All I can say is that my life is pretty plain
I like watching the puddles gather rain
And all I can do
Is just pour some tea for two
And speak my point of view
But it’s not sane
It’s not sane
I just want someone to say to me
Oh, oh, oh, oh
I’ll always be there when you wake, yeah, yeah
You know I’d like to keep my cheeks dry today, hey
So stay with me and I’ll have it made (I’ll have it made)
And I don’t understand why I sleep all day
And I start to complain that there’s no rain
And all I can do is read a book to stay awake
And it rips my life away, but it’s a great escape
escaape
escaape
escaayaaayaayaayaaaaape.
- Shannon Hoon, died from heart attack following cocaine overdose
The idea that movement is always towards someplace that is better that the place we are at is counter not only to human nature within this world, but also the world’s relation to our will. It seems you are claiming an ‘endless progress’ scheme that you denigrate belief in among radical leftists. “There is no human life without value” – according to whose valuing? People kill themselves every day. If you are arguing that all life has value – an arguable and defensible statement, that puts you in a position where people can argue against that stance, so let’s move on. Where there is breath, there is hope. “The pursuit of anything of value is a collective enterprise” – So just kick the teeth in of anyone who struggles alone in pursuit of something they alone value. Or maybe you are saying connection is important and no one is an island. – Then, you say – The idea that if people value something and work together on it – immediately a hierarchy follows. When I think of people striving together in a shared value I think musical groups, artist collectives, humanitarian or religious communities, social workers in general, and all of these to me THE IDEAL is that every individual shares as equally a participant and driving force as possible and all subsume their desire to be ‘the TOP’ to their better knowledge that the collective has superior intelligence to them alone, but maybe that’s just because I am a super genius who gets subtle social points of order like that. I think your talk, if I am hearing your actual points, is that you think the most important thing is hierarchies, and making sure that there are many rules and regulations to keep these hierarchies ordered according to some principal so that the hierarchy cannot be questioned by anyone – I’m guessing the elite of the hierarchy has deemed the hierarchy should not be questioned. You state outright that ideal member of your society/hierarchy/Peterson’s Republic is people who “support the order of hierarchies and work effectively within them.” What then would you say are the qualities of a great leader? Machiavelli? I at least admire a duplicitous leader who has the honor to publish his duplicitousness so that it is freely available amongst his subjects.
The Haunted Typewriter 