Georgia Guidestones Damaged by Explosion

[loveofourlord]

I thought the left was pro-violence towards monuments?

We all know this was done simply because of all the nonsense conspiracy stuff.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

What people have stated these ideals as any kind of goal of theirs? You keep mentioning “they” and “them” and “their goals”. I’d like to know who we should be on the lookout for.

They being the people who put the monument up. Their goals being the stated points on the monument. I don't think it unreasonable to not care about this monument's destruction or be against it's message.

 

[Rachel20]

 

[GoldenBoy89]

They being the people who put the monument up. Their goals being the stated points on the monument. I don't think it unreasonable to not care about this monument's destruction or be against it's message.

Yeah that’s all good and all but who are they, specifically? Do we have any names or faces to put to the monument? How would I know who to look out for if we don’t even know who actually believes this stuff?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Yeah that’s all good and all but who are they, specifically? Do we have any names or faces to put to the monument? How would I know who to look out for if we don’t even know who actually believes this stuff?

How would I know who specifically is behind the monument? All I know is that what the monument stands for is what I am adamantly against. Just thinking about implementation of such a vision should lead one to thinking how repellant the ideas on it are.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

They being the people who put the monument up. Their goals being the stated points on the monument. I don't think it unreasonable to not care about this monument's destruction or be against it's message.

My understanding is that they weren't articulating goals, but rather instructions on how to rebuild society following an apocalyptic event (i.e. nuclear war - they were erected in the 80s) while maintaining a balance with nature.

That's not to say that I agree with them - the eugenical implications of "Guide reproduction wisely" are particularly concerning from a moral and ethical standpoint - but they're hardly the bogeyman you make them out to be. There's no one (at least no one of any significance, or with any chance of sucess) actively working towards the ideas expressed on the guidestones as goals within present society.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

My understanding is that they weren't articulating goals, but rather instructions on how to rebuild society following an apocalyptic event (i.e. nuclear war - they were erected in the 80s) while maintaining a balance with nature.

That's not to say that I agree with them - the eugenical implications of "Guide reproduction wisely" are particularly concerning from a moral and ethical standpoint - but they're hardly the bogeyman you make them out to be. There's no one (at least no one of any significance, or with any chance of sucess) actively working towards the ideas expressed on the guidestones as goals within present society.

I don't think I've made anyone out to be a bogeyman, but I just don't care about this monument's destruction. As a thing, why do we care if it was destroyed or damaged?

 

[RocksInMyHead]

I don't think I've made anyone out to be a bogeyman, but I just don't care about this monument's destruction. As a thing, why do we care if it was destroyed or damaged?

I don't particularly care one way or the other - as far as I'm concerned, it was a tourist trap. However, you and others are trying to ascribe nefarious motives to it and/or its creators in order to justify its destruction. You say that you don't care, but you've spent the last few pages pointing out how you think it's calling for the destruction of most of humanity, and that doesn't sit right with me, because it's not true.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I don't particularly care one way or the other - as far as I'm concerned, it was a tourist trap. However, you and others are trying to ascribe nefarious motives to it and/or its creators in order to justify its destruction. You say that you don't care, but you've spent the last few pages pointing out how you think it's calling for the destruction of most of humanity, and that doesn't sit right with me, because it's not true.

I said I don't care that it was destroyed. Not that I don't care about the monument. There is a subtle difference there.

But I take the monument at it's word. To control the reproduction of humanity is a good thing according to it. There may be no nefarious motive there, in that they intend to do evil. Nobody really intends to do evil and we all justify our actions. Whoever created the monument thinks the points on it are fundamentally good.

 

[FireDragon76]

Just as long as the monument has writing that talks about reducing the human population down to no more than 500 million globally. But monuments that celebrate the founding of this country? Oh no, tear them down!

It doesn't talk about reducing population, it specifically says to "mantain" the population at those levels.

Keep in mind this was built for survivors of a hypothetical nuclear holocaust.

You should stop making assumptions about what sort of monuments people want torn down.

 

[FireDragon76]

Wonder if they'll get rebuilt.
And hoping they make those that did this pay for a new set.

I'm hoping they get serious prison time. Unlicensed use of explosives is a felony.

 

[Aldebaran]

I'm not too interested in preserving resources, personally, so I'd rather go with a massive project that costs lots of money.

The government usually agrees with that idea.

 

[FireDragon76]

Why spend so much money on something so expensive just to display some controversial messages? Why not post them on a bulletin board, or a website? It would take far, FAR less resources, and therefore be better for the planet.

The messages weren't for present generations.

Why should we want it to be reconstructed when it represents everything wrong with the current global elite world vision? That specific line about limiting the world to five hundred million is, quite frankly, evil.

I don't think the world will ever be one single unit, but within the world we do have enemies and we do have friends. The people who built said monument are not our friends and they don't deserve pity or tolerance.

It's not evil: it's not far off from what many experts say is the long term carrying capacity of the earth. No more than two billion people.

 

[Aldebaran]

It doesn't talk about reducing population, it specifically says to "mantain" the population at those levels.

Keep in mind this was built for survivors of a hypothetical nuclear holocaust.

A reduction needs to happen from the current 7.75 billion down to 500 million first in order for 500 million to be maintained.

You should stop making assumptions about what sort of monuments people want torn down.

Why would I make an assumption about it after actually witnessing it?

 

[Aldebaran]

The messages weren't for present generations.

Then it's outdated. So what difference does it make it outdated messages on some slabs of rock are blown up or not? Are we supposed to worship monuments now?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

The messages weren't for present generations.

It's not evil: it's not far off from what many experts say is the long term carrying capacity of the earth. No more than two billion people.

It is evil when you start to talk about controlling reproduction, especially on a global level. The amount of power a state would need in order to reinforce such a vision, especially against people who flout the standard makes it repulsive in my view.

What do you think would happen to dissidents under such a regime? Would they be tolerated and allowed to do as they wish? Probably not because it would go against the stated mission of the government or elite class.

 

[Lady Bug]

Well you can still find the content of those stones on the internet if you do searches, I suppose.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

A reduction needs to happen from the current 7.75 billion down to 500 million first in order for 500 million to be maintained.

Yes, the people who built it in the 80s believed that nuclear war was inevitable. They constructed the guidestones as a blueprint for rebuilding society after a nuclear holocaust. That's why they were etched in stone and in multiple languages. Their choice of location is somewhat questionable, as are some of the directives, but as far as I've been able to determine, there's no actual nefarious intent behind them.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Another fan of destruction of property.

 

[Arcangl86]

How much did it cost?

I suspect you don't really care, but contempary news sources say that it cost over $100K to build in 1980. That's about $350K today.