Your post is very interesting,
and fraught with well thought out questions, Aidan.
U have proven that u have the ability
to REASON far better than most, or ALL,
of the left-leaning citizens of this forum.
I thank u for your post
and welcome your questions,
which I shall proceed to answer
( please note that my use of size
and color of font is to set apart
my writing from yours
and to separate distinct concepts
from one another; it is not shouting ):
aidan wrote:David - I can't resist.
How does a belief in freedom, beauty, individualism and hedonism
automatically negate the "perverse left"?
1 ) I am a libertarian; i.e., I lust for personal freedom,
and I know that the authority of government
and personal freedom are INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL.
THEREFORE, I embrace the US Constitution
with enthusiasm, because its Founders
went out of their way to CRIPPLE their creation, government,
when it was brought into being, by disabling it
from doing 37 certain things,
set forth in its Bill of Rights,
as well as other things set forth within
the textual body of the Constitution of 1787.
BY RIGIDLY ADHERING TO THE CONSTITUTION,
I AM INFLEXIBLY CLINGING TO MY OWN FREEDOM
as a citizen, and keeping the neck of government
firmly under the boot of individualism.
2 ) The US Constitution is the social and political contract
that was enacted; it was the DEAL that was made,
creating government, after the Hanoverian Dynasty
was ejected from North America ( except Canada ).
Thus, rigidly adhering to that deal, that agreement,
is HONESTY and truthfulness,
whereas liberally deviating from it
is dishonest and fraudulent,
leading away from the truth of the deal
and away from my own freedom.
I can and I WILL employ my freedom
to enjoy beauty and hedonism
( which DOES mean what u said it means, below )
as well as I am able to,
in the individualistic way of my choice.
Quote:
I wouldn't call myself a leftist - but I definitely lean more to the left than to the right -
By leaning liberally away from the Constitution,
u lean toward rejecting its protections of personal freedom,
and lean toward authoritarianism.
Is that what u want ?
Quote:
and I think all of the things you say you choose are great-
I choose them for myself as a matter of fact.
(Hedonism means that happiness or pleasure is the chief good in life-
I can accept that- we're all striving for happiness, aren't we?
It's one of our inalienable rights under the US constitution - the pursuit of happiness).
Actually, THAT is in the Declaration of Independence.
Does hedonism automatically infer one's own happiness at the expense of others' though?
Not necessarily.
I do not suggest robbing anyone
to acquire the means of happiness;
( THAT philosophy is represented in
graduated taxation, a very leftist idea that I reject )
Quote:
I don't think so - but I'm not too sure about that-
that could present a problem.
Anyway - it would seem to me that it's more of a right-wing thing
to conform to rigid criteria, follow a set agenda
YES !
U r absolutely right.
U have a perfectly clear and accurate concept of this.
It means playing the game according to the agreed rules,
with no deviation therefrom;
hence, according to a conservative, inflexible interpretation
of the laws of mathematics,
4 + 3 = 7,
NOT 7.2, nor 6.9, but exactly and rigidly 7
with no fooling around,
whereas a LIBERAL interpretation
wud allow for some variation away from the 7
and a MORE liberal interpretation,
going FURTHER into error,
wud declare that 4 + 3 = 13.
A radical vu of math wud reject
the laws of arithmetic altogether.
Quote:
and deny creativity and beauty for beauty's sake in favor of responsibility
or standards or adherence to a doctrine, thus inhibiting freedom, individualism, beauty, and hedonism.
Einstein and Hawking have been creative
WITHIN the rules of mathematics and sound logic:
therefore, thay have been RESPECTED.
If their creativity had ventured into error ( mathematical liberalism ),
then their work wud have been rejected,
to the extent of their mistakes.
Their individualism shown forth
in their creation of mathematical beauty
and created ( or DISCOVERED )
the hedonism of freedom
within the rules of ambient truth set forth by Nature.
Quote:
And how does the gun fit into freedom,
individualism, beauty and hedonism?
Two ways:
Firstly, the original concept expressed by the Founders
was that the citizens wud keep government in line,
by those citizens being fully armed
and ready to remove that government,
if thay found it to be unsatisfactory,
the same way that owners of real estate
can and wud remove a property manager
whose services proved to be less than sufficiently pleasing.
Indeed, some years later,
this same spirit was exemplified in the Constitution of Texas
which authorized " anybody and everybody
to form a militia to overthrow the government of Texas "
and some of the ratifications of the US Constitution
( noteably including my State of NY )
expressed reservation of the right to withdraw
from the union if thay found it " necessary to their happiness ".
SECONDLY,
the gun is power to control the situation
in a predatory emergency,
to avoid one 's own destruction,
in the discretion of a predator.
By avoiding that destruction,
one continues to EXIST thereby
to enjoy beauty and hedonism
within the context of his own individualistic choices.
Quote:
(And you don't have to yell at me- we can discuss this calmly).
I wud only yell at u
to emfasize my joy at your obvious intelligence.
Have u considered applying for membership in Mensa ?
We have many activities that I think u 'd enjoy.
Thank u for a wonderful post, Aidan.
David
