Tjena! Jag är 18 år gammal och spenderar väldigt lite tid på att skriva, speciellt då uppsatser.
Jag kan själv tycka att jag är ganska duktig på det jag gör, men jag undrar även vad andra tycker. Folk som då förstår engelska, givetvis.
"Why do we place social stigmas on petty criminals?
When I say petty criminals, I'm not talking about the minor acts of fare-dodging, shoplifting and illegal parking. I'm talking about those who, for example, smoke and sell marijuana to relieve stress or provide for their family. Those who do not harm anyone but are still labeled the scrapings of society. Why do we stigmatize anyone who strays from the current social norms? This could happen to just an average Joe whose harmless intentions and acts are magnified by the media, seen as defilement, pointed out as just another lawless scum by the product of an imaginary perfect society. Yes, this happens in our imaginary ideal utopia full of saints. Our so called perfect cloister of individuals with exemplary characteristics. In our society where any crime regardless of its magnitude, be it murder or smoking naturally grown herbs, is perceived as a wicked sin. But why?
Many would think it's based on psychological factors, but it's actually the product of society, the current paradigm and the sociological behavior of humans. We have been disciplined into a world view that is the exact opposite of what reality really looks like.
We've always been told that drug addicts and drug pushers who sell drugs to provide for their families are the lowlife outlaws of our society, while we equal the political hypocrites with saints when they donate stolen money in the name of the government and call it solidarity. Any person who tries to avert such a barbaric fascism is a lawless loser, while the police are viewed as nobel knights when they want to incarcerate - what they call criminals - whoever tries to oppose their fascist agenda. Looking at society from this point of view, I feel trapped, and all I see is a dictatorship, inaccurately called democracy.
We are born into a world with already established laws and rules, written on a piece of paper to claim physical existence, yet being just another abstract entity. The existence of such a thing baffles me, and as soon as we're born into this world, we instantly lose our freedom. We are unwillingly forced to live in a world where rules are already set, and if we do not follow them, we have to take the consequences. Why should I take the consequences of laws I never reconciled with from the very beginning? Can someone show me the social contract that I, or anyone else, have signed in agreement that show our reconciliation for these consequences? Of course not. All of this is just black ink written on a piece of paper.
The word criminal used to be a word for anyone who harmed another person. Today it's a collective term for those who do not reconcile with, and abide by, the thousands of laws and orders issued by a parasitic criminal class. To us, the word crime is also synonomous with sin, which implements that our laws must be of divine descent, of Godly heritage, when they in reality are more related to corruption, filth and death.
We glorify this criminal class as legislators och claim there is no lower form of life than someone who breaks the law; a criminal. But to me, those who break the law, without violating their moral responsibilities, are people who dare opposing the current regime and the politicians; unsung heros. But to other people, they are lowlife scum. Lawless criminals just like those who freed the slaves from the cotton plantations, just like Schindler who helped jews escape from the war machine in the Third Reich, just like the freedom fighters who stood against the oppressors with picket signs and courage and were crushed by the tanks in Tiananmen square.
The comparison:
It's almost unbelievable how a law can turn a lethargic person with bad habits into an untouchable saint, while at the same stigmatizing people who, for example, smoke some marijuana to relieve themselves of stress. Yes, I'm talking about morbidly obese people vs pot smokers. Let us make a comparison here, I think it might be interesting.
In our society it is fully normal to publically scorn, mock and look down on those who commit minor offences, but overweight people are off the limits, even though their gluttony is far more immoral than someone smoking some harmless herbs. All this, while these gargantuan bags of lard being pushed around in wheelchairs by their slavishly devoted sit high upon their pedestal, and are seemingly untouchable by the public.
The notion of this is a dire problem in our society, because those who are willing to be perceptive and see with open eyes the flaws of the current social paradigm, are in a heavy minority. All these years of blood, sweat, tears and hard work to perfect the standards of living for the average man have gone down the drain. I guess we're back to the drawing board.
I'll wrap it up with these last words in a culmination of the article
The point of this article was to shed some light on the subject regarding the setbacks of those who decide to not abide by the laws. Sure, one can argue and call me an open border anarchist vouching for the legalization of murder, but this is not the case. The case is to analyze and illustrate the flawed modus operandi of the political elite. The ways of the self-satisfied business tycoons running the world with a smirk on the face. The same people subtly controlling our lives while we stay blind to the fact. I guess I have an axe to grind with the legal system and the ignorance of the blind population, but I'll bury the hatchet for now."
Hur skulle ni betygsätta denna?
Jag kan själv tycka att jag är ganska duktig på det jag gör, men jag undrar även vad andra tycker. Folk som då förstår engelska, givetvis.
"Why do we place social stigmas on petty criminals?
When I say petty criminals, I'm not talking about the minor acts of fare-dodging, shoplifting and illegal parking. I'm talking about those who, for example, smoke and sell marijuana to relieve stress or provide for their family. Those who do not harm anyone but are still labeled the scrapings of society. Why do we stigmatize anyone who strays from the current social norms? This could happen to just an average Joe whose harmless intentions and acts are magnified by the media, seen as defilement, pointed out as just another lawless scum by the product of an imaginary perfect society. Yes, this happens in our imaginary ideal utopia full of saints. Our so called perfect cloister of individuals with exemplary characteristics. In our society where any crime regardless of its magnitude, be it murder or smoking naturally grown herbs, is perceived as a wicked sin. But why?
Many would think it's based on psychological factors, but it's actually the product of society, the current paradigm and the sociological behavior of humans. We have been disciplined into a world view that is the exact opposite of what reality really looks like.
We've always been told that drug addicts and drug pushers who sell drugs to provide for their families are the lowlife outlaws of our society, while we equal the political hypocrites with saints when they donate stolen money in the name of the government and call it solidarity. Any person who tries to avert such a barbaric fascism is a lawless loser, while the police are viewed as nobel knights when they want to incarcerate - what they call criminals - whoever tries to oppose their fascist agenda. Looking at society from this point of view, I feel trapped, and all I see is a dictatorship, inaccurately called democracy.
We are born into a world with already established laws and rules, written on a piece of paper to claim physical existence, yet being just another abstract entity. The existence of such a thing baffles me, and as soon as we're born into this world, we instantly lose our freedom. We are unwillingly forced to live in a world where rules are already set, and if we do not follow them, we have to take the consequences. Why should I take the consequences of laws I never reconciled with from the very beginning? Can someone show me the social contract that I, or anyone else, have signed in agreement that show our reconciliation for these consequences? Of course not. All of this is just black ink written on a piece of paper.
The word criminal used to be a word for anyone who harmed another person. Today it's a collective term for those who do not reconcile with, and abide by, the thousands of laws and orders issued by a parasitic criminal class. To us, the word crime is also synonomous with sin, which implements that our laws must be of divine descent, of Godly heritage, when they in reality are more related to corruption, filth and death.
We glorify this criminal class as legislators och claim there is no lower form of life than someone who breaks the law; a criminal. But to me, those who break the law, without violating their moral responsibilities, are people who dare opposing the current regime and the politicians; unsung heros. But to other people, they are lowlife scum. Lawless criminals just like those who freed the slaves from the cotton plantations, just like Schindler who helped jews escape from the war machine in the Third Reich, just like the freedom fighters who stood against the oppressors with picket signs and courage and were crushed by the tanks in Tiananmen square.
The comparison:
It's almost unbelievable how a law can turn a lethargic person with bad habits into an untouchable saint, while at the same stigmatizing people who, for example, smoke some marijuana to relieve themselves of stress. Yes, I'm talking about morbidly obese people vs pot smokers. Let us make a comparison here, I think it might be interesting.
In our society it is fully normal to publically scorn, mock and look down on those who commit minor offences, but overweight people are off the limits, even though their gluttony is far more immoral than someone smoking some harmless herbs. All this, while these gargantuan bags of lard being pushed around in wheelchairs by their slavishly devoted sit high upon their pedestal, and are seemingly untouchable by the public.
The notion of this is a dire problem in our society, because those who are willing to be perceptive and see with open eyes the flaws of the current social paradigm, are in a heavy minority. All these years of blood, sweat, tears and hard work to perfect the standards of living for the average man have gone down the drain. I guess we're back to the drawing board.
I'll wrap it up with these last words in a culmination of the article
The point of this article was to shed some light on the subject regarding the setbacks of those who decide to not abide by the laws. Sure, one can argue and call me an open border anarchist vouching for the legalization of murder, but this is not the case. The case is to analyze and illustrate the flawed modus operandi of the political elite. The ways of the self-satisfied business tycoons running the world with a smirk on the face. The same people subtly controlling our lives while we stay blind to the fact. I guess I have an axe to grind with the legal system and the ignorance of the blind population, but I'll bury the hatchet for now."
Hur skulle ni betygsätta denna?
