The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Revolution is not making everyone adopt one position, but the creation of symbiotic relationships between different unique individuals.
We have been held back for decades now by the competition and conversion tactics of various left wing factions who could not understand this. Each one felt that in order for change to take place, the rest of humanity had to be convinced that their particular way of thinking and doing things was the right way; but in a society in which conflict is institutionalized as the system of relations, revolution would simply be the discovery of ways for different individuals and groups to coexist and cooperate. Not everyone has the same needs, or perspectives, or methods, and that is a beautiful thing. We need to stop working on "converting" others, and start finding ways to work with them, while trusting them to know what is best for themselves. A world of intellectual anarchists (or practical syndicalists, or commune-dwelling primitivists. . .) would be no more desirable than it is possible.
This means no more bickering over tactics. Every experiment must be worth a try. Find tactics that work for you, that give you joy and express your character in all its varied and conflicting facets, and find ways to make your efforts complement those of others. There is room for the young woman whose heart sings at the shattering of plate glass, for the stern grandfather who pays his dues in the steelworkers’ union, for everyone in this resistance, or else it is not revolutionary after all, just more authoritarian ideology-peddling.
Once people from the various cliques and ghettos of our society are integrated into such complementary relationships, the unnecessary conflicts created by the tensions between individuals subscribing to different brands of "identity" will begin to dissolve.
We have been held back for decades now by the competition and conversion tactics of various left wing factions who could not understand this. Each one felt that in order for change to take place, the rest of humanity had to be convinced that their particular way of thinking and doing things was the right way; but in a society in which conflict is institutionalized as the system of relations, revolution would simply be the discovery of ways for different individuals and groups to coexist and cooperate. Not everyone has the same needs, or perspectives, or methods, and that is a beautiful thing. We need to stop working on "converting" others, and start finding ways to work with them, while trusting them to know what is best for themselves. A world of intellectual anarchists (or practical syndicalists, or commune-dwelling primitivists. . .) would be no more desirable than it is possible.
This means no more bickering over tactics. Every experiment must be worth a try. Find tactics that work for you, that give you joy and express your character in all its varied and conflicting facets, and find ways to make your efforts complement those of others. There is room for the young woman whose heart sings at the shattering of plate glass, for the stern grandfather who pays his dues in the steelworkers’ union, for everyone in this resistance, or else it is not revolutionary after all, just more authoritarian ideology-peddling.
Once people from the various cliques and ghettos of our society are integrated into such complementary relationships, the unnecessary conflicts created by the tensions between individuals subscribing to different brands of "identity" will begin to dissolve.
Revolution is not making everyone adopt one position, but the creation of symbiotic relationships between different unique individuals.
We have been held back for decades now by the competition and conversion tactics of various left wing factions who could not understand this. Each one felt that in order for change to take place, the rest of humanity had to be convinced that their particular way of thinking and doing things was the right way; but in a society in which conflict is institutionalized as the system of relations, revolution would simply be the discovery of ways for different individuals and groups to coexist and cooperate. Not everyone has the same needs, or perspectives, or methods, and that is a beautiful thing. We need to stop working on "converting" others, and start finding ways to work with them, while trusting them to know what is best for themselves. A world of intellectual anarchists (or practical syndicalists, or commune-dwelling primitivists. . .) would be no more desirable than it is possible.
This means no more bickering over tactics. Every experiment must be worth a try. Find tactics that work for you, that give you joy and express your character in all its varied and conflicting facets, and find ways to make your efforts complement those of others. There is room for the young woman whose heart sings at the shattering of plate glass, for the stern grandfather who pays his dues in the steelworkers’ union, for everyone in this resistance, or else it is not revolutionary after all, just more authoritarian ideology-peddling.
Once people from the various cliques and ghettos of our society are integrated into such complementary relationships, the unnecessary conflicts created by the tensions between individuals subscribing to different brands of "identity" will begin to dissolve.
We have been held back for decades now by the competition and conversion tactics of various left wing factions who could not understand this. Each one felt that in order for change to take place, the rest of humanity had to be convinced that their particular way of thinking and doing things was the right way; but in a society in which conflict is institutionalized as the system of relations, revolution would simply be the discovery of ways for different individuals and groups to coexist and cooperate. Not everyone has the same needs, or perspectives, or methods, and that is a beautiful thing. We need to stop working on "converting" others, and start finding ways to work with them, while trusting them to know what is best for themselves. A world of intellectual anarchists (or practical syndicalists, or commune-dwelling primitivists. . .) would be no more desirable than it is possible.
This means no more bickering over tactics. Every experiment must be worth a try. Find tactics that work for you, that give you joy and express your character in all its varied and conflicting facets, and find ways to make your efforts complement those of others. There is room for the young woman whose heart sings at the shattering of plate glass, for the stern grandfather who pays his dues in the steelworkers’ union, for everyone in this resistance, or else it is not revolutionary after all, just more authoritarian ideology-peddling.
Once people from the various cliques and ghettos of our society are integrated into such complementary relationships, the unnecessary conflicts created by the tensions between individuals subscribing to different brands of "identity" will begin to dissolve.
Oi ! You've copied this from http://www.crimethinc.com/library/mutual.html
~~Belldandy~~
~~Belldandy~~
Cheating again are we Savo.
This is not going for a GAD i was just letting other users no about it.
I did copy it from there but i forgot to give the credit to them at the bottom.
Yes, we do need to change the way we live.
No, we do not need to exercise more freedom of choice.
Quite the opposite.
No, we do not need to exercise more freedom of choice.
Quite the opposite.
Mendax Bartender wrote:
> Yes, we do need to change the way we live.
Finally someone agree's
> No, we do not need to exercise more freedom of choice.
OK, you win on that one
The title is true because we do need to change the way we live.
> Yes, we do need to change the way we live.
Finally someone agree's
> No, we do not need to exercise more freedom of choice.
OK, you win on that one
The title is true because we do need to change the way we live.
SR Dude wrote:
> This is not going for a GAD i was just letting other users no about
> it.
---
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
> This is not going for a GAD i was just letting other users no about
> it.
---
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!