Poetry – Words are Weapons

4 thoughts on “Poetry – Words are Weapons”

1. OK Opher, here are some words in reply, from a very different angle:

   There is a battle going on between those who want every individual to have maximum freedom consistent with living in a civilized community, and those that want to force or browbeat their particular view of the world on to everyone else.

   There are those who see the destruction, injustice and exploitation against human beings by the politically powerful, and there are those that are wilfully blind to these things; or even promote or support the false accusations that make these things possible.

   There are those that purvey fake news, while accusing their victims of the very thing they themselves are doing; and there are those who always strive to find out the facts, and to tell the truth as they see it.

   There are fake “experts” that use their technical skills to make a case for a political agenda, and real experts who follow the facts to whatever conclusion they lead to. There are also bullshitters and those that cheerlead for them, and those who resist bullshit and debunk it whenever they can.

   There is a battle between those that make false cases for political action, and those they label “deniers.” “Heretics,” in religious terms.

   There is a battle between those that spread fear and hatred against the victim class of the moment, be it racial, religious, lifestyle, sexual proclivities, or earned economic success; and those who are tolerant of difference – though never of wrongdoing.

   There is a battle between the politically rich – the establishment, politicians, bureaucrats, big company bosses, well-funded pressure groups – and the politically poor; honest, productive workers and individuals and small business people.

   And I’ll go further:

   There is a battle between those who care about real human rights like property, privacy, freedom of speech and freedom of choice, and those that want to trash those rights.

   There is a battle between those who see human beings as (justifiably) superior to other animals, and those that see themselves as superior to us human beings.

   There is a battle between those who see government as serving each individual under it, and those that see individuals as resources to be used (and, at need, used up) by government.

   There is a battle between those who want people to live in diverse communities each small enough to reflect the interests of their people, and those that want a single, unified, world-wide super-state – controlled by the same politically rich that are in charge today!

   Loading...

   1. Gosh, there’s lots to pick up here Neil!!
      Firstly – we are animals – nothing more! We’re pretty violent, very destructive and we love killing. We’re pretty bad on that scale. We are superior in some respects and worse in others. Depends what you’re measuring. In terms of intelligence we are sadly lacking. We are not superior – only daft religious groups believe that. We all evolved from the same first cell.
      Government should serve the people and the planet. It’s our home. Greed and the lust for power is incredibly destructive.
      Caring about rights and freedoms should be fundamental but balanced against other bigger issues – such as pandemics and the environment.
      The capitalist model is certainly failing. Gross inequality is a sickness.
      idealism is fine but without a global perspective and controls the wealthy elite and politicians trash the place for their own gain.

      Loading...

      1. Well Opher, I won’t confess to being “pretty violent,” nor particularly destructive; and I’m no lover of killing anything. (Except for animals that I eat at one end of the scale, and pests like wasps at the other).

         When you say “we are animals – nothing more,” you do not speak for me. Here’s an extract from one of my essays from the days of WriterBeat:

         “What is it, that makes us different from, and better than, mere animals? First, we have evolved languages that are intricate and expressive. Second, we can think abstractly; for example, we can do mathematics or philosophy. Third, it is in our nature to take control of, and to leave our mark on, our surroundings. And we can record our ideas for posterity, for example through writing, art, music and architecture. Fourth, we have business and trade; not just at the level of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours,” but also, as Adam Smith put it, “give me that which I want, and you shall have this which you want.” Fifth, it is in our nature to co-operate, and to form societies of like-minded people. It is also in our nature to be creative, and to build civilizations. Sixth, we have invented, and are still developing, life-improving conveniences like money, property rights, workable systems of justice, and economic production. Finally, we are a fast-moving species. And despite periods of stagnation or regression, such as the Dark Ages, we tend to get better – and faster – as we go.”

         Those aren’t the views of “daft religious groups” – are they? I would say that the daftness of the religionists lies in their logic, which leads them to erect a Gahd and put it up on a pedestal, rather than in their particular conclusion in this matter. But then, I regard deep environmentalism, likewise, as a daft (and very dangerous) religion – putting something they call “the environment” up on a pedestal, and then trying to use it as a stick to beat us human beings into compliance.

         I agree that greed and lust for power are destructive. And that the current system is failing; but that system has absolutely nothing to do with capitalism. What we are suffering under today is a combination of statism and cronyism. It enables the wealthy elite and the politicians to trash our lives, and our rights and freedoms, for their own gain. (And one of the things in whose name they do it is “saving the planet!) All that must stop.

         Rights and freedoms are absolutely fundamental, and must always be so. A good test of humanity is, do they respect the equal rights and freedoms of others? (Or, at least, those others who in return respect their own rights and freedoms).

         As to inequality, as Friedrich von Hayek put it: “A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers.” Or, perhaps, you may prefer George Orwell’s take: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” The real problem is not inequality, but injustice. Under justice, each individual ought to be treated, as far as possible, as he or she treats others. But under the current system, shits like politicians and their cronies get the rewards, and the real human beings get mushroom managed. If I can help it, I won’t let a single one of those shits get away with anything – and nor should you.

         Loading...

      2. Neil – you make a case for us being intelligent animals – nothing more. We share many of those characteristics with other animals. Many have complex language, social structures and complex infrastructure. We are far from unique. An intelligent animal is still nothing more than an animal. It is religious people who place us on a pedestal. It’s a great shame none of the other hominids survived.
         Power corrupts but I do not think it is beyond to come up with a system that is fair, respects the planet and is not totalitarian. After all, the best of us are intelligent!
         I’m halfway through your book and enjoying it!

         Loading...

Comments are closed.