[ExI] How Corporate Media distorts Hawaiian Protests

Darin Sunley dsunley at gmail.com
Sat Aug 31 00:13:31 UTC 2019

The reason, John, that some people are responding poorly to your righteous
anger is that, by expressing it in those terms, you demonstrate, with utter
clarity, that you have been /thoroughly/ infected with one of the most
cancerous memes in the history of humanity: that the possession of a
virtue, is this case "reason", justifies the acquisition, continued
possession, and exercise of power over those that lack it.

You are somewhat unusual, in this day and age, in defining reason as a
virtue, but that doesn't matter. It's the general template of regarding a
virtue, /any/ virtue, as a justification for power, that kills entire
societies. From this innocuous-looking hellmouth has sprung every atrocity
in Western Civilization since the fall of the Roman Empire, from the
Crusades, through the Reformation, the Shoah, the Antifa riots, and most
mass shootings in America today. It is a mental illness so universal and
pervasive that, like water to fishes, it is almost completely invisible
until it is pointed out.

You may take solace in the fact that you are not alone in this condition.
Nearly every politically conscious adult in Western Civilization is
infected. Every political party on the entire spectrum strongly encourages
it, and every media channel is a carrier.

When one's political opponents are seen, by literally everyone in every
faction, not merely as mistaken but as literally evil, civil war, or the
brutal authoritarianism necessary to temporarily suppress it, is very close

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:34 PM Darin Sunley <dsunley at gmail.com> wrote:

> For myself, I prefer a telescope to exist there than not.
> The right to build a telescope there is contingent on ownership of the
> land. Those who can acquire and maintain ownership of the land have the
> right to determine its disposition. Acquiring and maintaining control if
> the land is a political power contest, one which is by no means resolved.
> I remain troubled by the characterization of our opponents in this contest
> as "barbarians". Barbarians stand opposed to reason, yes? But they only
> became opposed to reason when we seized the mantle of reason as a
> justification for the exertion of power we had already acquired. When we
> define ourselves with reason, what else can our opponents do but oppose it?
> They are barbarians only in response to our identification of ourselves as
> "civilization".
> The current toxicity in modern politics began when one side, finding
> itself ineffective on policy disputes, began to define their disagreements
> with the other party as moral. The other party then has no option but to
> define themselves in opposition to that morality, or to cease be able to
> define themselves at all.
> And people would literally rather die, ideally fighting, then surrender
> that definition of self.
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019, 5:10 PM Dan TheBookMan via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> On Aug 30, 2019, at 3:44 PM, John Clark via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 6:31 PM SR Ballard via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>> *> I support the scientists and not the protestors. I hope that clears
>>> up any confusion.*
>> I'm very glad to hear you say that! But I'm still confused, I still don't
>> understand why you're more angry with me than the protestors.
>> Let’s say you support a given cause. Let’s say there’s another person who
>> supports that cause too. Let’s say, though you agree with her on supporting
>> the cause, that she unfairly attacks those who don’t support the cause. Is
>> it really hard to understand why you might criticize her — even if you both
>> support that same cause?
>> Likewise, one might be against a cause someone else supports yet still
>> see that the supporter of a cause is, while wrong (by your lights?) about
>> the cause is still fair-minded, open to discussion, and doesn’t scold
>> everyone who disagrees with her as if they’re supporting the worst evil to
>> ever be conceived by the human mind.
>> I believe the above should be 101 level stuff in dealing with
>> controversies and disagreements. Of course, some folks here seem to believe
>> sneering louder, longer, and more frequently is the road to resolving all
>> disagreements. You know, folks who believe the ends always justifies the
>> means. ;)
>> Regards,
>> Dan
>>    Sample my Kindle books at:
>> http://author.to/DanUst
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20190830/685b3230/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list