|The Onion, The State, The Pinata...
Current time: 03-30-2017, 09:31 AM
The Onion, The State, The Pinata...
09-28-2013, 11:18 AM (This post was last modified: 09-29-2013 04:52 AM by eye2i2hear.)
The Onion, The State, The Pinata...
*note: written from a USA lingo perspective*
** essay-isk lengthy post alert **
The trusty ole onion. (the vegetable, not the satire website)
Often used as a metaphor because of it's layers that can be peeled away and down into.
I started to use it here regarding a look at The State. But realized it perhaps falls a bit short. I mean, an onion (if one likes the taste & feel of such) has much to value (nutritionally too), layer by layer. Only the rather rare spoiled or diseased onion is the exception. The State*, not so much --at least to one looking past the IndoctriNation and Con artistry.
*[one quibble might be that The State = Government, and government per the form of self government, and government by consent of the governed, equates to the good onion well enough]
Perhaps The State is metaphorically more like a pinata?
note (metaphorically) the blindfold, the required aggression & equipment, and the child (like faith)
You never know ahead what was stuffed into it and will fall out when you aggressively strike it hard enough and/or enough times, but once you do, you'll find yourself flooded with more of the same.
And unlike "Mother Nature"'s onions, the pinatas are 'man-made' from the git-go (not necessarily the same as Git`mo), so what's in them is up to the assembler (emphasis on the 'ass' as needed).
Of course, traditionally, or in genuine situations, pinatas are filled with goodies and not bait aka rat poison. Where 99.9% of bait is actual food, as what attracts and appeals.
Pinatas are used at children's birthday parties and other celebrations.
But with The State we're dealing with Muther Nature. Thus we're still dealing with Parties, but of the Political Order. So i'll go with pinata here.
a classic, Trojan Horse Pinata for We The People?! aka The Constitution...?
Common folks are led to see the Pinatas (States/Governments) as holding only good things (it's usually presumed any bad things are solely because of a few bad
Most things within considered 'treats'; others, like with some folks during another ghoulish celebration Trick or Treat, seen more as the necessities e.g. getting anything from an apple to celery stalks to tofu in your Halloween goodies bag.
The Statesist Tricksters tend to fill Their treaters sacks with razor blade laced apples or the equivalent of Exlax filled Hershey bars. As for Their pinatas, it's hallucinatory filled goodies, to the Exlax laden Tootsie Rolls that all come tumbling out.
And an irony here is that in actuality, most individuals, aka Citizens or Taxpayers, but equally anyone on The Land, are The Pinata! (see self flagellation? sadomasochism? musical chairs, but played with pistols/arms?)
This post was prompted by another (but as to point, unrelated) thread here this week regarding the SS#, aka the Social Security Number. (and thus not as NonE romped with, the VIN# of a sweet '70 SS Chevy; tho to own one in the condition of the one he posted, would net quite some $ecurity!)
Is the SSN a genuine Tootsie Roll, or is it an Exlax chocolate, manipulatively shaped and then wrapped in Tootsie Roll paper?
Ditto here, the Driver's License, Passport, Birth Certificate, Articles of Incorporation, etc.
Some hold that these are strictly optional, thus genuinely voluntary. And thus to 'have' (take) one is to indeed, either give Testimonial Evidence regarding Identity of Citizenship, a personal Declaration of some signaled acceptance, or entering into a Contract binding one to The Code (and/or Citizenship) --or possibly other hypotheses/theories (e.g. only Corporations aka Legal Persons can enter into such Contracts). [fwiw, if find zero to little to support anything other than the possibility of the first two options above supported; with the caveat of more to come regarding even those first two, as we continue]
But is this accurate? Is this The Case?
Is it voluntary, genuinely, purely (see 'clean hands doctrine')? [not to be con+fused with the IRS version of "voluntary compliance"]
Is it possible to be voluntary when it's in the pinata known as The State, where it's very nature is founded in the involuntary? (see "Taxation")
Can something founded in a lie, or a deception, not inherently be part of the lie? Can something fundamentally (emphasis on the 'mental') based upon literal violence and aggression graft in something (and it still be genuinely, legitimately) voluntary?
A quick side bar here, to remind one that ALL of such State-ing is conceptual. It does not exist commonly, but only personally (in the mind, the state of mind).
Which is not to say that one or more holding the same belief won't act as if, and thus convey rather convincingly, that such does exist 'in fact' (commonly/to the common senses) and is 'real'. But it is all relative to one's state of mind, then one or more United in State of mind.
[*when is 'real' real? how so?]
Also as a reminder, most (if not all) folks act on what they believe conceptually to be True or Real. And thus it's not only important to examine one's own beliefs, factually as evidence, but equally importantly, examine the beliefs of any with whom you'll have social association/interaction.
So, when it comes to the SSN, what do People believe about it?
Ditto Driver's Licenses?
The Name? (used for the above --'ab'used for the above? more on that momentarily)
Are the beliefs founded in evidence base upon fact(s) -or- Evidence based upon Opinion(s)? How does one go about distinguishing the two? (bonus query: how does opinion differ from an idea? an illusion? a fantasy? a hallucination? a delusion? indoctriNation?)
It seems the crucial factor here is: is one ready to face, via confrontation, Those who believe their Opinions exist in (common) reality? And that those are enforceable via threat, coercion, and violence? e.g. If They believe your 'having' (holding, taken?) a SSN, or Drivers License, using The Name, regardless of any conjunctive (inalienable?) threat, coercion, indeed means you are therein a Citizen, Subject to The Jurisdiction, how critical is that to your decision/"choosing" of such?
Yet just because They belief it (State it), is it in fact, binding?
(for those believing in such, can an "unalienable Right" ever be given, or taken, away? otherwise, isn't unalienable Right oxymoronic, a contraDiction?)
Another critical factor being, whether one values living with personal integrity. Up to and including poverty?
Does 'compromising' (?) per a SSN or DL differ from the compromise of doing business with (any) Corporations (ISP anyone, here?)? Using FRNs (ever/mostly/as "necessary"?)?
Another critical factor being: is Stateism inherently (inalienably?) a state of war (and war zones)? Thus, does one live by the rules of war whenever finding oneself amongst professing/positing Stateists? And if so, what if any, are the "rules" of war? Fact, or Opinion? [by what Authority is War defined/refined?]
Lastly, how easy is it to criticize (or guilt) another over such and actually be basing one's critique (or condemnation) in opinion (or Opinion), rather than fact(s), critical reasoning, logical consistency, and consistent integrity?
i indeed easily can see The State as that Trojan Horse Pinata.
i also too often find folks swatting at another that's seeking to explore and discover areas where they might decrease fueling and inflaming The State, The War Machine, but being swatted at as if they are a pinata / The State.
Personally, i argue that indeed, we're in The State of War, inherently, and thus apart from personal integrity, it is impossible to not live by the rules of war. Even eating in a prison cell makes one a part of The Pinata. Even "homelessness" sustains via dribbles from the teet of The Corporate State.
One old song had it as "Love is all around us..."; one might sing it as "War is all around us..." and be just as accurate? (a reversal of newspeak ie peace is war?)
Just as with the most literal war, this one is a matter of life and death, of survival, of picking and choosing one's weapons, and one's battles.
A significant aspect of it is signaling; propaganda too.
May we each be careful how we label or insinuate cowardice. The Front Line isn't much apart from the potato peelers. Conversely, who one will be peeling potatoes for, seems a question to value as well.
I welcome your thoughts, feedback, and critique/criticism. i simply ask that prior to that, you re-examine your position relative to possible lingering or unsuspected propaganda, belief, opinion, etc versus fact, logical consistency, critical thinking, context, etc.
* on the matter [sic] of common reality, of course nerve synapses are of common reality; every brain functions that way --as fact; but ideas, concepts, hallucinations, delusions-- all as indeed brain synapses, remain personal in that they are only knowable, distinctively, thus provable (via the common senses that establish any fact) when revealed via one or more of the common senses e.g. sound, sight*
* regarding the possibility of State being synonymous with war, click here for one examination*
* i've of course left a good many key words undefined; e.g. the word exist; thus an admonition here to the reader of Voltaire's advice: If you wish to communicate with me, first define your terms. This can prove a quite valuable exercise to do with one's self2. And if you find a word lending to an argument of point, consider not presuming any universal meaning*
* currently around here, the word Jurisdiction is a topic of emphasis; factually, what is "jurisdiction"? isn't it but a concept, a state or frame of mind? factually, it's but personal belief, no? etymologically, it is simply "to say, to speak" (diction; see dictate/dictator) "the law, the rule" (juris) --examining the words "law" and "rule" requiring yet further critical examination...*
Is it voluntary? (because if it isn't, what inherently is it?)
And can it be voluntary, if there's indoctrination, intimidation, coercion, threats & initiation of violence?
[not to be confused with asking: can it be said to be "voluntary" even when such is present.?]
09-13-2015, 05:18 PM (This post was last modified: 09-13-2015 05:24 PM by RAD.)
RE: The Onion, The State, The Pinata...
I don't think we can just presume the state/institution of government/statism have nothing to offer of value. Civilization as we know it is founded on religion. The anarchist hunter gatherers start a primitive religious cult, create a primitive farming society. The evidence seems to correlate the creation of primitive religions with creating society/progress/technology. The shared belief system is what enables what we call "civilization". You see it happen in various cultures around the world during the neolithic revolution.
1. Hunter gatherers form religions
2. They gather to worship
3. They start growing food.
4. They're able to build up/save up/store crops and form villages
5. Now there's something to tax. Enter the modern age of government.
Then these statist societies fight over which gang gets the resources. Humans now face a sort of prisoners dilemma: they live in religious statist nationalist gangs. They know there are other gangs out there who want to kill them. If their own gang isn't strong enough they can go the way of the Canaanites. The prisoners dilemma is that their own gang is founded on irrational superstitions, but their unity of belief is what enables the civilization enabling them to organize into armies to defend against other religio-political gangs. Like, the US political religion is retarded, but it's what humans came up with to solve the dilemma of how do you deal with hitler or King George or other politico- religious gangsters. That we even have the luxury to look at it from this perspective in history where there is really no viable national threat that isn't fake made for tv bs is probably pretty unique when you look back on the story of humanity as a whole. The Romans were more concerned with how do we not let the barbarians kill us then trying to make rational sense of the whole thing. And the Roman religio-political state, as flawed as it is as a logical construct, is the solution they came up with to how do we not go the way of the Canaanites. This survival strategy worked. Humans are the only creatures who seem to rely on self-deception as a survival strategy. This false belief in the divinity of the emperor is what enabled the Roman War machine which is what kept the barbarians from overrunning the Romans(until it didn't).
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)