Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Robin Hood Philosophy

  • I understand the concept of fighting fraud with fraud. I'll call it the Robin Hood philosophy. While I won't claim it's all bad, I would add that it is the same as fighting fire with fire, or an eye for an eye.  
    "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi 
    My own recent quote on the subject 
    "You can fight Bullshit with Bullshit, but in the end you both wind up covered in shit" ~Chris Duke

    How far you wish to go in using the Robin Hood Philosophy depends entirely on how much shit your willing to deal with, or more eloquently put, how much you are willing to become that which you despise. As I get older, I see much of what I have hated in the past in myself. 

    "hate begets hate" and "violence begets violence" Does "fraud beget fraud?"

    Despite my understanding of the concept, I still can't help but feel it justifiable on some level. Where it gets stuck in the mud for me is when you are presented with a violent act, and are in need to defend yourself and or your possessions or others from attack. I don't believe that scenario fits into the whole Robin Hood philosophy. I believe that to be another concept entirely, but have not been able to conceptualize a soft dividing line between the two. The hard dividing line is easy to see. A man comes after you with a knife, you pull out a gun and kill the fool. I don't consider that fighting fire with fire even if you were to use a knife to fight off a knife wielding attacker. But what got me to write this post in the first place was in reply to a comment about how to deal with the courts and cops who are using fraud to steal from the people. That is the soft dividing line in my opinion, that's difficult to justify with the Robin Hood philosophy. Do you risk becoming like them in using fraud to fight back? Or do you take the high ground? Any REAL LAW ALWAYS provides remedy. What these fraudsters are doing provides NO remedy whatsoever. That's one way you can tell they are not real laws. 

    So to answer my own question, I would suggest vacating the fiction, removing ones self from their privileges, stop consenting to be a party to their fraud, and then, once that has been accomplished, ones hands would be clean in whatever one does to recover or defend from their unlawful activities. But there is the catch 9 again. Should you consider (once ones hands are clean) conducting ones self in fraud to get compensation or battle the fraud once ones hands are clean? They would inevitably wind up covered in shit if you do.

  • No comments:

    Post a Comment