Scientific Proof Of God

[Hermit]

Not quite Marx with his idea of proletarian revolution.

Marcuse's revolutionaries are of a different sort:

Indeed. No advocacy of a revolution that entails mass destruction of private property, law and order, and those who benefit from them anywhere.

[superuniverse]

You give the very definition of revolution. Chinese, Russian, Cuba, English, and even American (18th century variety).

[superuniverse]

Now you want to talk about revolution in the USA, the most powerful and repressive civilization in all of human history?

A society where you can be shot or arrested for jaywalking let alone plotting revolution. A society that exercises surveillance on everybody's phones, and uses other more invasive methods for special troublemakers. A society that produces innumerable commodities so there is no shortage of essential goods for everyone. Why would anyone want to destroy such a system of things?

The USA is a highly functioning society that delivers the goods. But it comes at a price: the loss of human happiness and freedom, at least according to Marcuse.

[Brian Peacock]

...
26:32 "Advocacy of violence is under all circumstances in our situation should be taboo. Violence may be considered justified only as counterviolence."

...

Indeed. This approach is often called pacifism. But we also see the counterviolence argument played out by the powerful, like the state and state actors, particularly to justify resource grabs from, or crack downs on, the less powerful. It's almost as if these agents and actors realise that initiating violence is taboo, but nonetheless service their desire for control and authority through violence by dressing it as a counter-response to the violent turpitude of others. Saddam Hussain's "Weapons of Mass Destruction" springs to mind; the "War on Terror" generally, and the "War on Drugs", and at the moment, "The de-Nazification of Ukraine" etc. We even see things like legal obligations to investigate parents of trans children under the presumption of "child abuse" charges in Texas, and who can forget those now infamous remarks from King Troll, "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best... they're not sending you... they're sending people that have lots of problems... and they're bringing those problems with us... they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime... they're rapists..."?

America is a slightly unique case of course. They have a deep and rich tradition of what I call 'righteous violence', which we've seen reflected in popular culture from early Westerns and frontier epics to modern-day action films and superhero movies. The extreme violence of the 'good' is always justified by the 'bad' of others - in fact, at the end of the day being the 'good guy' is the only justification one needs for violence. Shit, one doesn't even need to be among the 'good'. Just being among 'the chosen' is often enough.

[rainbow]

Not quite Marx with his idea of proletarian revolution.

Marcuse's revolutionaries are of a different sort:

Indeed. No advocacy of a revolution that entails mass destruction of private property, law and order, and those who benefit from them anywhere.

Why would a Loving God want that?

[Svartalf]

The loving god is a cake, therefore, it is also a lie.

[superuniverse]

There also exists a group that possesses so much power they can annihilate without consequences and opposition.

[JimC]

superuniverse, the following posts (among others) are abusive towards fellow members of this forum:

viewtopic.php?p=1931505#p1931505

viewtopic.php?p=1931513#p1931513

viewtopic.php?p=1931510#p1931510

This is a warning that any further such posts shall result in a suspension, which, given previous breaches of forum rules, will be quite lengthy.

[superuniverse]

"...the matter will be clearer still.”


Seems pretty clear to us...

[superuniverse]

I want my religion out of your fking mouth...

[pErvinalia]

Someone is a bit angry. Take a few deep breaths.

[rainbow]

There also exists a group that possesses so much power they can annihilate without consequences and opposition.

Daleks

[Svartalf]

The Doctor would say it's not without consequences.

[superuniverse]

Anyways imagine if some stranger did that to Chris Rock. He would be sitting in a jail cell. It is this double standard of the law, one for the rich and one for the poor that spells the end of the system. Faster than you know.

[superuniverse]

If anything, my whole explanation of 911 is about this double standard. Both Rock and Smith do not represent the average black male in the USA. I have no sympathy for these super millionaires as they are parasites on the sum total of social wealth, which needs to be distributed as equally as possible. Hence comes Nostradamus and Marcuse, and you can't get more POWER than these names. THESE ARE INVINCIBLE NAMES. Now we need an authority with the power to enforce this revolutionary redistribution of wealth.

Do you think the rich will give up their wealth without a fight? Violence is purely up to them. If they walk away then there is no need to do anything to them. But if they fight with their lives for their wealth, then violence becomes inevitable. This is the violence of liberation, a counterviolence to protect the poor, while the violence of the rich is to perpetuate the terror of the system, to keep alive the struggle of existence for the vast majority.

So when is violence justified?