Should we put shame on us all? We burden our children


How do you suppose we activate it in others? Are you saying that it’s already there and we just need to find ways to bring those feelings to light?

How many people do you think would be like Griffin who doesn’t have that shame to be activated? I guess that number doesn’t matter as much when you consider it takes just 3% of the population shouting down the residence of those in power to have an impact. If it’d be a wildfire like you say, getting 15% of the population to become active should be no problem once we get the ball rolling.


Good read.

You have it right. The hope of these places is that the right person at the right time will read it and be moved to think inn that way, which should produce actions.

Think the butterfly effect.



Impossible without a platform and that means the means to buy it.



I say shame is a pessimistic ideology that brings self destruction because when there is shame, you must take a part of yourself away to make up for that shame; it cannot allow for improvements because, in my opinion, people don’t improve what they feel shame about they simply try to remove that aspect. See the “It’s okay to be white” prank.

Why change a perfect system, that’s just redundancy at its finest. What makes Aristotle better than an average working class man, I respect physical laborers more than any scholar.

Change is always good, if it is bad change people will rise to challenge it. I don’t adhere to any Communist ideals and think the whole first section you brought up doesn’t reflect reality at all, that’s simply a matter of opinion on both side and I’m not even going to budge on that.

I think you have a very loose grasp on how learning can effect people and cause change, and how change always will disrupt the status quo. Adam and Eve lived in a paradise and had only to learn from their surroundings, however due to their nature they took it upon themselves to learn and this got their paradise destroyed and they were flung into mortality.

No where, I don’t see any point to drawing a line. What major advancements are being lead by people not motivated by war, I’d like to ask you. Computers were developed by the US Army, drones were developed for espionage and flying death machines, walls were created to keep the next guy and nature from killing you.

Point conceded then, my mistake.


I think the shame I’m talking about is the one that gets you to think, “oh i shouldn’t do that”. What shame are you taking about?

I value people being able to make their work and craft an art. Like when they use to call those things straight up art in English. Things that were called art became something else and they needed different terms to describe what we’re actually doing; doing enough to just get by. There’s no good work anymore (for most).

I’m kinda conservative like that, when I start to get into really old paradigms.

People get bored, they think about how things work, they figure out ways to run the perfect system better. I’m really trying to see things your way, but it just doesn’t make sense to me. Perfect can always be improved. Maybe perfect isn’t the right word for what I’m thinking. The standard of perfect I’m going off of is “not broken in any way”.

Oh, so you’re a political scientist then. That’s cool. Hope you join the left economically, or create the new left some day.

I can accept that change will always disrupt the status quo and still hold the same understanding. I’m not saying how learning can effect people, but how curiosity effects people.

I think we can return to the garden. However, I think a perfect system is necessary to accomplish this. Not saying we’ll lose mortality; I’m glad that happened.

Virtual reality, medical science (the first reason to join a society in the first place), sustainable energy, space exploration. There’s plenty to go on after war. The occasional war can spark a lot of advancement I’m sure, but how much better would war time advancements be if they were occasional? Get more bang for the buck that way.

I see wars of the future being of the sort where one state A gets desperate enough to act against state B and either the state B retaliates or works with state A (such as develop technologies/improvements) to fix the problem.

I was thinking on when I was saying that your point was that dark implies light. I don’t think it does. You see, dark is the absence of light and black the absence of color. The existence of darkness precedes the occurrence of light, and in our universe the dark is the thing that exists somewhere before anything else. You might not see the point (and I may be high), but this is profound to me. I can see how a dark living can make the good things better, but I think there’s a better balance to be achieved than what we have.Life has enough troubles on its own.