Machina: the Ego-bots and their Individualistic Revolt
Originally posted to
philosophy where a discussion follows.
For some time I kept private my realization that the individualistic revolution is suffocating me. This revolt promised freedom from group think by proclaiming the individual divine and that my divinity would attain ultimate self-fulfillment. Now I find that its machina demands allegiance and insidiously operates only for itself, and possibly, graciously considers my interests only while I conform.
Rather than freeing me, individualism sends its Ego-bots to critize a Hollywood movie that I happened to like, chastize my purchase of a food processed by a subsidiary of Warmonger Corp., forewarn that, by not laughing at every joke made at Bush's expense, I passively support imperialism. Egoists informed me that altruism is, in fact -- beyond all skepticism --, a dilusion, and they scoffed at popular ideas that I attributed to them. Their acceptance of the independent movie, a micro-brewery downtown, the small-town coffee shoppe, the anarchist state, and other products of the revolution were in no way reflections of a group's will. Sundance is not like Hollywood, they claim; 42nd Street Bar is not like Busch, Crossroads is not like Starbucks, the island nation is not like the US, they say; all these ego-centric establishments are free from peer pressure and organized bureaucracy. Persistently these revolutionaries took exception to my generalization that their rebellion is fighting something that contains selves, and that I remain perplexed as to how an egoist, who holds that only their self is important -- or moreso, a solpsist -- can fight a thing comprised of more than one person -- or something other than theirself. Brushing aside my confusion, the Ego-bots persisted; zealously promulgating that Buddhism is still like Christianity because only the absence of organization allows the self to flourish.
Thus, I find this individualist revolution just as hypocritical as the fundamental Christian conservatives from whom I am emancipated and many of the egoists were ejected. Perhaps my brain was so washed by these Christians that I cannot comprehend the paramount preoccupation with something less than the general welfare; for Mama raised me to do things for others and -- how awfully group-centric -- I found this benefiting Hospice, my Mom, and me! I treasonably hord other delusional ideas from the Ego-bots, like my existence depending upon them and many others.
So let me be clear: I am crazy, not delusional, therefore I do not defend all types of altruism, nor do I offend all types of egoism. For example, ethical egoism sounds feasible, as does the altruistic notion of "disinterested love". And yes, I have watched (the Hollywood! *gasp*) film V for Vendetta and read Nineteen Eighty-four. But I proclaim something similar to the Musketeer's motto:
I fear neither you, nor the group, nor myself!
I am myself, you are yourself, we are ourselves.
Through you is me, through me, you. Through us, we see ourselves.
What's between egosim and altruism?
philosophy where a discussion follows.
For some time I kept private my realization that the individualistic revolution is suffocating me. This revolt promised freedom from group think by proclaiming the individual divine and that my divinity would attain ultimate self-fulfillment. Now I find that its machina demands allegiance and insidiously operates only for itself, and possibly, graciously considers my interests only while I conform.
Rather than freeing me, individualism sends its Ego-bots to critize a Hollywood movie that I happened to like, chastize my purchase of a food processed by a subsidiary of Warmonger Corp., forewarn that, by not laughing at every joke made at Bush's expense, I passively support imperialism. Egoists informed me that altruism is, in fact -- beyond all skepticism --, a dilusion, and they scoffed at popular ideas that I attributed to them. Their acceptance of the independent movie, a micro-brewery downtown, the small-town coffee shoppe, the anarchist state, and other products of the revolution were in no way reflections of a group's will. Sundance is not like Hollywood, they claim; 42nd Street Bar is not like Busch, Crossroads is not like Starbucks, the island nation is not like the US, they say; all these ego-centric establishments are free from peer pressure and organized bureaucracy. Persistently these revolutionaries took exception to my generalization that their rebellion is fighting something that contains selves, and that I remain perplexed as to how an egoist, who holds that only their self is important -- or moreso, a solpsist -- can fight a thing comprised of more than one person -- or something other than theirself. Brushing aside my confusion, the Ego-bots persisted; zealously promulgating that Buddhism is still like Christianity because only the absence of organization allows the self to flourish.
Thus, I find this individualist revolution just as hypocritical as the fundamental Christian conservatives from whom I am emancipated and many of the egoists were ejected. Perhaps my brain was so washed by these Christians that I cannot comprehend the paramount preoccupation with something less than the general welfare; for Mama raised me to do things for others and -- how awfully group-centric -- I found this benefiting Hospice, my Mom, and me! I treasonably hord other delusional ideas from the Ego-bots, like my existence depending upon them and many others.
So let me be clear: I am crazy, not delusional, therefore I do not defend all types of altruism, nor do I offend all types of egoism. For example, ethical egoism sounds feasible, as does the altruistic notion of "disinterested love". And yes, I have watched (the Hollywood! *gasp*) film V for Vendetta and read Nineteen Eighty-four. But I proclaim something similar to the Musketeer's motto:
I fear neither you, nor the group, nor myself!
I am myself, you are yourself, we are ourselves.
Through you is me, through me, you. Through us, we see ourselves.
What's between egosim and altruism?