In my opinion, the theory that humans are capable of doing everything, even the most despicable things, for survival is a myth, they say as an example that the underworld exists because there is poverty, people dying of hunger who take to the streets to steal, because if they don't they die, but they miss two things; the majority of the poor don't do "everything" to survive, only a minority; and most criminals are not in the lowest part of the social pyramid, but are rich and powerful, who steal more, kill more, and do more damage to society each one of them, than all the "poor criminals" united. The only thing they seek when saying that the human is capable of everything to survive, is to say that the human places himself above everything else, that we are animals in suits that deceive ourselves (which in a certain sense is true, but not in that sense), that the human is really bad by nature. Which is part of a tendency to misanthropy that exists in modern society.
There are thousands of cases of people who have rejected their survival, who have put their own lives at risk to fight for ideals, for values, for freedom and for justice, and who show that the human is not a cold-blooded animal.
Now, let's talk about those who do evil who are very few in comparison, and who are very high in the social hierarchy. They do evil, by choice, not for survival, because they are very ignorant beings, that their simple presence in positions of power is based on destroying society from within, eroding the trust and cooperation of people, which are the pillars of the society. They call this "ruling", and they believe in fact that they are ruling, governing and controlling people with all their lies and corruption, but what they are really doing to society is destroying it. But they don't even have the slightest idea about this, that is one of the reasons why I say they are ignorant, they don't know the full consequences of their actions, they in their head believe that they can continue to rule forever, but they have no idea that the longer they rule, the less society they will have to rule, the less power they have, and the more insignificant they become.
The only possible and viable form of society is cooperation between free people, everything else is really self-destruction.
People don't immediately choose crime if there are horrifying legal options (dangerous or unpleasant work) available to them.
I agree 100% with you on this point.
Yeah, but everyone really has options, just that some prefer to do morally reprehensible things and others don't.
There are situations where there really are no other options, although they are admittedly rare.
Also, there are also (less rare) situations where the LAW ITSELF is immoral.
For example,
In 8 minutes,
You will kill to survive,
Maybe, but killing is not always something morally bad, there are cases in which killing someone is justified, as in personal defense. In that case most people would kill, if strictly necessary, to survive, and it wouldn't be necessarily a bad thing.
But in the case of cannibalism, I don't think most people are capable of murdering an innocent person to survive, there are exceptions of course, yes there are people who would do that kind of thing, like those sailors, but I would not bet that are the rule. Most would not be able to. At least that's what I think. And the ones that would be are simply people who are willing to do similar things in any situation, they just have never been forced to do it and that's why they don't.
I think the numbers are perhaps a little higher than you and I like to think,
I wouldn't say "bad by nature", in the same way we don't consider it "evil" when a wolf eviscerates a rabbit.
Genuine self-sacrifice is most common when parents are protecting their own children, otherwise it is more of an anomaly than "the rule".
Some are brainwashed with the "hero myth" which (dubiously) promises "eternal honor" in exchange for their life.
It is a matter of finding something what matters more to people than their own life to show that it is not simply a matter of survival (in that case life would be above everything). For some it is their children, for others ideas, for others religion, values, etc., even money, comfort, and the like, it is not always a good thing
CON-ARTISTS hijack our natural motives.
(1) PROTECT YOUR SELF = PROTECT THE IDEAS OF YOUR LEADERS/RELIGION/PROPHETS
(2) PROTECT YOUR FAMILY = PROTECT YOUR FELLOW SOLDIERS/ZEALOTS/ORGANIZATION
(3) PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY = PROTECT THE SYMBOLS AND RELICS AND TERRITORY OF YOUR LEADERS/RELIGION/PROPHETS
For example, "i am second". LINK
The parasites you describe are often "cashing in" on the accumulation of faith a society has built up over time.
In many cases, the individual parasites never suffer the consequences of their "bad faith", merely leaving behind cracks in the foundation of their society, leaving it to crumble long after they've left the table.
Yes, but I think that the problem is bigger than these people, and that they are only the manifestation of the problem. They may never get what they deserve and don't learn the lesson, but society, on the contrary, does learn what it must learn and act accordingly. In this way, people like that don't have that power again. And as far as I know, that is the most we can do and what we need to do. We cannot change the world and how things are, but we can change ourselves and how we are.
WE MUST IDENTIFY CON-ARTISTS AND ROOT-OUT COERCION.