somewhat fashionable to detest corporations and everything they stand for. To an extent there is good reason for doing so as without doubt, they strongly influence areas of our lives in an insidious and invidious manner. But that is not true on every level. Take the supermarket; everyone loves to hate them in this day and age, and there's plenty of 'substance' to point a finger at, but out of all the 'hate-the-supermarket' crowd, who of them wants to return to marching up and down high streets with bags full of shopping?.. The greengrocers, the butchers, the hardware store, all half a mile apart.. Waiting in great long queues full of people who want to jabber on to the proprietor about the weather, their pet dog's haemorrhoid's, their 7 year old niece's worrying predilection for hardcore gangster rap... and so on ..

It's also become fashionable to harp back to these good old days as being a quaint, simpler time but I beg to differ. No one in their right mind would want to return to such frustrations, instead of parking up at one place and buying everything they need quickly and cheaply.

By all means attack the corporate level interference with democratic process, but that's the level it needs to be attacked at. Refusing to pay for goods and services, that you are just as reliant upon as any of the rest of us are, to my mind can not be justified by lifestyle choices on your part, or by directing attention to the evils of the entity you're stealing from. If you really feel they're that evil then cut away completely; by stealing from them, all you're actually doing is passing your bill on to other people, who, despite their reservations regarding corporates, see a transaction of goods and services in exchange for money as being 'fair'. Because despite what evils corporations may be doing on other levels, exchanging money for the produce of theirs that you want or 'need', is in itself simple and fair, and I fail to see how a developed economy is ever going to function without such components

I don't understand for one minute, why you feel that 'grown' produce should be free, when someone has invested their time, labour and money to grow it. How can that transaction ever be 'fair' and more importantly, how could it ever be commercially workable? Spend half the year toiling in a field growing your own fruit and vegetables, then see how many you feel like giving away for free..

 

[Windmill knight]

De-tached, my impression is that you were never really asking for objective feedback from the forum; what you really wanted was the forum to pat you on the back and tell you that what you do is alright. That didn't happen, so you have been rationalizing through relativism and legalism.

Ultimately how you live your life is your choice - that is the beauty of free-will - and in that sense, it's ok. Just don't confuse it with esoterism, being an STO candidate, fighting the system or building strategic enclosure, because that is not what it is at all. Your life is simply another version of STS - and a very STS oriented life, in my opinion - and nothing more. You are obviously very comfortable with it, so perhaps you should reassess your interest in esoterism?