17 replies to this topic

[JRC]

So, over at npr.org they've a brief review of the unabridged RR diaries from his presidential term:

The Reagan Diaries

One person rebuts this quote:
"To understand this, one has to be honest about just how evil and barbaric Marxist governments have been and how important it was to stop the global dominoes falling toward communist dominance. In truth, Marxist governments slaughtered over 120 million of their own citizens in cold blood throughout the 20th century..." etc etc so on and so forth.
With this:
NOT REALLY MARXIST GOVERNMENTS. A true Marxist government has never existed, it is an ideaology that would actually be greatly successful if not for the overpowering greed of humans. However, don't tarnish Marx's name by making it seem like Marxism promotes the slaying of a country's own people. That's the problem with anti-marxist rhetoric, aside from the fact that its tired and worn out, its completely unfounded. Do some research, read some Marx. This, I am sorry to say, is a "complete lack of understanding of philopsophy, ideology and geopolitics." Know the difference between real Marxist philosophies and those perpetuated to be. Such an illogical fear of Marxism still exists in our culture, one that would disappear if the real philosophy was actually studied without bias or predetermined opinions.

And, while I don't disagree with the rebutal, basically "ideas don't kill people--people kill people" I have always had a problem with idealogues who think its humanity's fault their dream government/religion/philosophy can't function in the real world.
The way I see it, is if you're idea can't work with the failings of human thought/emotion, then its not humanity's fault: its the failing of your theory.
As Homer Simpson once said, "In theory Communism works--in theory."
It aint my damn fault I want personal reward for my singular achievement.

The same with Capitolism, I suppose in a computer simulation we could create a perfect Capitolist Utopia, but the minute you add a chaotic variable--the lazey dude who doesn't want to work hard and run his own company, well its as good as sabotage.

What I'm thinking is, if you really want to have a great philosophy to move humanity forward, why not develope it to grow from our . . . baser instincts (is that the phrase I'm looking for?) instead of trying to "correct" them?

There are ways greed benefits humanity, just as their are practicle applications for collecitive sacrafice, just as we can use religious ideology to raise our spirits and give us emotional comfort.

So what is the theory of melding these things together into a satisfying, functional "social-network-program" ?

JRC

[Jacki O.]

Facebook!

[aaronburke]

there are offshoots of communism that reward personal
achievement while making sure everyone is covered.

[ladydemon]

i'm currently accepting applications for a tutor.

EDIT: I've got loads of potential.

EDIT: And I study hard!

EDIT: Plus I like to read.

[unluckycharm]

Aw screw it let's go back to little tribes, with a witch doctor and occasional sacrifice to appease some god or other.

[JRC]

Facebook!

Ya know, I really just don't like facebook that much, and it has everything to do with design.
If it was religion, I'd be an atheist.

JRC

[Jacki O.]

Facebook!

Ya know, I really just don't like facebook that much, and it has everything to do with design.
If it was religion, I'd be an atheist.

JRC

word. i am not high on facebook either. i dont like all those application thingys that they trick you into clicking on.

[raubhimself]

And, while I don't disagree with the rebutal, basically "ideas don't kill people--people kill people" I have always had a problem with idealogues who think its humanity's fault their dream government/religion/philosophy can't function in the real world.
The way I see it, is if you're idea can't work with the failings of human thought/emotion, then its not humanity's fault: its the failing of your theory.
As Homer Simpson once said, "In theory Communism works--in theory."
It aint my damn fault I want personal reward for my singular achievement.

This post is long and possibly nonsensical, read at your own risk.

Spoiler

Isn't it your fault? You seem to be holding the idea that our flaws are inherent, and can't be fixed. They might be inherent but it is your "fault" if you don't strive to fix them. Our perceptions of the world, and how we fit into it, can and do change fairly easily and many times throughout our life.

Any political system is just an attempt to get people to abide by a certain set of rules, be it Communism or Capitalism. Pure Capitalism doesn't work like you said. A lazy person will fail, and that sucks for them. Those who strive to achieve something will be rewarded. Our modern version of Capitalism is a far cry from this, and we reward laziness, greed, and complacency, among other undesirable traits.

However you are on to something. The big difference between pure Communism and pure Capitalism is how we look at those flaws. Communism to some degree attempts to correct the flaws inherent in human nature. Ideally it works, but in practice it does not. Capitalism punishes the flaws and/or rewards those who overcome the flaws. However, we have strayed and now reward bad traits, even if it is indirectly. We have bankers making poor decisions, and then we bail them out not to help them, but for the greater good of the people who would be crushed underneath them. If we did not bail them out, lots of people would be hurt, but it would tell bankers that if you make dumb decisions you will reap what you sow. We cannot stop people from being lazy, greedy, or slimy, but we can stop reinforcing that behavior.

Striving for ideals is almost always foolish. I can strive for personal ideals, but trying to get the whole world on board is a pipe dream. This is why I like a more pure style of Capitalism. There is no promise. If everyone works hard and honestly, maybe that ideal can be reached. But you being lazy doesn't necessarily stop me from prospering. There is only one person you can truly hold accountable, and that is yourself.

Many of the great things in the history of man have been advanced by individuals, not societies. Galileo, Da Vinci, Newton, Franklin, Einstein, and so on. It didn't take an ideal society for any of them to prosper in their respective fields. And look at the glaring flaws in society that existed in their eras and political systems.

I think we largely agree, I just think we are more in control of ourselves than you, perhaps. We create society more so than society creates us. At least if we want.

How I typed and thought all this out I don't know. I am full of buffalo chicken wrap and just sat outside in the sun for an hour and a half, and I am dozing off...

[JRC]

Nice thoughts, I'm not offended by any of it--at least I don't think . . .

I will say though, my overall point isn't specifically about addressing just the pro and con of socialist/capitalist/religious ideology.
I don't want this all to devolve into that argument.
I could just as easily be compairing Fashism, Krisha, Atheism, and demand side economic theory.

I do, as you say, think all ideologies [that I know of] are flawed because they don't take into account human "weaknesses".
. . . Hmmm, could it be were incapable of coming up with a working system because we are trying to do it w/ a flawed "genetic makeup"?!

I guess I don't see it a human nessesity to overcome our flaws actually.
They shouldn't nessesarily be celebrated or encouraged I guess, but they are there, and to me it the obvious reaction is to . . . I dunno, find ways around them or exploit them, instead of saying you're weak and that causes the system to crash, there for you are the problem.

Where is the place for everyone to be useful?

[weener]

I think it would be very difficult to form a theory that takes into account human weaknesses. Why? Because there are so, so many of them and they manifest in so many different ways. Start taking inventory of the way those could affect your system and you no longer have a theory...you have a clusterfuck. Just like real life.

[ladydemon]

there are offshoots of communism that reward personal
achievement while making sure everyone is covered.

you mean like anarchism, or nihilism?

From St. Dunstan's Red and White - April 1933

Man has the right of property without which he
could not effectually conserve his life which conservation
is his natural right. Without the right of property he
would not have the right of using those things which he
needs now, nor could he lay up for future use that of which
he will have need to maintain life. Also man has a natural
right to a human or imperfect happiness here on earth
which consists in a natural evolution and progression of
his faculties, and without the stimulus of property over
which he may gain the right of possession there will be no
evolution or perfecting of the sciences and arts. So denying
man the right of possessing property we deny him
happiness also, for the automaton of the communists’
idea will be a cloddish imitation of a man. As an effect
is always attributed to a cause, so the activity of a man
is attributed to him as an effect is to a cause. So we may
see, if a man perfects something the perfection of that
object is inseparable from the object itself, and since the
activity or the perfecting is attributed to the man so the
object must be attributed to him also.
_____________________________________________

I don't know if I buy into owning property guaranteeing happiness or as my right,
but i agree i have the right to a natural or imperfect happiness until I die.

That said, I would like to own a house one day...or an ice floe.

[BornInCrimson]

In theory, capitalism grows from a 'basic instinct', greed, and promotes hard work to support that greed.

I don't think any system will be perfect however, and it is humanity that is the issue. Any system we have is bound to have issues or people disagreeing with it. How would you make a system work by trying to have it work with say, a totally lazy person who wants to sit on their ass all day? Really while the system makes some difference, it's ultimately the humans inside it that make it work or not work, and we differ by national and cultural lines... not to mention who is controlling the system? One form of government may work well in a particular region under a particular ruler, where it would fail elssewhere or with someone else in charge. The people make the difference. I don't mean to be a thread-pooper, but this is a fairly vague argument in general.

I always felt we should acknowledge our own flaws but work to overcome them.

The real reason why I'm posting in this thread tho is to say that you have a fucking Invid as your avatar, which is pretty cool.

[Mary]

"We are animals. All we do that's still pure from the time we evolved is sleep and have sex, and we don't all have even
those right. And maybe barbecue, sometimes, but that's if we accept fire as our birthright, and frankly, I'm not willing to
take that risk. Who can say what was the turning point when this oversized brain moved into stupidity and cruelty? You bear a helpless child, raise him till he can hunt for food, paint on some cave walls at Lascaux, sing a little song, tell a little
oral history, and before you know it, you're attaching value to non-edible objects, killing your own species to get more of them, thinking one side of the river is better than the other, killing the people who get in your way there, writing the Bible, using and crippling and ruining each other, telling the lie that we're not all the same, or the lie that we are all the same, whichever suits your purpose, and leaving a trail so foul and twisted and incomprehensible that you can never, never find your way back."

me, © 1996

[simpleguy]

To get back to the original idea, I have to disagree. the very big problem with Marx and his ism was that if one wasn't into "it", then "it" certainly wouldn't be into you. And anyway, your opinion didn't matter cuz those in power were the ones telling you the way it was gonna lay down. And that was it.

A really cool part of OUR paradigm is that we can take it in those general directions. These days we are leaning more left, and I'd say we (as a nation) are on a significantly different track now than we were a year ago. Like it or not. Personally, I'm enjoying our new Pres.

So we still got the IRS and mass graves and traffic and work with people who don't give a crap, but we still got friendship, love and sex and altruism, because we want these things. They don't hardly cost anything. It doesn't always have to be a dungheap. And no, I didn't vote for Ron Paul George or Ringo

[Mary]

As a puppet mentioned on Election Night, 2004, after she woke up from a dream, "Oh, Jesus didn't get elected. But neither did Hitler."