Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] Re: Where the livin is easy

Expand Messages
  • tom
    Mary, The territorial impulse is connected with survival impulses.Land is territory that can be used for growing food. I d guess the first wars were fought
    Message 1 of 38 , Jan 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Mary,

      The territorial impulse is connected with survival impulses.Land is territory that can be used for growing food. I'd guess the first wars were fought over hunting and fishing rights.This was probably the motive behind most battles native Americans had between one another as well as aboriginal people anywhere.Of course, gang wars in the hood are usually over turf, land that can be used by one gang or another for drug selling and prostitution etc. I suppose this is how aristocracy originated. Someone would provide so many fighting men for a battle, and if the battle was successful, some portions of newly acquired lands would be given to the leaders in proportion to the contributions they had made to winning the battle.It certainly seems to me that the principles underlying aristicracy are identical to those underlying gangsters. Maybe that's the principle of Orwellian spin, once a gang becomes very successful it will call itself a dukedom, or a police force.

      Happy New Year.
      Tom
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: mary.josie59
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2009 8:36 AM
      Subject: [existlist] Re: Where the livin is easy


      Perhaps it's a latent territorial impulse. Perhaps the tipping point for sustainability or
      economic viability. The will to power? Human-centered philosophy? I'm definitely not an
      ecoanarchist, but occasionally I wonder what's really worth defending. If we destroy all our
      competitors, we destroy the planet ... Happy Ice Age!

      Mary

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "C. S. Wyatt" <existlist1@...> wrote:

      Study after study shows that social groups "tip" towards polarization once the population is
      larger than 150 individuals. We don't know why, but it happens even among the Amish -- so
      they split into new groups at that size.





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • louise
      ... to ... Correction required here. All the indications so far are that I am not at all to blame. Louise ... that ... say, ... the ... what ... I ...
      Message 38 of 38 , Jan 6, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
        >
        > Jim,
        >
        > Thanks for the encouragement. A return to the thoughts of Nietzsche
        > may be just what the doctor ordered for me. I am in no condition at
        > present to consider the complexities of race, politics or war, and
        to
        > feel this kind of subject-matter as personal grievance is the
        > antithesis of existential. Seems I am to blame.
        >
        > Louise

        Correction required here. All the indications so far are that I am
        not at all to blame.

        Louise


        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@>
        wrote:
        > >
        > > Louise,
        > >
        > > My remark was not altogether serious, as I do share your concern
        that
        > > sometimes this forum becomes "seemingly indistinguishable from,
        say,
        > > an intelligent political journal."
        > >
        > > I realize our political views are very different and that, for
        the
        > > most part, I disagree with what you write and you disagree with
        what
        > > I write when we each express our political views.
        > >
        > > However, when we return to philosophical and existential matters,
        I
        > > think my outlook is closer to yours than to any of our American
        > > friends.
        > >
        > > I accept that communication about serious matters is often
        difficult,
        > > and misunderstandings easily arise, but I genuinely appreciate
        your
        > > distinctive contribution to this list. I quite agree with what
        Mary
        > > wrote in her post 46143.
        > >
        > > Jim
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@>
        > > wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > All,
        > > > >
        > > > > At the risk of annoying Louise again, I'm submitting
        > > > > another `unexistential', general, political post.
        > > >
        > > > Jim,
        > > >
        > > > Am I the only one to find an element of farce about the latest
        > > series
        > > > of misunderstandings, disagreements and non-sequiturs which
        weave
        > > > through the serious arguments and friendly banter? It is not
        only
        > > > farce, because there is an element of the unknown, behind our
        > > speaking,
        > > > or writing. This is how words may 'cause pain'.
        > > >
        > > > It really is not the point if you should write something which
        > > annoys
        > > > me. I was simply getting upset that my own concerns were so
        > > difficult
        > > > to explain satisfactorily, or perhaps this is mainly a matter
        > > between
        > > > myself and Wil, with some involvement from Bill, who like me
        puts
        > > no
        > > > trust in the informal 'politics' of the Left.
        > > >
        > > > In fact, I find it most alarming, in the very process of trying
        to
        > > > present what I believe to be reasonable freedom of speech, if
        > > anyone
        > > > should feel restricted on my account, about writing at the list
        > > what
        > > > they hold to be true. Where there is any breach of list rules
        or
        > > > etiquette, Susan or CSW will step in as they see fit.
        > > >
        > > > I do get frustrated, it is true, when philosophical enquiry
        seems
        > > lost
        > > > in a welter of applied thought, such that an existential list
        > > becomes
        > > > for a while seemingly indistinguishable from, say, an
        intelligent
        > > > political journal. It remains the case, though, that I am a
        member
        > > of
        > > > this list, simply, and do not wish to be made an exception and
        > > excluded
        > > > from its disciplines. Kindness is appreciated, of course, when
        it
        > > does
        > > > not come accompanied with such misunderstanding that it causes
        > > further
        > > > pain. So if I have appeared ungracious in recent times, and
        > > appeared
        > > > to spurn such kindness, this is the reason.
        > > >
        > > > Louise
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.