Jay Dyer, What’s the Endgame for Atheists? |352|
- Thread starter Alex
- Start date
Really? 4chan? Maybe I'm thinking of /pol/, which I believe is actually 8chan, 8chan hates 4chan. But I thought both were pretty conservative.
So it's 8chan>4chan>Voat>Reddit
Ever been on Voat? It has a rep for being a Nazi safehaven (lol!) and yeah, there's some pretty despicable shit on there, but it's incredibly tolerant of most views. Little moderation, kind of like Reddit in the old days. You have to have a thick skin. Snowflakes need not apply. I go there to both toughen myself up and experience what NOT to be. But there's decent people too.
They're pretty damned intolerant of any kind of child sexualization though. Nazis have their limits, lol!
So it's 8chan>4chan>Voat>Reddit
Ever been on Voat? It has a rep for being a Nazi safehaven (lol!) and yeah, there's some pretty despicable shit on there, but it's incredibly tolerant of most views. Little moderation, kind of like Reddit in the old days. You have to have a thick skin. Snowflakes need not apply. I go there to both toughen myself up and experience what NOT to be. But there's decent people too.
They're pretty damned intolerant of any kind of child sexualization though. Nazis have their limits, lol!
S
I [recall] Shermer also claimed to be a scientist in a debate with Sheldrake but AFAICTell he just has a bachelor's in psychology so even less qualified than Nye.
I guess they think skeptical arrogance is a substitute for academia.
I guess they think skeptical arrogance is a substitute for academia.
I struggle with Vortex's commentary on the child-adult sex topic. I fully recognize the societal conditioning aspect to it, but also feel strong aligned with much of what Vault responded with.
I think my bottom line may be:
One, in western society (US for me) there seems no way this type of behavior would be pure in any sense of the word. The overwhelming majority of the population would see this as wrong, predatorial, and abusive. I don't see any way one might argue society could be "brought along" to this way of thinking. Which brings me to my second point.
Two, Why? Why would a society even want to explore such a thing? Is there evidence to indicate children are being harmed by not participating in such acts? I'll be straight up honest about the adult side of that question: I don't give a damn. Adults who may crave such interactions, well, those feelings and motivations should be scary to any parent; myself included.
In summary, I just don't get where you're going with this at all Vortex and why you go so far as to make sound like a cause you have taken up. To what end? To solve what problem?
I think my bottom line may be:
One, in western society (US for me) there seems no way this type of behavior would be pure in any sense of the word. The overwhelming majority of the population would see this as wrong, predatorial, and abusive. I don't see any way one might argue society could be "brought along" to this way of thinking. Which brings me to my second point.
Two, Why? Why would a society even want to explore such a thing? Is there evidence to indicate children are being harmed by not participating in such acts? I'll be straight up honest about the adult side of that question: I don't give a damn. Adults who may crave such interactions, well, those feelings and motivations should be scary to any parent; myself included.
In summary, I just don't get where you're going with this at all Vortex and why you go so far as to make sound like a cause you have taken up. To what end? To solve what problem?
I'll have to await your promised paper as your post had the opposite effect of clarifying what you are trying to accomplish. I'm more flabbergasted now than before I read your response. I was happily oppressed as a child. My children have been happily oppressed during their childhoods. Animals of all shapes, colors, and varieties "oppress" their children.
You are proposing that should an 8 year old daughter come home with a 40 year old man indicating they'd like to enjoy a consensual, sexual experience together.... the father should say "Cool, have fun" because to do otherwise would be totalitarian and oppressive? I may be strawmaning your point, but I'm honestly not sure.
You are proposing that should an 8 year old daughter come home with a 40 year old man indicating they'd like to enjoy a consensual, sexual experience together.... the father should say "Cool, have fun" because to do otherwise would be totalitarian and oppressive? I may be strawmaning your point, but I'm honestly not sure.
I'm curious, how much have you studied child development?
I've been interested in the cognitive and emotional development of human beings since I can remember. I spent two years in high school specifically studying child development, including observation and face to face interaction. It was an awesome program. I was also intrigued by the physical development as well, so also starting in high school I studied that aspect of human development.
Then in college I took psychology, marriage and family relations, another child development course, anatomy and physiology. I was actually keen on becoming a child psychologist, but ultimately decided against it because I am one of those people who have a tendency to take on other people's problems. I realized I would tear myself apart over the children I couldn't help. Now, with maturity and perspective, I realize I could have concentrated on those I could help. I'm considering going back to school to do just that.
My point is, this area has been an interest of mine for a long time. I've read numerous books, articles, etc. I think I have a pretty good handle on the stages we humans go through as our minds and bodies mature. I'm not an expert, but I've put considerable time into educating myself on the subject, plus I raised two children.
It's absolutely undeniable that children go through increasingly sophisticated cognitive stages as they grow. It's been very well documented what actually happens to children whose stages of development are disrupted by abuse or trauma.
I think most people aren't aware that the human brain doesn't actually achieve adult maturation until the early to mid-twenties. They used to believe the brain lost plasticity, but have since found it does not, and that the maturation process never stops. Ideally we mature until death.
https://www.boundless.com/psycholog...-s-stages-of-cognitive-development-270-12805/
https://childdevelopmentinfo.com/child-development/erickson/#.WUQMIoVOmaM
But two of the most important developments are the ability to think abstractly and emotional maturity.
The reason teenagers are so notoriously high in risk taking is that they have limitations to thinking in long term abstractions. They literally lack the physical maturity to fully understand long term consequence. This isn't a flaw, this isn't because of bad parenting, it's an actual physical limitation.
Many teenagers have a hard time thinking on the emotional level of adults. This doesn't mean they do not or cannot feel emotion. It means their understanding of their emotions and how their actions affect others is underdeveloped. Not non-existent, but immature. They still have a very self-centered view of the world. They are in the beginning stages of broadening this view, that they aren't the only person that matters, but it's still very immature. And we're talking about 16-17 year olds.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071107210133.htm
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2555426/#!po=41.5493
Now imagine a child much younger. Their ability to understand abstract thinking and consequence are highly limited. They do have rudimentary understandings but they are far from mature. This is why parents act in a protective manner. It's neglect if they do not. The key to good parenting is allowing a child more and more freedom to make certain decisions as they mature and can better understand the consequences of those decisions.
It so hard to really do any justice to these understandings in a forum post.
The job of parents is to teach their children how to be in the world. Our job is to civilize them. To guide them and provide a safe environment for them to test the world.
I think any parent here that has put their child through drivers education and saw them off on their first solo drive can attest that it's one of the hardest things to do. You are knowingly putting your child in a dangerous situation but you understand that they are mature enough to handle it and that it's part of becoming an adult. However, you don't just throw them the keys and shove them out the door. You teach them. Maybe you take them to an empty parking lot on a Sunday, when traffic is lighter (where I live it is) and you let them slowly get the feel for driving; the right amount pressure on brake and gas pedal, how to turn the wheel without turning too far or too little. You do this in a protective environment to keep them and everyone else on the road safe. As they increase in skill, you increase the danger and the level of risk. But you do it slowly and methodically. You would never dream of throwing them the keys and telling them to go do 100 mph on the highway.
Cognitive development is the same. You teach them, guide them slowly on how to be in the world. You teach them to understand their own limitations, when to ask for help and when to have faith in their own abilities.
Humans are incredibly complicated creatures, which is why it takes nearly two decades before we are able to go out and navigate this world.
And I hear people reference back to historical people, how teenagers were once bearing children, etc. Well, I think it can definitely be argued that the difference between that world and ours is vast.
Today's world is more complicated in many ways. It's naturally going to take longer to prepare to take it all on.
And I don't think it really needs to be said, but, I don't think pointing to how old cultures married off 8 year old girls and were perfectly fine (were they?) is really a comparison we want to make. What is the point of scientific inquiry if we are just going to throw that out and relegate our societal procedures to appeal to a time when less was understood?
As for the supposed evidence that children aren't harmed by sexual relationships until "society tells them it's wrong". NO. This is NOT TRUE. What I see referenced are various works by researchers and psychologists themselves. However, often the conclusions of these studies are misinterpreted by pedophile advocacy groups. What they miss (likely intentionally) is that what happens when abuse victims mature and gain the cognitive ability to fully understand and assess the situation they were in, they do suffer. They understand that they were manipulated and taken advantage of; that they trusted these individuals and were betrayed by them. Many often suffer from PTSD and part of their therapy is coming to terms with what happened to them, so that they can process the experience with an adult mind and alleviate their suffering.
While it may be true that some suffer greatly and others not so much, that doesn't take into account the severity of the abuse, confounding factors, family support (or lack thereof) and any co-morbidities, which are quite common in abuse sufferers. You also have to take into account that in often severe cases, victims have memory suppression and can develop dissociative disorders. Many suffer from co-morbid psychological states that they don't understand as being tied to their abuse. Another factor is the personal resiliency of the victim. Some people are just psychologically stronger than others.
The fact is, some people are more harmed by their experience than others. This doesn't mean that harm isn't done. Can a child live if you cut off an arm? Can they go on to lead successful, happy lives? Absolutely. Will some see the experience as more traumatic, hence their success and happiness in life will be drastically more affected? Also yes. It depends on the person, but I think we could all agree that two arms are better than one, and cutting off a child's harm would bring some level of harm, even if some children are better able to cope than others.
Do not mistake the resiliency of the human mind with the absence of harm.
I've been interested in the cognitive and emotional development of human beings since I can remember. I spent two years in high school specifically studying child development, including observation and face to face interaction. It was an awesome program. I was also intrigued by the physical development as well, so also starting in high school I studied that aspect of human development.
Then in college I took psychology, marriage and family relations, another child development course, anatomy and physiology. I was actually keen on becoming a child psychologist, but ultimately decided against it because I am one of those people who have a tendency to take on other people's problems. I realized I would tear myself apart over the children I couldn't help. Now, with maturity and perspective, I realize I could have concentrated on those I could help. I'm considering going back to school to do just that.
My point is, this area has been an interest of mine for a long time. I've read numerous books, articles, etc. I think I have a pretty good handle on the stages we humans go through as our minds and bodies mature. I'm not an expert, but I've put considerable time into educating myself on the subject, plus I raised two children.
It's absolutely undeniable that children go through increasingly sophisticated cognitive stages as they grow. It's been very well documented what actually happens to children whose stages of development are disrupted by abuse or trauma.
I think most people aren't aware that the human brain doesn't actually achieve adult maturation until the early to mid-twenties. They used to believe the brain lost plasticity, but have since found it does not, and that the maturation process never stops. Ideally we mature until death.
https://www.boundless.com/psycholog...-s-stages-of-cognitive-development-270-12805/
https://childdevelopmentinfo.com/child-development/erickson/#.WUQMIoVOmaM
But two of the most important developments are the ability to think abstractly and emotional maturity.
The reason teenagers are so notoriously high in risk taking is that they have limitations to thinking in long term abstractions. They literally lack the physical maturity to fully understand long term consequence. This isn't a flaw, this isn't because of bad parenting, it's an actual physical limitation.
Many teenagers have a hard time thinking on the emotional level of adults. This doesn't mean they do not or cannot feel emotion. It means their understanding of their emotions and how their actions affect others is underdeveloped. Not non-existent, but immature. They still have a very self-centered view of the world. They are in the beginning stages of broadening this view, that they aren't the only person that matters, but it's still very immature. And we're talking about 16-17 year olds.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071107210133.htm
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2555426/#!po=41.5493
Now imagine a child much younger. Their ability to understand abstract thinking and consequence are highly limited. They do have rudimentary understandings but they are far from mature. This is why parents act in a protective manner. It's neglect if they do not. The key to good parenting is allowing a child more and more freedom to make certain decisions as they mature and can better understand the consequences of those decisions.
It so hard to really do any justice to these understandings in a forum post.
The job of parents is to teach their children how to be in the world. Our job is to civilize them. To guide them and provide a safe environment for them to test the world.
I think any parent here that has put their child through drivers education and saw them off on their first solo drive can attest that it's one of the hardest things to do. You are knowingly putting your child in a dangerous situation but you understand that they are mature enough to handle it and that it's part of becoming an adult. However, you don't just throw them the keys and shove them out the door. You teach them. Maybe you take them to an empty parking lot on a Sunday, when traffic is lighter (where I live it is) and you let them slowly get the feel for driving; the right amount pressure on brake and gas pedal, how to turn the wheel without turning too far or too little. You do this in a protective environment to keep them and everyone else on the road safe. As they increase in skill, you increase the danger and the level of risk. But you do it slowly and methodically. You would never dream of throwing them the keys and telling them to go do 100 mph on the highway.
Cognitive development is the same. You teach them, guide them slowly on how to be in the world. You teach them to understand their own limitations, when to ask for help and when to have faith in their own abilities.
Humans are incredibly complicated creatures, which is why it takes nearly two decades before we are able to go out and navigate this world.
And I hear people reference back to historical people, how teenagers were once bearing children, etc. Well, I think it can definitely be argued that the difference between that world and ours is vast.
Today's world is more complicated in many ways. It's naturally going to take longer to prepare to take it all on.
And I don't think it really needs to be said, but, I don't think pointing to how old cultures married off 8 year old girls and were perfectly fine (were they?) is really a comparison we want to make. What is the point of scientific inquiry if we are just going to throw that out and relegate our societal procedures to appeal to a time when less was understood?
As for the supposed evidence that children aren't harmed by sexual relationships until "society tells them it's wrong". NO. This is NOT TRUE. What I see referenced are various works by researchers and psychologists themselves. However, often the conclusions of these studies are misinterpreted by pedophile advocacy groups. What they miss (likely intentionally) is that what happens when abuse victims mature and gain the cognitive ability to fully understand and assess the situation they were in, they do suffer. They understand that they were manipulated and taken advantage of; that they trusted these individuals and were betrayed by them. Many often suffer from PTSD and part of their therapy is coming to terms with what happened to them, so that they can process the experience with an adult mind and alleviate their suffering.
While it may be true that some suffer greatly and others not so much, that doesn't take into account the severity of the abuse, confounding factors, family support (or lack thereof) and any co-morbidities, which are quite common in abuse sufferers. You also have to take into account that in often severe cases, victims have memory suppression and can develop dissociative disorders. Many suffer from co-morbid psychological states that they don't understand as being tied to their abuse. Another factor is the personal resiliency of the victim. Some people are just psychologically stronger than others.
The fact is, some people are more harmed by their experience than others. This doesn't mean that harm isn't done. Can a child live if you cut off an arm? Can they go on to lead successful, happy lives? Absolutely. Will some see the experience as more traumatic, hence their success and happiness in life will be drastically more affected? Also yes. It depends on the person, but I think we could all agree that two arms are better than one, and cutting off a child's harm would bring some level of harm, even if some children are better able to cope than others.
Do not mistake the resiliency of the human mind with the absence of harm.
S
Sorry, but is this really the forum for pedophilia defenses or whatever this is Vortex is talking about? (Sorry dude I don't want to judge you personally but I think you're really on a bender here...maybe something happened to you in the past? Look for help, even if only online is available.)
I'm just a regular dude who likes philosophy & wanted to talk about the paranormal. I don't think I can handle going down some of these paths. Not trying to be anti free-speech or whatever, just saying every private space in the market needs to cater to its consumers and I can't imagine this is something most of the people here want to deal with...
I'm just a regular dude who likes philosophy & wanted to talk about the paranormal. I don't think I can handle going down some of these paths. Not trying to be anti free-speech or whatever, just saying every private space in the market needs to cater to its consumers and I can't imagine this is something most of the people here want to deal with...
S
Ok, and maybe this just makes me a "snowflake" or whatever the kids call it these days, but is this really an appropriate line of discussion for a podcast that was supposed to be following the data of parapsychology?
Having had a long term relationship with someone who had been extensively sexually abused between ages 7-9 I feel like can safely say the devastation this causes is incredible - I give her credit for successfully getting a $10K scholarship for law school* but it was definitely a process. Body dysmorphia, depression, anxiety had to be overcome with years of extensive therapeutic work (with a dash of prayer & shamanic healing to boot).
*I mention this b/c if anyone reading is a victim of abuse just know it can get better, you can come out the other side.
Having had a long term relationship with someone who had been extensively sexually abused between ages 7-9 I feel like can safely say the devastation this causes is incredible - I give her credit for successfully getting a $10K scholarship for law school* but it was definitely a process. Body dysmorphia, depression, anxiety had to be overcome with years of extensive therapeutic work (with a dash of prayer & shamanic healing to boot).
*I mention this b/c if anyone reading is a victim of abuse just know it can get better, you can come out the other side.
S
She was actually molested by another child who had been molested by an adult.
Just to give some perspective on where pedophila leads.
I realize people like Patricia Churchland are out there writing papers saying pedophiles aren't responsible since we have no free will but that's one of the reasons I took up the banner against materialism and the evils that follow from it.
Just to give some perspective on where pedophila leads.
I realize people like Patricia Churchland are out there writing papers saying pedophiles aren't responsible since we have no free will but that's one of the reasons I took up the banner against materialism and the evils that follow from it.
S
Even though there were spots in this interview which were solid enough, there was a definite undertone that I didn't gel with
I am not a fan of Jay's perspective; the notion that atheists are secret or inadvertent Luciferians is in my opinion hogwash
That kind of christian paranoia is the sort of mindset that leads to witch burnings and the like - very regressive and unhealthy
There may be satanists under every rock, but thus far in my lifetime I havent come across them; so I am not going to look for them or fear them
In my opinion LaVey et al are nothing but a lunatic fringe
At the same time there are many core beliefs associated with modern atheistic materialistic thinking which are in my opinion evil and dangerous and demonstrably false (in my mind)
NateC on the first page mentions two of them - social Darwinism and radical individualism
These modern forms of anarchism are two core beliefs which have poisoned many Western minds
They get in through media indoctrination; in other words non-consciously; and are extremely common and taken for granted by many Western people today
They underlie the dominant economic globalist paradigm of neoliberalism with which we have all been systematically indoctrinated over the past few decades
You do not have to go to satanic temples and dress up in luciferian drag to have these beliefs in your mind
These ideas have nothing to do with lucifer or satan; they are core beliefs of an economic paradigm designed to justify the greed and global domination of private Capital
There is a tendency to dramatize all this stuff and dress it up in fantastic tales and myths
Icke's 7 foot shape-shifting lizards; or Goode's blue savior aliens; or luciferian cabals and blood sacrifices at midnight in your local church, or in secret passages beneath hyde Park
and so on
I am not a fan of Jay's perspective; the notion that atheists are secret or inadvertent Luciferians is in my opinion hogwash
That kind of christian paranoia is the sort of mindset that leads to witch burnings and the like - very regressive and unhealthy
There may be satanists under every rock, but thus far in my lifetime I havent come across them; so I am not going to look for them or fear them
In my opinion LaVey et al are nothing but a lunatic fringe
At the same time there are many core beliefs associated with modern atheistic materialistic thinking which are in my opinion evil and dangerous and demonstrably false (in my mind)
NateC on the first page mentions two of them - social Darwinism and radical individualism
These modern forms of anarchism are two core beliefs which have poisoned many Western minds
They get in through media indoctrination; in other words non-consciously; and are extremely common and taken for granted by many Western people today
They underlie the dominant economic globalist paradigm of neoliberalism with which we have all been systematically indoctrinated over the past few decades
You do not have to go to satanic temples and dress up in luciferian drag to have these beliefs in your mind
These ideas have nothing to do with lucifer or satan; they are core beliefs of an economic paradigm designed to justify the greed and global domination of private Capital
There is a tendency to dramatize all this stuff and dress it up in fantastic tales and myths
Icke's 7 foot shape-shifting lizards; or Goode's blue savior aliens; or luciferian cabals and blood sacrifices at midnight in your local church, or in secret passages beneath hyde Park
and so on
A neutral and scholarly examination of the history of Satanism is presented by Massimo Introvigne from the Intalian Center for Studies of New Religions (CESNUR).
I, personally, have clearly negative attitude toward Satanism, seeing it as a mystically-sounding excuse for unrestrained self-adoration (at best) or as a reversal of any genuinely spiritual values and longings (at worst). No matter which of these options one choose, one thing about which I'm almost certain about is that: Satanists never ruled the world, do not rule it now and, most probably, will never do it. And I'm happy with it: while there is a lot of "fringe" phenomena which I would like to see accepted by mainstream (parapsycholgy / psychic research, child liberationism / (relative) child emancipation, anti-psychiatry / critical psychiatry, anarchism / anti-statism), Satanism is definitely NOT one of them! I think it won't leave the fringes where it always dwelled, and it's exactly how should it be.
BTW, I did read LaVey's "Satanic Bible", and found it to be laughably pompous and stupid, oftentimes possibly badly misinformed and sometimes probably deceptive.
I, personally, have clearly negative attitude toward Satanism, seeing it as a mystically-sounding excuse for unrestrained self-adoration (at best) or as a reversal of any genuinely spiritual values and longings (at worst). No matter which of these options one choose, one thing about which I'm almost certain about is that: Satanists never ruled the world, do not rule it now and, most probably, will never do it. And I'm happy with it: while there is a lot of "fringe" phenomena which I would like to see accepted by mainstream (parapsycholgy / psychic research, child liberationism / (relative) child emancipation, anti-psychiatry / critical psychiatry, anarchism / anti-statism), Satanism is definitely NOT one of them! I think it won't leave the fringes where it always dwelled, and it's exactly how should it be.
BTW, I did read LaVey's "Satanic Bible", and found it to be laughably pompous and stupid, oftentimes possibly badly misinformed and sometimes probably deceptive.
Last edited:
David, I think you'll like this article... since we seem to share an anti-capitalist position!
As this article correctly points, you don't need a fiendish secret coven of "dark occultisits" to pillage the world - non-spiritual capitalist elites are already more ruthless and deceptive (and destructive) than any hypothetical demonic cabal. No Satan-worship is needed; these people are ugly enough without support of infernal forces.
Spirituality, even of "darker", "Satanic" shade, is a marginal social phenomenon nowadays. Our elites do not represent "dark side" of spirit; they represent total ignorance of spirit and complete alienation from it.
I suspect, it is true for any evil - like Nikolai Berdyaev (another anti-capitalist), I think that evil is exactly this - ignorance and alienation from eternal freedom of spirit, an imprisonment in a labyrinth of illusions and phanthoms. Evil does not have any genuine ontological (or epistemological, or axiological) reality. It is not as much horrid as it is stupid and empty.
As this article correctly points, you don't need a fiendish secret coven of "dark occultisits" to pillage the world - non-spiritual capitalist elites are already more ruthless and deceptive (and destructive) than any hypothetical demonic cabal. No Satan-worship is needed; these people are ugly enough without support of infernal forces.
Spirituality, even of "darker", "Satanic" shade, is a marginal social phenomenon nowadays. Our elites do not represent "dark side" of spirit; they represent total ignorance of spirit and complete alienation from it.
I suspect, it is true for any evil - like Nikolai Berdyaev (another anti-capitalist), I think that evil is exactly this - ignorance and alienation from eternal freedom of spirit, an imprisonment in a labyrinth of illusions and phanthoms. Evil does not have any genuine ontological (or epistemological, or axiological) reality. It is not as much horrid as it is stupid and empty.
Hello Vortex thanks for the links; and perhaps we do agree; let me say a little more about my position
I am not opposed to capitalism in the sense of a private sector and individual enterprise; I regard both as essential elements in a rational and humane human society
However the private sector and individual businesses must always be secondary and subordinate to the public sector and the common good
By public sector I mean the the will and rights and wellbeing of the entire community expressed ideally in the form of a democratic social republic
(social does not mean socialist in the Marxist sense)
The core problem today is the massive imbalance between the public sector and the private sector; and the inversion of the proper order of relations between the two
Capital has usurped the political and social order
The ideological intent of neoliberal capitalism is that the private sector should entirely dominate the human world
In reality this means the domination of the world by transnational mega-corporations, which are essentially private global empires
(it does not mean the anarchist nirvana of voluntary transactions between free individuals in a free market as the libertarians and anarcho-capitalists imagine)
The New World Order of neoliberal capitalism is not a one-world government; but rather a transnational corporate imperium to which all governments and nations will be subject
That project is already well advanced
Concerning evil
In my philosophy the human journey undertaken by a spirit involves a cycle of many human lifetimes as different human individuals
Over the course of this journey the Spirit develops a human soul which embodies the experiential continuity between the lifetimes
I do not think it is possible to make sense of evil and such matters in any other way
So in that context I agree with you that evil arises from a disconnected egoic state of being; and will manifest differently in souls which are at different stages of the human journey
So it is a complex issue but also perfectly natural
(natural does not mean good)
Just a few thoughts
All the best
I am not opposed to capitalism in the sense of a private sector and individual enterprise; I regard both as essential elements in a rational and humane human society
However the private sector and individual businesses must always be secondary and subordinate to the public sector and the common good
By public sector I mean the the will and rights and wellbeing of the entire community expressed ideally in the form of a democratic social republic
(social does not mean socialist in the Marxist sense)
The core problem today is the massive imbalance between the public sector and the private sector; and the inversion of the proper order of relations between the two
Capital has usurped the political and social order
The ideological intent of neoliberal capitalism is that the private sector should entirely dominate the human world
In reality this means the domination of the world by transnational mega-corporations, which are essentially private global empires
(it does not mean the anarchist nirvana of voluntary transactions between free individuals in a free market as the libertarians and anarcho-capitalists imagine)
The New World Order of neoliberal capitalism is not a one-world government; but rather a transnational corporate imperium to which all governments and nations will be subject
That project is already well advanced
Concerning evil
In my philosophy the human journey undertaken by a spirit involves a cycle of many human lifetimes as different human individuals
Over the course of this journey the Spirit develops a human soul which embodies the experiential continuity between the lifetimes
I do not think it is possible to make sense of evil and such matters in any other way
So in that context I agree with you that evil arises from a disconnected egoic state of being; and will manifest differently in souls which are at different stages of the human journey
So it is a complex issue but also perfectly natural
(natural does not mean good)
Just a few thoughts
All the best