Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mlle. Zabzie

US Politics - All He Wants for Christmas Was His Two Dead Sheep

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I've heard many people bemoan the ignorance of the masses who vote.  And I must assume one of the pitfalls you note are barring people from voting based upon knowledge which has been roundly abused in many different contexts.

Yes and no. I am convinced that we need more democracy, not less of it.
The key is education - it has always been education. If people can't realize the consequences of their actions on their own, they must be taught.
And if people no longer trust other people then other means have to be found. We're supposed to be living in an information age after all.
How do you deal with a 3-year old who refuses to do what is good for them? You explain things. If that doesn't work, you show them. Forcing them is sometimes necessary, but good parenting means avoiding that as much as possible. What you want is for the kid to become responsible, because eventually they'll have to take decisions on their own.
We just need new ways to explain and show people what the consequences of their decisions are, so that we become more responsible collectively.
Parents deal with that on a daily basis, surely humanity can find a way to deal with its own stubbornness.
At first it may look like propaganda or brainwashing. That's the pitfalls I'm thinking of. We're already at the stage where distrust of intellectuals is widespread for ideological reasons (both sides having their share of guilt in this). That's what we'll have to work on: ways for intellectuals to regain or protect their authority.
We'll have to go back to epistomological debates to construct new ways of teaching -and learning- and we'll have to do it fast.
We'll have to question the ways we approach reality itself, because obviously there's something wrong with the way we do that today.
Maybe some form of super-consequentialist education, I dunno, I don't have the answers to everything, I tend to focus on asking questions in the first place. More educated people than me will know which philosopher to read to build something different. The history of human thought is a wondrous tool box after all.
Authoritarianism is like forcing your 3 year-old to do something they don't want to. At the end of the day you actually know best what's good for them (well, most of the time anyway). But it's only an ultimate recourse. It's better for everyone if they can figure things out on their own.
So instead of undemocratic regimes, I'd rather shoot for undemocratic ways of regulating information flows. You don't tell a 3 year-old that the Earth is flat or that knives are harmless. Perhaps it's time we stopped letting people play with information for stupid reasons.
You may say that's only a different form of authoritarianism. It is. But you have kids, and I'm pretty damn sure you taught them that knives can be sharp and dangerous. My 3 year-old wouldn't listen so he learned that the hard way. I'd rather humanity didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Yes and no. I am convinced that we need more democracy, not less of it.
The key is education - it has always been education. If people can't realize the consequences of their actions on their own, they must be taught.
And if people no longer trust other people then other means have to be found. We're supposed to be living in an information age after all.
How do you deal with a 3-year old who refuses to do what is good for them? You explain things. If that doesn't work, you show them. Forcing them is sometimes necessary, but good parenting means avoiding that as much as possible. What you want is for the kid to become responsible, because eventually they'll have to take decisions on their own.
We just need new ways to explain and show people what the consequences of their decisions are, so that we become more responsible collectively.
Parents deal with that on a daily basis, surely humanity can find a way to deal with its own stubbornness.
At first it may look like propaganda or brainwashing. That's the pitfalls I'm thinking of. We're already at the stage where distrust of intellectuals is widespread for ideological reasons (both sides having their share of guilt in this). That's what we'll have to work on: ways for intellectuals to regain or protect their authority.
We'll have to go back to epistomological debates to construct new ways of teaching -and learning- and we'll have to do it fast.
We'll have to question the ways we approach reality itself, because obviously there's something wrong with the way we do that today.
Maybe some form of super-consequentialist education, I dunno, I don't have the answers to everything, I tend to focus on asking questions in the first place. More educated people than me will know which philosopher to read to build something different. The history of human thought is a wondrous tool box after all.
Authoritarianism is like forcing your 3 year-old to do something they don't want to. At the end of the day you actually know best what's good for them (well, most of the time anyway). But it's only an ultimate recourse. It's better for everyone if they can figure things out on their own.
So instead of undemocratic regimes, I'd rather shoot for undemocratic ways of regulating information flows. You don't tell a 3 year-old that the Earth is flat or that knives are harmless. Perhaps it's time we stopped letting people play with information for stupid reasons.
You may say that's only a different form of authoritarianism. It is. But you have kids, and I'm pretty damn sure you taught them that knives can be sharp and dangerous. My 3 year-old wouldn't listen so he learned that the hard way. I'd rather humanity didn't.

Okay, but how does "education" help if the people "educated" don't buy into the "education" they are receiving?  That's part of the problem we are running into today.  People who went through schools that taught them that the world is a globe moving around the Sun orbiting our Galactic center of mass are now claiming that they've been lied to and that the world is flat and the sun is a tiny disk a couple of hundred miles in the air. 

If you allow those who are educated but just don't agree with what they've been taught to vote how did the education help?  To be clear I absolutely don't think we should bar anyone from voting I'm just trying to figure out how your plan works if everyone is still allowed to vote?

What do you mean by saying "Perhaps it's time we stopped letting people play with information for stupid reasons"?  What, specifically, are you proposing?

Edited by Ser Scot A Ellison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

I'm starting to lean towards a technocracy. Inevitably the powerful scientists and engineers who run our government will warp education and admissions standards so that their own offspring are the only viable candidates for replacement, but democracy wasn't no good anyways.

You clearly haven't read enough science fiction written in the 1950's, showing the consequences to societies controlled by scientists and technos.

Anyway I no longer have an a iota of patience for the endless calls for me to be more sympthetic and understanding of the perspectives of so-called red state, rural, white, displaced, left-behind, blahblahblahs.

Why does no one ever suggest any of them try to understand the perspective of, o, say, Native Americans (who tend to often live in rural regions), African Americans (who also often live in rural regions), people hustling to work on long commutes in urban areas to jobs that don't pay enough to keep up with their obligations and without a bonus for the 15th year in a row, the academic adjunct racing from one class to another in three or more different educational institutions, without a single benefit, including unemployment pay, the "personal assistant" to some exec, which for women of color in particular, used to be a fine stepping stone up the ladder, but those jobs are being rapidly digitized out of existence, the nurse practicioner who spends almost all of his working day touching the keyboard and not the patient, the teacher who has to pay out of his own shrinking pay packet any supplies for kids and who is hated by rural parents for having such a cushy life with three months of vacation (which summer break is expected to spent getting yet another degree at her own expense to keep her job) and on and on and on.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

be more sympthetic and understanding of the perspectives of so-called red state, rural, white, displaced, left-behind

you don't, unless running for office in one of those places, in which case you need to put on a theatre of sympathy for their pro-life politics while you cut taxes for the employers who have fired them and abolish regulations for the industrialists whose pollutants cause their kids to die of pediatric malignancies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the root of authoritarianism. Even the smoking example, i choose what is best for me, not your idea of what you think is best for me. Total upper class snobishness at its apex.

cute when the cappies put these words in rightwinger mouths but the rightwingers think they're their own words, a chorus of heroic individualists who just coincidentally all happen to believe the exact same self-serving cliche.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Okay, but how does "education" help if the people "educated" don't buy into the "education" they are receiving?  That's part of the problem we are running into today.  People who went through schools that taught them that the world is a globe moving around the Sun orbiting our Galactic center of mass are now claiming that they've been lied to and that the world is flat and the sun is a tiny disk a couple of hundred miles in the air.

Ultimately there's no magical solution to such complex problems.
However, just as it's easy to demonstrate that knives are dangerous, anyone can also demonstrate that the Earth is round. I would assume that people who decide that they no longer believe the Earth is round were only told of the fact rather than having performed experiments proving it. In this case, I would assume a bit of empirical evidence would have nipped the craziness in the bud.
Scientific experiments are one of the best things about middle-school ; in actuality, many experiments can be performed even earlier.
You might say that it's harder for socio-economics. But is it, really, if you think hard enough about it? Field trips and internships could demonstrate quite a few things. Poverty and wealth are both very real. Political decisions have consequences that can be observed. It's not impossible to study most government activities performed on a daily basis and understand their cost. It's also perfectly possible to observe the workings of a few essential industries (agriculture and energy especially).
And that's just using empiricism. Rationalism can also be taught.
In our age, abstract knowledge can easily be found on the internet. Education could be entirely focused on understanding reality, and the practical side of knowledge in order to develop individual agency and responsibility. I'm not even sure it would necessarily require more means and resources, it might well be all about didactics.
Integrating such knowledge into wider abstract frameworks to compare theories and ideologies would then be the cherry on the cake, in the final years of high school as well as first years of college.
Generally speaking, ignorance and craziness don't appear out of the blue, they are failures of education.
They're also a strategy. Public education has been underfunded and teachers underpaid for decades in the US. I can't say for certain that education will help at this point, but it's an absolute certainty that lack of education doesn't.
It's a repeated truism that Trump is a symptom, not a cause. A symptom of what? I don't think it's absurd to posit his election could be the result of a decades-long strategy to destroy American public education.
It's interesting what you get by typing "neo-liberalism" and "education" in google...

Edit: I'd missed that bit.

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What do you mean by saying "Perhaps it's time we stopped letting people play with information for stupid reasons"?

Well, there was once something called the fairness doctrine in the US... Maybe the FCC could get its teeth back for starters.

Edited by Rippounet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, sologdin said:

This is the root of authoritarianism. Even the smoking example, i choose what is best for me, not your idea of what you think is best for me. Total upper class snobishness at its apex.

cute when the cappies put these words in rightwinger mouths but the rightwingers think they're their own words, a chorus of heroic individualists who just coincidentally all happen to believe the exact same self-serving cliche.

Are all men so easily deceived, Father?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kalbear said:

I have no idea why you're arguing with a ultra right libertarian from Australia who wants kids to be able to work in coal mines and have sex with adults if they choose to, but please continue, it's super entertaining. 

What now? Such an unhealthy obsession with kids must make you a Biden fanboy. Apart from being an Australian who leans more libertarian than liberal, the rest is malarkey.

Anyone who makes baseless accusations like that is probably projecting. Im actually surprised its ok to post that shit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, the responses range from how do we talk to the dumbasses to who cares about the dumbasses with some insults thrown in. One of you even said they read a book about someone who was speaking to dumbasses once. Its almost like you took below literally. 

16 hours ago, Squab said:

Who is more qualified to know which party is the more worker friendly? The workers themselves? No, It'll be someone well educated who has studied the policies and even visited one of these areas once. And because the worker is dumb a low information voter, all we need is the right messaging next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

If you can solve that problem you've hit it out of the ball park.  Both my parents are Trump supporters.  My mother will still call me to see what I think about things.  I think she thinks I'm talking down to her when I explain that, yes, Constitutionally the House can call what ever it want "high crimes and misdemenors" so long as it can muster a 2/3's majority to vote in favor of such.  She wants to talk about the lies told about Trump but never wants to talk about Trump's lies.  It is the danger of being in an information bubble.  

If I was in your shoes I’d (i) ask if she thinks that and if so explain why it isn’t so and (ii) challenge her on only wanting to discuss one side, even if that’s difficult and makes you both uncomfortable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first article of impeachment has been passed.

It's been hours of every time tuning into the live coverage, all I hear are rethugs howling in their horrible hectoring voices about Space Force, crucifixion, coup, destruction of democracy. Plus fatuous slow downs and stunts and blockages such as resolutions to make it go on longer. Not to mention trying to pass resolutions to impeach Dems or execute them or whatever.  Lies lies and damnable lies and more more more of them. All in those horrible hectoring voices.

My chapeau is doffed in honor of Pelosi, Schiff and the Dems for enduring it this long, and now more hours to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Zorral said:

The first article of impeachment has been passed.

It's been hours of every time tuning into the live coverage, all I hear are rethugs howling in their horrible hectoring voices about Space Force, crucifixion, coup, destruction of democracy. Plus fatuous slow downs and stunts and blockages such as resolutions to make it go on longer. Not to mention trying to pass resolutions to impeach Dems or execute them or whatever.  Lies lies and damnable lies and more more more of them. All in those horrible hectoring voices.

My chapeau is doffed in honor of Pelosi, Schiff and the Dems for enduring it this long, and now more hours to go.

It's not clear if this was just like Pearl Harbor or the crucifixion of Christ. I'm surprised 9/11 hasn't been brought up. Have you forgotten?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that was relatively predictable, though I fear the Senate will also be predictable. It depends on how many Republicans are prepared to cross the floor on a vote that isn't going to result in conviction. Democrats badly need some Republican support in the Senate so that they can argue it wasn't a completely partisan move, but McConnell has pretty strong control over his caucus. If the Dems only get Romney and a couple of others, that won't be enough for a Senate moral victory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ormond said:

Not sure it matters that Squab is Australian, and I gathered he was probably "libertarian" from his comment on euthanasia.

When you're in a topic about us politics and telling other us citizens about their politics and how they're wrong to trust experts and should instead let people do anything they want, it is both very relevant (as far as his expertise goes) and highly ironic that a person outside the entire thing would protest telling other people what to do from expertise by...telling people what to do from a total lack of expertise and experience. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jeor said:

Well that was relatively predictable, though I fear the Senate will also be predictable. It depends on how many Republicans are prepared to cross the floor on a vote that isn't going to result in conviction. Democrats badly need some Republican support in the Senate so that they can argue it wasn't a completely partisan move, but McConnell has pretty strong control over his caucus. If the Dems only get Romney and a couple of others, that won't be enough for a Senate moral victory.

If Mitt Romney votes to convict then I'll walk to where you live without shoes and @Tywin et al. will give you the best blowjob you've ever had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kalbear said:

When you're in a topic about us politics and telling other us citizens about their politics and how they're wrong to trust experts and should instead let people do anything they want, it is both very relevant (as far as his expertise goes) and highly ironic that a person outside the entire thing would protest telling other people what to do from expertise by...telling people what to do from a total lack of expertise and experience. 

Emotionalism vs intellectualism is an under-studied part of Hitler's worldview. I've believed that since reading Speer's book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jace, Basilissa said:

Emotionalism vs intellectualism is an under-studied part of Hitler's worldview. I've believed that since reading Speer's book.

Oh yes, I agree. One thing republicans have entirely jumped into with both feet is this performance outrage about...anything. They discovered how well it worked with Kavanaugh and then have just ridden it hard, because people dont make decisions on rational input for the most part - they do it on their feelings. And weirdly (to me at least) democrats are doing the entire somber emotionless decisions and republicans are entirely emotional babies, and it's working quite well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×