Humanity is most afraid of wisdom although it should be afraid of stupidity.. J.W Goethe

::::::::

Mark, I strongly believe in the non-aggression principle. This means   that aggression is never to be used against peaceful, non-violent
individuals. I am curious to know what your thoughts are about that? Is
it ever OK to use violence or threat of violence against non-violent,
peaceful people?

Let's say that you and your neighbor, John live on the same block. There
are 10 houses on the block. Out of the 10 houses, You and John are the
only 2 wealthy people who live there. The other 8 are all poor. Some
have families. They are all really struggling. Out of the kindness of
your heart, you decide to give some of your money and food to those
people to help them out. But, John does not. You go over to his house to
talk to him. You want to encourage him to also give money to the poor
people on your block. But he doesn't want to. Do you think it is OK for
you to use force against John in order to get him to help out? Is it OK
for you to put a gun to his head and demand that he give money to the
poor people on your block? Is it OK for you to put a gun to his head and
take his money and then distribute it to the others? Is it OK for you
to go to the poor people's houses and take a vote to determine if John
should help out? And he John refuses, is it OK to use violence against
John? 

The above is a comment   to me by a certain Mr. F who strongly believes in you can see what. Mr. F apparently    considers that people like me will aggressively  (if   the situation permits) extract   wealth from the poor Johns above and he   hereby asked   me in his comment if his worries could be justified.    I strongly believe in satisfying  deep cravings, so   yes,   Sir, Mr. F,   in the situation you had described anything is possible because, unfortunately, it is a false situation from top to bottom.

Let's first start with the    perceptions. Mr. F. here describes only two groups of people: wealthy and poor. There are no     others. In fact, in his description those people do not possess any other qualities. They do not have faces. They do not have lives. They are abstract categories. That tells us   actually   about the universe many people here live in;   they divide the world in only two categories: wealthy and poor. Wealthy people have a right to make live decisions, to   have a good heart or bad heart, to   help others or not, to   be aggressive or not, etc.   Poor people   have no such right. They exist on that street , but only I and   John, the   two wealthy folks   are alive   for Mr. F.   I wonder if he noticed   the grotesque of his own description.

Furthermore, the STREET reminds of SmallVille; nothing is beyond. There are wealthy people and poor people there as a given. How did that happen? Did I or John   do business on that street? How did we somehow    end as the ONLY two wealthy families there?   Did we decide to live on the poor street or did the poor decide to live   close   to us? Do we know them? Do they know us?   Did   we fall on that street from the outer space, the wealthy   aliens, and now one   of us wants to share that wealth and another does not?    Who pays   for our existence, for our safety, for our power, for our water? And again, what do those poor people do? Nothing? Or maybe they just   earn less then us, significantly   less then us but they work,   they pay taxes, they   live every day in the same pursuit of happiness   as us? Mr. F. does not care. He   is afraid   of the aggression   against John. Mind you, not    the poor people, he is afraid   of. John can protect himself from the poor with guns and police (BTW, police people   are not   that wealthy either). Yes, Mr. F.   knows   whom he should be afraid of. He is afraid of the people who   like me   could question the   status --quo and   demand   accountability; the people who also could have means to exercise that perception,   the ones who have wealth and know how to use   it, but also have a   heart. Such people he fears.   Even for a moment he does not consider that he or John or me could also be a part of the poor folk.   He does not consider that there could be any   unjustified aggression towards them.   He does not consider that if John, for   instance   had decided to get rid of all of us on the street by, say, polluting the wells through fracking, that's aggression pure and simple and we have to defend ourselves. In fact, if John or Mr. F. consider that due to their wealth they can do harm to humans,   the way the GOP does now or   that they can   pretend that   everyone is for himself as soon as that does not include them, like Ron Paul preaches - that's a blatant aggression of parasitism and   yes, then Mr. F should be worried a lot. Parasites are to be worried, sorry.

And now one   more thing. We do not   live   on some street   of   wealthy and poor. We live under the same   Sun, breath the   same air and we live among the people.   Today I can be wealthy and tomorrow I can be poor and to prevent the Hell on Earth I would   advise to somehow   make sure   that   I and other people could survive and still   live reasonably well   if the worst   happens. That excludes   greed and stupidity. But most of all it excludes indifference   and   blatant selfishness , like 'leave me alone.'    What happens with those who are left alone we know all too well.   Stray bullets kill them.   Nobody can afford to   ignore other people these days. So, John, you better take  a good   look   at your street while you still have a chance and it is not on fire. We all should. Then maybe we should understand   that our wealth only makes sense as a part of wealth of all Humanity.

Authors Bio:

The writer is 67 years old, semi- retired engineer, PhD, PE. I write fiction on a regular basis and I am also 10 years on OEN.