reply to a socialist chat group

[Guest guest]

Anthony <arthur_cravan wrote:WiCopendebate

" Anthony "

Fri, 16 Apr 2004 22:47:09 -0000

[WiCopendebate] Re: Fwd: Necessity of moral dictatorship

 

It is far from the truth that socialist POLITICAL ideas go hand in

hand with humanitarianism and sensibility: witness your own people

here rushing to the defence of those who torture animals, on the plea

of " cultural diversity " , when ANYONE I know or would want to know

feels nothing but utter repugnance! This has proven true of all the

socialist and Leftist groups here on the internet, and it came as a

shock to me who has been a socialist all my life. In the spirit of

Steve Coleman, a REAL socialist, I despise ~ with the exception of

you, Robbie, all others here on this and other such groups: not only

those who rush to support the exploitation of animals, or just to

tolerate it, but also those who agree with me but just sit back.

The trouble is, socialists should re-read Stephen Jay Gould. They are

trapped in the 19th century approach to evolution, which sees Man as

the centre of the universe and the ultimate achievement!

As for imposing human values, such as " rights " , on other animals, I

am not imposing anything. We are in the position of protecting those

who cannot protect themselves from rampant cruelty (Hayduke is on the

side of cruelty). We determine what are animal rights, and our

awareness of what animals share with us ~ a common sentient nature ~

ought to lead us to the moral conclusion that we ought not to torture

them.

As to " culture " , Hayduke: why are hill-billies etc. not a culture,

and Spaniards are one? Every community of people forms a culture. So

you approve of INSTITUTIONALISED cruelty (such as in Spain), where

the ruling class patronises it, since this forms " a culture " to your

mind, and the people of rural America do not?!

Morality? Yes, there will be a socialist morality. It will consist

solely of compassion: the compassion for our fellow humans and other

animals; but no, not for the AIDS virus!

And as I`ve had enough of the pettiness and verbal acrobatics which

are evident here ~ and evident AT THE EXPENSE OF SENSIBILITY AND

PROGRESS AND IN FAVOUR OF ITS OPPOSITE: CRUELTY AND REACTION ~ I am

leaving, as soon as this and a following message have been posted.

Anthony.

 

 

WiCopendebate , " robbo203 " <RRobincox@a...>

wrote:

> Hi Anthony

>

> You say:

>

>

> " Given that socialism would not automatically abolish such things

as

> bullfights and animal cruelty which does not depend specifically on

> the abolished capitalist system, if we want to rescue tortured

> animals, how could we, without doing so by force? Maybe there could

> be ways in which the more advanced citizens of a world common-

wealth

> could shame those who continue their crimes, but this could take

> decades. In the meantime, animals would continue to be tortured. "

>

>

> I agree that socialism does not " automatically " get rid of such

> things as animal cruelty and so on. That would be putting forward

an

> over-mechanical approach to societal change.

>

> I would prefer to talk in terms of an " affinity " of ideas. Certain

> ideas do tend to go along with certain other ideas. C S Lewis once

> wrote something to the effect that " what we call man's power over

> nature turns out to be a power exercised by some mean over other

men

> with nature as its instrument "

>

> It is a wonderful quote and there is more than a smidgeon of truth

in

> it. As the history of humankind's treatment of animals bears out,

> the brutalisation of human beings in oppressive class-based

societies

> tends to go hand in hand with the brutalisation of animals (there

are

> numerous examples of this in Keith Thomas' seminal work - Man and

the

> Natural World; Changing attitudes in England 1500-1800)

>

>

> However, we do need to be wary of such generalisations: Adolf

Hitler

> was fond of animals but not particularly fond of certain kinds of

> people!

>

>

> At the end of the day there is a certain logic that connects a

caring

> attitude to our fellow human beings with a similar attitude to the

> rest of nature. It is up to us to make this connection but there

is

> no absolute necessity that it will be made

>

> Regards

>

> Robin