Why Good People Stay Silent About Evil

[manxman]

charity is slave assisting slave, as charlie says we are all slaves.

charlie is mistaking parasite's for predator's, a predator will look you in the eye, then bite yer head orf, whereas parasite's will feed of us all our live's, and done right most host's dont even know.

 

[Randall]

charity is slave assisting slave, as charlie says we are all slaves.

All slaves to who? To what? Slaves to those above us? Slaves to those below us? Slaves to the system? Slaves to ourselves? Maybe slavery is just a state of mind. Maybe if we think of ourselves as something else instead, that would make us something else instead. For example we're all creators. At the very least we create experiences for ourselves and others. Many people actively create things for the pure joy of creating. I'm not writing this post because I'm a slave to the Paracast, or the Internet, or some corporate giant, or some cabal of elite world rulers. I write because I enjoy thinking and creating bits of written material for you and others to read. I'm nobody's slave and never have been, though I'll admit it's easy to become cynical about the system, especially when it comes to large corporate culture .

 

[boomerang]

Everywhere I look in human affairs, I can't help but see the tribal dynamic at work. In politics, in religion, in the work of corporate stockholders, pan-globally and across socio-economic lines. It's yet one more example of mankind's technology outpacing embedded instincts. Today's political think tank or corporate board meeting is yesterday's gathering of tribal elders in suits and ties. And yes, humans who don't know or won't admit they have animal instincts are a peculiar type of loose cannon in society. What technology may have fundamentally changed is a re-definition of what constitutes the tribe. It has historically been geographic but seems increasingly based on specialized abilities. This makes for a kind of disconnect between people who live and work in close proximity, but may have no common stake in the future welfare of society. It has always been thus, to some extent. The nobility of medieval Europe invested great fortunes in fortressed city states to keep the peasants out. But perhaps they were more dependent for their survival on the masses than are today's elites. There were crops to be grown by hand and lucrative wars in need of many grubby feet on the ground. Even WWII was hideously "labor intensive" in the days before smart bombs and nukes. But it's always been about balance of power.

 

[Charlie Prime]

Seems that the phenomenon you're alluding to is more than "just" apex predation.

Yes, "apex predation" it's just a metaphor for the phenomena, like the metaphor "human farming".

If humans are merely animals, one should have no qualms about managing and harvesting them like any other natural resource.

 

[Randall]

Yes, "apex predation" it's just a metaphor for the phenomena, like the metaphor "human farming". If humans are merely animals, one should have no qualms about managing and harvesting them like any other natural resource.

So why call it apex predation instead of what it is, like slavery, exploitation, abuse? Is changing labels an attempt to understand the behavior by looking at it another way? Or is it an attempt to make it seem more forgivable because, well, after all, we're just animals like "apex predators" and therefore we just can't help ourselves. Please clarify.

 

[Charlie Prime]

I think Predation is a more accurate and descriptive term. Slavery, Exploitation, and Abuse are mixed up with lots of other connotations.

If you get the impression from this thread that I desire to make it more forgivable, I really don't know what to say.

 

[Randall]

I think Predation is a more accurate and descriptive term. Slavery, Exploitation, and Abuse are mixed up with lots of other connotations. If you get the impression from this thread that I desire to make it more forgivable, I really don't know what to say.

I don't get either "impression". It's just a question. So You could say. "No." or you could say, "Yes.", Your reaction implies that you're taken aback at the question, but your continued use of an animal behavior label implies you may be avoiding it. Dehumanizing people is the first step to marginalizing them. So what more effective way to reduce people's objections than to reduce it all to animal behavior? Have you ever watched the TV show Grimm? The characters are written with animal personas. There are predators and there is prey. So in your model, are all humans the predators? And if so, why are so many more willing to play the role of the prey?