How Far Does Anti-authoritarianism Go?

[RealNeat]

At which point are humans to have a concrete set of rules for the way they treat one another or their planet as a whole?

Is all of it up for debate or do we have a specific purpose? How about the individual brave enough to stand by their definition of it without falling into the trap of "authoritative corruption?"

How does one live by and apply "I prefer not being told what to do," but also expect to be treated a certain way? Seems like an oxymoron?

Fwiw I believe we need a little of both and where the message is coming from really matters. I'd like the input of others who may have educated input on the matter.

 

[Twohandsondeck]

It's all context dependent. Life is grey, not black or white.

The only certainty I can make of it is that we're to act with that intent that brings about the greatest harmony of all that is conscious... Which includes plants, animals, and even minerals to boot.

I suppose the best course of action is to do what brings one emotional contentedness... But if that action disturbs the greater peace of local conscious beings, then moving that action to a different location (whether that's a country, friend group, etc) should be considered.

If that action continues to disrupt new local peace repeatedly, then it should be considered whether or not the peace of the local consciousness reflects itself in any way as the peace of the actor.

Barring sociopaths, the peace of the local consciousness will always be (at least partially) the peace of the individual consciousness. The group and the individual are cut from the same cloth and are thus inextricable from the experience of one-another. One such cloth is humans among humans, but the grand cloth is consciousness among consciousness, which is what I think you're posting about.

There's no 'right' or 'wrong' but rather an intent which manifests order from chaos. To the degree that this manifestation is orderly (or justified) directly correlates to the degree that it disrupts that greater harmonious accord that connects all conscious life.

Jerk off all you want, just don't go trying to give birds a taste of their own medicine.

 

[lampofred]

Not particularly educated on the matter, but I believe in free will without hurting others. Yeah that might increase the chances of excess drug use and such but I think people are naturally kind and self-regulating when they live in a good environment, so drug abuse isn't the actual problem, the inclination to abuse drugs is.

I agree it is a problem to waste energy on things that don't contribute to the advance of the world, but as RP says, this is due a toxic environment raising stress hormones rather than an innate character flaw.

 

[Herbie]

I order you to imagine that all humans are healthy in mind and body and would all together behave in a way which is not destructive to themselves, each other or the planet as a culture, this would be humans unchanging nature which wasn’t instilled in them by authority’s brainwashing. It would be impossible for people to even conceve for lack of a better word evil ideas and action. Its possible in abundance as no need for greed and insecurity or possesion.

When humanity is sick in mind and body they need authority to force them through fear and punishment to do what the powers want and this makes people un healthy in body and mind and likely to behave in ways which are evil or against authority..

As much as I would love to be an authoritarian dictator or be under one, I know that it sounds romantic but doesn’t work because we are too sick and whoever does it will mess it up and won’t have long enough to get it right and would have to be one person for the whole planet and no greed or sick mental state.

 

[RealNeat]

Considering these responses, what is one to do if they don't live in a utopia? Which we don't. These conceptualizations of a vague non-authoritarian existence are what seems romantic to me instead of a just power structure within our current paradigm. Many authoritative issues seem to arise from loopholes, rules not being obeyed, promises broken, essentially distrust from the (and if) a authoritative power was chosen by the collective of that area. Wasn't democracy supposed to be a reality based on the preferences of the people, kind of like we are theorizing here?

How do we have people agree to act in accordance with a collective harmony? Or do we individually live in accordance to that and just let everyone else suffer (its an impossibility that everyone will conform to collective unity) until a non-organized (intention based) homeostasis is randomly found.

My apologies if I sound forward, I root for the day we can all get along, are very healthy and can make great decisions as a result of that. However, I also witness individuals/ organizations who are very rich and have many luxuries at their disposal but still insist to do others harm and support injustice. I just don't see equality happening without at least some leadership and law enforcement (I don't currently have a good example of such a phenomenon, at least not in practice).

Also what if the opposite is true? What if one is obligated to do something for the harmony of the collective even though that does not bring harmony to them? Who defines that harmony? Humans can be manipulated and emotionally controlled quite easily. Vaccines, climate change, abortion... these hot topics can really start to divide people in terms of the "harmony of the collective." Say we then form smaller communities based on our preferences but one group insists that our choice is impeding on their choice, what then?

 

[morgan#1]

one is obligated to do something for the harmony of the collective even though that does not bring harmony to them? Who defines that harmony?

I don’t think this is true harmony. I don’t think it works to divide people. There is order in nature, and I think if you quiet down your mind you can feel it. And I think if you have order inside, than others can feel it. Order= no judgements, no comparisons, financial or physical. And order makes you feel good.

Others can see this or not, you can’t force them. But that’s irrelevant. You’re in order with the universe, and what could be better than that!

 

[morgan#1]

Maybe what we need to look at is not to rely on others. People are struggling, mentally and financially. Having a hard time, look at what’s happening around, the violence is crazy! People are sad, depressed and angry. And what’s happened is that we think it’s fine to say me against you. And kill someone for that. There’s always divisions, and when we have divisions, especially mind and body, then we’ll never be whole/have order.

When you are aligned I think you know what’s right. At least I do. I don’t always do it, that’s my downfall.

 

[gaze]

society will always be the same no matter what name the governments called. it’s best to forget about it and focus on yourself, make your own judgements, become your own god, and continue to find knowledge which allows you to gain the power to maneuver through whatever society you’re in without falling to the various ideologies around you.

 

[Twohandsondeck]

Or do we individually live in accordance to that and just let everyone else suffer

Yes. Living in accordance with oneself is to live in accordance with the collective. If you are living in accordance to your utopia, you're doing the most that you can to elucidate that utopia to those you come in contact with. Framing it in those words implies that the onus is solely on you for the well-being of someone else... And while that's true, it's only true to the extent that you might lend a hand that doesn't implode your own personal, radiating utopia. If someone else's suffering becomes your own, everybody loses. If only one of two people is suffering, there is still hope for he who is suffering.

until a non-organized (intention based) homeostasis is randomly found

Haha, whatever homeostasis this is, it's the opposite of random. It exists pervasively within all of us.
I think an important point to be made here is that the individual IS the collective. The declaration of independence was funneled through the mind of one individual at a time. The expression of the individual *is* the expression of the collective. In this sense, a group of people can be identified as one person, which leads to...

individuals/ organizations who are very rich and have many luxuries at their disposal but still insist to do others harm and support injustice

Corporations! These are the (potentially) cancerous loopholes. Corporations are treated in the court of law as if they are people; they are given human rights. Ultimately as long as financial currency is an agreed reality, people will perpetuate the momentum of corporations in the interest of their comfortable livelihood. Corporations which invest with the sole interest of increased profit will often lead to manufacturing shortcuts that harm consumers, but at the end of the day when a corporation is brought to court, it only dissolves and in the best outcome a handful of people *might* face repercussion for their sleazy actions.

I don't believe any individual that works at any business is intentionally saying, "yeah, **** that guy! Make his life harder!" but rather they're guilty of succumbing to the other end which might sound something like, "give me all the money, make me as comfortable as possible. Everyone else has free will about them and it's not my problem."

I just don't see equality happening without at least some leadership and law enforcement

People are competitive by nature so law enforcement will always have to exist, yes.

What if one is obligated to do something for the harmony of the collective even though that does not bring harmony to them?

If an action doesn't bring harmony to the individual then by default it does not bring harmony to the collective. I understand what you're getting at, but this is an impossible occurrence.

Who defines that harmony?

The answer is nobody because harmony isn't something to be defined.
Regardless, someone will always offer their opinion and it's up to the individual whether or not they subject themselves to said opinion. As harmony is an experience, it is thus exclusively something which may only exist within and about an individual, otherwise referenced as God.

Say we then form smaller communities based on our preferences but one group insists that our choice is impeding on their choice, what then?

Wouldn't that be the point of forming smaller communities in the first place, so that when one doesn't have the same preferences they can return to their respective group which accepts those preferences?

There is order in nature, and I think if you quiet down your mind you can feel it.

Agree!

You’re in order with the universe, and what could be better than that!

Precisely. Individual order is order is collective order is universal order.

I don’t always do it, that’s my downfall.

Hey, don't sweat it. We're all in the same boat, no worries.

society will always be the same no matter what name the governments called. it’s best to forget about it and focus on yourself, make your own judgements, become your own god, and continue to find knowledge which allows you to gain the power to maneuver through whatever society you’re in without falling to the various ideologies around you.

This is crass but accurate. Asserting oneself is a prerequisite to stabilizing local consciousness. If the individual doesn't have the "power" within themselves to withstand surrounding chaos, then they cannot, by default, be contributing to any orderly ideal. In a sense, they're part of the problem. Hot air! Takin' up space.

 

[Broken man]

This Is the way I see it. I see humans as a one type species living on our planet. Given this fact, all that matters Is survival, evolution And reproduction. Hans Selye too wrote that one should be selfish to live by rules od nature. I understand it that when you will be selfish, you Will take care of your things And not of others. The only way how to beat bad life or health is through knowledge because knowledge Is Freedom. So work on your health to increase your sex attraction and have alot of sex with a lot of women if you want to load your genes inside her brain and work on your knowledge so you can live freely.

 

[Twohandsondeck]

have alot of sex with a lot of women if you want to load your genes inside her brain and work on your knowledge so you can live freely.

Bahaha wait what? Banging more chicks means more knowledge?

Or putting sperm in the right space allows personal freedom?

If a kid comes out of that, doesn't it do the opposite by hampering freedom?

You must have a fantastic lawyer!

 

[Broken man]

Bahaha wait what? Banging more chicks means more knowledge?

Or putting sperm in the right space allows personal freedom?

If a kid comes out of that, doesn't it do the opposite by hampering freedom?

You must have a fantastic lawyer!

I wrote increase your knowledge, not that having sex will increase it but the more of something you will have, the more knowledge about the subject you will you have?
Its not about sperm, girl stores hormones from pheromones of every men with which she had sex.

 

[Twohandsondeck]

I wrote increase your knowledge, not that having sex will increase it but the more of something you will have, the more knowledge about the subject you will you have?
Its not about sperm, girl stores hormones from pheromones of every men with which she had sex.

I see, I see. Practice makes perfect and sex is a way to understand (in this case) the opposite sex.

 

[Broken man]

I see, I see. Practice makes perfect and sex is a way to understand (in this case) the opposite sex.

But to be honest I thought real knowledge. The type od knowledge that can help you with your work, health, psychology, improving your environment.....

 

[Twohandsondeck]

But to be honest I thought real knowledge. The type od knowledge that can help you with your work, health, psychology, improving your environment.....

Interpersonal experience that's used as intrapersonal experience that helps better lead to more/denser future interpersonal experience.

The kind of experience we're made of but often outsource to screens in the present day.

 

[LUH 3417]

I wrote increase your knowledge, not that having sex will increase it but the more of something you will have, the more knowledge about the subject you will you have?
Its not about sperm, girl stores hormones from pheromones of every men with which she had sex.

Store hormones? Where is their secret vaginal safety box vault where all these pheromones are stored? Sounds like red pill internet biology...

 

[Twohandsondeck]

Where is their secret vaginal safety box vault where all these pheromones are stored?

Haha the world's most frightening box.

I think the contents of the box are evenly distributed such that every subsequent word, facial expression, and mannerism exudes a fractional piece of a woman's Penis Pandora.

 

[Broken man]

Store hormones? Where is their secret vaginal safety box vault where all these pheromones are stored? Sounds like red pill internet biology...

Its through pheromones but cant find study.

 

[postman]

For some people it seems to be just a buzzword. Marxism-Leninism isn't anti-authoritarian in the slightest.