thorhammer
Coming late again, but at just the right time, as it turns out.
How dare we feel sorry for those termed "disabled"? What arrogant superiority is implied! If your desire to work with the disabled stems from a need to be needed, a power play, or superiority complex (and only you can know this, when you truly look inside yourself), then yes, it makes you a weak person. But if not, then no; helping these people to reach their potential in the face of a society which disregards their input, thereby putting yourself in a position of adversity, makes you a strong person.
).
Just some thoughts, not fully formed, on the role of democracy in the development of the current state of social affairs: In handing over power to the few, the many have sacrificed their own power to fight for their desire, their Will. Now, mathematically, this means that the disputes are resolved peacefully and usually without loss of life. But what if we took that whole voting paradigm out of it, and pitted the sides against one another in pitched battle? The many would slay the few; the Will of the many would prevail. Same result, but without the simmering dissent and the need to keep on voting.
I'm not advocating anything here; just following what, to me, is a logical train of thought. And damn, it feels good to say these things that have been in my head for so many years . . .
\m/ Kat
Yesterday, I was driving (plot important) to the post office when, hoofing it down the footpath on the opposite side of the road to me, I saw a dude with a wheelchair. He was loping along, supporting his weight between the handles of the chair and propelling himself with surprisingly agile strides of his legs - underdeveloped, clearly inadequate (hence the chair) though they were, here he was, running along pushing his chair. And there I was, driving. Yes, I was ashamed. And humbled.Freddie said:
How dare we feel sorry for those termed "disabled"? What arrogant superiority is implied! If your desire to work with the disabled stems from a need to be needed, a power play, or superiority complex (and only you can know this, when you truly look inside yourself), then yes, it makes you a weak person. But if not, then no; helping these people to reach their potential in the face of a society which disregards their input, thereby putting yourself in a position of adversity, makes you a strong person.
IMO, absolutely not. I'll cut out the profanity, but you can imagine . . . Stuff 'em. Let 'em find their own Wills. We're all on our own, and wielding power with the consequence that some are damned and some pandered to (democracy) is, again IMO, decidedly un-Thelemic. That is the cultural norm that has given rise to the perpetuation of life in the face of death (life-support machines keeping the terminally ill alive at massive energetic and financial expense) and what I personally see as the corruption of the gene pool with the less-than-fit (easy for me to say, being a reasonably fit individual in most respectsCurtis Penfold said:
). Just some thoughts, not fully formed, on the role of democracy in the development of the current state of social affairs: In handing over power to the few, the many have sacrificed their own power to fight for their desire, their Will. Now, mathematically, this means that the disputes are resolved peacefully and usually without loss of life. But what if we took that whole voting paradigm out of it, and pitted the sides against one another in pitched battle? The many would slay the few; the Will of the many would prevail. Same result, but without the simmering dissent and the need to keep on voting.
I'm not advocating anything here; just following what, to me, is a logical train of thought. And damn, it feels good to say these things that have been in my head for so many years . . .
\m/ Kat
