Can a voluntaristic society succeed?



So if it takes to long, don't bothor? If enough people lived their lives in such a Way, would things not change? Living right, and treating your neighbors the way you want to be treated. Maybe that's all that's needed to change the world
On a hyper-localized level, and within the context of sending ripples forward through time, yes, your individual actions are meaningful.

That said, I don't care.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7BuQFUhsRM]Agent Smith and Cypher - YouTube[/ame]
 
Seriously though. This is how people without money think.

Dreaming about sitting around, jerking off, watching TV and playing WoW all day sounds a lot better than it actually is.

gKEpMro.jpg


It is true that you can be a selfish twat and look out for #1 till you're in the grave. That's generally what all societies call a leech and would like to get rid of. Of course, you can make contributions along the way, or perhaps your entire selfish motive included the most philanthropic thing ever in existence.

Of course, when establishing the moral/ethical value of a person's life, you can look at the intention, action, and the consequence. But anyone who has psychologically matured into adulthood knows that the most weight falls upon intention, but not solely.

Once you achieve the basics, then you go after monies for long-term security. Then you will find yourself thinking about things like "meaning, contribution, art" and things of a slightly abstract or transcendent nature, because you're a grown up. You've grown as you've achieved success in the system you live in. Talking about some OTHER system ain't gonna get you there unless you can conquer the one you're in and use it to propel things forward.

You can't just reject the reality you live in and log-out. You have to embrace and expand, transcend and include. THEN maybe you can talk about getting rid of some shit or starting something new.



For mere mortals, it takes several generations. But we've had some boss ass niggas on this planet who make this statement 100% null and void.

Sri Ramana Maharishi
Moses
Padmasambhava
Saint Teresa of Avila
San Juan De La Cruz
Guatama Buddha
Rumi
Plotinus
The Bearded Bodhidharma
Lady Tsogyal
Lao Tzu
Plato
Pythagorus
Baal Shem Tov
CCarter
Abraham Lincoln
Barack Hussein Obama (lol)
Bob Marley, even
John Lennon, even
Alan Watts
Timothy Leary

C'mon bruh.


You forgot the Great Dr. Leo Marvin...

baby-steps.jpg
 
Maslow's hierarchy of needs is like the National Enquirer version of economics.

It's fairly close to UG's "Human nature is violent" social theory.
 
Could work. Could not work. We we will never know until we test it.

Reminds me of Wikipedia. If Jimmy Wales came to any of us and said: "hey guys, I have this idea about creating an online encyclopedia where anybody can contribute and create/edit content"... we would have laughed and sent him to meatspin.com, because we would have assumed that this idea couldn't work due to the amount of trolls and psychos on the Internet that would just mess up the content for fun...

We are all highly influenced by the system that we live in. Maybe one of the reasons there are so many sociopaths and psycopaths today is because of the fucked up system we live in.
 
New guerilla is a defeatist, when did this happen?

I remember the old guerilla that turned me onto Ron Paul on digital point when I liked Obama.

Isn't funny how quickly a few years changes everything?


Everyone changes. Some grow. Some regress.

I won't speak for guerilla. Personally, I've realized that I no longer care what others think or do. I merely try to minimize their impact on my life and my loved ones.

Everyone else can burn.
 
I certainly believe that there are individuals who could organize and maintain a volunteerist society. I just don't believe this applies to society as a whole. In order for it to work you would at least need people with an open mind and a studious nature. In reality, this is not the case. Not everyone takes the time to learn about something before forming an opinion (and therefore a vote) based on some personal ideology.

acceptance-of-evolution.gif


Also, someone brought up the concept of sociopaths and that's another issue. Even if most of us do engage in thoughtful cooperation, there will always be individuals (or a cluster of individuals who coalesce into a group(s)) that won't share our worldview of a society based on cooperation.
 
I won't speak for guerilla. Personally, I've realized that I no longer care what others think or do. I merely try to minimize their impact on my life and my loved ones.

Everyone else can burn.
You and I were talking about something similar along these lines over a year ago via email. Carlin and Mencken were right. Enjoy the show and have a good time.

We all wearing lenses of our paradigm
It's stuff like this though that assaults the very nature of critical thinking because in both cases the statements are demonstrably false, and yet in both cases, they seem to be the foundation of the paradigm.

I don't care what delusions other people have, as I am sure they don't care what delusions I have. That said, I am not going to pretend something that is outside the bounds of critical thinking is in fact intelligent thought. I can laugh at other people, pretending to be one of them is harder for me to do.

In reality, this is not the case.
"In reality". The only plane of existence accessible to us. There is nowhere OUTSIDE REALITY because we only exist IN REALITY.

If you or I didn't exist in reality, we wouldn't be able to read each others shitty posts.
 
What with that assumption that reality depends on you experiencing it. God complex again?