[MD] Shouldn?t we be, like, revolting ?

[Andre Broersen]

Thank you for this David, it is helping me to untangle some of my thoughts
and getting these into a MoQ way of thinking. But I keep pouring over these
pages in Lila (pp224-225, Bantham Hardcover ed.)
I was brought up in an SOM world, a capitalist world and didn't like it
much...I felt there should be more...human/social quality. Now I am enjoying
the opportunity of experiencing a socialist world ( ok, I do this as an
outsider and will always be considered and treated as such) but my many
conversations with colleagues and students tell me that there should be
more..., not only for me ( I can leave anytime,they cannot) but for them,
they are the same patterns as us in terms of hopes and dreams and feelings
and opportunities and freedoms [of movement, speech, initiative,creativity
etc]),But they are not allowed to act on these.
In the MoQ every level is open to DQ, some act accordingly and others do not
( at the in/organic levels that choice is spontaneous,  random/
unpredictable... towards "better")
However,when we reach the social/ intellectual level it appears to me that
intellect decides what is good and not on behalf of a great number of
people. In other words it decides what QE's (quality events) are allowable
and which are not allowable to be acted upon. The problem that I see is that
this decision is restricted by one overarching, dominant ideology (ie static
intellectual patterns) in my example : a socialist ideology given a morally
higher status within the MoQ. Has it to do with the Giant (as Pirsig calls
it) not bothering about a few bodies here and there to reach its aims? And
is this morally correct?
Is this SOM thinking or do I not understand Pirsig correctly?

Still wandering..Andre