Bilingual article from Sammyboy.Com forum

English URL:

Re: Your money worries and your democratic rights

I urge Singaporeans to learn and be clear about Rights & Ability, or the rather Rights vs Ability.

Confusion between the 2 is very bad.

Rights is a logical matter, Ability is a physical. Difference is big here.

If you are on your death bed, lost 99% of your ability, you will still have 100% of your rights as long as the rest in this world still respect your rights. You would even have your rights as a DEAD MAN totally with zero ability, as long as the others would uphold your rights for you.

If you had your physical Ability to enforce and guard your what is rightfully yours, it is a very different thing, because you don't need to depend on any others to uphold your own Rights, and if any of them violated your Rights, you physically put them to the places they belong.

As activists we help people by inspiring them and encouraging them to acquire their physical Abilities to empower themselves, to guard their own logical rights.

When people's Rights had been violated and compromised / undermined, helplessly, that means they lack the ability to uphold and guard their own Rights, or defending against the violators.

Hence talking about Rights in these cases is just merely Account the amount of losses suffered at the most, if you just merely talk about Rights. By that we know that the violators will only continue to exploit, unless your talks alone can stop them via embarrassment. If that is the case it is too easy, and these lucky people don't really need any activists to do anything.

In most cases, if you really want to Reclaim the losses suffered, you really need quite some Physical Ability, that is whatever form of Damages, Pressure, Pain, Losses, Distress, Hurt, Death etc you can cause to the violators to defend your violated Rights.

Talks are cheap. And most likely not very helpful.

Because in the 1st place the violators did not accidentally violated people rights, they calculated and prepared and intentionally / purposefully did it.



They neglected and disrespected and violated the people's right for their own gains, in most cases.

If Singaporeans had absolutely no Ability to inflict something wonderful on the LEEgime, you think Ass Loong Son will apologize like he did in GE2011. You really think so?


I strongly believe otherwise.

uy..

中文链接：

【权】 与 【 能】


绝对有必要清楚的认知两者的分别和作用。

两者绝对不相等，搞错了搞混了，麻烦就可以很大。

【权】仅是人为的逻辑性存在的。 只有人为的承认和维护它，它才存在。它人为的存在也可以人为的消逝，或者人为的被改变（增/减/扩/缩）。

决定的人为因素通常包括：法律；宗教；信念；政治理论；学术理论。。等等。 皆为人为因素。

【 能】必须是实体的；实践性；物理性的存在的。必须有实际的效果。而非理论性；逻辑性；或凭空想像的。空谈不能包括在这里 面。

例如老虎有能力吃掉你。但它未必有权这样做。
老虎吃你的时候，你有权自卫。但是你未必有能力做到。

因为【权】是人为存在的，老虎它当然就是不懂，它不懂得人为的东西嘛。
老虎它有的是【 能】而，你知道你有自卫【权】，因为你被人为的教育了，你知道其他人会承认/支持你的自卫【权】。

如果老虎被你关在笼子里面了。你可能会要把它送到餐桌上尝一尝，你可能有这个【能】力。但是，你未必有【权】这样做。你可以争议自己有【权】，但是这要看地方的法律。各地方的法律不相同，这完全是人为的因素。这不影响你的【能】力。你有本事把虎烹吃了，不管法律是否允许。你本事大些，执法的人不知道你把虎烹吃了。你本事再大些，执法 的人即使知道你把虎烹吃了也告不了你。你本事再更大些，你把法律改了！

这就是你自己的【 能】的分别。只有实践性的【能】力，才能改变人为的【权】。空谈无用。


【权】是人为的所有可以争论不休，没完没了。人的看法无法一致，这问题当然没完没了。

【 能】的实践性就很直接了当。马上实践证明就完了。到底是老虎吃你还是你吃它，很快就有答案。老虎饿了吃你，5分 钟下肚子，几小时後消化拉屎。你就变成虎粪了。活不回来了。跟理论分别巨大。你把老虎烹吃了可能1或2小时 。同样会消化拉屎。煮不卫生的话，你拉肚子。老虎吃你多数不拉肚子。因为它的适应消化能力和你 不同。这是【 能】的分别。

吃下去就么有什么子争论啦。

uy..