1,756
edits
Nathania: Difference between revisions
→Current incarnation
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) |
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
New prisoner-related content ceased to be added in February 2014, as upon further reflection, Larson considered that his giving in, on 7 December 2012, to pressure to tell the judge what he wanted to hear (viz. that those who communicate with felons in violation of their terms of supervised release are at fault for their own incarceration), rather than taking a principled stand similar to the one Oscar Wilde took while being cross-examined in ''[[wikipedia:Oscar_Wilde#Regina_v._Wilde|Regina v. Wilde]]'', disqualified him from doing further [[wikipedia:Jail solidarity|prisoner solidarity]] work, as it constituted an unforgivable betrayal of the values of integrity and courage required of such a worker. The caving in to the judge's expectations had been influenced by Larson's mother expressing loneliness at his absence, which put Larson in a position of having to choose between standing for his political beliefs or provoking the court to impose a punishment that would cause his family additional suffering. Since, according to Larson's philosophy, liberty is the highest cause that a person can pursue, only the most honorable individuals are deemed fit for the task; and a dishonorable act of such magnitude, even under duress, results, according to Larson's personal standards, in a lifetime ban from the most sensitive and important libertarian work, viz. that which involves interaction with persons incarcerated for victimless offenses. However, Larson did not deem it to be violation of those standards to continue operating personal blogs such as Nathania.org, since those are one-person operations that do not involve prisoners, and therefore their administration can be considered a position of lesser responsibility. | New prisoner-related content ceased to be added in February 2014, as upon further reflection, Larson considered that his giving in, on 7 December 2012, to pressure to tell the judge what he wanted to hear (viz. that those who communicate with felons in violation of their terms of supervised release are at fault for their own incarceration), rather than taking a principled stand similar to the one Oscar Wilde took while being cross-examined in ''[[wikipedia:Oscar_Wilde#Regina_v._Wilde|Regina v. Wilde]]'', disqualified him from doing further [[wikipedia:Jail solidarity|prisoner solidarity]] work, as it constituted an unforgivable betrayal of the values of integrity and courage required of such a worker. The caving in to the judge's expectations had been influenced by Larson's mother expressing loneliness at his absence, which put Larson in a position of having to choose between standing for his political beliefs or provoking the court to impose a punishment that would cause his family additional suffering. Since, according to Larson's philosophy, liberty is the highest cause that a person can pursue, only the most honorable individuals are deemed fit for the task; and a dishonorable act of such magnitude, even under duress, results, according to Larson's personal standards, in a lifetime ban from the most sensitive and important libertarian work, viz. that which involves interaction with persons incarcerated for victimless offenses. However, Larson did not deem it to be violation of those standards to continue operating personal blogs such as Nathania.org, since those are one-person operations that do not involve prisoners, and therefore their administration can be considered a position of lesser responsibility. | ||
Since the fight over pedosexuality is still, in [http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/mirkin_text.htm the terminology of Harris Mirkin], a Phase I struggle, there seemed to be little to gain, politically, by becoming a martyr | Since the fight over pedosexuality is still, in [http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/mirkin_text.htm the terminology of Harris Mirkin], a Phase I struggle, there seemed to be little to gain, politically, by becoming a martyr, since fellow activists would be unwilling to spread the word of what happened. Furthermore, there was no avoiding some form of defeat, since a severe punishment would have incapacitated Larson from carrying on any activities that cannot be conducted from prison. But this did not constitute an excuse from duty, in Larson's view. | ||
According to this theory, the system is designed to put activists in situations that will essentially induce them to say "[[wikipedia:Nineteen_Eighty-Four#Confession_and_betrayal|Do it to Julia!]]" and thereby make themselves seem unworthy in their own eyes; but it is still the activist's responsibility to resist succumbing to coercion, regardless of punishment, for the greater good of society. This view holds that [[wikipedia:Allocution#United_States|allocution]] is often the activist's one chance to speak in court in defense of his ideas and actions, and the whole nature of the situation is to serve as a test of whether he has enough backbone to rise to the occasion when called upon. Vlad Draconis PenDragon (aka Matthew Mercer-Kinser) compared it to a situation of a homeowner's declining to tell the [[wikipedia:Gestapo|Gestapo]] about Jews hiding in his attic, but Larson viewed his statement to the court as more analogous to [[wikipedia:Erwin Schrödinger|Erwin Schrödinger]]'s 1938 ''[http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Miscellany:Confession_to_the_F%C3%BChrer Confession to the Führer]''. | |||
Originally, suicide had been considered the best option, since the way in which society is currently set up only gives a person two other options, both of which are problematic. One of those paths is to work within the system, attempting to effect change in ways that don't involve lawbreaking. The other is to rebel in illegal ways. This latter path is the most in accord with the [[wikipedia:Henry David Thoreau|Thoreauvian]] values set forth in ''[[wikipedia:Resistance to Civil Government|Resistance to Civil Government]]'', but can often result in incarceration, which rapidly grows tiresome. In Larson's view, the suicides of [[wikipedia:Mohamed Bouazizi|Mohamed Bouazizi]] and [[wikipedia:Aaron Swartz|Aaron Swartz]] had beneficial impacts on public opinion concerning statist tyranny; and further suicides of activists might have the same effect. However, as documented in the bliki, Larson, after making a plan and acquiring the necessary supplies, found himself incapable of going through with it; and unwilling to go back to prison, had to resort back to the path of working within the system. | |||
==Controversies concerning the site== | ==Controversies concerning the site== | ||