Celestial-body-NOS
Why should Man not rebel against Nature, when Nature herself is in rebellion against Justice?
No bio...
User ID: 290
So let me get this straight: he's covered literally to his head in tattoos, he sells drugs, he's a drunk and a junkie, he's violent with the criminal conviction to back that up, and he just straight-up violently murdered a guy with a samurai sword over a disputed drug debt. But he's such a loving partner and father!
The contradiction is not as irresolvable as it may, at first glimpse, appear; it is far more common than one would assume that someone will be benevolent to their family or close associates, while displaying unbounded cruelty to those they have convinced themselves deserve it.
This cuts across distinctions of personal appearance; the same pattern, with substitution of variables, describes the Nazi concentration-camp guard ('he's a sub-human weakening the Aryan¹ Race'), the Soviet gulag guard ('he's a wrecker trying to derail the Revolution on behalf of the capitalists'), the United-Statesian ICE agent ('he came into our country rather than obey our command that he quietly starve or be murdered in his place of birth'), the person of hair colour and pronouns in the cancel-mob ('he's a cishet-white-male schistlord who used a term² on the naughty-no-no-word list') and the seller of disfavoured substances ('he didn't pay me the money he owed me, thus violating the Non-Aggression Principle').
Focus less on "Which personal aesthetics mean that this person is or isn't safe to associate with?" (cf. Goodhart) and more on the Parable of the Good Samaritan³, as interpreted by Fred Clark. (Patheos, April 2017)
¹...despite him being of Romani origin, and thus more Aryan than the Germans.
²...which was actually the preferred nomenclature five years ago.
³If Jesus were telling the story today, would it be the Good Palestinian?
The cost of obesity is enormously high economically, medically and aesthetically.
The cost of fat-shaming, in human suffering, is higher.
2: Stop signs are periods, not commas.
3: Where do you live where they have letters in the speed limits? All the ones I've seen are made out of numbers!
Inter-ethnic conflict that expresses itself in “cruelty as deterrent” is as historically common as the summer rain.
A lot of things are historically common, but we still condemn them as bad; inter alia, chattel slavery, spousal and child abuse, and many types of war crimes.
This is very “rootless cosmopolitan” coded.
Fair cop; I'm the kind of person who, as Scott Alexander described, sees a headline 'Victory for Man United' and feels inspired until I look at the article and realise it's just some sportsball thing.
they don’t think any nation is really worth defending on its own terms
Correct. Individual human beings are worth defending as an end in themselves; all organisations, from the nation to the East Cupcake Middle School Parent-Teacher Association, have value as a means to an end. (cf. Immanuel Kant).
Note that "marg bar _____", while literally translating as "death to _____", is often used as an idiomatic expression of general hostility; compare how N. W. A. were not expressing carnal desire for the local constabulary.
He could have been motivated by a (real or perceived) personal or professional slight which he blamed on the individuals targeted.
Like with Charles Guiteau shooting James Garfield?
I'm wondering, I suppose, whether there's a way we can employ shame in a truly good way as a society? Can we somehow shame people without turning into monsters ourselves...?
Public shaming is a very dangerous weapon, and, if its use is normalised, can easily change targets to things that aren't anyone else's business (e. g. hair length in the 1960s).
Therefore, if it is employed at all, it should be reserved for situations of exceptional moral gravity, of a degree far beyond that attained by any of Aella's lifestyle choices; her father's parenting practises, or the making of excuses for them, would rise to that level.
(Also, the Third (Protestant)/Second (Catholic) Commandment, while commonly interpreted as an injunction against shouting 'G-dd-mn it!' when Mr Hammer meets Mr Thumb, might more accurately be rendered as 'Thou shalt not carry the name of the Lord thy God in vain', i. e., do not claim divine endorsement for your personal prejudices/power-complexes/&c. Thus, calling one's sadistic child-rearing programme 'God's Way' could be argued to be far more blasphemous than the output of Andres Serrano or Chris Ofili that drew so much controversy from Concerned Citizens.)
- Prev
- Next
But the value is vastly less than the cost, even before one takes into account the low effectiveness.
More options
Context Copy link