BEYOND FREEDOM AND DIGNITY lies only slavery and indignity.
“BEYOND FREEDOM AND DIGNITY” – The Proglodyte Lemmings’ Ever-Forwards Movement:
The only things the soft (‘social’) sciences ‘teach’ in universities and colleges these days, are excuses for crimes: they are all cause-and-effect-free idolatries, metaphoric illusions pretending pre-determinism is real. “War” for instance, (in their pretense that, as they claim, it is some kind of an unavoidable, natural phenomenon,) has many causes, most notably (as does all crime, in their backwards liberal fantasies) poverty and lack of trade. But how many war-mongering dictators were poor? European countries traded freely with each other before the Kaiser decided his relatives needed a thumping. The enemedia reflects this nonsense, too, reinforcing irrationality and backwards excuses over rational, cause-and-effect reasoning.
Today’s public ‘education’ only “teaches” group rights victimology, (slanderously divisive extortion, where it’s always claimed that, since someone sort of like you somewhere – but not necessarily even here – may have sort of once discriminated against someone sort of like them, we’re going to here and now take from you and give to them; and besides, you owe us because you bothered to earn stuff we didn’t). And victimology relies on might-makes-right predeterminism: the false and corrupting notion that there is no real evil, no real crimes nor criminals at all, because we are all really only ever helpless victims – of society, products of our environments, and slaves of allah. i.e: “It’s never our fault; we didn’t do it – only the ____ (system, procedures, group, etc.,) did it! Whee!” There is no self-reliant responsibility, no rights to wealth earned by responsibility, but only historic economic accidents which enforced wealth redistribution (extorted thefts) will ‘correct.’
They assume we are all really only fallible, potentially dangerous mistakes, which must therefore always form into ever larger gangs (of fallible, potentially dangerous mistakes) for our own protection; The Group (‘globalization prevents war!’) will solve all problems!
Today’s “collectivist” (i.e: totalitarian conformist authoritarian) schools focus on teaching kids what to think, (“wealth redistributing theft = social justice”) rather than how to think for themselves.
In fact, they seem to focus on teaching them excuses for not thinking at all.
Stealing truth: telling people – children – there’s no wrong answers, also means there’s no right answers!
Today’s “educationalists” are not teachers; they are really only lazy, self-promoting salesmen who seek to keep their rights to be paid, while avoiding their own responsibilities to teach, and so they abuse the kids in their charge by telling them they have the right not to fail and have the right to remain ignorant, in order to do so! As is usual with criminals, they want a guaranteed equality of outcome (a right to your stuff, without the responsibility of paying for it) over an equality of opportunity (to earn it). When buying you low to sell you out by selling themselves to you as the most high, they ensure that your ignorance is their bliss.
Beyond merely having rights without responsibilities, and the right to negligently ignore fear (and so, the ‘right’ to also avoid discovering the source of the pain which causes that fear and by discovering that source, being able to fix the mistakes and solve the problems which cause them) while insisting that Hope IS a Plan, they “teach” (abuse) children the false and self-defeating, self-enslaving notion they have the false right to remain irresponsibly wrong, in stead of truly educating them that they have a responsibility to become right, as in factually correct.
The only principle any one ever need agree to, is of course the Golden Rule of Law which defines all situational morality as Do Not Attack First.
No right can be gained without acceding to the commensurate responsibility; property rights, the law of contract, law and justice itself all depend on the recipricocity of the Golden Rule, where the only right we have is to not be attacked first, and that right depends on our agreeing to the responsibility to not attack (thereby innocent) others first, either! When we renege on our responsibility, and choose to attack first, not only do we thus define our selves as the predatory criminal aggressor and they as our innocent victims, but we also open ourselves up to the logical response of a defensive counter-attack.
Bear in mind that threats are (psychological) attacks, aka intimidation, bullying, coercion, duress, extortion, and terrorism, and all first-attacks are already crimes. Counter-attacking, or attacking second (as even the legal system eventualy does) is a necessary requirement for all punitive and deterrant justice.
From agreeing to adhere to the “social contract” of this One Rule, we gain trust, progress, and civilization. The criminal opposite (deciding one’s group has the holy right and duty to always attack all ‘the others’ first) can only ever inflict distrust, stagnation, and barbarism (liberal islam) on people.
Civilized people heed the “Greed Not; Be Fearful” (of consequences) binary, while criminals obey the opposite: “Fear Not; Be Greedy!” and so only fear NOT attacking others first, first!
The rest of our valid, civilized “laws” are all only symptoms of this One Golden Rule, and all sub-sequent valid legislation depends on that Rule: Every law is an if/then warning which says, in effect: If and when you choose to attack first in this, that, or those ways, then this, that, and these punishments will apply to you.
A “Judge’s” only job is to determine rational cause-and-effect (who started it) and all irrational criminal excuses or alibis are based on the opposite, victim-blaming slanderous pretense.
It should therefore be easy for any judge to see if a law is bad (an attempt to deprive citizens of due process, by disregarding any need for evidence by slanderously insisting on asserting that they are Guilty Until Never Proven Innocent, and so must impossibly prove a negative in order to defend them selves).
But today’s educationalists would stand that most basic social contract rule, and so also society and Civilization, on its head, and thereby “progressively” replace them with lawless savage barbarity.
Proglodytes are relativists who hate dynamic causes and effects, and so can always be found to idolatrously insist that their static idol notion of all “attacks” are equally bad, and that counter-attacking in defense of one’s self and/or of innocent others, is just as bad as the criminal aggressors’ initial and unprovoked attacks, and so their only response is that they always just want it all to stop. This slanderously prejudicial stance of immoral relativism blames the victims and punishes them for being attacked, while
excusing the criminals at the same time. Idolatry (pre-determined victimology excuses) sanctions crime.
PS: I’d studied Skinner in my psych classes back in Univeristy 30 years ago or so, but all I can remember is he should have been placed in one of his own “Skinner Boxes” and forgotten.
I just wiki’d “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” and got quite the laugh; beyond Freud’s nephew, Edouard Bernais (Fast Eddy Bernays) I hadn’t realized the behaviourists had such distinguished originators (or more likely I had once known it, but forgotten such trivia):
Beyond Freedom and Dignity is a book written by American psychologist B. F. Skinner and first published in 1971. The book argues that entrenched belief in free will and the moral autonomy of the individual (which Skinner referred to as “dignity”) hinders the prospect of using scientific methods to modify behavior for the purpose of building a happier and better-organized society.
Beyond Freedom and Dignity may be summarized as an attempt to promote Skinner’s philosophy of science, the technology of human behavior, his conception of determinism, and what Skinner calls ‘cultural engineering’.
The thing such proponents of the binary carrot and stick approach to humans being machines failed to notice, is that since we are such machines, simply reversing whatever social engineering ends they might seek to achieve would be, as simple as, well, flipping a switch LOL! And the best way to forestall or even cancel their subliminal thefts entirely is to simply immunize the public to them by educating us as to our own nature, not to endlessly and pointlessly try to modify it (impossible LOL!) Liberal criminals always insist that progress must involve might makes right force, over right makes might education.
Conservatives define progress as ways to improve things for people, while backwards liberal “progressives” want to improve people for things.
And of course the only real reason liberals (criminals) want to dummy-down their victims is as part of their own attack-first “defensive” strategy!
Their brains are short-circuited by fear; where rational, civilized folks will fear attacking first because that instantly destroys their hope of no pain and could lead to counter-attacks, criminals always focus on their own imagined fear AS other-caused pain, (they see their own subjective fear as an objective attack) and so, pretending to assume that they will inevitably be attacked anyway, only fear NOT attacking first, at least with backwards assertions of victim-blaming slander, an act which puts their victims on the defensive, and so (to them,) will hopefully preclude their ever being attacked first. Rational people believe in the hope of no pain, while irrational criminals (liberals, muslims) choose to see life as zero-sum: cause fear or be feared, pain or be pained, attack or be attacked.
As masochists, they will induce the worst-case scenario whenever possible, in order to pretend to have always had control over it (“Screw you, I meant to do that!”) and “If we don’t rush in first, then some other fools will surely beat us to it!”