Comment: Unconvincing, hazardous Farrakhan's rhetoric

(See in situ)


Cyril's picture

Unconvincing, hazardous Farrakhan's rhetoric

Well, yes Dr. Ron Paul has been crying in the wild against the Federal Reserve SCAM for a while now, Mr. Farrakhan.

Thank you for noticing, eventually.

HOWEVER.

Well, I am also sorry about something else, people...

... I may not have been a contemporary of the first two, but I did do some homework for myself with the records I found on Martin Luther King Jr., Malcom X, and today's Farrakhan.

And here's what struck me and continues to speak the loudest to me, anyway:

the first, ONLY, Martin Luther King Jr., HAS vastly elaborated - thoroughly, very patiently, quietly, rationally, compassionately - on defending the rights FOR ANY AND ALL INDIVIDUALS, while the other two, Malcom X and Farrakhan, by the past and still in the present, have vastly focused - almost exclusively, soon or late - in opposing groups - the white man vs. the black man, the muslim vs. the zionists, the rich vs. the poor, you name it.

As long as we're stuck in this infinite loop of recognizing our supposed "allies" or debunking our supposed "foes" by seeing them in these or those groups... we won't have the cause of liberty progress a lot, if at all.

I DO NOT care - and I DO NOT condone, and even less endorse - that this or that group of people is being defended or opposed to, EVEN IF some groups arguably can or cannot be identified precisely. For this is only SUBJECTIVE AND MORAL ABSTRACTION BIAS.

What I DO CARE about is WHOEVER CLEARLY FOCUSES AND DEFENDS THE RIGHTS of the INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS - and EXCLUSIVELY those individuals'.

"Groups" are useful to classify THINGS. Or animals and other living things, maybe.

But they are not only mostly useless BUT ALSO ACTUALLY ESSENTIALLY HARMFUL as soon as it is about speaking on behalf of people's past or present "rights" or "martyr" - EITHER WAY.

And even for living thing which isn't human, consider this:

You can touch a living tree. You cannot touch the forest.

You CANNOT defend and protect EVERY SINGLE TREE unless YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT EVERY SINGLE TREE ONLY, and refrain from diverging towards speaking of the forest's "rights" or "interests".

You REALLY DON'T WANT to continue do the same error with people.

This is the ERROR AND INFAMY that we are ALREADY LIVING - every single freaking day OF OUR LIVES - for decades, if not more than a century, now.

Let us now try the true defense of liberty for the people's INDIVIDUALS. For good.

Just IMO.

Peace.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius