>'cause you should never apply the laws of physics and
>chemistry to our social constructs, the analogies just won't
>bend to fit eh.

they do in some instances. check out game theory or just watch a beautiful mind. that dude's whole premise was that certain socio-economic factors can be quantified and predicted based on certain mathematical models. or for that matter, check out Aasimov's "Foundation" series...it's fiction but its ideas are baseed on sound, if speculative math

>The only way to win is to fight the fight, some of us can
>fight the big battles, may more of us can fight the little
>ones; promoting nihilism just ain't gonna cut it.

i don't see the cat's philosophy as nihilistic. just as buddhism, which advocates the non-existence of a soul or any permanent intrinsic object-properties, was called nihilistic by the early hindus who believed in the positive existence of one, so the idea of non-violence and non-resistance (King, Jesus, Buddha, almost every "mystical" religious leader) seems hopeless when compared to dualism or social conflict theory--where society, the universe, existence, is veiwed in terms of discrete parts all operating with their own movement, bumping into each other, causing friction and the appearance of a divided universe. to the contrary, co-operation theory advances the notion that all things are just one big thing (like the cells of your body are just you but YOU are not just the cells of your body), sum being larger than the parts, that's the universe viewed thru unity. in such a system it becomes obvious that two actually unified forces competing with one another set up the apperance of good and evil where in actually mutuality prevails: ergo, common enmity. eureka, the two foces who think they are enemies are actually partners in the same lethal dance! ah but how to tell that to the little cells who must be shed?

>*edit* And I'm not just talking about drugs in the States
>either, I'm speaking much more universally.
>
>*extra edit* And to get real technical, the entropy part of
>the laws of thermodynamics state two things: systems (and
>we're talking systems at an atomic scale) will revert to
>disorder if possible, and that no reaction is 100 % efficient,
>but that's it; they're laws for systems in which the parts =
>the whole, but the way people live is different (any society
>is greater than the sum of its parts).

yes, absolutely. what's funny is that i can almost restate your reasoning verbatim and come in my mind to the exact opposite conclusion because in a reaction (whether as simple and inert as mixing kool-aid, water and sugar or as complex as the exchange of energy and transformation of matter that is bloodshed) nothing is 100%, thus nothing is finished, perfected, leaving the door open for later reactions--everything evolving--the "fighting" never ends, "reactions" never end, it does, at some point, taken to its logical conclusion, does sort of beg the question of "What's the point?"

Or put it like this, We as black folks with our allies fight segregation and win! Yay! Then all of a sudden all the money flows out of our "system" and we're broke in the hood, leaving a whole new battle to fight, say, for dough, which we start making through, say, music, basketball, entertainment, media, and that's good, but then we have to fight to keep our morality in check because the entertainment world basically tries to strip that shit away quick, and blah, blah, it does go on and on. I don't know if that's nihilistic or just clairvoyant.

be god!