Incredible Sacrifice – Shi Dakai (石達開)

Standard

Shi Dakai (石達開) was one of the major leaders of the Taiping Rebellion, a failed peasant uprising against the corrupt Qing dynasty.  After accepting defeat at the hands of the Qing army, Shi Dakai sacrificed himself in exchange for the lives of his troops:

Shi Dakai Monument

A monument of Shi Dakai in Chengdu

 

On 13 June, Shi Dakai negotiated with the Qing to spare his men’s lives if he turned himself in. He entered Qing camps with three followers, dressed in formal Taiping uniform, and spoke to the Qing fearlessly. He was questioned and imprisoned, and on the 25th he was executed by slow slicing in the Anshun Court.

via Shi Dakai – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Elite Fit to Rule

Standard

The only elite fit to rule over humanity are those who understand the value of direct democracy, in my opinion.  They are the truly sane human beings who must push back any force that tries to enforce a minority will on the majority.

This “elite” supporting TRUE democracy can (and hopefully does) include the majority of people.

People’s emotions are more accurate than what elitists define as “logic/reason.”  Every person who pretends to be pure logic/intellect supports imperialism, military power, oppressing other groups, and—in many historical cases—slavery, racism, sexism, rape, torture, etc.  People who say they are pure logic/reason also despise direct democracy despite supporting invading other countries using the phoney excuse of spreading democracy.

People who pretend they are of advanced intellect always need to be extreme elitists who justify the worst abuses of power because in reality they aren’t reasonable or logical in the slightest.  However, if they talk in a condescending manner, create the illusion of intellectual sophistication, and support the oppressor, it makes no difference how stupid or nonsensical they are.

People’s emotions are LOGICAL and accurate the majority of the time.  For those times intuitive instinct is not accurate, logical extrapolation of commonly held truths to broader situations, allowing the maintenance of logical consistency, is helpful.

People who think pure logic can guide all actions are not logical at all in most cases.  They just don’t want humans to trust their gut instincts and want to enforce elitism using excuses designed to sound logical.

People should trust their instincts and temper it with a little bit of logic here and there for greater accuracy.  People who want humans to be PURE logic are typically asking for humanity to be wrong/inaccurate the large majority of the time under the illusion that such actions make sense from some special realm of advanced intellect (which in reality does not exist.)

Voluntaryism Wants to Undo Centuries of Progress

Standard

The anti-democratic anarchists are so dangerous. They want to maintain property rights for the rich (enforced by a minority onto a majority,) but seek to abolish anything that would allow the public to properly redistribute wealth.

Nobody truly owns anything. Ownership (ideally) is something the collective group temporarily allows for to make transactions and day-to-day affairs faster and easier.  All ownership can be reassigned at the whim of the voting public.

Voluntaryists who seek to abolish democracy altogether seek to undo centuries of struggle, advocacy, and progress.  The rich owning everything while everybody is disenfranchised will just result in feudal society again where the masses must toil labouriously for rich land-owners.  Inevitably, people will start seeking democracy again only to discover that racism, sexism and other forms of bigotry have all crept back in to such a pervasive extent that rights people already suffered for have to be won a second time around.

Thus, people must nip these anti-democratic, pro-elitist movements in the bud.  One problem is that representational democracy has proven itself to be a total failure, (at least, in my eyes.) Thus, direct democracy alongside things like freedom of speech is a must at this point to avoid descending into another dark age.

Anti-Democratic Anarcho-Capitalism: Total Scam

Standard

I’ve never heard of anything dumber than anarcho-capitalism which opposes democracy and the current state system, but thinks all property/wealth gained under the current, unethical system should be preserved even after it is abolished.  Many use the terms “voluntaryism” or “anarcho-libertarianism” to mask a system solely revolving around rich people unfairly owning everything and the majority having no ability to reclaim the earth as free, voluntary association.

In their minds, the rich have the right to defend unfairly acquired wealth using machine guns and personal armies, but the majority using democracy to reclaim property they never consented to conceding in the first place is categorized as “theft.”

I was completely wrong when I said there was a split in the left.  These phoney-leftists opposing democracy have one basic argument: “As long as you leave rich people’s stuff alone and don’t use democracy to take back what rightfully belongs to the public, you are free to do whatever you want.”

Keep Playing Dumb

Standard

(Note: This is especially targeted towards those who think direct democracy should be curtailed on their behalf.)

For me, Israel should have never been created.  The Palestinians are not descendants of those responsible for the Jewish-Roman wars that occurred in that region roughly two thousand years ago.

Furthermore, it’s pretty obvious that Aboriginals can prove that they are the direct descendants of the original inhabitants of the Americas.  They have a far greater claim to taking back their original land.

I think it’s interesting how such obviousness completely slips under the radar.  People who consider themselves “the responsible and enlightened men and women of society” are suddenly nowhere to be found when such obvious inconsistencies arise and easily allow the more aggressive and unapologetically illogical voices of society to take over.  It’s obvious that right-wing loud-mouths make no sound arguments, yet those who pretend their place in society is to sort out the foolishness of the common person don’t intervene at all when people far less sensible than the common person use the least sensical arguments to justify Israel’s “right to exist” while pretending the Native Americans being almost completely wiped out when the Europeans arrived was just a coincidence.

I’ve seen people using the greater surface area of the Arab nations as an argument for why Israel is the victim.  Again, suddenly all the “responsible men and women” just let such nonsense occur despite being more than intelligent enough to know these are not sound arguments whatsoever.  Even if a person sides with Israel, they should still speak out against people siding with Israel for reasons they disagree with. Sam Harris who cares so much about logic/reason suddenly doesn’t mind the amount who support Israel for purely Christian reasons.  Even if he sides with Israel, he should still voice criticism of people supporting for a reason he is supposed to disagree with.

The Economist suggested a meritocracy where the public votes on more issues, but “responsible men and women” review everything and have final say.  What responsible men and women? It’s obvious that many within the political/media/academic/business élite knew full well what Israel was up to and have been intentionally lying and whitewashing the crimes.  Are they going to own up to that now that the public knows what’s been happening? Are they going to bear proper punishment the way responsible men and women are supposed to? Or are they going to be as silent as possible, hoping the situation blows over, so they aren’t given the punishment they deserve?

For the Native American issue, even if current Americans aren’t responsible for the crimes of their ancestors, they still need to make amends.  If my grandparents stole a painting from your grandparents, that painting still belongs to your lineage.  “Enlightened/responsible men and women” should be smart enough to figure that out.  But the issue never comes up.  “Erudite” men/women will talk for ages and write countless scholarly articles about some obscure philosophical concept, yet, for something so basic and obvious, they suddenly choose to say nothing and let illogic they purport to hate have voice.

Any treasures taken during colonialism must go back to their rightful owners. That’s basic common sense—if you are holding goods your ancestors stole, they still don’t belong to you.  But “mature and responsible men/women” who are so much more logical than the rest of us, again, just play dumb and refuse to deal with the issue despite being more than intelligent enough to know what is right and what is wrong.

It’s juvenile and irresponsible to be silent about such things and then make claims that you are one of the more sensible voices of society who need to bar the will of the people and curtail true democracy because everybody else is so illogical, irresponsible, and immature.