Music Banter - Lil Reese beats up girl.

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)

- Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/)

- - Lil Reese beats up girl. (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/65679-lil-reese-beats-up-girl.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conan (Post 1245911)

I still would make the case that a reasoned, rational morality based on non violence and being civilized is beneficial to our survival as species. I would also assert this as being superior to most religious moralities as it isn't based on superstitous and petty restrictions which don't withstand critical thought.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conan (Post 1245911)

In any case, I wouldn't say religion is necessarily the origin of rooting for the underdog, which I guess was HHBH's original assertion. Protecting the defenseless goes back to hammurabi's code and certainly spans holy books the world over. I think it's a reaction evolved very early on in the most primitive groups. Cooperation is key to group survival, after all. We've never been a species to disregard the weak amoung us. We've used and usurped the weak by asserting dominance in positions of power and leadership, but generally not abandoned them. I'd say this is a trait we have in common with our ancestors, as many of our cousins display altruism.

Hierarchy is based on inequality of power and the greater the hierarchy, the greater the inequality. In other words, hierarchy is based on violence & the threat of violence.

Now, yes, there is a dialectic between compassion & terror in such hierarchys; however, what you're ignoring is that the compassion was community specific, and that the notion of compassion for everyone the world over is entirelly new and rooted in Christian superstition.

There's a very simple way to explain this, and here it is:

Would YOU want this little rapper twat beating up your girlfriend/wife/sister/friend? Would YOU justify it, accept it, see it in any other light than "I'm gonna kill that ****er??"

I rest my case. The guy's a waste of skin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop (Post 1246001)

I'd remind you when most people say they support "non-violence", in this culture, they're lying. What most people consider as violence is only that which falls outside the intersection of officially sanctioned violence & popularly supported violence.

Calling the police on someone is an act of violence, incarcerating someone is an act of violence, and taxation is an act of violence. What differentiates these from smacking girls is the level of popularity of each & the lack or presence of official sanctioning.

Hierarchy is based on inequality of power and the greater the hierarchy, the greater the inequality. In other words, hierarchy is based on violence & the threat of violence.

Now, yes, there is a dialectic between compassion & terror in such hierarchys; however, what you're ignoring is that the compassion was community specific, and that the notion of compassion for everyone the world over is entirelly new and rooted in Christian superstition.

The difference is that power structures based on some threat of violence reinforce society, whereas allowing anybody with bigger muscles to pick on the weak undermine society. I mean...duh.

Things I've learned from this thread: HHBH doesn't know what the word "violence" means.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop (Post 1246001)

and that the notion of compassion for everyone the world over is entirelly new and rooted in Christian superstition.

New as in, over two thousand years old? Christ man, even the Romans and the Visigoths looked after their own people, and the strong protected the weak. Trying to say that basic human compassion is a Christian (with a capital C) invention is just, well, insane.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop (Post 1246001)

So you think governments in democracies sanction violence on their own population?

Quote:

Calling the police on someone is an act of violence, incarcerating someone is an act of violence, and taxation is an act of violence. What differentiates these from smacking girls is the level of popularity of each & the lack or presence of official sanctioning.

With reasoning like this, I'm lost for words......How does somebody even try an get inside that brain of yours, give it a good shake and hopefully start to find some level ground with you. You actually sound like one of these fanatical redundant Trotskyists that were common here at student gatherings in the 1970s and 1980s, but of course you couldn't be, you're about as far right as they were left.

Quote:

Hierarchy is based on inequality of power and the greater the hierarchy, the greater the inequality. In other words, hierarchy is based on violence & the threat of violence.

Something that makes a bit more sense. But of course it depends on what type of political hierarchy you're talking about.

Quote:

Now, yes, there is a dialectic between compassion & terror in such hierarchys; however, what you're ignoring is that the compassion was community specific, and that the notion of compassion for everyone the world over is entirelly new and rooted in Christian superstition.

Unless your're willing to explain this dialectic in more detail, what you've written above is complete gibberish.

I would say VIOLENCE is never a good thing on any case.

How is calling the police on someone an act of violence??? :confused:

Never thought a thread that has a simple grasp of a situation could turn out to be so complicated and confusing. :/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart (Post 1246119)

How is calling the police on someone an act of violence??? :confused:

If they're like the Gestapo or the NKVD, then it's like an act of violence, but in normal countries no.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rjinn (Post 1246120)

Never thought a thread that has a simple grasp of a situation could turn out to be so complicated and confusing. :/

Whenever HHBH enters a thread, the simple quickly becomes the complicated and nobody leaves any the wiser.