[Apollia]

Originally Posted by Ecce Homo

My take:

Victims believe that other people are responsible for their happiness. Victims believe that other people have actual authority to determine their destiny. Victims believe that they are weak and powerless. Victims believe in the efficacy of complaining and dramatizing their endless sufferings at the hands of the almighty other. Ironically, in their own way, victims can even become violent in their demands on others.

Now turn that entire paragraph into its exact opposite to get a feel for what responsible people might believe.

Responsible people believe that their happiness rests entirely on their own shoulders. Responsible people believe that the final decision making authority in their life is in their own hands. Responsible people believe that they are strong and powerful. Responsible people believe in the power of optimism and focus their attention on finding ways to overcome whatever challenges they face. And by owning their power, responsible people believe in the wisdom of cooperation and the “win-win” strategy of relating to themselves and others.

The victim response to life is maladaptive. The “responsible response” is just that: an effective way of answering life.

In some ways, I agree. I guess part of the problems I see with discussions about victims in general just boils down to semantics.

A person who is a victim of, for instance, a crime, is a victim whether they like it or not. It's an objective fact, the crime happened to them and there's no way to undo it (unless time travel or something is a possibility) - therefore the person is a victim.

Unfortunately for victims, the word "victim" in some social circles is almost a pejorative, a put-down. It can imply weakness and irresponsibility.

But, anyone who is victimized could react either in the weak "victim" manner or the more strong "responsible" manner you described. (Or, I would hope, a more realistic, less extreme perspective, which doesn't regard either oneself or others as being unrealistically far more or far less powerful than they really are).

Originally Posted by ticktockclok

Thanks for the response Apollonia, lots of stuff for me to chew on.

You're welcome.

The thing is, I don't feel at all depressed.

Good to hear it.

I feel like I will do whatever it takes to eliminate the state with no compromises, and very quickly. Even when friends look at me like I'm nuts, it doesn't deter me. My family largely used to think I'm nuts, but I guess repeat exposure to me has gotten them to agree with my ideas. It helps me see that the same kind of thing can work on the world, but I've got to figure out how to show people libertarianism on a mass scale.

Well, I can understand why you'd want to get rid of the state, but, anarchy has always seemed a bit extreme to me. I also don't see how it could last long. If everyone was free to do as they wished, certain people, groups, tribes, marauding thugs would likely end up banding together and amassing a lot of power and creating new states just through brute force methods (similar to the Vikings or any other conquerors). Warfare would likely become even more common, and possibly feudal systems complete with lords and serfs would arise again, and who knows what other historical monstrosities (like religious inquisitions, etc.) might run amok again.

I think after a period of anarchy, other oppressive states, tyrants, etc. would almost inevitably arise, and many people might end up being subjected to more and worse coercion under worse systems than they are presently under the rule of relatively nice democratic states, which at least make attempts at balances of power, and at least pay lip service to ideals of freedom, fairness, etc.

Not trying to argue, just speaking my mind a bit.

I agree with the article I cited though that nearly every person in the world is a victim of the state.

I agree.

Perhaps the victim in this article and the victim as in "oh, my life sucks" are two different uses of the word.

I agree with this too.

I'm wondering exactly what intentions I would have to release to facilitate the elimination of the state, and help me find more opportunities to help end the state. Exactly what beliefs and intentions would be helpful for me? I'm going to think about this long and hard on my own, but would appreciate any more advice.Right now, I'm not up to arguing over politics, so please leave that to the world affairs forum.

Well... maybe an intention for clarity, greater insight into what is likely to happen if states cease to exist.

Much as I wish human beings would be much nicer than they are, I don't have enough faith in humanity to believe that things wouldn't turn very ugly very fast if we had anarchy.

Before taking any drastic actions I think it's always good to question whether it would really help or only make things worse.

Maybe a more general intention like for the well-being of everyone in the world would be good. "In an easy and relaxed manner, in a healthy and positive way, in its own perfect time, for the highest good of all". (A quote copied from Steve's Million Dollar Experiment post).

Some other intention advice I often hear is the idea of focusing on the results you want (such as a world where people will never be victimized), and to not get attached to a specific idea on the means by which that result must be brought about, since otherwise one's rigid ideas of how things must happen can interfere with the manifestation.

Best wishes,
Apollia