des,

political ideologies and their proscriptive dictates of how people interact has yielded the best of both worlds. Or the worst, if ya come from a scarcity attitude. What we have is what are meant to have, else we would make it different. People get the govt they deserve.

What we have is a compromise, which mostly works. Democrazy is the best of a very bad bunch. l will not pretend that its some supremely laudible and inately superior framework. Its merely the force of numbers... might makes right.

Ideas like the 'common interest' is nothing more than people with the same self interest getting together. So what. Commonality does not raise the level, if you will, of the self interest manifested. If everyone decides to vote for a despot who bludgeons an ethnic group, then the 'common interest' has deemed that appropriate to its interests.

I refuse to pretend that l am not pretending.

Socialism and capitalism are opposite sides of the same delusional coin, that one side is better than the other. Delusional because its a false dichotomy. Pure rubbish, in practical terms, the fodder of pointlessly eternal debate and discussion. Is a bit like the climate change debate. Everyone goes around painting stuff green, but then hop into their cars, drive home to their overbuilt houses and wallow in a standard of living that drives, nay invented, the whole mess in the first place.

There is no such thing as a 'free' market. There is no such thing as a 'common' interest. They're both non-sense.

(cont)

(cont)

des,

frustrating when a simple statement gets twisted into something it isnt, in order to drive rhetoric. Absence of a centralised entity dictating the nature of peoples interests, based on nebulous concept of commonality, mass projected by the force of numbers (democrazy)... doesnt imply one will act with disregard for others. This is a huge leap. One of the things l rejected about the left... its sanctimonious, holier-than-thou platitudes, paradoxically built on a very negative characterisation of the human condition. We dont need a self appointed perveyor of 'common goodness' telling you and l on what terms we can engage.

We can do that ourselves, conscious of simple truths like cause and effect.

The need for taxation is not self evident. The conclusion (social welfare state) is used to justify the initial premise of taxation, ergo it begs the question. Its existence illustrates (illusory semantics of contrary politics aside) that we live in the grip of statist social welfare, driven by the centrally dictated collectivised redistribution of everyone's existence... from bank account, to backyard, to opinion, to consciousness itself.

Unless ya drop out and retire to a Himalayan foothill monastery.

l am not implying anything about you.

ps. my personal political theories are completely untenable, riddled with ironies and contradictions, having little practical application beyond myself. Its easier, not to pretend otherwise. l am a sort of er 'free' market ararchist who dislikes guns, violence, coercion and manipulation, who appreciates public roads/education/health. But l dont like tax. See, much contradiction. l live with it and try to be low profile. This country seems easy enuff to live in, the system seems to work, tho its a bit of a charade politically. l dont bother pretending that lm not pretending on things like marking a piece of paper and dropping it into a box every few years. And l dont let that stop me from voicing an opinion... hmmmm, pretending?

Yeah l know.

peace.