Norbert Lennartz

There is no conscious politics with love. Change!

@Rilles I'd rather be kicked out, wouldn't I? And that would ironically prove that I don't belong to your society after all.

quite different What's society? In the past, people lived in small associations, starting with the family, the extended family, the tribe, the village, the valley, etc. And yet, in a sense, the whole of humanity was a sociably connected "society" with sometimes generous trade routes. What do you have in mind with the word "society"? You think on other scales. Now that your ancestors have forcibly placed tribal society on the feet of nations, you dream of a world with a single world government, as if the problems of Ireland in India and China were to be resolved. What's true about your story: You are not born into a family voluntarily. That's all there is to it. But when a certain day comes, it is better for both sides to leave the parents. That is beyond dispute. And so tribes and primitive peoples have always been divided because it was better for them. If they did not do that, then it were slave-owning societies. What you want is to shift the organizational level of an absolutely authoritarian tribe (and not all of them were authoritarian at all) to the global level in the modern thinking of egalitarianism (from the left) and you also call this "spiral dynamics" to expand consciousness for the ultimate goal of "good government". This is simply megalomaniac. Cage keeping is not rooted in our nature. There have always been ways to get away from something, to escape exploitation or to find better ways. Only this makes a human and loving society possible at all.

We're not ants. Comparison is thinking, which often leads us into traps. If you don't open yourself to it, you can't see the big picture. I will answer to the rest.

We can vote on who is a low quality poster. So Jesus was nailed to the cross. I don't feel that I am a low quality poster, but I feel that many people don't understand my subject because they are too far away, too conditioned.

Thinking in is-ought problem.

Leo, you're about to ban me from your forum. I am not a representative of any political movement. I don't do bashing about the politics of Trump or others. You are the one who forces a political debate. You have in front of you a picture of a society that is sceptical about any voluntary cooperation and hostile if necessary.

The candidate wouldn't be complacent. All people marching to the ballot boxes, all professional politicians, all addicts would be complacent. They would just dump the candidate, kill him if necessary, nail him to the cross. Do you want to infiltrate the Mafia?

If they did, it'd be for no reason. It is your limited mind that asks this question.

Because they have no reason to. You make the reason through your limited thinking. You are the one who invokes the ghosts.

Do you really think a person with Buddha nature or Jesus ethics would stand for election?

Oh yes, one country forbids discussing the details of the Holocaust, one country forbids discussing the details of 9/11, one country communitizes the production of bread, one country communitizes the production of shoes, in one country women are not allowed to drive a car, in one country they are not allowed to drive diesel through the city. You cannot know what is happening. But whatever happens: What is certain is that all this is a systemic continuation of the survival strategy of the state idea of each individual. The fundamental basis of any "good policy" or "good government" is that you are able to participate voluntarily. It is an offer that you can refuse gratefully. But that would violate the definition of a state.

@Leo Gura Of course politics can break your leg, but you will not make politics so that your broken leg is cared for. Rather, you will look for ways that politics cannot break your legs. This is a very personal private matter, even if you give a payment slip to a politician to bribe him.

It's like someone unscrewing his car and putting it back together to prove it's his car.

Anyone who is fully conscious of politics will no longer be involved in politics. I promise you that. You can't do it anymore. But that also means that one is fully aware of the state as such. Anyone who is fully aware of the state as such will no longer be a member of the great mafia. Or otherwise, he is a convinced professional criminal, of course - about whom I am interested when I have to emigrate. Go inside. See. Go out.

yeah Enlightenment enlightenment the Enlightenment anti-Enlightenment post-Enlightenment pre-Enlightenment Counter-Enlightenment early Enlightenment Enlightenment figures enlightenment ideals enlightenment movement Enlightenment philosopher Enlightenment theologian Enlightenment theology late Enlightenment popular enlightenment [capitalization varies] pre-enlightenment pseudo-Enlightenment public enlightenment self-enlightenment shallow Enlightenment (of the) Enlightenment Age of Enlightenment early German Enlightenment enlightenment-based worldview great enlightenment philosopher child of the Enlightenment literature of the Enlightenment philosopher of the Enlightenment philosophy of the Enlightenment proponents of the Enlightenment Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda Dialectic of Enlightenment Enlightenment Guaranteed

You're welcome to strive for your own survival by advocating for a presupposed benevolent one world government, and dismissing the principles of self-descion and ethical praxeology in favor of your preferred form of slavery (i.e. humans claiming ownership of other humans). Slavery is nice and comfy when you are on the sun side. Even more on the dark side: You don't have to worry about what you're going to do with your own body or how you will survive because your masters will govern almost every aspect of what you can or cannot do with your body (which would technically be their body because they would enforce their claim of ownership over it). I want you to notice the failure point in the worldview of most, which is how there is no way of preventing purely selfish psychopaths from claiming the tip of your ideal centralized pyramid. They will do whatever is necessary to get to the top of that hierarchy and they will rule like tyrant. Those types of people won't have Y(OUR) survival in mind when they dictate their agendas from their ivory towers. The only way to minimize the potential damage these individuals can do is to decentralize. Centralized power is not only too damn tempting for people wired to be super effective tyrants, but it's the delusional belief that most people have in the legitimacy of such an idea that means millions of people can be rounded up and executed, or starved to death, or sent to be slaughtered in senseless wars. Let us be clear: when we advocate for government, we are advocating for these things to be. (edit of a comment on Youtube)

@Preetom great!

I am not against the community. I am against caging. Against dangerous monopolies. It's all about what Leo wants. To understand the concepts of living systems, to observe, and to recognize something that hardly anyone has understood before, instead of stupidly dying. We judge too quickly. It did not do that. It only occupied everything and explains it a top priority.

Laissez faire. No ideology. Yes, it does.

@kieranperez Who are you referring to? Obama? Thomas Hobbes? Greta Thunberg? Mao Tse Tung? I don't know. It would be easy if there was a serious reference to it like Rothbard's "Anatomy of the State."

@kieranperez When I read this pathological stuff, you're at war to make it happen.

@Rilles Nonsense is another word for nothingness with lowercase "n". Stupid too. So it would be better to be stupid with capital letters "S". The field is sown.

@Shiva In a sense, it's to point out that it's nonsense.

@Shiva The same nonsense as saying, I let children die peacefully through my taxes in Iraq, as long as I stay alive.