|
so if there is no mechanism for domination and no discernable coordinating mechanisms... from what would one draw the conclusion that domination is present?
if one is certain that domination is present, how do you separate domination from a more objective reality when no controls are in place to keep truth suppresed. is it not a more rational idea that the person dissatisfied with the way truth is presented while others are not is simply dissatisfied with the truth itself? i know its possible for millions to be wrong and a few right, but such circumstances are always accompanied by a repression of knowledge... something that has yet to be proven to me.
you may argue that fundamental information-dispensing institutions are themselves the dominators... making prohibitions against certain ideas and truths irrelevant. but, i think if one were to propose that, he/she would be obligated to provide:
1. proof that truth was being suppresed.
2. a model that better conveys truth (thus proving that such domination is not endemic to human communication to begin with)
__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
~ Winston Churchill
|