Its disgusting, it really is. by Smartbutdumbblonde

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Its disgusting, it really is.

POSTED BY: SMARTBUTDUMBBLONDE
UPDATED: Thursday, August 3, 2006 19:13
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4225
PAGE 2 of 2

Wednesday, August 2, 2006 11:19 AM

Grrr. Argh. Okay. Hi, citizen. I don't want to get into any kind of Battle of the Definitions, but to remove the stigma of absolute power from your definition of "dictator" really seems to remove the term from any relevance to reality or politics. I don't believe Mal's power is absolute except to the extent that it's his ship and if you don't like how he runs it, you can get off. People haven't owned entire countries since feudal times, so I fail to see how Mal's proprietary rights have anything to do with any post-medieval political system.

But you're saying that because Mal makes the big decisions about what happens on his boat he's a dicator. Office managers are dictators. My congressman is a dictator. Milton after he went blind was a dictator--well he was! He dictated all his writings after that didn't he? (I'm sorry. I tried to resist, but I was weak.)

Have it your way. I don't see the value in diluting the "emotional implications" out of the meaning of the word "dictator" and you do.

Quote:
Quote:
That's funny, 'cause it also proves my point that modern man is ashamed of himself and foolishly thinks he can succeed by denying his violent impulses rather than integrating and healing them.
Yeah but my points on topic . Well it's not but you seem to be off on a tangent with this...

I don't think it's a tangent at all. Y'all were talking about human nature, whether you did so intentionally or not. I thought the human nature angle was important to bring out.

When you think about it, greed is a violent impulse. And the creation of an underclass is the political result of unchecked greed. Our culture denies the connection. The disgusting consumption of the extremely rich reflects a catastrophic lack of empathy.

What do you think is the cause of this lack of empathy? Is it inherent or learned? Is it a malfunction or an innevitable conclusion?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 3, 2006 9:22 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Grrr. Argh. Okay. Hi, citizen.

I think it's safe to say that any frustration you feel because I. Just. Don't. Get. It. Is mirrored in the frustration I feel because You. Just. Don't. Get. It.

The emotion I was talking of is that which when we hear 'dictator' we think of Hitler or Mussolini. These men are not the definition of Dictatorship anymore than Stalin is the definition of Communism.

Quote:
I don't think it's a tangent at all. Y'all were talking about human nature, whether you did so intentionally or not. I thought the human nature angle was important to bring out.

We seem to be jumping about a bit, I was talking about Anarchy with that quote, you hit me with human nature is what I mean.

Quote:
When you think about it, greed is a violent impulse. And the creation of an underclass is the political result of unchecked greed. Our culture denies the connection. The disgusting consumption of the extremely rich reflects a catastrophic lack of empathy.

What do you think is the cause of this lack of empathy? Is it inherent or learned? Is it a malfunction or an innevitable conclusion?

Capitalism is a system that promotes and rewards greed. What do you expect?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 3, 2006 5:02 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

This is really late in the discussion, but ...

The discussion migrated from 'free market economy' - which does have a shady historical track record - to anarchy. For those who think armed anarchy is the path to true personal, economic and political freedom, I'd like to suggest Somalia and the Congo as current real-world approximations. People who are NOT interested in your freedom or theirs WILL join together to - take your strawberries, as Citizen pointed out.

I have relatives who DID live in what should have been the perfect anarchy - rural and self-sufficient, small groups, eveyrone knew everyone else, low overarching control. The meanest man got avoided as much as possible by everyone else who was just trying to farm their crops. But he did create a fair bit of havoc, and there was no organized social response. During times of instability (WWII), groups of people got together and attacked other groups of people who they thought were out to get them. It strikes me as being a fearful, unstable way to live, and not at all 'free'.

As a thought experiment, I guess, Firefly was brought into the mix. I do question whether Serenity was a dictator-ship (hee hee ship - get it?? :nudge wink:). If Mal pushed too hard, everyone would just go away, the next planet. Either way it is a limit on Mal's 'rule' (either he tries hard to not cross over that invisible line, OR he ends up a dictator of one). That implies a certain amount of voluntary cooperation on all sides.

FWIW, there was a recent study (I'd have to dig it up) where groups of average people did better at arriving at good decisions than did a single very smart person. That makes dictatorships actually inferior to democracies or committees.

I'm not going to approach the topic of individual and group dynamics ! How is it that a person recognizes that another person is 'like them' and interacts personally rather than generically? How is it that a person gives up some of their autonomy and conforms to the actions of a group? (PS As someone who fomented a palace revolt at work, I have to say that there is a distinct dynammic to group consensus, apart from either individual action or mob movement.)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 3, 2006 7:01 PM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
For those who think armed anarchy is the path to true personal, economic and political freedom, I'd like to suggest Somalia and the Congo as current real-world approximations.

My husband's best friend is from the Dem. Rep. of Congo (formerly Zaire). My husband has visited several times, as well as other central and eastern African countries. None of those countries have been or are currently approximations of an armed anarchy.

In an armed anarchy, EVERYONE is armed. That's the keyword, everyone.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, August 3, 2006 7:13 PM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
CTS- Coming up with a hypothetical example (in this case school bullying) and then using it to support your points is unusually self-referencing, don't you think?

What? It's an EXAMPLE, for Pete's sake. An illustration. That's what examples do--they are called forth to lend imagery and support for one's point.

Some countries get bullied more than others. Just like some kids get bullied more than others. What's the problem? Do you disagree with that statement? What?

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE