I do not think I remember asking to exist, unless I start to lose my head.
And these gracious parents once surprised me by saying : "Now that we have given you life, you will have to pay your body by working, and while you are at it, you will pay our retirement as we have made it for our own parents, otherwise hell is waiting for you."
To work, that is to be "constrained" in one way or another. It is either to be constrained by others, or to constrain oneself indirectly, because others have placed you in the position of having to constrain yourself by blackmailing on your life, your misery, your suffering, or your death without even uttering a single word of blackmail: If you want to pursue the life that your parents, with social complicity, have imposed on you, you will have to buy your food, your health, your shelter, your security.
It is indeed a blackmail that parents and society are doing on their children and associates for the sole purpose of maintaining a system that is yet a bellicose system, provider of misery, disability, suffering, and death, that they pretend hypocritically or stupidly to try to spare you without success since it is impossible.
As for people who are happy at work and at home, or who pretend to be, because they have to praise the life of their children (which they have constrained to exist), it is not worthwhile counting them because this happiness is normal; however they are the only ones who speak.
Those who live in misery, in pain, in disability, do not have the floor. They are confined in their hospital room or in a hospice to die, and so stunned by their misfortune that they no longer think, but have they ever thought through their own means?
Do we give them the floor to know what they really think about this miserable life of maggots, which one has so kindly imposed upon them, without any compensation or reparation, when they are not reproached to exist like that, and to cause the misfortune of their relatives, and social expenses, or even to be a diabolical burden!
Our parents are "free to oblige us" to exist according to society, which encourages them strongly, the same society telling newcomers that they are born free and equal in rights (I have a vague impression that there is a paradox in this very short sequence of words. What do you think of that?) while in the arms of our parents we are pure recorder objects (cameras / eyes and microphones / ears) at their service.
It must be said that society derives enormous benefits from this, since the human world is made as it is, that is to say, very crowded with our associates who occupy the planet, it has become virtually impossible to live without being forced to work to buy his body, so his food and water, daily, which is, of course, a totally crude social and parental hypocrisy, but as they manage to impregnate the culture of submission to the customs of the newcomers, the latter are still very little aware of this subterfuge.
However, being forced to work to live is called slavery, even if you are very kindly assured that you can go and see elsewhere how it happens, nothing retaining you in your initial homeland automatically designated.
Working to survive is out of human rights, and we are all forced to work to survive. No mother gives birth to a baby by pure kindness of heart by assuring it a free life. The child is used as a hobby to mothers "martyrs," who, without this "virtuous" occupation that they have given themselves by "sacrifice," would not know what to do in their lives.
Curiously, women in our western societies are beginning to proclaim, indignantly, that child custody, housekeeping, are an additional work with that to earn their own lives! But who asked them to fabricate an existence? Did one put them a social gun to their head?
Making this "dear" baby (handicap or no handicap, immediate or deferred?) is it a job or an occupation? Does the maternal love you impose yourself under have to be remunerated, Mrs. Hypocrite?
Do not pretend to love your child whereas you have installed it in the quasi-trashcan Earth! Do not pretend to love your child whereas you have installed it in a world that is not peaceful! Do not pretend to love your child whereas you have kindly granted it a physical or mental defect!
All this was perfectly foreseeable, since these physical and mental defects are common. Do not pretend to love your child whereas you live in a slum or some place that displeases it! Do not pretend to love your child whereas you force it to pay its body!
Do not pretend to love your child whereas your work does not please you, does not relate enough, whereas unemployment rages everywhere! Do not pretend to love your child whereas the society in which you live is very imperfect! Do not pretend to love your child whereas you live under the dictatorship of money!
Do not pretend to love your child whereas you conceived it to serve you, whereas you conceived it to pay your social debts, your old days, your retirement! Do not pretend to love your child whereas you offer it death to finish its ordeal! And if you are a believer why do you offer it Hell?
To claim that you love someone after throwing it into a stinking quagmire is too easy! Does the law of Retaliation authorize the abused child to give back to his parents what they have kindly offered it? If the child is born blind, can it make blind its parents? No, say you! Yet should not this prenatal maltreatment be punished by the law?
Every human is created by its parents to serve, since it has itself evidently not asked to exist. The ethic of Daddy Mom is flawed, because the child who is created, this very dear baby, this person, has a good chance (see the WHO website) to be born disabled.
Does Mom Dad and society, all militarists, consider this percentage of disability risks as collateral damage? Are the suffering and death, which one inflicts automatically to the being that one creates, a service that one renders to the one who did not exist (absurd phrase in itself), a non-existence ?
No, of course, the created being, the child who is to be cherished afterwards, will slide on the fatal toboggan to serve as work fodder, tax fodder, and cannon fodder, because Mother Dad needed companionship.
There are no ethics in life. We have gone from the mechanical animal stage to the intelligent animal stage capable of making tools, but we are not yet to the self-sacrifice.
Abnegation, that is to say, the truly ethical intelligence with ourselves, to the point of thinking of the billions of future beings who will suffer and die for nothing but an idea of fixism, specism, Humanism, which has no meaning, even if we were immortal and insensitive, as individuals or pseudo-species.
Most children are born idiots, for it is not a question of comparing each one to an average, but of aiming at highest. By law of Retaliation, therefore, they have the right to take revenge or at least to file a complaint against this mental voluntary wound produced by the parents, but as the child is an idiot, it will, of course, not think about it, especially since the parents will do everything so that this question does not come to mind. This is called belief.
Life is obligatory, that is, we exist because another person, our mother, has forced us to exist. Work to earn its life when this life is obligatory is obviously the vilest and most hypocritical form of slavery that can exist.
Personally if I did not need to "earn a living" I would have taken care of myself in diverse and varied ways and as interesting as possible by simple need to spend my obligatory life time.
In our societies there are chores, but these chores are always performed by the same people who do not understand that what they call work is a bond slavery to provide, them, the chores for some others.
There are people who have jobs that they have chosen by themselves, but the fact of being forced to do this work, all day long, weeks, months, and even years, make it chores, which one cannot really like, especially as they became routine.
Love for this occupation is not the love of a profession. Any person who works does a social chore. These chores should be performed equally by all.
When an interviewee tells you that its job pleases it, it is because it does not want to pass for an idiot who has done an unpleasant job for years, unable to be smart enough to find the job of its dreams.
Is it normal that people's income should not be calculated according to the same principle? Some are remunerated by the time they spend doing an activity that demands more or less physical power, others more or less intellectual capacity, others according to the number of goods that can be replicated to infinity, others according to the number of spectators, others according to the number of people they manage, etc. ? While the money that everyone obtains with this income is a public notion representing work, but what work does it represent?
Why would the rich have complexes to enrich themselves, since poor people persist in mass reproduction to provide them with slaves? Obviously, as long as the poor reproduce themselves, they will justify the rich.
Because reproduce itself, it is to accept the rules of the world in which one lives by imposing them on a person who has not even asked to exist and who will have to endure these crazy rules that you impose on it, you the poor, by forcing it to exist, your own child. (Is that clear enough?)
We all spread culture, through speech, writing, simple chatter. Without this spread no wealth, no technical improvement. Do you receive a salary for this work? No.
We are all inheritors of ancient inventions, such as fire, wheel, paper, glass, tools of all kinds, and so on. Do you receive a salary for this inheritance? No.
Have we not all been obliged to exist? Did our parents assure us before we were born? No. Did our parents establish a natal contract before we were forced to exist? No.
Were our parents more interested in their own desire to procreate than in their future child, who evidently did not ask to exist? Will it be compensated, this child, if it is handicapped? Will it be able to obtain redress for all its lacks of life? But, once suffering is created, how to undo it?
We are only vehicles for ovules and spermatozoids. We are merely instruments of an absurd mechanism. The uterus is the main contractor who works blindly, it is not me the man who is the prime contractor, and not even the woman carrying the organ that has been imposed on her by the lottery of life.
We are, for the most part, only triggers of life indoctrinated by habits, customs, parental and social cultures.
Life is a monstrosity committed by the universe that has nothing to do with misery, suffering, death. Life works only by replication and does not care about the quality and benefits of your life. Life that you will derive from living for the service of others.
The universe is a mechanism, Life is a mechanic, humans are mechanisms initiated by the universe. Life is a violent struggle of Life against Life. Life is a sinecure for nobody.
Creating a life for a conscious being of all this is a sadistic monstrosity. It is a monstrosity of a slaver who needs, to accompany it in life, a little punching-bag, who needs a staff of old age, who needs for the society work-fodder, tax-fodder, cannon-fodder.
To summarize the mental state of a human being with regard to climate change: you put a human in a natural trashcan, it says nothing. You put the same man in an artificial trashcan known for such, it complains, it cries, it revolts, but continues to put other humans in the worldwide general trashcan!
Imagine! As John Lennon would say. You put a couple in a cell, it's in a dome on Mars. He must work hard to fabricate his body, that is to say to pay his water, his food, but also his air.
On Earth we do not yet pay our air to buy our body, only the rest and that's a lot, especially because it is forbidden to buy a human being on Earth. However each one buys himself from birth by the social debts that accumulated on his back.
But on Mars, it will take to pay for his body, supposedly given by Mom and Dad, and will buy its air in addition. And this gentle couple will hasten to add a small additional Martian, which will have been conceived to serve his parents, as on Earth, but conceived in a prison of a few square meters, a real cell, of which he can walk out only with one spacesuit.
Thank you Mom, thank you Dad, thank you society without heads, and especially heartless. (But did I tell you about punishment, prison, despite the impossibility of free will? See the text on free will.)
About robots: Before we ask ourselves what to do with humans if robots work for them, we should first ask ourselves the question of the usefulness of the existence of anyone or anything, before putting it in the world, including intelligent robot.
We know that it takes only 50 years to reduce humanity to nothing (the time of menopause).
The question of Shakespeare, "To be or not to be?" is a selfish question which should immediately have given rise to the following remark: "The creation of an existence serves only those who already exist and when it is not mastered, this creation is the work of an idiot or a sadistic."
Hence the existence of 7 billion silly and sadistic humans ... and some others (I add these 3 words so as not to offend you).
The question of Camus of the same order, "Is life worth living?" is also a selfish question that should have generated the following "Is life worth being imposed when one does not master the creation of that existence?"
So what to do to humans, if the robots work for them? Nothing, it is enough not to fabricate humans, but possibly robots that manage between them. And even if you have a child, it is better it is healthy and immortal.
That would be the case of a robot who would refrain from putting in his software the consciousness of mental suffering and misery, knowing that a robot has no limit of size and duration ... and "cherry on the cake", he will enjoy a quasi free will since it will be able, at least, to self-determine at his convenience, except the initial self-determination, of course.
If there was only one question that all those, who wish to manufacture a new life, were to ask themselves, it should be this one:
"Now that I have made a suffering being, how to undo suffering? "
Dead end
E. Berlherm (November 2016)
