[MD] Emotions' place?

[skutvik at online.no]

Christoffer

27 Oct. u wrote:

> >  Chris use of "reactionary" is way off, he ought to know the
> > difference between the left/right spectrum within democratic/
> > parliamentary rules and the real reactionary despotism/fascism.
 
> Oh, and by the way Bo, I think you are wrong here. Because as I have
> said before, democracy and all that good stuff doesn't really mean
> anything. It's just words.

What's not "just words" if you start on the language trail? 

> And unless people reflect upon these things with reason it is just
> another social pattern. 

There is no "people" or "man" in the MOQ. Read LILA! It's quite 
hilarious how this point evades understanding and how easily one slips 
back into a somish view the MOQ where where words resides (in this 
case "democracy") at the intellectual level, while the patterns that the 
words refers to belongs at the social level (the first "matterish" level in 
such a quasi MOQ).    

> That's why democratic countries elect racist governments, and that's
> why democracies go to war because of paranoia and greed and stuff like
> that. The intellectual level - reason for the sake of this argument -
> hasn't won. Sure institutions have been created that makes it easier
> for the intellectual level to fight against the social one, but they
> doesn't mean ANYTHING unless they really work to make people more ruled
> by the intellectual level than the social one. The battle can only be
> won in peoples minds. And that battle is far from won. 

If not the SOM-MOQ premise shift is understood from the outset, so 
many assertions can be made in the name of the MOQ, but really 
being SOM, and these we may discuss until blue in the face without 
any progress. 

Bodvar