Re: virus: Taking Over the World (was: Sign Off)

Brett Lane Robertson (
Mon, 20 Oct 1997 17:01:41 -0500

Speaking of taking over the world, does attempting to
bring the world under one rule interfere with naturally emerging complex
--David R.


All willful action interferes with fate. But at the root of this question
is another: Is there such thing as self-will? My opinion is twofold: (1)
Yes, there is self-will but only in opposition to "naturally emerging
complex order" (It is not willful to eat when hungry but it is willful to
eat when not hungry; is therefore only "willful" if *un-natural* or
*disordered*). (2) Actions which are self-willed are therefore maintained
by force and when the force is no longer being applied, things will revert
back to a natural order.

There also seems to be a "sacrifice" element such that if something is
paradoxical--both fated and willed--then this paradox may be contained
within one person so that by sacrificing this person for the intended
outcome the outcome might be paradoxically maintained at the "resurection"
of the sacrificed icon.

Otherwise, there seems to be the embodiment of a cause within an icon
(individual) so that the purpose of the icon becomes the externalization of
the cause (kind of a "self-sacrifice" element) and this speaks to the
apparent will of the icon in a way that might be termed "fated".

These observations are loosely based on the history of cult movements and
their various successes after the death of their leaders.


Rabble Sonnet Retort
It is better to kiss an avocado than to get in a fight with
an aardvark