Alright faggots, you changed my mind about something important. For who haven't read it, The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas is a short story about a hypothetical civilization in which everything is perfect except for the suffering of one child, left alone, not tortured, but never acknowledged by any human being.
It's been a while since I read it. But when I did, my answer was always "Stay in Omelas." If I remember correctly, the story is framed as if there is no way to get around the suffering of that one child.
I've been here long enough to change my answer. I don't walk. I run the fuck away. There is no world in which I would stand to be a part of Omelas. Holla Forums has reminded me of the man I was before (((atheism))) and (((university))). That man would never have stood for a world of such injustice.
In the story the residents show you their mechanisms, the levers of society which are finely adjusted to bring about the utopia-of-injustice that is Omelas. All you have to do is walk away and reverse engineer their system to omit *unjust* suffering. The story hands you the blueprints to a society of 99.8512% perfection. What kind of self-respecting Aryan man wouldn't immediately say about the task of perfecting the world?
Also for the ethics/philosophy fags: this has me questioning my utilitarianism.
So we could have a whiteopia space empire if we just nutted up and screwed over one kid?
Fuck that kid.
Joseph Reed
Well if you extend the analogy of the story - walking away from Omelas to the wilderness to build a new civilization - extend that to space empires, you'd have expansive choice in planets on which to begin your own space empire with fucking over one kid per generation. Your very worst-case scenario is recreating the Omelas space empire. Of course the kid can get fucked if it is really the only way. But there's a net positive probability of improving the unjust suffering of that one kid. What the hell else is there to conquer?
Jose Foster
*>with or without fucking over one kid per generation.
I messed up
Camden Gutierrez
If you haven't killed yourself to give up your organs to the many people in need of transplants, you aren't a real utilitarian. That said, "muh feels" and "the lesser are worth more than the greater" faggots from the liberal left need to be gassed. The trick is to strike a balance: there is no way of making a world entirely free of suffering so we must instead act to minimise it. This does not involve turning a blind eye to suffering (for us here in the real world) but instead preparing for it and making sure everyone is well equipped to face it.
I read a story of one child bearing all of the ills of the world so the rest can have a utopia a little while ago. It was called The Bible. One person, or few, suffering so the many can live is not in any way a unique or uncommon thing. Soldiers, for example, are a few that sacrifice themselves compared to the many they protect from war. Saying the world should suffer instead of one child because "muh poor child" is the same as saying everyone should be raped and pillaged instead of having a military because "muh poor soldiers". Someone's got to do it or much worse will come from it.
Quickly reading through a synopsys, I don't think I'd be able to live in a place like that. I've been walking head first into a howling gale all my life and if the wind was suddenly to stop, I'd fall flat on my face. A world of perpetual delight would leave me wanting and I don't think I would cope. Good ol' stoicism, huh.
Why do you need to leave at all? I doubt these omelas guys are gonna complain if you figure out the solution to their kid problem.
I get that this is all a metaphor but it reminds me a lot of the wait-for-hitler fags who trash everything that isn't full GTKRWN. It's making perfect the enemy of the good.
Robert Cooper
I agree. I was careful to specify unjust suffering (at least I think I was careful). There is no utopia without personal struggle, at least not for you or me. That's why I walk away - the only injustice left is a mistreated child. I could make a civilization better than that given the knowledge in the story.
If you are imagining the world suffering, I might be remembering the story wrong. I don't imagine walking away to bear any suffer for that child. I imagine walking away and building a better future.
I wouldn't want that either. But I also would want to live a life that improves the editor for my progeny. Building a perfectly just civilization would ensure a zero percent chance of my progeny being the unjustly suffering child.
I like that pic user.
Carson Ward
Editor = world.
Ryder Cook
The real correct answer is to take the child's place
Joshua Morales
Try to come up with some convoluted plan that just wastes time and won't save whites anyways. The solution is actually quite simple but you are ignorant. TRS/Alt-right made perfect the enemy by the way so kill yourself.
Daniel Gray
Yes 100%. That's what ought to be done.
What if nobody listened though?
Michael Davis
I don't consider that justice.
Zachary Edwards
>inb4 someone finally gets up the balls to ask "Is the child white?"
Levi Rogers
The world is a simple place made complex by people's constant mental masturbation. If a person wants the world to be as they desire, then they only need the will and a means to make it so. There is no other way to live that holds more significance. We are mortal.
Daniel Kelly
Take the for granted - it's a utopia right?
Anthony Baker
Without suffering life is not worth living, stop trying to get away from suffering and start becoming stronger.
Jackson Wood
UNJUST SUFFERING NIGGER
There is no life worth living without suffering. Justice is a different thing entirely. I would happily build a civilization of Aryan spacefarers on the suffering of trillions of untermensch if it was just that the untermensch suffered. But to perfect an imperfect world into a truly just utopia is a worthwhile goal for which to dedicate one's life.
Cameron Allen
You don't have to consider it just, but it is the morally correct choice in this scenario. It's the only one really possible that avoids purely random suffering. [spoilers] If everyone made it, imagine how much Omelas might change. [/spoilers]
Justice is kind of a strange and elusive thing. Trying to define and envision a platonic form of it is a pretty serious challenge. Especially within the imagination constricted by the limitations imposed by injury and death that exist in reality. Trying to put a finger on it is not something we usually attempt. Mostly it's a gut feeling. It's an idea we need to have so that we can feel like our participation in society is worthwhile. Also that our society is beneficial.
But in this world "justice" can frequently edge towards wrath or insanity. Not strictly in an "eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind" sense, but also in an "you can't kill a mass murderer more than once" sense. Our forefathers really struggled with this. If you look back at history on of the biggest problems with the death penalty was always trying to figure who should carry it out. There have been creative solutions, but the fundamental problem generally remains. Not that life in prison is a kinder or more just alternative: just that in a very real sense true justice is hard to find and harder to practice.
Anyway in this case I'm essentially arguing that the single greatest effect you could have on the system here is by suffering so as to potentially transform it completely. You might not succeed. There is a risk you might suffer forever alone. But that's the risk you have to take. Just by making that choice you are fundamentally changing Omelas. Atlas was a god, after all. [spoilers] And hope springs eternal. [/spoilers]
Nathan Gomez
And I fucked up my spoiler tags. Ah well.
Ethan Nelson
Justice is tricky and we don't have to get into defining it as long as we agree that the child's suffering is unjust. Do you agree with that assertion?
I maintain that choosing to suffer in the child's place instead of choosing to build a better system is a strictly worse use of your limited personal resources. Your lifespan is limited. A utopia of one unjustly suffering child extended over all of time means an infinite amount of unjust suffering. Your lifespan of taking the place of the child is morally preferable to doing nothing. But it is infinitely more moral to perfect the system so that that child and the future infinity of children never has to suffer unjustly.
