Two Types of People

We may have a war. The first truly World War. For the first time, both our information technologies and our "force projection" abilities fully encompass the entire world. And, the combatants are apparently inextricably enmeshed with each other.

One side cherishes life. The other cherishes death. One or the other may temporarily win in this conflict. This is an eons old conflict. It has found expression by some in unusual ways.

A recent spokesperson for the United Nations has stated that we may be facing a conflict between two differing "mind sets." Those who view "diversity" as a threat, and those who view "diversity" as a boon. He also uses the differences between "Confucian" and "Western" philosophies as a backdrop for this comparison.

An economist, Milton Friedman, has stated that there are two kinds of people in the world; those who are free and independent and refuse to be told what to do and how to live versus those people who insist that they have the right to tell everyone else what to do. He notes that this conflict has existed throughout recorded history, has never been resolved, and ALWAYS results in bloodshed. In the early nineties, he noted that he thought this conflict was about to come to a head.

And finally a recently deceased editor and founder of "Astounding Science Fiction" magazine once wrote a series of essays that expounded on the concept of there being two differing kinds of human beings, those who were "Tribal," and those who were "Barbaric." But, because of the differing emotional context that people bring to those words, he had to specifically define them, because one man’s tribe might be considered another man's barbarian.

To him, a "Tribe" was a "group think" type of organization that would not allow diversity or dissent, and had three distinct characteristics. They are 1. Change of any type is taboo. 2. Each individual human is unimportant, only the survival of the "group" as a whole has any value. and 3. The "Group" has all the "answers" to any question one may ask.

To him, a "Barbarian" was a "free thinking and doing" individualist. To this type of human, change was a constant, to submit to another was a form of slavery, and answers to questions were things to be learned.

And, Mr. Campbell, the editor, pointed out that these two types of humans "despise" each other. It is a visceral reaction. The Tribal human views the barbarian as uncouth, uncontrolled and filthy in its habits and morals. The Barbarian human views the tribal person as a stupid, docile slave, not strong enough or worthy enough to be allowed to survive in a tough world. And then, Mr. Campbell makes an astounding possible discovery.

Whether a human has a predisposition to tribalism, or barbarianism, may (just MAY, as there are no scientific studies on this yet) be genetic. It may be "hard wired" into each of us. Those of us who are "afraid" of diversity, and want someone "else" to tell us what the right thing to do is may not be able to help it. It may be in our genes. And for those of us who demand the right to be left to our own devices, it may be in our genes too.

So those of us who are "free", who think everyone else in the world wants to be "free" too, may be wrong. There are people out there who cannot be that way. They won’t be that way. And not only will they fight to the death for their "group," they will also attempt to "force" everyone to join their "group", or be killed.

And that, my friends, is what this current new "World War" is really about. This is the root, the core of the conflict. It is between two kinds of humans, and it has never been, nor may it ever be totally resolved. Why? Because most of you out there, who are of a propensity to be one type or the other, don’t even recognize this either in yourself, or in your opponent. If you are of one identifiable type, you can’t even comprehend how anyone can be of the "other type." And no solution is ever presented to possibly "resolve" a conflict that almost all of you don’t even recognize exists. Wars to exterminate each other has been the only solution throughout history, and it is what we are about to embark on today.

And be advised, since this will be an all out world encompassing war for extermination, I absolutely do not intend to be the one exterminated. Take that any way you want.

And to those of you who will fight while you don’t know what is really going on, you have my sympathy. And as George Patton said, It is not my intention to die for my country or way of life, it is my intention to make the other bastards die for theirs.

PHILOSOPHY PING

(If you want on or off this list please freepmail me.)

I personally do not agree that that there is a genetic 'hard-wired" difference in people, as Mr. Campbell supposes, but I do think there are two kinds of people, different by choice, and that they are totally incompatible.

One kind really loves freedom, the kind of true freedom that means one is totally responsible for themselves, answering to no one else, surviving or perishing, succeeding or failing entirely by their own efforts and merit.

The other kind really despises freedom though they profess to love it, but what they mean by freedom is freedom from responsibility in exchange for security. They enjoy freedom, so long is they do not feel threatened in any way, but the moment they suspect they are inadequate or something is too difficult for them, they will throw all freedom away to secure the assurance that even if they screw up their life, it will still be OK.

Between these two kinds of people there really never can be any agreement, because, while the first kind is perfectly willing to allow the second kind to surrender their freedom to anyone or anything they choose, so long is they leave the freedom lover alone, the second kind cannot abide to see anyone who is truly free, especially if they are successful, because it puts the lie to everything they believe.

[Note: I call the first type individualists. I will call the second type non-individualists to avoid the loaded but correct term, collectivist.]

The following is a list of some people I believe were individualists. I do not think they were all consistently individualist, but within the context of their knowledge and the society they lived in they were:

Individualists:

Leonardo da Vinci
Voltaire
George Bernard Shaw (I know Shaw was a Fabian, but it was shaw who said, "Freedom means responsibility. That is why most men dread it." Personally, he was an individualist.
Rudyard Kipling
Oscar Wilde
Benjamin Franklin
Samuel Adams
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Paine
Henry David Thoreau
Thomas A. Edison
Mark Twain
H.L. Mencken
Albert Camus
Ayn Rand

Here are my questions:

1. Do you agree with the thesis? 2. Are you an individualist or non-individualist? 3. In the list above, do you agree that they all were individualists? Whom would you add/subtract from the list? Hank

LINK HERE.

Are You a Larry, Curly or Moe?

As Found in the Chapter 10 "Weird Politics" Introduction in High Weirdness by Mail

by Rev. Ivan Stang.

==============================================

There are three kinds of people -- I call them Larrys, Curlys, and Moes. The Larrys don't even know that there are three types; if they're told, it's an abstraction, because they cannot imagine anything beyond Larry-ness. The Curlys know about it, and recognize it as a pecking order, but find ways of living with it cheerfully...for they are the imaginative, creative ones. The Moes not only know about it, but exploit and perpetuate it.

Among the listees in this book 1 , the naive, pleasant New Agers and "nice" UFO contactees, for instance, are Larrys (as are normals at large)--ineffectual, well-meaning do-gooders destined always to be victims, often without once guessing their status. Like sheep, they don't want to hear the unpleasant legends about "the slaughterhouse"; they trust the strange two-legged beings who feed them. The artists, unsung scientific geniuses, political writers, and earnest disciples of the stranger cults are Curlys--engaging, original, accident-prone but full of life, and intuitively aware of the Moe forces plotting against them and trying to fight back. They can never defeat the Moes, however, without becoming Moes, which is impossible for a true Curly. The Moes, then, are the fanatics, the ranters, the cult gurus, the Uri Gellers AND the Debunkers; they are the Resistance Leaders and the Ruling Class Bankers, both. They hate each other, but only because they want to control ALL the Larrys and Curlys themselves. They don't actually enjoy their dominance; it's simply part of their nature. Nor are they any less foolish for the fact that they make the decisions. They suffer a chronic paranoia that is unknown to their less demanding underlings. Larrys and Curlys die in wars started by rival Moes--the Larrys willingly, the Curlys with great regret. Concepts like "Hell" and "Sin" were invented by Moes to keep Larrys in line; the Larrys, in turn, being far more numerous, exert social pressures on the Curly minority to also obey...mainly so the Larrys won't feel like suckers.

The Moes also invent myths, like that of the "Grouchos, Harpos, Chicos, and Zeppos," to throw the more rebellious Curlys off their trail and keep them unsure of the real situations.*

I am a Moe, though not a particularly powerful one; that is why I know these things, and it is also why I dare to tell you -- for most of you will think it's just a funny joke. A few will know it is the truth, but will fight far harder against my Moe enemies than you will against me, a relatively harmless Moe. My fellow Moes--enemies and uneasy SubGenius allies alike--will know what I'm REALLY saying, and chuckle in appreciation while plotting my downfall. In vain. ALL in VAIN, boy...

1 High Weirdness by Mail, by Rev. Ivan Stang, 1988, a Fireside Book, published by Simon & Schuster, Inc., New York, NY.

* When the Curly's finally die of overwork, the Moes find that they cannot live in an all-Larry world; they select special Larrys and vainly try to mold them into False Curlys...but it isn't the same.

==============================================

This is from High Weirdness by Mail, p. 156-7, by Rev. Ivan Stang. Copyright © 1988 by Rev. Ivan Stang. All Rights Reserved. Used without permission. Any use of copyrighted material or trademarks in this file should not be viewed as a challenge to those copyrights or trademarks, but rather as an attempt to promote the product or copyright in question.

This is an excellent book, even if slightly out of date. From the back cover: "You can get "Free stuff for Weirdos!!...Do you enjoy getting unspeakably weird things in the mail? Then have we got a hobby for you!" Categories include Weird Science; UFO Contactees; Jesus Contactees; More Weird Religions; Health and Self-Improvement $chemes and $cams; New Age Saps; Cosmic Hippie Stuff; Respectable Weird Publications; Great Catalogs; Religion Vs. Religion; Weird Politics: Left, Right and Off the Map; Groups You Love to Hate; "Funny" Clubs; Weird Art; Rantzines; Comics; Great Badfilm and Sleaze; The Cassette Revolution and Edge Music.

Note: to the best of my knowledge, the copyright is no longer valid on the Three Stooges picture. If anyone has evidence otherwise, please let me know immediately.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.