From: pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Who cares
Date: 22 Jul 92 21:44:00 GMT
	<12381@inews.intel.com> <1992Jul22.114742.12106@linus.mitre.org>

In article <1992Jul22.114742.12106@linus.mitre.org> 
heimberg@pacific.mitre.org (Jeff Heimberger) writes:
>Then why beat ourselves about the head and shoulders over it?  If you
>and me and everyone else on the net does our own little bit to help
>alleviate the situation, we can live with a clear conscience.

I don't really understand the clear conscience thing, that seems Christian
and I'm not Christian. To use an analogy, to clear one's conscience seems
like washing one's hands of it. I don't know, I don't get all the symbology.
I'm not a sinner by default, I'm only me. My only sin would be to fall from
my path and that's not really sin, that's human. To me it's just the question 
of living a good life and that's as a function of time. I seek self 
improvement and sometimes that requires that I be beat about the head and 
shoulders, but only in the verbal sense.

>I agree that HSS must change their current living patterns on the
>earth, but I wonder how we are to control our power, and particularly
>our numbers.  Controlling power through treaties, negotiations, etc.
>seems relatively simple when compared to controlling our numbers.  I
>guess communist China has the right idea in that regard?

Well, call me overly simplistic if you like, but I think the problem of our
run away population is very easy to control. You see, who is making babies?
The poor. Why? Because it is the only way for them to survive, to make a
living. For the poor, children are a source of income and the knowledge
that if they keep it up, their kind will eventually be dominant thus turning
the tables. So it's really very simple, isn't it. Why do we have poor
marginalized people, even in the US? I don't see why except for greed. Make
that change and I don't see population control as a problem. I'm not talking
welfare, you gotta teach them how to fish and provide the opportunity, not
throw fish at 'em. They are after all humans, just like us.

>No, I don't mean war-like aggression, but I do mean the male force as
>described by Robert Bly in _Iron John_.  It's that resolute will to be
>a man, to be responsible, loving, nurturing; and also to be "tough",
>strong-willed, and positive.

Good. But turn that inward pointing force outwards, towards human kind. Choose
your battles wisely, not for personal gain but for gain of the greater being.
Be a warrior, but be a warrior for the Grail. And be careful of the little
people you may run over with your tanks. Everybody counts. It may be that
one of those little people knows the missing piece that will send you in the 
right direction, -towards the Grail. Now, what is your favorite color?

>But the OMs *do* have the numbers, if not the power.

Women, if they were united, would have the numbers, but they don't have the
physical power. There is this thing called rape which is a pretty good way
of keeping the physically weaker down. I'm not saying you do this, but some
do and them that do should not be on the streets.

>Nitpick:  The US is a constitutional republic, not a true democracy, as
>I understand the distinction.

Yeah, I hear you. I would prefer a democracy, but the demos have to be
ready for that responsibilty. Call me a libertarian, if you like.

>I agree that there should be equality of rights, justice, and
>opportunity for all.  However, I don't see the value in denying any of
>those rights to any individual, including SWMs, in order to address
>wrongs done in the past by other individuals.

Sure, but this gets mirky at some point. Right to vote, sure no problem. But
what about the right to a glass ceiling and the old boy network and ... well
you get the picture. Some rights are just not so self evident.

>>That's not as easy as it looks. Just forty years ago it was understood that
>>a woman's place was in the home and Blacks were not slaves but they were
>>expected to stay on their side of town and ride in the back of the bus. We
>>look back on that now and say that was stupid and blatantly oppressive, but
>>who's to say our children won't view us in a similar light? What are we
>>doing today that we see as standard practice that our children will see as
>>blatant oppression? Just something to think about, that's all.
>
>True.  Can you think of any examples from today?

That's the key I think, to be looking out for those examples here today. I
think there are some. Like the ghetto in the US, I don't understand the need
for that at all. And the way we use the police force and the idea of "fit
the discription". And the idea that Spanish is not an American language. 
And the way we treat Mexico, and even Canada. And who's history are we 
teaching in school. And the way we use culture as a weapon. And the idea of a 
junky or a prostitute or a numbers runner as a criminal. And the ways we 
continue to disgrace the natives. I think you see what's up. It is all very 
confusing and complex, but solutions are at hand, it is just a matter of 
aligning one's self.

>It's sad, however, that we seem unable to pull some people up, without 
>tearing others down.

Yeah, some of it seems like the creation/destruction thing. But there is no
need for shame. When you see the greater whole and you see progress, then
you will know happiness. Being torn down doesn't mean anything when you see
that the greater whole is being lifted up. Sure, as a man I will probably
lose some income and some things I have become accustomed to, but if I
have those things unfairly, I don't have the right. I don't want things I
don't have the right to. I'm a man, I can pull my own way, I don't need
any preference items and privaleges of the ruling class. Those things I
gladly give up and when I learn of more things, I give them up too. I'm
glad I have sisters to tell me of such things. It is not what you achieve,
it is how you achieve. Fight the good fight. Then we will all dance and
tell our stories, the stories of our people, all of them.