Lipton’s Journal/January 31, 1955/353 - Revision history

Grlucas: Added more info to note thanks to external reader.

2023-08-10T14:33:09Z

Added more info to note thanks to external reader.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:33, 10 August 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{LJtop}}		{{LJtop}}
	Horse-racing. An article in ''Life''{{refn\|~~“The~~ Doping ~~of Race Horses”~~ appeared in the January 31, 1955 ''Life'' magazine.}} by a racing bureaucrat decries against horse-doping while giving a marvelous description of its benefits. We are against doping horses because if it works with horses why shouldn’t it work with men? But that is too dangerous for society. Society accepts an innovation pressed by ''reformers'', only when society is ready to adapt it to its own uses. So, it is perfectly possible that drugs will be used socially for people in twenty or fifty years or indeed in five. But society will then have elaborated the techniques of controlling the {{LJ:H}} thus released. It will use drugs in order to make people function more efficiently for its purposes.		Horse-racing. An article in ''Life''{{refn\|“Horse Doping, Still a Blot on Racing” by Dr. John McA. Kater appeared in the January 31, 1955 ''Life'' magazine.}} by a racing bureaucrat decries against horse-doping while giving a marvelous description of its benefits. We are against doping horses because if it works with horses why shouldn’t it work with men? But that is too dangerous for society. Society accepts an innovation pressed by ''reformers'', only when society is ready to adapt it to its own uses. So, it is perfectly possible that drugs will be used socially for people in twenty or fifty years or indeed in five. But society will then have elaborated the techniques of controlling the {{LJ:H}} thus released. It will use drugs in order to make people function more efficiently for its purposes.

	That is why I have instinctively been opposed to reformers and have always seen myself as a radical and revolutionary. As indeed I am. The reformer is the revolutionary turned back. His H turns back upon itself the moment it is in danger of going out too far—going to No-man’s land. So the reformer delivers nothing—he merely offers language and analysis to society when it turns in its adaptations to what he presents. If he were not there, it would have done it more clumsily. That is why the Soviet Union is so ponderous, clumsy, and contradictory in its reforms, its very movements. It has to be since the reformer has nothing like the social sanction here.		That is why I have instinctively been opposed to reformers and have always seen myself as a radical and revolutionary. As indeed I am. The reformer is the revolutionary turned back. His H turns back upon itself the moment it is in danger of going out too far—going to No-man’s land. So the reformer delivers nothing—he merely offers language and analysis to society when it turns in its adaptations to what he presents. If he were not there, it would have done it more clumsily. That is why the Soviet Union is so ponderous, clumsy, and contradictory in its reforms, its very movements. It has to be since the reformer has nothing like the social sanction here.

Grlucas: Fixed typo.

2022-07-29T14:13:31Z

Fixed typo.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:13, 29 July 2022
Line 5:		Line 5:

	But I am a revolutionary because only by revolution, and probably not political revolution, can the {{LJ:S}} be set back on its heels and put into serious retreat, thus opening larger H gambits for future generations in which the S will never be as strong again? Although of course it cannot disappear until man reaches God which I suppose is the point of infinity.		But I am a revolutionary because only by revolution, and probably not political revolution, can the {{LJ:S}} be set back on its heels and put into serious retreat, thus opening larger H gambits for future generations in which the S will never be as strong again? Although of course it cannot disappear until man reaches God which I suppose is the point of infinity.

			{{Notes\|title=note\|width=60em}}

	{{LJnav}}		{{LJnav}}
	[[Category:January 31, 1955]]		[[Category:January 31, 1955]]

Grlucas: Created page.

2021-04-02T18:29:43Z

Created page.

New page

{{LJtop}}
Horse-racing. An article in ''Life''{{refn|“The Doping of Race Horses” appeared in the January 31, 1955 ''Life'' magazine.}} by a racing bureaucrat decries against horse-doping while giving a marvelous description of its benefits. We are against doping horses because if it works with horses why shouldn’t it work with men? But that is too dangerous for society. Society accepts an innovation pressed by ''reformers'', only when society is ready to adapt it to its own uses. So, it is perfectly possible that drugs will be used socially for people in twenty or fifty years or indeed in five. But society will then have elaborated the techniques of controlling the {{LJ:H}} thus released. It will use drugs in order to make people function more efficiently for its purposes.

That is why I have instinctively been opposed to reformers and have always seen myself as a radical and revolutionary. As indeed I am. The reformer is the revolutionary turned back. His H turns back upon itself the moment it is in danger of going out too far—going to No-man’s land. So the reformer delivers nothing—he merely offers language and analysis to society when it turns in its adaptations to what he presents. If he were not there, it would have done it more clumsily. That is why the Soviet Union is so ponderous, clumsy, and contradictory in its reforms, its very movements. It has to be since the reformer has nothing like the social sanction here.

But I am a revolutionary because only by revolution, and probably not political revolution, can the {{LJ:S}} be set back on its heels and put into serious retreat, thus opening larger H gambits for future generations in which the S will never be as strong again? Although of course it cannot disappear until man reaches God which I suppose is the point of infinity.

{{LJnav}}
[[Category:January 31, 1955]]