The Revolutionary Society

Manu wrote:

MadHatter wrote:

Manu wrote:

MadHatter wrote:

Khaos wrote:

edi are not called to lead from the front, at least from my interpretation of this passage. We lead by example, by uplifting others, by building up each other and those who seek us out.

How are you going to be an example from the back?

Ask the teachers and tutors of men like Marcus Aurelius or Alexander the Great. The teachers and tutors were most assuredly behind their pupils when it came to rank and authority.

So you would rather be the teacher of Alexander the Great rather than Alexander the Great. Why?

Because when I was in the military I have had leadership and authority and I loath it. A teacher passes on wisdom but rarely gives commands never mind giving orders that could costs lives needlessly. To have that power is not something I want. Its risks and the costs involved on a personal level and on a wider level if you mess up far outweigh any benefits to me. Nor do I think myself wise enough to rule nations. I am barely wise enough to rule over my cats and even that is a debate on who is in charge.

Say I don't want the responsibility of making big world-changing decisions. Isn't teaching the one who does how to do it a huge responsibility in itself? I might be mistaken, but your point seems to be based on the fear of assuming responsibility.

Fear? No, not fear I just know its not for me. I do not have the stomach to send men to their death and that is something any leader on a national level will likely at some point have to do. Nor do I believe myself wise enough to make decisions for entire nations. Being a teacher is simply passing on what wisdom you do have to your student and doing it the best you can. A teacher's level of responsibility is large but not on the same scale as a world leader. I am a squad leader at best because then I am working with my men not giving orders to entire armies. A president or general these days gives commands from the rear while overseeing entire fronts of a war. That is indeed leading from the rear.

Silas Mercury wrote: Jedi aren't a race, and please point out the part about an evil race.

well you dont claim jedi are a race thats true, but you seem to have the assumption that "jedi" are just morally superior to non-jedi, and that assumption is cut from the same cloth as the assumption of racial supremacy, because at heart it is just blind faith that your own group is better than all the other groups out there

as for the "evil race" youve identified, thats no mystery lol




if you want to understand people and situations, you have to look at them very specifically, and judge them from their own contexts; you cant let sweeping generalizations be the source of your conclusions about specific instances (well you can but your conclusions wont be accurate)

OB1Shinobi wrote:

Silas Mercury wrote: Jedi aren't a race, and please point out the part about an evil race.

well you dont claim jedi are a race thats true, but you seem to have the assumption that "jedi" are just morally superior to non-jedi, and that assumption is cut from the same cloth as the assumption of racial supremacy, because at heart it is just blind faith that your own group is better than all the other groups out there

as for the "evil race" youve identified, thats no mystery lol

Warning: Spoiler!

Silas Mercury wrote: Here's what Michael Moore has to say: (from Stupid White Men)
* Who gave us the black plague? A white guy.
* Who invented PBC, PVC, PBB, and a host of chemicals that are killing us? White guys.
* Who has started every war America has been in? White men.
* Who is responsible for the programming on FOX? White men.
* Who invented the punch card ballot? A white man.
* Whose idea was it to pollute the world with the internal combustion engine? Whitey, that's who.
* The Holocaust? That guy really gave white people a bad name (that's why we prefer to call him a Nazi and his little helpers Germans).
* The genocide of Native Americans? White man.
* Slavery? Whitey!
* About 20 percent of young black men between the ages of sixteen and twenty- four are neither in 'school nor working- compared with only 9 percent of young white men. Despite the "economic boom" of the nineties, this percentage has not fallen substantially over the last ten years.
* In 1993, white households had invested nearly three times as much in stocks and mutual funds and/or IRA and Keogh accounts as black households. Since then, the stock market has more than doubled its value.
* Black heart attack patients are far less likely than whites to undergo cardiac catheterization, a common and potentially lifesaving procedure, regardless of the race of their doctors. Black and white doctors together referred white patients for catheterization about 40 percent more often than black patients.
* Whites are five times more likely than blacks to receive emergency clot-busting treatment for stroke.
* Black women are four times more likely than white women to die while giving birth.
* Black levels of unemployment have been roughly twice those of whites since 1954.

Every time they catch a serial killer, it's a crazy white guy. Every time a terrorist blows up a federal building, or a madman gets four hundred people to drink Kool-Aid, or a Beach Boys songwriter casts a spell causing half a dozen nymphets to murder "all the piggies" in the Hollywood Hills, you know it's a member of the white race up to his old tricks.

if you want to understand people and situations, you have to look at them very specifically, and judge them from their own contexts; you cant let sweeping generalizations be the source of your conclusions about specific instances (well you can but your conclusions wont be accurate)

Han Solo: Where did you dig up that old fossil ?!

MadHatter wrote: Fear? No, not fear I just know its not for me. I do not have the stomach to send men to their death and that is something any leader on a national level will likely at some point have to do. Nor do I believe myself wise enough to make decisions for entire nations. Being a teacher is simply passing on what wisdom you do have to your student and doing it the best you can. A teacher's level of responsibility is large but not on the same scale as a world leader. I am a squad leader at best because then I am working with my men not giving orders to entire armies. A president or general these days gives commands from the rear while overseeing entire fronts of a war. That is indeed leading from the rear.

If the teacher is wise enough to teach the world leader, why would he not be wise enough to lead the world himself?

Silas Mercury wrote: No, I mean a person who has worked hard all their ljfe and deserves the post, not some posh dude who studied economics.

So.....the UN?

Manu wrote:
If the teacher is wise enough to teach the world leader, why would he not be wise enough to lead the world himself?

Well, I for one don't think such vast amounts of wisdom are contained within one person nor do I think such a person would desire to lead the world if they were so wise.

here is something you might consider Silas: if white men really are naturally disposed towards racism and bigotry, and you were born white male, shouldnt you be extra careful about your own tendency towards becoming a racist and a bigot?

just because youve turned your racism and bigotry towards the race that you were born into, doesnt make it less racist and bigoted

youve still hit the same button, psychologically, which is the desire to place personal judgment and blame on individuals based on their demographics and not on their personal histories, for situations that were outside of their personal control

Manu wrote:

MadHatter wrote: Fear? No, not fear I just know its not for me. I do not have the stomach to send men to their death and that is something any leader on a national level will likely at some point have to do. Nor do I believe myself wise enough to make decisions for entire nations. Being a teacher is simply passing on what wisdom you do have to your student and doing it the best you can. A teacher's level of responsibility is large but not on the same scale as a world leader. I am a squad leader at best because then I am working with my men not giving orders to entire armies. A president or general these days gives commands from the rear while overseeing entire fronts of a war. That is indeed leading from the rear.

If the teacher is wise enough to teach the world leader, why would he not be wise enough to lead the world himself?

A person can be an amazing teacher of rhetoric or military history but maybe not both. Or he could teach both but not have the hardness of spirit it takes to kill or send men to their deaths and stay sane. I mean at some point someone taught Barack Obama US History does that make that person qualified to run the US?

Jamie Stick wrote:

Manu wrote:
If the teacher is wise enough to teach the world leader, why would he not be wise enough to lead the world himself?

Well, I for one don't think such vast amounts of wisdom are contained within one person nor do I think such a person would desire to lead the world if they were so wise.

I agree. I am not implying there should be a one-world theocrat. I'm just runing with the original analogy of a teacher not being responsible for the students he produces.

MadHatter wrote: I mean at some point someone taught Barack Obama US History does that make that person qualified to run the US?

You can't quite compare modern education and Obama's history teacher with ancient education and Aristotle providing one on one tutoring to Alexander.

Manu wrote:

MadHatter wrote: I mean at some point someone taught Barack Obama US History does that make that person qualified to run the US?

You can't quite compare modern education and Obama's history teacher with ancient education and Aristotle providing one on one tutoring to Alexander.

Even in the days of one on one tutoring, most leaders had more than one teacher and for a reason.

Edit:

I mean do you think Aristotle taught Alexander how to use a sword or military tactics? No he taught him HOW to think.

MadHatter wrote:

Manu wrote:

MadHatter wrote: I mean at some point someone taught Barack Obama US History does that make that person qualified to run the US?

You can't quite compare modern education and Obama's history teacher with ancient education and Aristotle providing one on one tutoring to Alexander.

Even in the days of one on one tutoring, most leaders had more than one teacher and for a reason.

Edit:

I mean do you think Aristotle taught Alexander how to use a sword or military tactics? No he taught him HOW to think.

I think this whole back and forth is straying to far from what I originally was setting out to ask:

MadHatter wrote:

Khaos wrote:

Jedi are not called to lead from the front, at least from my interpretation of this passage. We lead by example, by uplifting others, by building up each other and those who seek us out.

How are you going to be an example from the back?

Ask the teachers and tutors of men like Marcus Aurelius or Alexander the Great. The teachers and tutors were most assuredly behind their pupils when it came to rank and authority.

It seems to me, from this quote above, that it is implied our role is to never be at the front, but work from behind the scenes. My question is very simple: why?

Why ?? Because our leaders are too scared to step up and take a role on the world stage. We should lead from the front, tbe middle, the back, make sure nobody is left behind, and we will achieve what we are capable of, instead of "encouraging" others to do things we could get done a lot quicker.

Manu wrote:

MadHatter wrote:

Manu wrote:

MadHatter wrote: I mean at some point someone taught Barack Obama US History does that make that person qualified to run the US?

You can't quite compare modern education and Obama's history teacher with ancient education and Aristotle providing one on one tutoring to Alexander.

Even in the days of one on one tutoring, most leaders had more than one teacher and for a reason.

Edit:

I mean do you think Aristotle taught Alexander how to use a sword or military tactics? No he taught him HOW to think.

I think this whole back and forth is straying to far from what I originally was setting out to ask:

MadHatter wrote:

Khaos wrote:

Jedi are not called to lead from the front, at least from my interpretation of this passage. We lead by example, by uplifting others, by building up each other and those who seek us out.

How are you going to be an example from the back?

Ask the teachers and tutors of men like Marcus Aurelius or Alexander the Great. The teachers and tutors were most assuredly behind their pupils when it came to rank and authority.

It seems to me, from this quote above, that it is implied our role is to never be at the front, but work from behind the scenes. My question is very simple: why?

That is my opinion because that is how I read the creed and the code. Jedi do not seek leadership we guide if asked and if pushed into it,they assume such roles reluctantly. Those that seek power are often the most unfit for it.

Silas Mercury wrote: Why ?? Because our leaders are too scared to step up and take a role on the world stage. We should lead from the front, tbe middle, the back, make sure nobody is left behind, and we will achieve what we are capable of, instead of "encouraging" others to do things we could get done a lot quicker.

So you are calling people whom you know little of cowards because they do not do what YOU think they should? Yet you claim the title Jedi? I'm sorry but nowhere have I ever seen ideas that I would call Jedi in nature that seem so arrogant and judgemental of others that do not believe or act a particular way.

Quicker is not necessarily better.

Manu wrote:

MadHatter wrote:

Khaos wrote:

Jedi are not called to lead from the front, at least from my interpretation of this passage. We lead by example, by uplifting others, by building up each other and those who seek us out.

How are you going to be an example from the back?

Ask the teachers and tutors of men like Marcus Aurelius or Alexander the Great. The teachers and tutors were most assuredly behind their pupils when it came to rank and authority.

It seems to me, from this quote above, that it is implied our role is to never be at the front, but work from behind the scenes. My question is very simple: why?

Our Doctrine has a few things to say about this:



A Jedi will be where the Force guides him to be. In some cases we may be the best to lead the charge from the front, but often we can be of greater service in another capacity. Every action we take will influence the world, and it is our duty as Jedi to recognize which action will be most beneficial to others and then ourselves. It is not about being in the front or the back, but being in the place where you can do the most good.

And I do recognize my limitations. And I'm ready to test them.

Senan wrote: Every action we take will influence the world, and it is our duty as Jedi to recognize which action will be most beneficial to others and then ourselves. It is not about being in the front or the back, but being in the place where you can do the most good.

This I agree with it. It feels completely different from being relegated only to the back.

And you know the place from where we can do good ??

THE FRONT !!!!

Don't forget the dimension of time!!! The best leader might be from the past, and the best student from the future :S
Or did I get that backwards!?

lol you're funny silas.