/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15116507]

Some of U.G.'s criticisms of social movements are interesting. The Anti-Bomb movement is a good example. U.G. argues that the Bomb is only an extension of the structure which has created the need for the policeman. The policeman exists in order to protect my little property from perceived threats. The Bomb, in just the same way, exists in order to protect the collective property of a society or nation from perceived threats. I cannot consistently justify the need for the policeman and yet oppose the need for the Bomb. They go together. This was U.G.'s response to Bertrand Russell when he met him at a time during which Russell was actively involved in the Anti-Bomb movement.

[Anonymous No.15116516]

The ecological problem is another example. U.G. points out that the roots of the present ecological crisis lie in the Judeo-Christian belief that the human species is superior to other species because it alone was created for a grand purpose, and that, therefore, it had the privilege of dominating and using the rest of nature. Hinduism and Buddhism also share a variant of this belief, the idea that birth as a human being is the most precious and highest form of birth. It is believed that in order to attain enlightenment or moksha even the gods have to be reborn as human beings. U.G. completely rejects this belief in the special status and superiority of the human species. He observes that the human species is not created for any grander purpose than the mosquito or the garden slug is. Our erroneous belief in our own superiority has been used to justify our extermination of other species, and has led to the environmental problem. What is in question is not just the kind of technology and the economic system we have, but the structure of belief and values which drive the technology and the economic system.

[Anonymous No.15116524]

But the problem endangers us, not the planet. Nature can take care of itself. So it is absurd to talk of saving the earth or saving the planet. "We are in danger, not the planet," observes U.G. The problem has to be dealt with realistically in relation to the objective of meeting the basic needs of the population of the planet. He is quick to point out that Hollywood stars are only interested in promoting themselves and not the environment. The lifestyle of these stars is itself a contributing factor to the problem. Similarly, those who write books and articles criticizing the destruction of trees are also contributing to the problem because the paper for their books and articles comes at the expense of those very trees. U.G. does not see any justification for the publication of books in the age of the computer and the video-cassette. And he is absolutely right. U.G. also warns that the cause of the environment, like other religious and political causes, will be used to justify the persecution and destruction of individuals.

[Anonymous No.15116911]

[Anonymous No.15116959]

>>15116507
Yep he's very based.
Watch Jeremy England's lectures on YouTube to see why the Bomb is a natural extension of our purpose as living assemblages, to dissipate heat.

[Anonymous No.15116980]

>>15116959
you mean human extinction?

[Anonymous No.15116994]

whats u.g.'s thoughts on love and relationships
cant seem to keep a gf :(

[Anonymous No.15117034]

>>15116980
Nope. We've been firing off atomics for 80 years now, near continuously. Just because the technology has the capacity to kill us all, doesn't mean it will ever come close to doing it.

[Anonymous No.15117043]

>>15116994
Love is a meme, girlfriends are dumb bullshit.
Do what comes naturally. Fuck or don't. Hang around some girl or don't.

[Anonymous No.15117047]

>>15116994
You're not going to like what he had to say above love. He would recommend you to fuck though if you really need to.

U.G. is notorious for his response to the 60's slogan "Make love, not War". He retorts that making love is war! For U.G., love-making and war-making spring from the same source, the separative structure of thought. They both presuppose a division between the "self" and the "other". This is why U.G. does not take kindly to fashionable talk about "loving relationships". He points out that the search for relationships of any kind springs from a sense of isolation, an isolation created by the separative thought structure. What one wants is to fill the emptiness or void with someone. It is a process of self-fulfillment, self-gratification. But we are not honest enough to acknowledge this sordid truth. Instead, we invent fictions like "love" and "care" to deceive ourselves about the whole affair. When these fictions are blown away, what remains expresses itself in its own way. Then there may not be "others" to love or to be loved by.

[Anonymous No.15117053]

>>15117047
>>15116994
Watch this
https://youtube.com/watch?v=NomeI_cqWXs

[Anonymous No.15117061]

>>15117047
That's exactly what I just said here >>15117043

[Anonymous No.15117072]

>>15116994
https://youtube.com/watch?v=mSCoAKIJTdQ

[Anonymous No.15117151]

Seems he really THOUGHT a lot about what people should do

[Anonymous No.15117240]

>>15117047
but what if i do admit i just want a gf cause im lonely?

[Anonymous No.15117247]

>>15117240
Then go get it

[Anonymous No.15117255]

>>15117247
i[ve been trying bro. but they all lose interest once they figure out im just lonely and needy. man being a male sucks

[Anonymous No.15117404]

>>15117255
Best of luck