And when violence comes to be acted without the direction of the system of society or the state by lone individuals it then becomes illegal.
What is the hypocrisy of pragmaticism or utility within a society?
When a society as a collective does horrible things to individuals for it’s own personal gain it is called necessary pragmaticism.
When a individual by theirselves alone does horrible things to individuals for their own gain without what is thought to be a higher permission of authority they are sentenced to imprisonment or death.
Why is it that the pragmaticism of the collective is seen to be more important than the pragmaticism of the lone individual acting out of resentment or rage?
The pragmaticism of society is the exchange of skills for that of resources often enough utilizes malign behaviors of oppression, exploitation, extortion, hypocrisy, alienation, coercion, threats,inequality, slavery, and disenfrancisement which through that of law, government or legislation it justifies.
The pragmaticism of individuals involved in society who turn to rebellion or revolt by that of what is considered crime and social upheaval is merely a secondary reactionary stance to the malign entrapments of society’s own construction.
By understanding both parties motivation as being greed since greed itself is the motivation of survival, knowledge, reason and innovation we can come to understand this:
Just like Perspectivism is often used to defend any absurdity on the grounds that all perspectives are equally subjective and there is no truth, so now Pragmatism is used, on this board, to defend selfishness or subjectivity no the grounds that it is useful, without ever considering what makes something of use.
From the beginning I’ve stated that an opinion must rely on observable phenomena, all can experience, and that these opinions must be able to predict future phenomena.
Joker, if you go against the system, then you just have your work cut out for you. You attempt to replace the macrocosm with your microcosm.
Society doesn’t like this and society is strong. For example, what would a single individual replace the macrocosm with? Something stronger or weaker?
The current macrocosm has been battle-tested through centuries of warfare and it has survived … that’s respectable.
The question for you should not be how to abruptly change or destroy the current macrocosm, because it is nearly impossible, it wouldn’t be done so quickly.
The question for you should be: “how is it manipulated?” Information is controlled. If you follow the information, then you will see the Wizard of Oz hiding.
The machine itself is not magical; it’s actually rather simple.
