![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 3 of 3. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by alexandra_k on February 12, 2022, at 14:08:09
human rights are dependent on people behaving in ways he approves of.
that is to say if people do things that he does not like (for example, not comply with doing what he says when he says because he says) then they give up their human rights.
so, you know, if someone is not capable of filling out the forms that will not submit without contradition (therefore the person is a liar) they have given up all of their human rights.
that's what human rights are, according to our minister of finance. who is, of course, authorised to speak about such things.
it is good that he knows, the minister of finance. so that he can tell it to the people.
i wonder where he learned all about human rights and about how dependent they were on his choosing to confer (or not confer them) upon people for whatever reasons he thinks or wants or likes.
i wonder if it was in school or if his mummy taught him or if he has a direct line to god.
i don't know where he finds the time, to be minister of finance and proclaiming to inform the new people about this very very special notion of rights that is so very different from what is meant by rights pretty much every other developed nation in teh world...
Posted by alexandra_k on February 12, 2022, at 14:13:46
In reply to minister of finance says..., posted by alexandra_k on February 12, 2022, at 14:08:09
(because being speaker of the house means that he is the majority in parliament. he speaks for the majority of parliament. he is parliament).
he says that parliament isn't listening to the protestors because they are a 'minority who think they are a majority'.
becuase he thinks that the way it works is that he (one man) is the majority in parliament and because he is the majority in parliament he dictates the majority and then that wins becuase mob rule.
but he is so much bigger than the number of protestors.
particularly when you factor in all the police officers that are on his pay-roll to inforce his majority of himself.
__
they don't understand that it would be wrong to sacrifice a lonesome stranger. they think that since utilitarianism is correct (or since they are one individual who dictate what the majority is to believe or say if they are to be counted at all) and utilitarianism says that that's what happens to people who stick their neck out.
they don't understand the case as a reductio.
but their own view is internally incoherent since they won't count anybody who doesn't agree with / support / endorse the view of the...
lone speaker of parliament.
quack quack mallard.
duck.
how do to stop dogs pissing on your lawn?
that's the attitude.
it's time to go.
Posted by alexandra_k on February 12, 2022, at 14:25:30
In reply to speaker of the house says, posted by alexandra_k on February 12, 2022, at 14:13:46
they genuinely don't get it.
they genuinely think that biggest mob wins.
they are saying they don't care what anti-vaccinators or people who won't get vaccinated or people who protest being mandated have to say, because they are in the minority.
they don't think that the people matter (or that they have any rights) because trampelling over the rights of minorities... well, there is no such thing, because minorities don't have any rights.
individuals don't have any rights, therefore. because i am only one individual and there are a total of how many people who are not-me which means I don't have any rights as an individual at all.
rights are things that are had by the largest collective only.
and only then when jacinda ardern approves?
or hipkins? when hipkins makes his individual discretionary judgment on whether this or that...
or maybe the speaker of the house?
these individuals dictate what is the majority and then all the resources will go into that being upheld by might is right...
the leaders of this country are intellectually handicapped, i genuinely do believe. i suppose it is the case that instead of them being intellectually curious or instead of them seeking knowledge or working to underestand or advance their learning they instead sought to control everything so everything would be the way they wanted it to be... regardless of their ignorance.
they are not willing or able to listen to people who have devoted portions of their life not to asserting their will or bullying other people to comply with their demands but actually learning and working to undersetand and advance knowledge...
they surround themselves with sychophants only.
yes sir yes sir yes sir anything you say for $25 sir.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.