Thank you for your reply!
With that context, I understand much better what you mean.
Scott wrote: ↑January 23rd, 2021, 9:37 pmPolitical philosophy mostly only interests me to the extent that it acts as an analogue for my spiritual philosophy of spiritual freedom. For instance, self-government can act as an analogue of self-discipline, and self-employment can act as an analogue of both of self-government and self-discipline.
Primarily, the authorities and enslavements I seek to firmly, stubbornly, and defiantly reject are much more than merely petty political ones. I suspect generally only those people who are way too attached to the material world of the flesh could care very much about the topical human politics of a sliver of time on a tiny planet in an endless sky.
Generally speaking, I consider the concept of "making the world a better place" to be a dangerous superstitious notion. A similar thing people often say, when "getting their hands dirty" (e.g. committing aggressive violence such as murder, rape, or slavery), is that the are doing it "for the greater good". Sometimes they will even say to the actual victims of violence, "this is for your own good". Indeed, that latter case is the epitome of violent nanny statism.
One needn't be Jesus to completely and utterly reject all of that as dangerous violence-conducive superstition. One needn't be Jesus to refuse to commit non-consensual non-defensive violence (e.g. murder, rape, slavery, etc.). One needn't be Jesus to choose to not be a murderer or rapist.
In contrast, one who believes the ends can 'justify' the means, with the ultimate end being something superstitious like "making the world a better place" or such, then such a person can rationalize any means no matter how brutal or violent.
So, no; In that sense, I think one absolutely does not have to "get their hands dirty". You don't have to commit severe non-consensual non-defensive violence (e.g. murder, rape, slavery, etc).
You choose to, or at least you can.
One chooses to.
Or, one chooses not to.
For more on those subjects, please do see my other topics below related to the superstition of 'justice'/'morality' and of the dangers of violent nanny statism.
Topics on Violent Nanny Statism and "Getting One's Hand Dirty" for the alleged 'Greater Good':
- Orwellian Agent-Smithism | How Control Freaks, God Complexes, And Violent Nanny Statism Attack Freedom and Diversity
- Dangerous Moral Busybodies | "A tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive."
- All the do-gooders are troublemakers: A plague of virtuous people | A perfectly pestiferous mass of a million saints
- Friends, I ask you to oppose all non-consensual non-defensive violence, even when it's legal or done by your own government.
Related subjects: "the ends justify the means"; "two wrongs make a right"; "the lesser of two evils"; and violent utilitarianism.
Topics on the Superstition of Justice/Morality/Shouldness/Oughtness:
- A World Blinded by Sadistic Anger | How the dangerous superstition of justice leads to aggressive violence and misery
- An elaboration on how judgemental moralizing and the superstition of 'moral law' infringes on free-spirited inner peace
- What the word "evil" means to me, and why I believe evil (as I use the term) does not exist.
- There is no "Is-Ought Problem" because there is no 'ought'.
- I lovingly and deeply pity those who think unchangeable reality "ought" to be different than it unchangeably is.
Of course, my book, In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All, makes the stronger, more convincing, more efficient-to-read, and more agreeable case for all of the above, in part since I worked on the book for over 5 years and employed multiple paid professionals to help craft, edit, and refine it. So the book gives the reader much more value per-word-read than any of my posts here on these forums could ever come close to doing, alone or in combination.