Democracy, Birds, And Snails

[Bozo Erectus]

The plain truth never makes me shudder.

 

[Cheetah]

So you know someone who sells tickets to this show? Otherwise forget about this option. The guys playing in this league aren't interested in you or anyone else to join.
It would mean to cut another peace from the cake.

All left to do is to hope for the left wing monarchists, I can tell you

While we wait for the left wing monarchists, I hope I can make myself usefull and start to climb the system. I doubt I would ever reach anywhere near the top, but it's still better than the bottom, where you're still waiting for the monarchists.

(a) a liberation from the us vs. them mentality
(b) a long term pov giving human development some sort of teleology
(c) a innate desire to "better" ourselves
(d) related to (c) ceasing of the personal aggrandizement as the main driver for most of our actions by are large

I'm afraid I am to deluded and cynical, but I have doubts that we will be able to change our nature.

 

[Gothmog]

I’m late to this game, but I’ve been busy for a while now, and I’ve gotten to work early so… prepare for a long post.

While much of the following debate was interesting, I found the article simpleminded and self serving.

I wonder whether liberal democracies do not follow an ordained trajectory into the muck, ripening like fruits, having their arteries harden, and falling, plop, to be eaten by birds and snails.

i.e. things were so much better in the past, when men were men. People today are blind, lazy, and stupid - those kids today don’t listen.

America does not have a free press. The media are big business and speak for those who own big business. They lie and distort and always have. Now, however, they all lie and distort identically; here is the rub. Their function is to herd the sheep. The public knows only what it is allowed to know, except for the tiny few who go to the internet.

Some truth and some self serving crap. There is still some good info out there, on the internet and elsewhere (e.g. NPR, BBC), and there is lots of ‘big media’ too. This does nothing to support or deny his initial sentence.

“Political correctness” is not an annoying fad. It is a deadly serious means of preventing public discussion of things that those in power do not want discussed (for example, race, affirmative action, illegal immigration.)

Nothin interesting here, PC is a red herring. It means different things to different people. People for and against anything can claim it hinders them.

Though it may run counter to intuition, the press itself has little interest in freedom of the press; this is why freedom is so easily denied. Journalism is first a job. It is second a job with rich perquisites: A reporter travels abroad, attends exciting events, enjoys privileges unheard of among mere citizenry. It’s a racket. Only a cantankerous few would risk these wonders for the sake of telling the truth. They are soon weeded out.

I’m cantankerous and was weeded out for being honest and good, I miss the perq’s (i.e. self surving).

Then comes a bunch of stuff about the Demakins and Republocrats, which again has some truth but is simple minded. Do you really think that Gore or Kerry would have made the same choices as Bush? That there was no substantial difference to the direction they would have taken the country? Nonsense.

I do think that people want security more than freedom, in general people want to be told what to do in a way that help them feel in control. But that’s a conclusion I reached when I was 10. People will fight for things they love. In any case, this is not a practically useful observation.

He threw in some anti-federal stuff here too.

The people lack the intelligence to govern any entity larger than a very small town

Possibly true, but not useful in any way and definitely self serving (i.e. I’m not like that).

unable to farm, fish, hunt, defend themselves, change their spark plugs or build a shelter. They cannot live without the state

Again with the ‘when men were men’ stuff. People obviously cannot live at our current standard of living with out a society, never could – not even close if we include mortality in there.

The common run of humanity has no interest in learning anything or in any sort of intellectual betterment. They resent anything they see as indicating superiority in others, though, and want assurance that, as kids used to say in Alabama, “you ain’t no gooder’n me.” The degradation of the schools serves to eliminate obvious distinction, improve docility, avoid unwanted study, and make people consumers of witless amusement provided from above, as for example terrible music and awful movies.

More of the ‘things were so much better in the past, people today are blind and lazy, those kids today don’t listen.’ stuff. Oh, and I’m different (i.e. better) - you are too if you agree with me. Self serving nonsense.

It could be lots worse.

Yes, and it always has been. What utopia is he comparing our current lot too? I see nothing constructive at all in this article, just a bunch of simpleminded self serving nonsense.