Some thoughts on beliefs, progressives, and conservatives r

For non-partisan discussion ONLY. This policy will be strictly moderated and enforced. For those with eyes wide open, visionaries, lunatics, humorists (definitely!)

Moderator: Super Moderators

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5865
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 10-21-2009 09:00 AM

vigo wrote: There is such hate and waste of talent in the world today. It keeps us from moving forward.


Well, you've described one of the main characteristics of homo economicus culture. It ensures that the most profitable & exclusive systems/technologies survive, not necessarily the "best", or most universally accessible/beneficial systems. That's one of the reasons such an arrangement could never lead to a planet wide type one civilization, but will instead keep us mired in war & divisive competition - and lead to planet wide death & destruction.

The advantage of organizing into many local structures instead of large homogeneous continental structures is pretty simple - diversity. Many eggs, many baskets. Many autonomous regions, many unique approaches/solutions. The resistance comes from the economic top, because the more we carve up the political/religious structures, the more "chiefs" there will be, and the smaller each slice of the economic pie becomes.
Linnea wrote: In this case, however, I am asking if 'religion' - and this only from the view of religion (*and politics) being a form of social organization or control - is 'hard wired' into basic communal behavior.


Yes, I believe these things are "hardwired" into our aggregate psyche, and such control is probably a survival requirement. We always have, and always will form hierarchies of one sort or another. I think the question becomes - is humanity capable of creating a "culture" which will form universally beneficial power structures, rather than radically exclusive & parasitic ones.
Last edited by SquidInk on 10-21-2009 10:10 AM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-21-2009 12:39 PM

I'm sure that's already happened, we've just forgotten and/or are too stupid, collectively, to do it again.

Also, to throw a wrench into all of the above, I'm still not sold on the ideal of a planetary civilization -- I think that would create more "death and destruction" than anything we've seen thus far. Who was it that said you can't make an omelet w/o breaking a few eggs? You'd have to break quite a few for that planetary omelet....it remains my strong hunch that the Utopian impulse is largely genocidal.

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5865
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 10-21-2009 02:14 PM

HB3 wrote: I'm sure that's already happened, we've just forgotten and/or are too stupid, collectively, to do it again.

Also, to throw a wrench into all of the above, I'm still not sold on the ideal of a planetary civilization -- I think that would create more "death and destruction" than anything we've seen thus far. Who was it that said you can't make an omelet w/o breaking a few eggs? You'd have to break quite a few for that planetary omelet....it remains my strong hunch that the Utopian impulse is largely genocidal.


Oh, so now you're revealing yourself as a "Zeroist"? Disgusting! (I'm kidding)

I've had similar thoughts. One of the biggest obstacles in the way of solving all the problems we've been discussing is the lack of a "planetary" objective. Could there ever be one, strong enough to displace the objectives of the economic minded individual?

What advantage would we gain by creating a class one civilization? The ability to explore further into space? To what end? I'm sure there is an advantage, but I don't think we know what it is yet - so we fail to adopt philosophies & discover technologies to help us achieve those ends.
Last edited by SquidInk on 10-21-2009 02:17 PM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-21-2009 02:31 PM

SquidInk wrote:
What advantage would we gain by creating a class one civilization? The ability to explore further into space?


Yeah, I think that's what they say. There's a book called the Physics of Immortality by the physicist Frank Tipler that caused a stir a few years back. It's a very involved theory, but basically we'll have to move out into space to sort of create our own eschaton. He really gets far out with it, arguing that eventually we'll technologically create a mass-scale resurrection of the dead. Again I wonder if so much of this high-flown progressive philosophy really isn't about becoming one with, taking the place of, or becoming as powerful as God. Biblically speaking, that's the big no-no, isn't it?

I also think the ideal of a planetary civilization isn't really compatible with the ideals of diversity in the usually stated way. What's more "diverse," a planet of multiple civilization, or "one" civilization? What would that "one" civilization look like? What would be its characteristics? That would automatically mean discrimination, wouldn't it?

vigo
Chief Swabbie
Posts: 2809
Joined: 11-29-2004 01:35 AM

Post by vigo » 10-21-2009 02:38 PM

HB3 wrote: I'm sure that's already happened, we've just forgotten and/or are too stupid, collectively, to do it again.

Also, to throw a wrench into all of the above, I'm still not sold on the ideal of a planetary civilization -- I think that would create more "death and destruction" than anything we've seen thus far. Who was it that said you can't make an omelet w/o breaking a few eggs? You'd have to break quite a few for that planetary omelet....it remains my strong hunch that the Utopian impulse is largely genocidal.
As much as my inner old soul hungers for world peace, I too fear the megalomaniacs who would conquer the world as you mention.

I do think it is possible and hope for our eventual movement forward into a type one civilization. More than a few cocks and not eggs would have to be broken in order for that to happen though. ;) Problem is the eggs are lined up like borg drones willing to take the shots or chips and obey their masters. These chicks need to crack their shells and get beyond the propaganda and think for themselves.

I do believe there is a global consciousness that is touching people and it reaches out to others. We give relief in disasters. When others are in pain, we feel it and respond. When a great world figure dies they are immortalized. When there is HATE we respond. ie. 911. Hate is a much stronger response and it triggers old wounds in old battles. ie. Israel & Arab world (catch 22 made for tv :( ). Among many others.

Peace seems too much to ask. Too personal. The risk is so great and supposed benefits a weakness that an enemy could exploit.

So it always comes down to a cockfight. Problem is, these cowards are always making omelets.

Still, I have faith...

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5865
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 10-21-2009 02:41 PM

I think the idea is that once we find the reason, it will be so compelling that everybody will be eager to become part of the "one" civilization. Kind of like the profit motive which supposedly had everyone, from every culture, clambering over one another to make it to America, a century ago.

As far as becoming God - yeah, supposedly a no-no. One theory of mine, as stated here, is not that we/they desire to become God, but simply to disprove God, and supplant those creation myths.
In other words, they are driven towards a Type 1 culture because that is the only path to space exploration, and the discovery of the origin of everything. Once the origin of everything is discovered, the old fables which have stood in their way for so long will be finally put to rest.
...

For them , the goal is to understand the origins of everything because understanding the origin is closest to being the origin. What they refuse to acknowledge is the fact that the origin of everything is unknowable. That doesn't jive with their self absorbed delusions.


Not a perfect concept, for sure, but then again I'm not a psychotic econo-sadist.
Last edited by SquidInk on 10-21-2009 02:46 PM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-21-2009 02:43 PM

The idea of a voluntarily assumed order is the old anarchist dream. But that notion is more plausible if you buy into the Rousseau-ian formulation that "man is born free and everywhere in chains." So -- throw off the chains. Simple. But if that isn't the situation -- if evil truly exists in the world and in people, and is never going away -- then pursuing that old anarchist dream is just opening the door for tyranny. Bad situation. The idealist yearns for transformation because he can see how the world could be, but that's because he lacks that tyrannical heart that really is out there...

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-21-2009 06:36 PM

And I'll add this is what drives the poet mad. He holds the vision, yet the world fails to transform. Why, when it could be so beautiful? Because he makes the mistake of thinking what's in his heart also exists in the world around him. It does and it doesn't. How could there possibly be a single transformative moment among 4 billion people? There are only transformative moments within individuals...pity them.

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Linnea » 10-21-2009 07:48 PM

Wow. Looking back on the 'progress' of this thread throws some light in dark corners - or, maybe just a few more shadows on the wall of the cave. Basically, I think we have gone down the road here, unpacking a lot of 'unknowing' - or 'progressive speak' as we've gone along. And we have ended up basically 'no where' - or back at the beginning - which bring us back to circles.

I can see where I stepped off on the path of 'unknowing' - (extreme enough to have backtracked all the way back into the mists of time or 'first beginnings' to ask the useless question if we were doomed as we 'became human' to begin with) - which is absurd - when all we need to do is build the barn.

We already have a planetary civilization. This planetary civilization has been built with both with co-operative circles and hierarchic structures. The hierarchy is geared toward control of the many, by the few. And 'the thing' is getting really ugly.

Really large questions are now being considered: 'we are trashing the planet', 'millions are dying', 'we are running out of water', 'we are facing a world where we will be killing each other off as we fight for diminishing resources', 'we are destroying eco-systems', 'we are killing off entire species', 'we are polluting the oceans', 'global finance is collapsing' and etc...

Is much of this, at this point, a 'cover story' as we are led by the 'hierarchy' of elites, to justify continuing genocide? What shadows are flickering on the wall of the cave?

Whatever the 'answers' - we need to focus on the solution - supplant the 'hierarchy' from the bottom up. Get back to local structures/communities which have always been the sustainable, sane, accountable and effective means of sustainable reality and survival. This is a solution, basically that of non-participation in the hierarchy - which can have impressive results, even over the short term. We would be 'starting over' with a system which is already working - and which, with this change in emphasis - would express the power of the people, which we all ready have.*

Just get back to building the barns.

*this is an interesting freudian typo. 'already' or 'all ready' ;->

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-21-2009 07:56 PM

Whatever the 'answers' - we need to focus on the solution - supplant the 'hierarchy' from the bottom up. Get back to local structures/communities which have always been the sustainable, sane, accountable and effective means of sustainable reality and survival. This is a solution, basically that of non-participation in the hierarchy - which can have impressive results, even over the short term. We would be 'starting over' with a system which is already working - and which, with this change in emphasis - would express the power of the people, which we all ready have.
I think this is good. But it's about as "anti-planetary" as it can get, isn't it? And can't you say that that's how nation-states started, anyway? As an expression of locality, a conglomerate of customs, a people? So, yes. I would rather see the planet as a variety of nation-states with their own unique identities, and which make basic efforts to keep to themselves. And this is the unsteady structure we've had for quite some time, hard-won and frequently disrupted.

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Linnea » 10-21-2009 08:02 PM

Just another thought here which I hope will not be too distracting (and also will not result in being shot at dawn).

We might, in some respects, see this trend towards terrorism as another response to hierarchy. A response of the truly desperate - chaotic, suicidal, destructive. A response, which on some levels, comes from those whose community/local structures have already been devastated beyond recovery.

Something to think about...

It grows late.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-21-2009 08:06 PM

Sort of related to my previous point, that is a very humanistic interpretation that might not -- in fact probably doesn't -- hold up in actual experience. It implies a universal decency that probably doesn't exist, unfortunately.

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Linnea » 10-21-2009 08:08 PM

Originally posted by HB3
I think this is good. But it's about as "anti-planetary" as it can get, isn't it? And can't you say that that's how nation-states started, anyway? As an expression of locality, a conglomerate of customs, a people? So, yes. I would rather see the planet as a variety of nation-states with their own unique identities, and which make basic efforts to keep to themselves. And this is the unsteady structure we've had for quite some time, hard-won and frequently disrupted.


Good afternoon, HB

Exactly! A variety of nation-states with their own unique identities. Planetary does not mean 'one government'. Globalization does not mean 'one government, or 'one economic system'. We do not have to be pressured by the elites to accept this definition of 'planetary'.

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Linnea » 10-21-2009 08:13 PM

Originally posted by HB3
Sort of related to my previous point, that is a very humanistic interpretation that might not -- in fact probably doesn't -- hold up in actual experience. It implies a universal decency that probably doesn't exist, unfortunately.


If you want to have a definition of 'decency' which implies a healthy impulse toward survival - I believe universal decency does exist. Again, not to appear naive or 'humanistic' - I understand there are hierarchical objectives which also fuel terrorism. Just believe that might not be its sole, or even most important, motivating force as far as 'the people' who are drawn into it.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 10-21-2009 08:14 PM

I think that's how you would feel if you ever became a terrorist, but not necessarily them.

Bad people exist. Truly bad people.

Post Reply

Return to “Pirates and Skeptics -P&G, etc”