Frankly I think that most of what you’re talking about isn’t really relevant. The question of whether revolutions produce positive or negative results is a political and historical one. Musings on the human condition, feelings of hopelessness and despair, cynicism, those are just reflections of your mental state, and is shit for you to work out. It’s not a reflection of reality.
When we actually study history, and look at facts and evidence, comparing before and after, then it’s clear that revolutions do have the capacity to improve things, at least in certain conditions. It doesn’t have to be a necessary part of life, that’s not really the question. Why go through life limiting yourself to only what is necessary?
Will things get worse again a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand years from now? While Vietnam is still better off today than it would’ve been otherwise, it’s true that at a certain point, the sun will explode. But why is that an argument for not doing something as opposed to doing something? If everything blows up in our faces and we make a whole mess of things, that mess, too, will be temporary and will pass.
Regardless, even if life is destined to be nothing but suffering for all eternity, it is still human nature to strive against that, and if it’s all hopeless anyway then there’s no harm in trying shit.
As I said, you strive against hunger by eating, even knowing that it won’t last. So why is it that I shouldn’t strive against oppression, just because it may not last?
Revolutions accomplish things, but the old problems creep back in because we are humans and we can’t not fuck things up.
For example, Russia used to be ruled by one person, propped up by wealthy elites. It still is, but it used to be too.
Why bother eating when you’re just going to get hungry again?
Exactly. Coming down from the trees was our second mistake. Leaving the water was the first.
K.
But you still eat.
Yes, but I know that revolutions are not necessary for life, and hold no expectations that large groups of people will ever act rationally
Frankly I think that most of what you’re talking about isn’t really relevant. The question of whether revolutions produce positive or negative results is a political and historical one. Musings on the human condition, feelings of hopelessness and despair, cynicism, those are just reflections of your mental state, and is shit for you to work out. It’s not a reflection of reality.
When we actually study history, and look at facts and evidence, comparing before and after, then it’s clear that revolutions do have the capacity to improve things, at least in certain conditions. It doesn’t have to be a necessary part of life, that’s not really the question. Why go through life limiting yourself to only what is necessary?
Will things get worse again a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand years from now? While Vietnam is still better off today than it would’ve been otherwise, it’s true that at a certain point, the sun will explode. But why is that an argument for not doing something as opposed to doing something? If everything blows up in our faces and we make a whole mess of things, that mess, too, will be temporary and will pass.
Regardless, even if life is destined to be nothing but suffering for all eternity, it is still human nature to strive against that, and if it’s all hopeless anyway then there’s no harm in trying shit.
As I said, you strive against hunger by eating, even knowing that it won’t last. So why is it that I shouldn’t strive against oppression, just because it may not last?
My plan is to avoid large groups of humans and let you all kill each other because there’s always an asshole.
Lazy and cowardly
Perfectly human.