251 lines
13 KiB
Plaintext
251 lines
13 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
### ###
|
|
### ###
|
|
### #### ### ### ### ####
|
|
### ### ##### ### ###
|
|
### ### ### ### ###
|
|
### ### ##### ### ###
|
|
########## ### ### ##########
|
|
### ###
|
|
### ###
|
|
|
|
Underground eXperts United
|
|
|
|
Presents...
|
|
|
|
####### ## ## ####### # # ####### ####### #######
|
|
## ## ## ## ##### # ## ## ## ## ##
|
|
#### ## ## #### # # #### ####### ## ##
|
|
## ## ## ## ##### # ## ## ## ##
|
|
## ## ####### ####### # # ####### ####### #######
|
|
|
|
[ Encounter With The Populace ] [ By Joseph & The GNN ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
____________________________________________________________________
|
|
____________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ENCOUNTER WITH THE POPULACE
|
|
endured and written by Joseph and The GNN
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a transcript of an actual conversation. It took place
|
|
at the Indian Palace pub in Gothenburg (Sweden), February 15
|
|
(1997), during a minimalistic, but charming, uXu-gathering.
|
|
|
|
[A pleasant evening in a crowded and smoky bar turned into a living nightmare
|
|
as the attention of some poor uXu members was suddenly called upon by yet
|
|
another bragging ignorant slave of the system. The slave in question was a
|
|
drunk woman in her mid-thirties. Her interest was our political standpoint.
|
|
Obviously, she did not know whom she dealt with. If she had, she would never
|
|
ever had confronted us with the ridiculous question:]
|
|
|
|
"Are you right- or left-winged?"
|
|
|
|
[Needless to say, this question was not intended as an invitation to a
|
|
political discussion, but more as an embarrassing attempt to get laid.
|
|
However, members of the uXu do not copulate with pseudointellectual and
|
|
frivolous barflies.]
|
|
|
|
"We find the question in itself annoying. You expect us to choose between
|
|
two alternatives, none of them appealing. Our main principle in life is to
|
|
develop ourselves and others. Therefore, we cannot walk left or right;
|
|
because that implies no progress. The only way to go if one want to get
|
|
somewhere, is the most underestimated road of them all; namely, the one that
|
|
leads _forward_."
|
|
|
|
[A puzzled expression spread over the face of the woman.]
|
|
|
|
"I see..."
|
|
|
|
[Note how the above statement is completely inconsistent with her follow-up
|
|
question:]
|
|
|
|
"Eh... now what the hell does that mean?"
|
|
|
|
"Practically speaking, it means that we do not descend ourselves to choose
|
|
between right or left. Neither do we vote, nor do we accept the institution
|
|
of voting. We do not accept 'democracy', on the basis of it being inherently
|
|
oppressive by its very nature - thus a threat to human fulfilment. We oppose
|
|
this inadequate system. Political labels are the work of less intelligent
|
|
people, but in spite of better words we call ourselves anarchists."
|
|
|
|
[This humble fact clearly upset the woman. She cleared her throat and leaned
|
|
over to our side of the table, as if she was about to share something of
|
|
great importance and wit with us. That, however, was not the case:]
|
|
|
|
"Anarchists? So you want anarchy, yes? That's horrible! A society that's
|
|
based upon anarchy would be completely chaotic! Everyone would kill each
|
|
other, drugs would flood the streets, no one would feel safe!"
|
|
|
|
"Please do not speak if your only aim is to expose your lack of knowledge.
|
|
You are clearly confused concerning the basic principles of anarchism."
|
|
|
|
[Short pause. A fuse burned in the head of the woman.]
|
|
|
|
"Oh... oh, really? Well, uh, what's anarchism, to you, then?"
|
|
|
|
"Anarchy is a state of affairs that involves the most complete and total
|
|
freedom that is conceptually possible."
|
|
|
|
[Using the filter of ignorance that interprets everything said into nice
|
|
newspeech (most modern people are equipped with this feature), the woman
|
|
managed to misunderstand the whole statement.]
|
|
|
|
"So? I mean, was that it? I mean, that's just the way our society is
|
|
constituted today. Democracy! Freedom! No dictatorship. Simple as that."
|
|
|
|
"'Democracy' does not imply freedom. It only says that the people in a
|
|
society are personally involved in choosing the ones who rule. Of course, the
|
|
rulers are also supposed to make decisions that adhere to the public
|
|
interest. Needless to say, the latter is not the case in our world. This is
|
|
because it is impossible to make decisions that will satisfy all interests.
|
|
Therefore, democracy can only exist in a pseudo-form, hence it is inadequate
|
|
as a pragmatic political system.
|
|
You connect 'freedom' with 'democracy' because you have been taught that
|
|
'democracy', like 'freedom', is a concept that contains positive value.
|
|
'Democracy', however, includes _more_ intrinsic value, according to you, and
|
|
can thus override 'freedom'. Nothing could be more wrong. While 'freedom' is,
|
|
by definition', positive, 'democracy' is strictly neutral. It only
|
|
_describes_ a state of affairs, it does not _judge_ this state of affairs.
|
|
If it was not the case that you, and people like you, applied positive
|
|
value to 'democracy', it would not work. Democracy only works if people
|
|
falsely believe that it works. Tyranny (as we will find in a dictatorship),
|
|
on the other hand, does not require that the masses incorporate false beliefs
|
|
into their minds. A tyrant can fight all opposition with force, but a
|
|
'democratic ruler' cannot do that. He must convince the masses, with lies and
|
|
soft force, that his position is for the best. You believe that this is the
|
|
case, you are fooled. Order is high, but the truth is even higher. Therefore,
|
|
an honest dictatorship is more true than a false democracy.
|
|
But anarchism, on the other hand, requires no deception and no tyrant. It
|
|
is a state of affairs that is judged positive, since it includes no neutral
|
|
concepts but only positive ones - as 'freedom'. Dare not say that it includes
|
|
negative values like 'chaos', because chaos is also a neutral value. It
|
|
becomes negative in relation to other values that you _falsely_ believe to be
|
|
positive, that is all.
|
|
Hence, we ought to bring forward a state of affairs that is 1) true, 2)
|
|
carrier of positive value, and 3) possible. The only state of affairs that
|
|
make this happen (bearing in mind that we seek what is good for the humans,
|
|
not the abstract 'state') is anarchism."
|
|
|
|
[Now it was time for the woman to present a good con-argument. As expected,
|
|
she failed big time:]
|
|
|
|
"Everything you say _sounds_ good. But that's all. You paint a picture of
|
|
a world that doesn't exist, and cannot exist. Our world is, and will always
|
|
be, ruled by the free market. This is the hard reality. You are childish
|
|
illusionists. I'm a realist. Your ideas doesn't fit with the real world."
|
|
|
|
"Let us make one thing perfectly sparkling clear: the thing you refer to
|
|
as 'the hard and unchangeable reality' is not any form of 'reality'. You
|
|
confuse the meaning of 'realism' with 'dogmatism'. You are convinced that
|
|
something is the matter (market rule) but you do not stop there. You also
|
|
believe that this is, by necessity, some kind of eternal fact; likewise, the
|
|
hard-core Christian believes in God, but do not stop there. Instead, he
|
|
continues to make up certain rules and eternal 'facts' from this belief. And
|
|
suddenly, the Christian does not only believe that he believe in God, he
|
|
believe that God (and all principles that follows from that concept) is a
|
|
matter of unchangeable fact. Nothing could be more wrong.
|
|
The only thing that one could for certain refer to as 'the hard reality'
|
|
is the concept 'anything goes'. To deny this obvious fact is to be mentally
|
|
insane - like you. 'Anything goes' is, ceteris paribus, a true normative
|
|
ethical standpoint. All standpoints that are incompatible with this truism
|
|
(like 'anything goes not') are by necessity false. Since morality is made for
|
|
man, not man for morality, we ought, for the sake of humanity, not spread or
|
|
accept false ideas.
|
|
However, 'the state' is not interested in the human good, only its own
|
|
good. Therefore 'anything goes' has been removed from the public sphere,
|
|
thanks to millenniums of state propaganda. 'Anything goes not' is what the
|
|
state wants you to believe, 'anything goes' is what common (which
|
|
unfortunately is not so common nowadays) sense says."
|
|
|
|
"Okay then, now explain to me: how would it look if you got the power in
|
|
our society?"
|
|
|
|
[The statement above is interesting because the woman assumes that she
|
|
herself cannot play any active role in changing anything. This is, except for
|
|
the obvious ignorance, the most scary part. Only after talking to us for a
|
|
couple of minutes she is ready accept us as the 'new leaders'.]
|
|
|
|
"There is no such thing as 'power' in such a society. In fact, it is
|
|
hardly a 'society' at all. The reason why you ask such a question is because
|
|
you are conceptually confused. This confusion stems from the fact that you
|
|
have been brought up with these terms, like 'power', in an indoctrinative
|
|
manner. You 'know' that 'society' needs someone in 'power', i.e. you connect
|
|
the very concept of 'society' with 'power'. However, you do not really know
|
|
what the concepts mean. You only repeat things you have been taught, but you
|
|
have never questioned the things themselves."
|
|
|
|
[The woman tried to save her own face by a classical argumentum ad hominem:]
|
|
|
|
"My God, what a load of bullshit... You just talk. You just produce words.
|
|
You don't know what you are saying."
|
|
|
|
"On the contrary. _You_ are using words without meaning. We, on the other
|
|
hand, use them perfectly correct. That is the difference between you and us.
|
|
We understand the full meaning of the words we are using, while you
|
|
shamelessly - without really knowing about it - merely abuse them."
|
|
|
|
[Kindergarten semantics and basic human psychology was not the woman's
|
|
strongest side, so she decided to quickly change the subject:]
|
|
|
|
"Yeah, yeah. Whatever. Tell me, how's all this supposed to be carried out
|
|
in _practice_? By which means will you create your... world?"
|
|
|
|
"By all means necessary: terrorism, that is."
|
|
|
|
[We find it rather strange that the woman did not react more emotionally than
|
|
she actually did:]
|
|
|
|
"What?! But that's... outrageous!"
|
|
|
|
"A person can live his whole life with a bad tooth. He can live with that
|
|
pain. He does it because he knows that if he pulled out the tooth, he would
|
|
for a short moment experience a pain that is far greater than the pain he now
|
|
experiences. But if he actually removes the tooth, his life will become much
|
|
better - there will be no pain at all.
|
|
People like you are only aware of feelings like pleasure and pain. When
|
|
you feel pain, you run away. Those things that give you pleasure you stick
|
|
to. The society of today offers you a drug that gives you a nice and drowsy
|
|
pleasure; and that drug is ignorance. You fear knowledge, because that will
|
|
make you experience pain. Therefore, we must give you your needed pain. We
|
|
must kill you, so that you can be born again."
|
|
|
|
[By this stage, the woman had nothing better to say than:]
|
|
|
|
"I still don't buy your arguments! I don't find 'em good at all."
|
|
|
|
"We know. We did not expect that either. You see, people like you are
|
|
beyond any kind of help. You are, and will always be, the populace, the
|
|
plebs, the mob. You have been programmed to uphold the existing system; that
|
|
is your only task in life. We cannot convince you - but that is no problem,
|
|
because we do not have to. It is in your nature to be ruled. You know no
|
|
better, because you do not _want_ to know any better. If you wanted to know
|
|
better, you would be like us. But you are not. Our mission is not to convince
|
|
you that you are wrong. Our noble mission is to save you from yourself.
|
|
It is wrong and inappropriate of you to say that you do not 'buy' our
|
|
arguments. Because the real truth is not that you do not accept them, the
|
|
real truth is that you do not _understand_ them."
|
|
|
|
[The lights turned on, and you could clearly see that the woman felt quite
|
|
relieved from that. She quickly left the table and headed for the exit. But
|
|
before that, she said goodbye. And so did we, in the most correct and
|
|
suitable manner of them all.]
|
|
|
|
"Oh, well, it has been a nice chat. But they are closing now, so I ought
|
|
to get going. Thank you and good night!"
|
|
|
|
"Suck our cocks, bitch."
|
|
|
|
[End of transcript.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
uXu #390 Underground eXperts United 1997 uXu #390
|
|
Call SOTH'S DOMAIN -> +1-401-463-8889
|
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|