Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
a classic by Rothbard on the left's bait & switch...

"Earlier in this century, Left-Liberalism came to Americans preaching the alluring gospel of Liberation from Guilt. Americans, they boldly proclaimed, are repressed, inhibited, guilt-ridden for giving in to their natural desires and impulses. We come to preach you a joyous removal of guilt, hammered into you by repressed ministers and priests. We preach hedonism, the end of guilt, following your desires, and to put it in a common rebarbative phrase of the 1960s Sexual Revolution: "if it moves, fondle it." Sex, furthermore, is "only a drink of water," natural and harmless.

The era of guiltlessness under our Left-Liberal culture lasted, as I remember, about six months. Now, the entire culture is characterized by massive collective guilt, and if anyone fails to give due public lip-service to a long list of solemnly avowed guilts, he is literally driven from public life. Guilt is everywhere, all-pervasive, and brought to us by the same scoundrels who once promised us easy liberation. A brief rundown: guilt for centuries of slavery, guilt for the oppression and rape of women, guilt for the Holocaust, guilt for the existence of the handicapped, guilt for eating and killing animals, guilt for being fat, guilt for not recycling your garbage, guilt for "desecrating the Earth."

Note that this guilt is never confined to the specific individuals, say, who enslaved or murdered or raped people. (There are, I dare say, very few enslavers left in America today ? say a Southern slaveholder aged 150?) Effectiveness in inducing guilt comes precisely because the guilt is not specific but collective, extending throughout the world and apparently for all time.

In the old days, we reviled the Nazis for their doctrine of collective guilt; now we embrace the same Nazi concept as a vital feature of our ethical system. For confining guilt to specific criminals would not do, because it would not fit with what Joe Sobran has brilliantly called our doctrine of Accredited Victimology. Some groups are accorded the status of Official Victims; everyone not in the Victim groups are, therefore, criminals and Official Victimizers. The Victimizers are expected to feel guilty about the victims, and therefore ? because there is no point to guilt without a payoff ? to pay through the nose in money, privileges, and "empowerment" forever and ever without end. Amen.

There is never a way of getting out from under. And this is what our liberators have brought us. In return for old-fashioned Christianity and guilt about sex, they have brought us a new religion of Victimology and of the Goddess Nature. And even sex, the last bastion of hedonism, is no longer guilt-free; with the onslaught of "sex exploits women," and ravening condomania in the interest of "safe sex," it might be better to scrap the whole thing and go back to Christian guilt. Certainly it would be simpler and more peaceful.

As in all other aspects of our rotten culture, the only way to save the day is to raise the banner high and engage in a frontal and all-out onslaught against the Left Guilt-inducers. In such an onslaught lies the only hope of taking back our lives and our culture from these malignant pests and tyrants."
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,390 Posts
guilt, even collective guilt, has its place in society. guilt is merely our mind's way of answering the clamoring questions of our conscience. it is our conscious awareness of what we have deemed to be right or wrong. these things must exist if there is to be a society where man is humane, lawful and responsible for his/her own actions.

the other side of guilt is where it is abused. where one oppresses his fellow man with guilt (for example religion). this is (and every good thing has a flip-side) guilt's whorification, if you may. i'm sure we all know the difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,491 Posts
when you post an article you should also include your opinion... get more responses that way.

anyway...
left, right... its all politics as usual. i didnt read the article, just skimmed it, cos im completely turned off by one side blaming the other. both are corrupted... none innocent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
'Diva, a great philosopher once said never to accept unearned guilt...

dl, yes, left-right the politicians who play both sides of the middle each using very clever methods to advance their power...the left destroy the soul so the right have no opposition when trashing the Constitution when advancing the military-industrial state...and talk about that wonderful marketing bait & switch technique--the latest administration uses 9-11 to advance their Owellian agenda with the Homeland Security Act & Patriot Act II, which spell the death knell of the land of the free and home of the brave...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
the philosophy of hedonism that much of the left accepts is the doctrine holding the good is whatever gives you pleasure and, therefore, pleasure is the standard of morality. A better philosophy for man holds the good must be defined by a rational standard of value, that pleasure is not a first cause, but only a consequence; that only the pleasure which proceeds from a rational value judgment can be regarded as moral; that pleasure, as such, is not a guide to action nor a standard of morality. To say that pleasure should be the standard of morality simply means that whichever values you happen to have chosen, consciously or subconsciously, rationally or irrationally, are right and moral. This means that you are to be guided by chance feelings, emotions and whims, not by your mind. A rational phiolosophy holds that one cannot achieve happiness by random, arbitrary or subjective means. One can achieve happiness only on the basis of rational values... It is the province of the science of ethics to define for men what is a rational standard and what are the rational values to pursue.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,642 Posts
lakeway :) Interesting but I don't really see how this kind of guilt plays a role in today's society...except for in religious life that is...and that to me is fastly slipping away. who are you quoting above??
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
6,694 Posts
lakeway11 said:
To say that pleasure should be the standard of morality simply means that whichever values you happen to have chosen, consciously or subconsciously, rationally or irrationally, are right and moral. This means that you are to be guided by chance feelings, emotions and whims, not by your mind. A rational phiolosophy holds that one cannot achieve happiness by random, arbitrary or subjective means. One can achieve happiness only on the basis of rational values...
Pleasure and Happiness are not the same thing: sometimes one has to sacrifice the former in pursuit of the latter.

I didn't understand the rest.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,390 Posts
lakeway11 said:
'Diva, a great philosopher once said never to accept unearned guilt...
..
i agree with you lakeway...unearned guilt is when someone else is pressing it upon you. the guilt that i feel is needed is not earned but instead innate. the one that comes with a conscience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
bajangurl, sorry but Rothbard's examples:
"A brief rundown: guilt for centuries of slavery, guilt for the oppression and rape of women, guilt for the Holocaust, guilt for the existence of the handicapped, guilt for eating and killing animals, guilt for being fat, guilt for not recycling your garbage, guilt for "desecrating the Earth."...are all examples i sure see--and i'd add guilt of the Western-biased founding fathers and treatment of Indians and guilt for prefering your culture...all of which are used to attack the capitalistic system of free-enterprise and property rights
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
DeuceDiva said:
i agree with you lakeway...unearned guilt is when someone else is pressing it upon you. the guilt that i feel is needed is not earned but instead innate. the one that comes with a conscience.
yeah but that is what i see the Irreligious left doing--imposing guilt for all things having to do with Western Civilization
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Willow said:
Pleasure and Happiness are not the same thing: sometimes one has to sacrifice the former in pursuit of the latter.

I didn't understand the rest.
i agree...and so would Aristotle:)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,642 Posts
lakeway11 said:
bajangurl, sorry but Rothbard's examples:
"A brief rundown: guilt for centuries of slavery, guilt for the oppression and rape of women, guilt for the Holocaust, guilt for the existence of the handicapped, guilt for eating and killing animals, guilt for being fat, guilt for not recycling your garbage, guilt for "desecrating the Earth."...are all examples i sure see--and i'd add guilt of the Western-biased founding fathers and treatment of Indians and guilt for prefering your culture...all of which are used to attack the capitalistic system of free-enterprise and property rights

Do you really believe people feel guilty for these- I don't buy that-I'll admit that i have met some white people who seem to feel guilty about slavery but I dont' think this is a norm. I don't think blacks try to make white people feel guilty about slavery and I dont' think white people, generally speaking of course, feel guilty and same goes for the holocaust etc.I mean you can talk about people wanting reparations, affirmative action etc but i think people think about those things in the context of today's society...people may cite those historical incidences/wrongs but i don't think people's general conscience is about past wrongs..at least, no one i have interacted with..or maybe better yet, i don't think people's actions are swayed by feeling guilty for any of these things...tehy might feel bad but isn't guilt usually followed by informing how people act and behave?
 

·
Devoted Capriati-Ite
Joined
·
185,291 Posts

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:
All
Hail
All
Knowing
All
Seeing
Most
Wise
Wonderful
And
Beautiful
Duece
Diva!
:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,541 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
i guess bajangurl i see it from a different perspective--in terms of what is being taught in today's schools and what can and cannot be said and taught...heard of "sensitivity training", "bias committees"...u think these are just to inform & elighten or also to instill guilt to program children's minds to the new world order agenda...if one this this an exaggeration I suggest consult "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America" http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/ that chronicles such from the horses' mouths...no I think people do feel guilt--and if not guilt at least fear to speak out what they seem as ridiculous for fear of being called this & that by the thought police...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,642 Posts
lakeway11 said:
i guess bajangurl i see it from a different perspective--in terms of what is being taught in today's schools and what can and cannot be said and taught...heard of "sensitivity training", "bias committees"...u think these are just to inform & elighten or also to instill guilt to program children's minds to the new world order agenda...if one this this an exaggeration I suggest consult "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America" http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/ that chronicles such from the horses' mouths...no I think people do feel guilt--and if not guilt at least fear to speak out what they seem as ridiculous for fear of being called this & that by the thought police...

why do you think things like sensitivity training (not sure what you mean- are you speaking of multi-cultural training :confused: ) or bias comittees are wrong? I don't see how that has to do with feeling guilty- how does being made aware of others differences and accepting them wrong or make someone feel guilty?? I agree people are generally these day always attempting to be political correct and some of that IS sickening...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,390 Posts
Barrie_Dude said:

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:
All
Hail
All
Knowing
All
Seeing
Most
Wise
Wonderful
And
Beautiful
Duece
Diva!
:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:
barrie..i don't think there's a nice way of saying this but you know what dude? you really need to fuck off! i mean please....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34,218 Posts
So Lake, when Empire Maker was "overthrown", you didn't want to re-register as Funny Cide? :p (I mean who the 'ell else here ever heard of Rothbard)? I did, of course, and even met him. The late professor of economics was a well read man and a prolific writer, but a little out of touch, IMO. In a lecture he once argued that the parties responsible for (automotive) air pollution were the drivers, not the automakers. I objected that used as intended, cars pollute (more then than now, thanks to laws "Dr. Libertarian" hated as a violation of property rights, blah). But Murray didn't believe in (shared) rights to public property (like cleaner air). So he replied that his uncle had bought a car and kept it as a never-driven showpiece... :rolleyes: Duh! Murray, you were indeed a "learned" man, but you never learned reality!
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top