Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl00689)

At 05:00 PM 4/17/96 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>cut<<<<<<
>	Alexis, I agree with you.  However, we are in the minority
>on this one.

Jerry, That's clearly true. But it doesn't mean we're the one's who are
mistaken.
>
>>>>>>>>cut<<<<<<
>	This is the point I have been trying to make for about 3 years now.

Now you have an ally and we'll try together for three or more years till we
finally get someone else to agree with us.
>
>>>>>>cut<<<<<<
>	Hitler's intent was to help the majority at the expense of the minority.
>Perhaps a better way is to first consider "...if it harm none."

It certainly is a "better way to consider", but, of course, Hitler didn't
really care about "harming none", of course his first task was to utterly
dehumanize those who he intended to harm. He succeeded. But as I continually
have said since about 1945 when I first visited a Concentration Camp, all
the Germans, who were Hitler's contemporaries, are almost equally guilty.
Some for active collaboration but most for passive acquiesence. "An it harm
none" is one of the twomost important things Aleister Crowley ever taught,
it's a shame it gets ignored all too frequently while his nonsense doesn't.
>

>	Right.  This is the difference between the higher and lower stages
>of Kohlberg's moral developmental stages.
>
>	Jerry S.
>	Member, TI
>
>alexis dolgorukii, member TI, FTSA