I am an anarchist and proud of it



Do we know what people similar to me have been called? They would call me an anarchist. Anarchists have been against to all forms of government. Anarchists have been opposite all forms of mastery as well as control. All governments have been bad. All forms of mastery as well as carry out have been bad. So we am an radical as well as unapproachable of it.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
'You skip a point, RPK'.
'Don't spin this in to a secular issue, RPK'.
'You need to demeanour during a large picture, RPK'.
'We need to focus, RPK'.
'We first need to change a government, RPK'.
'The crime in BN is many worse, RPK'.
'BN is racist, RPK'.
'What preference do we have? We have been oppressed for some-more than 50 years, RPK'.
'We have been not opposite a Malays, usually opposite a Umno Malays, RPK'.
'What do we expect? The Chinese have faced taste for some-more than 50 years, RPK'.
'Compare things with a Chinese-run Singapore or Penang as well as we can see a large difference, RPK'.
'When we had a Chinese Finance Minister similar to Tan Siew Sin things were many better, RPK'.
'The Chinese got abounding by tough work, RPK'.
'The Malays wish a shortcut to wealth, RPK'.
'Criticising a antithesis is assisting Barisan Nasional to stay in power, RPK'.
'You have been treacherous a voters, RPK'.
'We should speak about all this usually after Pakatan Rakyat takes over, RPK'.
'After Pakatan Rakyat takes over we can purify out a debase in Pakatan Rakyat, RPK'.
'If we do not support Pakatan afterwards we contingency be a ! Barisan stooge, RPK'.

That as well as many some-more have been a arguments which many readers routinely put brazen to clear as well as urge their stand. This is called 'working backwards'. You take a mount as well as afterwards we urge which idea with an argument. Religionists have have use of of this same routine as well as deliberation which 80% or so of a universe believes in a sacrament means which this routine is really effective.
How do we infer which God exists? God exists given we have been here. The actuality which we have been here means a little aloft energy contingency have combined us. Hence which aloft energy has to be God. So, given we exist, afterwards God contingency additionally exist. If God did not exist afterwards we would not be here.
Does this have sense? It certainly does to those who hold in a religion.
So as well as so is a Prophet sent down by God. And a Prophet told us which he is a loyal Prophet as well as which his sacrament is a loyal religion. How do we know this? The Holy Book says so. Where did this Holy Book come from? It came from a Prophet as well as was written by a supporters of a Prophet some-more than 100 years after he died.
Does this have sense? It certainly does to those who hold in a religion.
So we see, any evidence is a good evidence if we already hold in something. Your idea is intact. It does not waver. It is usually which we need to clear as well as urge this belief. So a evidence is not to assistance we believe. You already believe. The evidence is to explain as well as clear your idea as well as have it sound sensible as well as credible.
You already hold in your religion. You already hold in your Prophet. You already hold which there is a God. Your arguments have been to have clarity of a idea which would not routinely have clarity unless we can disagree your belief. In which same spirit, we already have a domestic belief. And to have clarity of! this do mestic idea we additionally need to put brazen various arguments to urge this belief.
This is called arguing in circles. Arguing in circles would be as follows. My sacrament is correct given my Prophet says so. My Prophet is correct given a Holy Book says so. The Holy Book is correct given it came from God by my Prophet.
Okay, let's stop arguing in circles. Today we am starting to be brief as well as brutal. Today we am starting to call a scoop a spade. And if we do not similar to which afterwards we had improved stop celebration of a mass during this indicate as well as go to another Blog or website.Malaysia Todayis not for a faint-hearted.Malaysia Todayis not for those who similar to to read nice things as well as things which dovetail with their idea system.Malaysia Todayis not for those who live in denial syndrome.Malaysia Todayis no holds barred.
Politicians need businessmen to finance them. Businessmen need politicians to have money. This is so in America, in Japan, in Malaysia, as well as in many places in a world.
In Malaysia, however, commercial operation is a domain of a Chinese while politics is a domain of a Malays. There are, of course, Chinese politicians as there have been Malay businessmen. But a Chinese politicians need to obeisance to a Malay politicians usually similar to a Malay businessmen need to 'Ali Baba' with a Chinese businessmen.
Hence we need to see 'unholy alliances' between a Malays as well as Chinese. The Chinese have to assistance a Malays get in to energy as well as a Malays need to assistance a Chinese get commercial operation deals. The Chinese need to have have use of of their income to assistance a Malays get in to energy as well as a Malays need have have use of of their domestic energy to assistance a Chinese get commercial operation deals.
Money is a track to domestic energy as well as domestic energy is a track to making money. They both need eac! h other. One can't live without a other. This is so in America, in Japan, in Malaysia, as well as in many places in a world.
So it does not have a disproportion either it is Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat, usually similar to it does not have a disproportion either it is Islam or Christianity. Both Islam as well as Christianity apply a same 'logic' of arguing in circles. And both Barisan Nasional as well as Pakatan Rakyat need a same politics-business alliance formula to have it. Business fuels domestic energy as well as domestic energy fuels business. Whether in a United States, Japan or Malaysia, it is all a same.
So, yes, we do wish to see a two-party complement in Malaysia. So, yes, we do wish to see a statute celebration without omnipotence in Parliament as well as a clever antithesis which can keep a statute celebration in check. But we need a third force. We need an 'auditor'. We need a 'police' system. And this purpose contingency be played by us, a people, therakyat, a voters.
What is religion? Religion is a complement of mastery as well as control. Now, please, we repeat, greatfully do not plead this in a context of theology. Let us plead it in a context of history. Theology does not have sense. History does. So we do not wish to plead theology though history.
What was Jesus Christ's mission? Did Jesus deliver a brand new religion? Did Jesus tell his disciples, "God sent me to we so which we can deliver a brand new sacrament to humankind called Christianity"?
Jesus Christ's mission was to break down a complement of priests as well as temples, a eremite hierarchy, which was a domestic system. Jesus longed for to finish a mastery as well as carry out which a complement had over a people. The eremite complement was combined to carry out a people. And Jesus longed for to finish this carry out as well as give energy behind to a people. Before which energy was in a hands of a system.
Hence Jesus Christ was merely ! a leader of a reform movement, a domestic transformation of which time. And which was because they turned on him. Jesus was a threat to a domestic complement of priests as well as temples.
Then, 325 years later, a complement took behind this energy as well as what by afterwards was identified as Christianity again dominated as well as tranquil a people by a origination of a doctrine. And those who resisted were put to death so which eventually usually those who embraced a didactic discourse remained.
Islam went by this same routine 425 years after in 750. First a Umayyads grabbed energy in 661, twenty-nine years after a death of Muhammad. Then, a Abbasids ousted a Umayyads as well as grabbed power. Hence Islam went by a same routine which Christianity went by 425 years earlier. And to clear things, doctrines (such as Hadiths) were combined as well as those who resisted were killed off, usually similar to what happened in Christendom earlier.
In a finish it was all about domestic energy as well as carry out over a people. But in those days it was domestic energy by eremite doctrine. That was what encouraged Emperor Constantine in 325 as well as additionally what encouraged a Umayyads in 661 as well as a Abbasids in 750 -- domestic power.
So, how opposite is it today? Today we have Barisan Nasional as well as Pakatan Rakyat. In those days we had a Umayyads as well as Abbasids and, earlier, a Western as well as Eastern Roman Empires. The Abbasids combined doctrines to clear a ousting of a Umayyads as well as a Eastern Roman Empire combined doctrines to clear a ousting of a Western Roman Empire.
And is not Pakatan Rakyat additionally formulating 'doctrines' to clear a ousting of Barisan Nasional?
Ultimately, it was all about carry out as well as domestic power. It still is. So we contingency have certain which neither Barisan Nasional nor Pakatan Rakyat controls us. Instead, we contingency carry out them. And to do which we contingen! cy rejec t their doctrine. We need to confirm which doctrine.
And which is because politicians have been scared of people who have been independent-minded, usually similar to religionists are. If we have been independent-minded they cannot carry out us. And politics, usually similar to religion, is about carry out as well as power. In fact, sacrament is power, energy over a minds of a people. And is not politics a same?
So, let us demeanour during your arguments again.

'You skip a point, RPK'.
'Don't spin this in to a secular issue, RPK'.
'You need to demeanour during a large picture, RPK'.
'We need to focus, RPK'.
'We first need to change a government, RPK'.
'The crime in BN is many worse, RPK'.
'BN is racist, RPK'.
'What preference do we have? We have been oppressed for some-more than 50 years, RPK'.
'We have been not opposite a Malays, usually opposite a Umno Malays, RPK'.
'What do we expect? The Chinese have faced taste for some-more than 50 years, RPK'.
'Compare things with a Chinese-run Singapore or Penang as well as we can see a large difference, RPK'.
'When we had a Chinese Finance Minister similar to Tan Siew Sin things were many better, RPK'.
'The Chinese got abounding by tough work, RPK'.
'The Malays wish a shortcut to wealth, RPK'.
'Criticising a antithesis is assisting Barisan Nasional to stay in power, RPK'.
'You have been treacherous a voters, RPK'.
'We should speak about all this usually after Pakatan Rakyat takes over, RPK'.
'After Pakatan Rakyat takes over we can purify out a debase in Pakatan Rakyat, RPK'.
'If we do not support Pakatan afterwards we contingency be a Barisan stooge, RPK'.

What indicate is which which we have missed? What large picture? Foc! us on wh at?
What preference do we have? You have a choice, a preference to determine your own destiny.
You faced oppression as well as taste for 50 years? Who voted for a same celebration for 50 years?
No lah, stop justifying as well as raising sore excuses. You have been a victim of your own creation. Nobody did anything to you. You did all this to yourself. For thousands of years, people have authorised themselves to be manipulated, controlled, dominated, oppressed, suppressed, etc. They even combined sacrament as well as doctrines to legitimise it. And afterwards they roar blue murder.
we can't see a large picture? Yes, we can. The large design is really clear to me. It is about not giving anyone power. It is about taking behind power. It is about energy contingency be in a hands of a people.
Do we know what people similar to me have been called? They would call me an anarchist. Anarchists have been against to all forms of government. Anarchists have been opposite all forms of mastery as well as control. All governments have been bad. All forms of mastery as well as carry out have been bad. So we am an radical as well as unapproachable of it.
Read More @ Source



More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz

No comments: