Interesting post yesterday. u/SwornThane posits that the antiparahuman movement could have been avoided if the parahuman authorities (ie. the Wardens) had revealed the truth about Gold Morning, Scion, Endbringers, S-class threats, etc. He suggests that the parahuman decision to withhold information is justified entirely by a selfish desire to avoid "short term problems this would cause", and that because of this secrecy, antiparahuman sentiments and concerns have "metastasized into a full blown disaster/insurgency [over] the last few months at the worst possible times." The specific antiparahuman complaints which he cites are as follows:
- Little to no representation or a say in how things are run
- Little to no power over their daily lives
- Too much power in the hands of parahumans
- Parahumans being first class citizens with perks and benefits for literally doing nothing
- Soft balling of Parahumans compared to non powered people
- Absolutely no information about the end of the world or what the Wardens are fighting
- No communication between non powered people and the wardens regarding city wide discussions or priorities
- Lack of accountability from parahumans, and the neutering of non powered organizations such as the police
- A truce and golden ticket for every parahuman regardless of their crimes against people
I want to analyze these claims because I think it's key that we get a better understanding of why the antiparahumans are acting the way they are, not just because it's integral to our understanding of the story, but also because (as was outlined by several commenters on the thread) it is integral to our understanding of antiauthoritarian movements around the world.
First, on two simple principles that are analyzed in an integrated manner through the rest of this post:
- I don't believe that the parahuman authorities (eg. Wardens) are acting exclusively out of a selfish motivation in maintaining secrecy around the issues they feel need to be secret, and
- I believe parahumans have, by and large, fallen victim to the age-old trap of generalization. There are plenty of factions within the parahuman group and few of them are helping each other.
Was it avoidable?
In all Dinah's possible futures, was there ever a world in which the issues cited by the antiparahumans did not come t
... keep reading on reddit ➡
There’s been a lot of social media talk about the fact that the countries doing the best at dealing with CoVid-19 are run by women.
That somehow it’s the fact that they’re women that makes them better able to handle it. Particularly when it comes to the fact that women are more compassionate and care more about the health of others.
It’s also been suggested that the female leaders are less prone to authoritarian behaviour.
But isn’t the fact that we’re doing lockdowns evidence of authoritarian behaviour? Aren’t the countries with the best outcomes enforcing the strictest rules?
With the exception of Sweden, obviously.
It's always been creeping, but now it's no longer under any disguise. It's blatant, and it's all being done under the convenient excuse of "public safety", "veerus", etc. From this enforced quarantine, threats of warrantless arrests, actual arrests over "quarantine violations" and "fake news", people locked in animal cages, requiring licenses to leave your house, among others, all of these are utterly illegal, unconstitutional, and ugly affronts to liberty. The courts are closed and the prosecutors are gone. They'll supposedly set up hotlines for urgent matters, but what does it matter at this point? You're arrested for nonsense, and in the meantime, people disappear.
What worries me is I see people left and right cheer it on. "Justified by the emergency", "exigent circumstances" they say. I understand that these measures might help, but I wholly believe that you don't get civil rights only when it's convenient for government to respect them. What might be solved by an iron fist would have been better solved by just proper education.
What really ticked me off was DTI's Memorandum Circular 20-07 the other day on hoarding and panic buying. Aside from the notion that they should lay off on free markets, the memo provides -
> Any doubt shall be construed strictly against any person violating the provisions hereof and, given the declared State of Public Health Emergency, shall be meted the maximum penalty under applicable laws, regulations, and ordinances.
Absolutely insane. Penalties are for the courts ALONE to decide, and it is a fundamental and constitutional principle that any doubts in any criminal matter are to be decided in favor of the accused.
But it's okay, it's an emergency.
Edit: It seems you're all okay with this, for the force of authority now trumps personal responsibility. Ah well. When the time comes, we'll find that once we consent to the signing away of fundamental freedoms, it's nearly impossible to claw them back.
The dominant centrist narrative, especially over the last 3-5 years, is that democracy is under attack by extremists who are subverting democracy across the planet. However, studies indicate that centrists are uniquely hostile to democracy. People on both the right and the left are more supportive of democracy than centrists. This helps to explain why centrists are untroubled or even supportive of things like the continued existence of the US duopoly and the system that maintains it, constant regime change operations launched by the United States and its allies including those against democratically elected leaders, Michael Bloomberg buying his way into the Democratic Primaries, the Clintonites stealing the 2016 Primaries from Bernie Sanders and then blaming Hillary's loss on Russia, the mass media smears of Jeremy Corbyn, censorship, the arrest of Lula in Brazil on trumped up charges and the impeachment of his successor Dilma Roussef, the prosecution of Julian Assange, Justin Trudeau cancelling the electoral reform he promised Canadians, and many more.
In a 2018 study, David Adler discovers that contrary to the dominant media narrative, centrists are uniquely hostile to democratic values. “Respondents at the center of the political spectrum are the least supportive of democracy, least committed to its institutions, and most supportive of authoritarianism,” writes Adler, whose findings were based on data from the World Values Survey and European Values Survey.
The Centrist Paradox: Political Correlates of the Democratic Disconnect by David Adler
edit: Centrists aren't just liberals, they're also mainstream conservatives. Centrists are people who view opinions outside of what is called in the United States the 'bipartisan consensus' as illegitimate.
In one of my recent posts I talked about how we should "Overthrow the Monarchy of Heaven!", that is to say, we should do away with spiritual bureaucracy.
However, in my recent post, "6 Sources of Revelation", I mention how titles can be used as a tool for achieving greater spirituality.
I have taken a large portion of my time and dedicated it to spiritually developing myself and those around me. The title I like to describe myself with is "Elder".
This has brought up a question in my own mind: what is a prophet?
The best definition I could find is this one. They are someone who has studied morality and spirituality for a large portion of their life. They feel naturally drawn to expound the truth and call the wicked to repentance.
However, I still felt some reservations regarding that word "prophet". Within the spiritual bureaucracy, it has largely come to mean a sort of spiritual dictator. To describe yourself as a prophet means that you have authority over someone spiritually. They respond to percieved threats to their authority harshly.
So where do I land in regards to the word "prophet"? It depends on who is using it.
If you describe someone you admire who spoke truth and preached repentance to the wicked for the betterment of humanity and were willing to risk safety to do so, that would be admirable. I view people like Sam Young (/u/Invisibles_Cubit) to meet the definition of a prophet.
However, if you use it to describe someone who seeks power over others, it becomes deplorable. When people like Russell M. Nelson, Denver Snuffer, or Julie Rowe use the term "prophet" to describe themselves, it makes my skin crawl.
Redefining things for myself like the word "prophet" is just another step I'm taking to reclaiming Mormon spirituality and making it a healthier :)
