Breeders' Domination over Hypoanimalistics' Responsibility
I defined my use of the word breeder in entry 66. But there are two kinds of breeders, who behave differently.
1. The automatic breeders. They are those, whose instinctivity outweighs a low rationality, they breed without even reflecting about it.
2. The conscious breeders. They are those, whose very high instinctivity outweighs a much higher rationality than that of the automatic breeders. They breed, because they consciously consider breeding as their purpose in life, they have an identity of being a part of some system more important than the individual. Their rationality is a tool to enhance success in breeding. They are very often those, whose religion commands them to breed.
Both kinds of breeders put the wellbeing of their progeny above their own wellbeing and above the wellbeing of unrelated living people, but in a fundamentally different way.
The automatic breeder focus directly on advantages to bestow upon their progeny during their own lifetime. The fight for power as a way to acquire resources, they usurp resources to use in favor of their offspring, ruthless to all genetically not related persons.
The conscious breeders think further ahead. They focus on long term benefits not only for their direct progeny, but also for many more generations of the bearers of their genes. They want to improve the world, they are willing to make own sacrifices and they want to force the same sacrifices on everybody.
Both kind of breeders compliment each other, but both attempt to impose sacrifices in favor of the bearer of their genes on other living individuals, breeders or hypoanimalistics.
Example 1 - Garbage
Automatic breeders can quite often be those, who take their brats to a picnic somewhere out in nature and then carelessly leave the garbage behind.
Conscious breeders want to preserver nature for the progeny of their progeny, so they are willing to be the volunteers to participate in activities to clean other people's garbage.
As an hypoanimalistic person, I feel responsible to my own self and my own values, and on an individual level to all those people, with whom I am in direct contact. That means, I do not litter nature with garbage, because I would feel ashamed doing it. But I have my pride too. I am not the servant of the automatic breeders and other inconsiderate persons. I have no reason to clean after others. I am an individual, I am responsible for what I do, not more and not less.
Example 2 - Accommodation
In more or less arid areas, water is scarce. As a fair deal, water should be available to everybody for a fair price, and should be predominantly used for the basic human household needs and to grow food.
To Los Angeles and the area around, water is pumped from some place up in the mountains, but it is taken in such amounts, that it causes damage to that area. Under such circumstances, the Californian lawn system is preposterous and inconsiderate. Lawns are kept short by mowing them about twice a month. But the shorter the lawn, the more water it needs, so huge amounts of water are used in elaborate sprinkler systems to keep the lawns growing fast. It is madness, but the breeders dominate and set the norm, because they want to have a huge green playground around their houses for their brats.
In the USA, if people can afford it, they have a chance to live in a separate house with some ground around, as is beneficial for their brats. In Germany, the conscious breeders dominate. Their idea to preserve nature for the future of many generations of their own progeny is restricting the area of allowed use for housing to densely populated cities. Those, who make the laws and decide, where houses may be built, usually can and do themselves afford a house with ground around. But the majority of people are supposed to live in apartments in houses of several floors.
It is cruel to put people into apartments like rabbits into cages. Most of those buildings have been built without any consideration to make them in any way sound proof. Therefore, either by rules or by social pressure, people after 10 pm are not supposed to play music above whispering level, take a bath, run the washing machine or do anything else, that causes noise.
To live under such conditions is a heavy strain on the health of people, both on those, who have to control every of their expression of being alive, and on those, who feel disturbed otherwise.
I think that having control over the acoustic environment in both ways, the free expression and being spared acoustic pollution, is a basic need to stay healthy, and this need is denied in such apartments. I am convinced, that the sickening effects of living crammed into those rabbit cages contributes to a lot of social problems, be it aggression and criminality, be is addictions and other psychological troubles.
The living individuals are forced to make sacrifices for future generations, no matter, if they are breeders or not. Nature is treated like a holy cow. Buildings can be removed as they can be built. People, who cannot afford a house and ground, should have an alternative to the rabbit cages, by being given small plots of land as a lease, where they are allowed to live in the way they feel comfortable. It could be a caravan, a shack, a hut of any kind. The importance is the freedom to a minimum of creativity and self-realisation in their lifestyle, enabling them to take responsibility for themselves.
In the USA people are at least allowed to live in trailer parks. Over here, all is very restrictive. People are made sick in the rabbit cages, until they are incapacitated by enough disadvantages, and then they are kept on a meager welfare, some for their entire life time.
I defined my use of the word breeder in entry 66. But there are two kinds of breeders, who behave differently.
1. The automatic breeders. They are those, whose instinctivity outweighs a low rationality, they breed without even reflecting about it.
2. The conscious breeders. They are those, whose very high instinctivity outweighs a much higher rationality than that of the automatic breeders. They breed, because they consciously consider breeding as their purpose in life, they have an identity of being a part of some system more important than the individual. Their rationality is a tool to enhance success in breeding. They are very often those, whose religion commands them to breed.
Both kinds of breeders put the wellbeing of their progeny above their own wellbeing and above the wellbeing of unrelated living people, but in a fundamentally different way.
The automatic breeder focus directly on advantages to bestow upon their progeny during their own lifetime. The fight for power as a way to acquire resources, they usurp resources to use in favor of their offspring, ruthless to all genetically not related persons.
The conscious breeders think further ahead. They focus on long term benefits not only for their direct progeny, but also for many more generations of the bearers of their genes. They want to improve the world, they are willing to make own sacrifices and they want to force the same sacrifices on everybody.
Both kind of breeders compliment each other, but both attempt to impose sacrifices in favor of the bearer of their genes on other living individuals, breeders or hypoanimalistics.
Example 1 - Garbage
Automatic breeders can quite often be those, who take their brats to a picnic somewhere out in nature and then carelessly leave the garbage behind.
Conscious breeders want to preserver nature for the progeny of their progeny, so they are willing to be the volunteers to participate in activities to clean other people's garbage.
As an hypoanimalistic person, I feel responsible to my own self and my own values, and on an individual level to all those people, with whom I am in direct contact. That means, I do not litter nature with garbage, because I would feel ashamed doing it. But I have my pride too. I am not the servant of the automatic breeders and other inconsiderate persons. I have no reason to clean after others. I am an individual, I am responsible for what I do, not more and not less.
Example 2 - Accommodation
In more or less arid areas, water is scarce. As a fair deal, water should be available to everybody for a fair price, and should be predominantly used for the basic human household needs and to grow food.
To Los Angeles and the area around, water is pumped from some place up in the mountains, but it is taken in such amounts, that it causes damage to that area. Under such circumstances, the Californian lawn system is preposterous and inconsiderate. Lawns are kept short by mowing them about twice a month. But the shorter the lawn, the more water it needs, so huge amounts of water are used in elaborate sprinkler systems to keep the lawns growing fast. It is madness, but the breeders dominate and set the norm, because they want to have a huge green playground around their houses for their brats.
In the USA, if people can afford it, they have a chance to live in a separate house with some ground around, as is beneficial for their brats. In Germany, the conscious breeders dominate. Their idea to preserve nature for the future of many generations of their own progeny is restricting the area of allowed use for housing to densely populated cities. Those, who make the laws and decide, where houses may be built, usually can and do themselves afford a house with ground around. But the majority of people are supposed to live in apartments in houses of several floors.
It is cruel to put people into apartments like rabbits into cages. Most of those buildings have been built without any consideration to make them in any way sound proof. Therefore, either by rules or by social pressure, people after 10 pm are not supposed to play music above whispering level, take a bath, run the washing machine or do anything else, that causes noise.
To live under such conditions is a heavy strain on the health of people, both on those, who have to control every of their expression of being alive, and on those, who feel disturbed otherwise.
I think that having control over the acoustic environment in both ways, the free expression and being spared acoustic pollution, is a basic need to stay healthy, and this need is denied in such apartments. I am convinced, that the sickening effects of living crammed into those rabbit cages contributes to a lot of social problems, be it aggression and criminality, be is addictions and other psychological troubles.
The living individuals are forced to make sacrifices for future generations, no matter, if they are breeders or not. Nature is treated like a holy cow. Buildings can be removed as they can be built. People, who cannot afford a house and ground, should have an alternative to the rabbit cages, by being given small plots of land as a lease, where they are allowed to live in the way they feel comfortable. It could be a caravan, a shack, a hut of any kind. The importance is the freedom to a minimum of creativity and self-realisation in their lifestyle, enabling them to take responsibility for themselves.
In the USA people are at least allowed to live in trailer parks. Over here, all is very restrictive. People are made sick in the rabbit cages, until they are incapacitated by enough disadvantages, and then they are kept on a meager welfare, some for their entire life time.
