What I Think And What You Think

[cactoblasta]

I am saying that the Argentinians should know if their government is about to rob them blind. I am saying that the starving millions should know that their dictator is pocketting the aid from overseas. I am saying that you should know if your other half is shacked up with your so-called best mate. I personally couldn't give a damn because it doesn't affect me, but you have the right to know.

 

I've got no problem with that. It's quite likely that those Argentinians and the starving either would like to know or already know. I don't believe that people should be kept ignorant of things that are actually immediately important to them. I'm just against the trend of going around insisting everyone be aware of everything - as if knowing about Bush's family oil connections is ever going to be personally important to a Tipparoo farmer.

 

I only wish to defend the value of petty illusions. Either I haven't put that across well enough or you and Peregrine think people have no rights to petty illusions either.

 

To make them carry on believing in their false illusions?

 

I don't mean to make them do anything. I mean to do nothing. If they really, truly want to know then they'll already be following Socrates lead and questioning everything, in which case in nearly any western society the truth won't be far away. No one should be made to do anything, least of all be liberated from a harmless illusion.

 

Exactly. Our ignorance of those in power is a danger to all society.

 

Rubbish. Human society has survived thousands of years without broad public involvement in state affairs. Sure, you get a rebellion here, a massacre there, but I doubt we'll ever reach a state where the scum doesn't rise to the top. What makes you think public involvement is important now? It's not like any policy is formulated these days on the will of the people anyway. The modern statesman uses the mob in much the same ways as Pericles did. It's only the vocabulary of power that has changed, not its source.

 

Your statements are the epitome of smallmindedness and a lack of desire to make the world a better place.

 

Of course. I firmly believe that it's impossible to make the world a better place than it is already. Humanity seems to be hardwired to be petty, callous and oftentimes cruel. It's a blight on our natures we can never overcome. All we can do is try to help as individuals, and the best way to do that is to a) not go out of our way to needlessly spread suffering through being disciples of pointless truths and b) do something meaningful, like lending a hand to someone in need. Providing knowledge without agency doesn't help anyone.

[karkarinus]

I only wish to defend the value of petty illusions. Either I haven't put that across well enough or you and Peregrine think people have no rights to petty illusions either.

 

So now, thinking that the status quo is just spiffing is a petty illusion?!? Sure, thinking that your country is going to win the World Cup, or that there's life after death, or that your great great great grandfather was some famous playwright, is all very well, but you're talking about things that implicitly affect everyone in their respective country, community or even creed. Like corruption. In fact it pretty much all boils down to corruption, or lies or deceit of one form or another. We have a right to know that if we are being cheated. What if your boss was fiddling the books and pocketting half your sales commissions? Whether you choose to quit, or say anything to him or tell your colleagues, is up to you, but in the meantime you're not all starry-eyed thinking that he's a great bloke.

 

harmless illusion

See above.

 

Rubbish. Human society has survived thousands of years without broad public involvement in state affairs. Sure, you get a rebellion here, a massacre there, but I doubt we'll ever reach a state where the scum doesn't rise to the top. What makes you think public involvement is important now? It's not like any policy is formulated these days on the will of the people anyway. The modern statesman uses the mob in much the same ways as Pericles did. It's only the vocabulary of power that has changed, not its source.

 

 

 

I'm not talking about public involvement - I'm talking about public awareness. And no, no political policy is formulated from the desires of the people, but we are lead to beleive so. Dees ees de problem. When we make decisions (like voting) based upon what we are told, we are wandering into the hunter's snare. I can assure you that those Argentinians didn't know what the government were scheming, because if they had, they would never have paid the money into the bank. We vote for those who seem to offer us the greatest improvement in our own personal status quo. We don't give a damn about how it affects others, as long as we are to see change in our favour. Then the XYZ Party gets into power and does whatever the hell it likes. If we had been informed of that oh-so-painful truth beforehand, we could have voted for someone else (who admittedly would more than likely have lied too, but if just one party was exposed as actually being honest, wouldn't you vote for them? Regardless of what apparent improvements were offered by the other, corrupt parties?) Which brings me to my next point:

 

 

 

Of course. I firmly believe that it's impossible to make the world a better place than it is already. Humanity seems to be hardwired to be petty, callous and oftentimes cruel. It's a blight on our natures we can never overcome. All we can do is try to help as individuals, and the best way to do that is to a) not go out of our way to needlessly spread suffering through being disciples of pointless truths and b) do something meaningful, like lending a hand to someone in need. Providing knowledge without agency doesn't help anyone.

 

 

 

I happen to agree with you that it is impossible to make the world a better place - despite many of my right-honourable on-forum colleagues disagreeing with me - but that by no means takes away my desire to do so. If enough people have the same knowledge and desires, there is yet a glimmer of hope.

[VaanicOne]

I don't know why I even bother replying to you. You're just a complete moron, deserving of nothing but contempt from me. Ignorance is NOT a virtue to be proud of, it's flaw that should be corrected. I can't even imagine how pathetic your life must be, that you would actually want to be part of the herd of mindless sheep in society. Or that you could throw away all responsibility for yourself, all of your basic dignity, in exchange for peaceful ignorance. You disgust me.

 

Peregrine, you are kindly reminded that verbally assaulting people is against the forum rules. It isn't cool/sexy/brave/funny/honourable/popular.

 

 

 

Of course. I firmly believe that it's impossible to make the world a better place than it is already. Humanity seems to be hardwired to be petty, callous and oftentimes cruel. It's a blight on our natures we can never overcome. All we can do is try to help as individuals, and the best way to do that is to a) not go out of our way to needlessly spread suffering through being disciples of pointless truths and b) do something meaningful, like lending a hand to someone in need. Providing knowledge without agency doesn't help anyone.

 

 

What a sad thing to say...

[cactoblasta]

So now, thinking that the status quo is just spiffing is a petty illusion?!?

 

No. I just don't that it's ever going to change much for the better, so I'm not going to bother antagonising people by breaking the illusions that make their lives seem better than they really are.

 

I'm not talking about public involvement - I'm talking about public awareness.

 

The public has never been aware of what's going on in politics, least of all today. The political advantage of the modern two-party state is that it provides the illusion of choice with the guarantee of continuity and stability. It's a success precisely becausee it let the people think they are involved whilst simultaneously making difficult the entrance of outsiders to the process.

 

That may be overly cynical, but I've yet to see a political leader who acts ethically on all matters rather than pragmatically. If they appeared I expect they would be crushed in a heartbeat because they are too weak to deal with the process.

 

We vote for those who seem to offer us the greatest improvement in our own personal status quo. We don't give a damn about how it affects others, as long as we are to see change in our favour.

 

Exactly. From what I've seen the public will never do what is right so long as the benefits of doing wrong are more apparent. I do think though that third parties and the 'truly honest' make use of this just as much as anyone else.

 

I happen to agree with you that it is impossible to make the world a better place - despite many of my right-honourable on-forum colleagues disagreeing with me - but that by no means takes away my desire to do so. If enough people have the same knowledge and desires, there is yet a glimmer of hope.

 

I gave up on that desire last year when I saw beggars kicked and spat on and the poor die in the street outside hospitals because they couldn't afford 20 bucks worth of medicine. That doesn't mean I don't think people shouldn't try and make a difference. I just don't think it's possible to do so on anything other than a personal level, and therefore I don't see any great need to go and strip the illusionary happiness from those who still have it.

[karkarinus]

I think the reason you and I are going round in circles here is that we both have very similar viewpoints, and yet are taking quite opposite stances in a debate. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you appear to be just as p¡ssed off as the rest of us, but you have taken a conscious decision to do nothing about it - let the apple cart trundle along its way, because you alone do not have the strength to upset it. I have said here and in other threads that I agree with this, but you are denying the desire to do anything about it. How can you possibly say that you do not wish to prevent those beggars from being beaten? You may turn a blind eye so as not to get caught up in things, and you may resign yourself to the fact that it's just par for the course, but inside you're burning with a rage and in 2.5 milliseconds you've thought "If only I were - ........ a group of policemen....... the Prime Minister / President ......... Terminator 4........... a rich man............. - I could have - ........arrested the perpetrators.........changed the system.............blown dem all away, muthfkker!..........or generously offered to pay for the beggars' treatment." You lack the means and therefore the inclination - but not the desire!

 

 

 

The public has never been aware of what's going on in politics, least of all today. The political advantage of the modern two-party state is that it provides the illusion of choice with the guarantee of continuity and stability. It's a success precisely becausee it let the people think they are involved whilst simultaneously making difficult the entrance of outsiders to the process.

I heartily agree, but that doesn't change the fact that it's wrong. A façade of democracy may serve to quell public uprising, (I can anticpate your response to that..... "Exactly why we should do nothing about it - better peace through false democracy than rebellion through knowledge of the truth....") and to some extent I agree, but that doesn't make it right, or mean that I like it. The difference here is that I choose to suffer in silence, while you choose (or claim to choose) to avoid that suffering by accepting that that's just the way it is. I doubt, however, that you do not quietly wish for change.

[cactoblasta]

think the reason you and I are going round in circles here is that we both have very similar viewpoints, and yet are taking quite opposite stances in a debate.

 

Probably. But if all the fun is in the journey, getting there in a straight line just cuts off half the fun.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you appear to be just as p¡ssed off as the rest of us, but you have taken a conscious decision to do nothing about it - let the apple cart trundle along its way, because you alone do not have the strength to upset it.

 

Not quite. I'll do what I can, but I'm not about to join the apocalyptic crowd and spread such a disheartening view of society, no matter how accurate I think it is. Knowing how terrible things are in, say, Iraq, won't help a friend whose life revolves around ice and girls. That's the kind of ignorance I think shouldn't be messed with - the innocent belief that the world is a great place. The last thing I want from the world is for everyone to think it's bleak, or to paraphase into a cliche, for people to let the truth get in the way of a good story.

 

The difference here is that I choose to suffer in silence, while you choose (or claim to choose) to avoid that suffering by accepting that that's just the way it is. I doubt, however, that you do not quietly wish for change.

 

Sure. But I believe that beneficial change will never come from raging against the machine or 'raising awareness'. Most revolutions and popular movements just replace one tyrant with another. It's often only the people being oppressed that changes. So going around 'raising awareness' isn't going to help. Far better to just help those you can and leave the rest to ignorance. People rarely realise they're oppressed until someone tells them, and then they're insufferable.

[karkarinus]

Not quite. I'll do what I can, but I'm not about to join the apocalyptic crowd and spread such a disheartening view of society, no matter how accurate I think it is. Knowing how terrible things are in, say, Iraq, won't help a friend whose life revolves around ice and girls. That's the kind of ignorance I think shouldn't be messed with - the innocent belief that the world is a great place. The last thing I want from the world is for everyone to think it's bleak, or to paraphase into a cliche, for people to let the truth get in the way of a good story.

 

 

 

I think you have indirectly agreed with me on something there: that the Max Power Boy should be left to go about his petty life because he couldn't care less either way. But those of us who want to know should be allowed to know. I am not condoning the enforcement of enlightenment upon those who don't want it - merely defending the right of those who do.

[Stampede]

I have deleted the offending post and all posts relating to it, as they really did have nothing to do with the topic heading.

 

In future if you disagree with a moderator, PM them and changes will be made if needed. I hope we can carry on with this popular thread.