What is the problem with the world?

S

Still Life

Trooper
Everyone in the world right now is bitching about tolerance for all. Yet these very same people are turning around and judging others. You are either all or nothing, there is no inbetween. And really, who is anyone to judge anyone else? I believe that God is the only one worthy of that task. Who is society to judge the common man? Why do we need rulers, and governtments? I know why. Because people are too fucking stupid to handle true freedom. People arent responsible enough to handle not being told what to do. Now, I am not saying society has the right to judge, I am just saying that is wy we need governments; to protect us from ourselves. And I also realize that what I am saying right now could be considered judging, but Im not really trying to, these are just me thoughts and observations. I am sooo tired of being told what to do. What is wrong, and what is right? Who the fuck are you to decide for me? This world would be soooooo much better if people could just share, and work for the common good. But no. We pretend we are working to help others, when, in fact, we are just trying to fulfill our own needs; trying to extinguish our own insecurities. I think its time we just all stopped pretending, and actually tried to love evryone. In spite of their "problems" or "issues". I trust that everyone here is smart enough to understand what I am saying now, and that they are responsible to enough to do the right thing with the gift I hope I am giving you now. The song I was listening to, and the song that provoked all these thoughts was "Heaven is a halfpipe" by OPM. I recommend you listen to this song. Its time we all just let eachother do our own things, and love eachother for who we are.
 
Well there is just ONE major problem with your solution to our problems. When most people are let to their own devices they either a. decide to do nothing or b. decide to do mayhem. Since I only have two classes I have WAY to much time on my hands so once in a while I watch television in the morning and you should see the crap that is on. There are at least 5 shows with quasi-psychologists (like "Dr." Phil) that talk with people on different issues. Issues like "My daughter does drugs and has sex and she's oly 13" "My son hits me, please help" "i'm psychologically tortured by my husband" and so on.... Now, i'm not saying that because it's on TV it's true, however, if these type of shows didn't have an audience or connected with a big demographic there wouldn't be 5 or 6 shows like that. Most people don't even care if the Trinity is logically or reasonably impossible, if there really is a heaven or hell, most people don't notice they are manipulated by their governments and media, most people just want to take care of themselves and don't care about their neighbors. As for the judging.. hmmm. I go back and forth on this one. SOMEONE has to be in charge, you said it, that is why we have government and why WE vote for those people in government. As for people telling you what is wrong and right... well depends who says it. If a homeless junkie wants to give me what's wrong with me I'll just walk away, if my Parents are the ones.... I will walk away too... LOL kidding, I'll listen, or if it's a close friend or someone with credentials (a shrink, clergy). But I will only see them as mere opinions, then I'LL decide what to do. Personally I loathe people that I try to help with heartfelt advice and they just say "who are you to judge?" i'm not judging and sucks for them if they think so... because if they just listen, to whoever is trying to HELP them, they would be better off. Instead they'll learn the hard way.
 
I really like your reply because it fills in the blanks of my post. Its not as simple as saying there should be anarchy, cuz that would suck. And you cant just let things be the way they are, cuz that sucks too. There are conditions. . . Its a fucking shame that nothing can ever be easy.
 
There's two schools of thought on this subject. One: government exists out of need. We need the government to protect us, as people, from ourselves. Two: government exists as a method of oppression, through which social elites perpetuate their dominant stature.

Arguments for both sections of thought can (and have been) made. Perhaps the greatest progenitor of the first was Hobbes, who in his book "The Leviathan", spoke about how society needs a firm guiding hand in the form of an all-powerful monarch to guide it, and to keep it on the straight and narrow. Karl Marx, of course, with the Communist Manifesto, argues that mankind can rip down the government and replace it with a perfect communist order, in which all recieve according to their needs.

What's too much? Hobbes's sovereign holds absolute power, and if you move into Machiavellian theory, he must wield this power swiftly and decisively in order to control his throne. It's safer to be feared than loved is the basis premise put forward in Machiavelli's "The Prince". Of course, we have to ask the simple question - what happens when the monarch becomes corrupt?

Well, it's fairly simple. Society as a whole becomes corrupt. In an authoritarian regime such as the one Hobbes puts forward, we have a personality cult around the monarch. This personality cult ensures that all manners of society reflect the attitudes of the monarch.

On the other hand, we have Marx's theory of communism. In communism, the elite classes are destroyed, replaced by the communual ownership of public property, on which all people live. However, in this sort of system, again, there's an opening for corruption. Communism is defined as a utopia, thus, achieving it is impossible because of inherent human flaws.

So where do we find a middle ground? Where do we find something that balances this? We find it in trial and error. Every single monarchy that has obtained power and remained a monarchy has fallen. Every single one. From the ancient empires of Egypt, India, and Rome...to the medieval nations like Alba in Scotland, the Holy Roman Empire in Germany, and the great Islam Nation that arose after Muhammed...to more recent examples, such as China, Japan, and the Ottomans...they've all fallen. This isn't coincidence. Eventually inept rulers will reign, and rot begins. This ends with disintegration, usually brought on by a period of intense warfare.

Similarly, we've never had a true communist revolution. The Soviet Union, considered the greatest attempt at communism, was a joke from day one. Marx always assumed that a communist revolution would occur in industrialized nations - Germany, France, Britain, the United States - NOT the feudalistic nation of Russia. Thus, Lenin assumed a posture of leading the people for them - not unlike the rule of the Czars - and established a ruling council, underlining the basic premise of communism, that is, rule by the working class! These elites established, as Trotsky put it, substitution. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union substituted the working class; the Polituburo (cabinet) substituted for the ruling party; the General Secretary substituted for the Polituburo. Thus Stalin takes power in 1925, thus we have, instead of an implimentation of Marxism...Hobbes's leviathan!

Do we need government? One man, John Locke, argues that yes, we do. But as government exists of need, to protect us from ourselves...it must also exist to protect the government from itself. Government must be structured to allow the input of the people, and it must be structured to keep it from becoming a tool of the social elite, or at least a tool wrenched totally from the grasp of the commoners (or the normal people, or the proletariat) by the elites.

Locke proposed a government that is seen today in most modern democracies, a government divided into three branches - legislative, executive, and judicial. Each branch is supposed to operate seperate from the other branches - ideals recognized in such documents as the Constitution of the United States of America, which was the first nation to be founded on Lockean thought.

Sadly, 200+ years later, we can see that the USA's founding document, the "great" Constitution, isn't as suited to modern life as we once thought. The American electoral system is a mess, the president wields powers he was never intended to wield, and the Supreme Court is heavily influenced by the politics of the other two branches (which quite obviously led to the appointment - not election - of George W. Bush in 2000). However, more representitive democracies like Germany and France seem to be having more success.

The fact of the matter is that the greater the power of the common people, the better government will be. Similarly, the closer people are to the government, the better government will be. One of the problems with democratic nations today is that there is too much bureaucracy - a problem highlighted in the United States. Also, there's a massive split in the influence of the elites in the American political system as there is of the working class. Let's face it. In the USA, you need an income of over a million dollars to become President. You need the support of corporations and rich elites, not the common folk. There should be donation limits, and they should be strictly enforced!

Anyway. As modern governments (many following Lockean theory, but others under Hobbesian or Marxist thoughts) pull away from their people, they lose their ability to control, to influence, and to guide. People stop looking to the government for examples, and the government itself becomes more corrupt, because people stop looking at the government. In the end, people take the examples of life around them rather than striving for more - and there's always someone corrupt to set a bad example.

Do I have a point?
Vote Kerry.
 
LOL "Vote Kerry" LOL Well, you could have said all of this in ONE paragraph! I'm serious. Before I answer your post however, I wanted to mention something to Still Life. SL, you mentioned Anarchy as a bad thing... Anarchy, like all the systems and theories LC just pointed out works wonders IN SMALL COMMUNITIES. A few years back (maybe 5) I was watching the news and they had a story about a small town in central Mexico that lived in total Anarchy, they had kicked out the local and state police, the mayor and any other form of federal or state authority. The reason they made the news was because they had lynched a theif. Here is a community that is looking after itself with no help from the government. Now you may say that lynching people is barbaric, backwards and inhumane, but think about this: How many people would steal something knowing that could be them? Not many...
Now, LC, you asked what do we do when a Monarch becomes corrupt, easy, you kill him. You forgot to mention WHY Hobbes prefered a monarchy and not a representative government like Locke, because in a Monarchy you know who fucked up, the king, who is corrupt, the king and who needs to go, the king. In a government like in the USA you can only say "the government" is corrupt. Well who IS this "government"? well... we are, we voted for this representatives, so are we corrupt? the Judges of the Supreme court? The president? you don't know.... maybe all of them. So personally I agree with Hobbes because if the King is corrupt just chop off his head like in the good old days (it happened frequently in England and Russia if the king/czar was inept or corrupt {or homosexual LOL}). And not ALL monarchies have died out. you have one alive in well in England you have constitutional Monarchies in Spain and Sweden. Well, not sure about Sweden, i'm going off on a rumor on that one.
 
Sweden does have a king, yes. But it's awful hard to execute a king when they have absolute power. And as I said...no major monarchy has survived. Constitutional monarchies hardly count.
 
you're right, but just for the sake of arguement, awful hard, yes... impossible, no. [!--emo&:)--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/smile.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'smile.gif\' /][!--endemo--]
 
Winston Churchill sayd "democracy si the worst form of gouverment, except for the ones that have already been tested out. 'Nuff said
 
And what democracies are those? That I know of the US is the only country to start from scratch and actually had the luxury of implementing Locke's theories from the start. France, England and the rest of Europe had to SHIFT and ADAPT into democracies and before that there were none.... so technically we are still "testing out" democracy.... Honestly I think we already need a new system, 200 and some years has ben enough of this...democracy [!--emo&:D--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/biggrin.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'biggrin.gif\' /][!--endemo--]
 
Well, I agree with Hobbes about his theories on human nature, but as far as there having to be an absolute monarchy, well, thats bullshit(IMO). The people need a voice, a strong one, so that our civil liberties arent taken away. The problem is that people are too stupid to make good decisions often enough. Democracy has worked well so far, but its starting to show its faults. Like Onhell says, I think its time for a new system. Unfortunately though, I cant come up with a good one for the life of me, and I have been thinking of this for a while. We should brain-storm to come up with the best possible way to govern this crazy world of ours. I think it would be fun, and if we come up with something good enough, I think we can make some real change. Maybe I am just thinking too much of our power, but who cares, its worth a try. I am getting tired of having my life put in the hands of Jack-asses. There must be a better way to do things, so lets put our great minds together and come up with one!!!
 
I've thought about it too, and I always come to Plato and his philosopher kings. The wisest (not daddy's boy or the most popular) governs and HE chooses his heir, or if he dies before he can there is already a committee of other philosophers to choose, sort of like the College of Cardinals electing a Pope. There is one small problem with this, ever been with a group of smart friends? They all want to be right, they all think themselves the leader of the group and they make little room for compromise. HOWEVER, look at this board, we have very intelligent dialogue most of the time and we acknowledge our good points and point out our weaknesses keeping ourselves in check rather well. The other problem is that it is an elitist point of view but I actually defend that. You yourself said most people are stupid, I prefer the term "uneducated". Because they do have the right to decide how far they want to take their intellectual endevours. Yet stupid will do fine, and since most people are idiots I favor the elitist point of view in that a wise group of people can decide for everyone. The problem with THAT is that it is too close to communism and people have had enough of that...well socialism. Because in my opinion, Utopic Communism should be what we strive for... not democracy and capitalism.
 
I hate to be an ass, but Plato, too, was wrong. Democracy is the way to go - but American style democracy is inherantly flawed. Off the top of my head:
1. The electoral vote system is bumpkas.
2. Political corruption is huge. Big business needs to be removed from politics.
3. You elect, based on parties, the people who supervise the elections?
4. Electoral campaigns are based on smearing, not arguing.
5. You have a fucking monkey as president.
 
That was supposed to be the rant to end all rants [!--emo&:(--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/sad.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'sad.gif\' /][!--endemo--].
I think a good form of gouverment is the one described in Dune (the first book). A techno-feudalism, where the power is held by houses (or families) all subdued to the empire. Even though it may seem tiranic, it has great parts like:
1. The Great Convention, which condems use of nukes with totall anihilation
2. Wars are wars fought on a small scale. The only victims are the nobels, or the spies sent to kill them
3.The power is evenly balanced between the empire, the guild, which assures transport between all human worlds and CHOAM, which is kind of a world bank.

Even so, there is no such thing as the perfect regime, as humans are not perfect. The rant following this rant was pre-written and follows a totaly diferent point of discussion




Anyway, @ Still Life, God(if he exists),is nowhere near perfect because he created us. He knew that we had flaws, and that our creation would bring chaos, evil, and suffering. For that alone, he deserves not to be praised but loathed....I'm jounreying deeper into this GOD issue and philosophy, and hopefully, someone will agree with me [!--emo&:unsure:--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/unsure.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'unsure.gif\' /][!--endemo--] . The meaning of life is life itself. The perpetuation of the species. God, even if he wasn't perfect, he knew what he was doing. As Albert Einstein put it "god does not play dice"...Yet, when you see all the suffering, and the disasters that we spill to our home planet, that may as well be considered our mother, you wonder why extend this agony with another generation. Because that's the meaning of life. It's beyond us. It's beyond our collective intelect to understand what God meant us to do. For this generation, we must hope and do our best for humanity to pass over the darker times which await. It is certain tthat the planet economy is heading towards a disaster. The greatest comoditys' price, oil, rose 72% in one year. And we can expect that to go even higher. Everything around us spells disaaster...I'm afraid our dear ol'band was prophetic with Total Eclipse. So, we must strive to survive in the hope (a small one, yes) that we may reach a higher state of thought. Rant complete. [!--emo&:apu:--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/apu.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'apu.gif\' /][!--endemo--]
 
Well, thats fine, believing that the purpose of life for humanity is to perpetuate the species. But does this mean that we can't take measures to make sure that the future is better for the next generations? Yes, I agree that things to come look very grim; but thats why I started this topic, so that we could try to change things, even just a little bit. Right now there isnt alot we can do, but the more we think about this, the more ideas that we come up with, the more power we gain. Who says that we can only make sure the species survives? I think we should strive to Create a Utopia, as suggested by Onhell. Now, I know that that is almost impossible, and it wont happen in our lifetime, or even in the next. It would take very long, but why can't we get the ball rolling now? I think its ridiculous to say that humans have no purpose other than to mate, and live, because that isnt even a purpose at all. Some might say that people have a purpose, they just dont know what it is, or that we have no reason for living at all, that we just are. If this is the case, I think its time humanity gave itself a purpose. A reason to live, a reason to exsist. Life is empty without purpose, without goals. Humanity can never really reach true happiness until they know what they want, and work hard, together, to achieve the goal (IMO).
 
I believe that each individual person should have their own purpose in life. However, people aren't born with a purpose. They eventually figure it out what it is they wish to do as their life goes on. In a broader sense, I guess I would say that every single person's purpose is to devote their life to accomplishing something or advancing on something which has already begun. Some people devote their life to making music or trying to discover a cure to a disease. Many people would perhaps strive to do something much less worthwhile thus not having a very good purpose to live. Having said that though, there are a great deal of people who don't have one purpose. Some people only wake up in the morning because they have to go to a job in order to get money in order to pay for things in order to enjoy living. This doesn't always work for people (including many of those who devote their lives to something) which leads to people hating life. Actually, I'm beginning to think that government is just one many problems in the world. Our whole planet is fucked. But I suppose we should at least try to fix it as SL said, no matter how impossible it is. I'd rather be fucked than fuck myself.

Now, onto the government issue. Democracy is flawed because too many people are idiots and unable to make the right decisions. But on the other hand, a system like socialism is worse. The people should at least have some say in what the government does. Democracy could work much better if everyone was educated enough but that is something that probably won't be happening until a loooong time from now. And if history has taught us anything, it's that utopic communism is pretty much unattainable. But there has got to be a happy medium between these though any new form of government is guaranteed to have its fair share of faults also.

Discuss.
 
@Black Ace... Don't worry I took a VERY deep breath after reading your post [!--emo&:D--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/biggrin.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'biggrin.gif\' /][!--endemo--]. God (if he exists like you said) is perfect, our imperfection is irrelevant, because WE, not HE are imperfect. I hope that in your journy through this God issue you actually pick up the Bilble and read Genesis, you'll see in there the various "Covenants" done between man and God. To Adam he says he is created to rule over all animals (he says that to Noah too...) If you read St. Agustine you'll see that he explains that we are imperfect UNTIL we recieve grace from God, then we are made whole AND perfect. So I don't know about you, but I'm working on being able to detach myself from temporal things meaning i'm trying to go a week without my CD player without suffering withdrawl syndrome. [!--emo&:)--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/smile.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'smile.gif\' /][!--endemo--] But that also includes keeping my Lust, Greed and Pride in check. These "sins" if actually thought of them that way and dealt with them you'll see your life improve dramatically. Now before SMX says something about me polarizing this through the Christian lense I'll say this. Buddha explains the SAME THING in his four truths and in the Wheel of Suffering. I hope you bump into his sayings in your journy as well. Because remember God gave us Free Will so you CHOOSE to be imperfect or Perfect, it's not God's fault it's yours. So I'm not going to loathe him because I can't be responsible for my own actions...
But anywho this thread is about GOVERNMENTS, not religion and let's please keep it that way because as Seperation of Church and State has shown you can believe whatever you want, but we still have to get along.
 
Socialism isn't about removing people completely from the process - it's about setting the government between the process and the people, creating a buffer, a zone of "sober second thought". Government control, under socialism, is NOT absolute - socialism is about regulating a capitalist economy to maintain it. We're more socialist than we realize. Especially on stock market controls.

There are certain things the government should regulate - health care, alcohol/tobacco sales, power, water, and the like. There's no need of an American-style two-tier health care system. That's foolish and dangerous. But I don't think the government should regulate and control...say, the hotel industry. That's silly.
 
@Still Life, I may be very grim (i'm romanian remember) but Utopia is impossible. As i said, from a simply atheist point of view, we are NOT perfect. There's no such thing as an incoruptable human being. THe only way we could acheive Utopia is, some sort of thought control maybe, or transcendence to another state in evolution...but then again, we wouldn't be human... And let's face it, we need more than a few maidenfans on an internet board to mov the world. Even if we would come up with the closest to perfect gouverment there is (we are not perfect, thus no perfect gouverment) it will probably be lost, like a tear in a typhoon.
 
It is really sad that you think that way black ace. Being atheist or religious has nothing to do with being pesimistic. I'm pretty grim too (I'm Mexican remember?) And there is such a thing as an incorruptable human being (John Serpico, Ghandi, Mother Teresa, Ernesto "Che" Guevara....) I think you should read Nietchze as soon as possible, I think you'll like his writings. Before him I used to think atheist were full of shit (no offense to any in this board) but after I read him I was actually inspired. He basically lays it down for you, how you can be complete, HAPPY, and fulfilled as a human being without religion. And sure it takes more than a few maidenfans to change the world, but everything starts small, everything as an idea from one imperfect human being. Do you think if Locke or Marx would have thought like you (oh gee what can I do? it won't matter anyway) We would be having this Democracy vs Communism or other form of government discussion? ACTION is the word my friend. And discussing it in this board is a good start.
 
Being an atheist doesen't mean that I don't have a moral code inspired mainly of christianity. But I just don't believe, that Jesus was the Son Of God. There's not enough proof. On the other hand, a romanian philosopher and poet, Lucia Blaga, states that the love is the ultimate gateway to knowledge. So, where the rigours of math, phisycs or chemistry fail, you need to open your heart. Maiden take this theme on ROTAM "We Must love ALL things that God made". That's my main philosophy in life. It's close to a hippie point of view.The hippie generation, although an inspiration, sometimes make me sick (don't be offended Mav). They wanted a revolution, like we want now, and look at them. Most of them are the politicians that we want to bring down...they crossed their principles so far,they can't even remember them. If I become like that, I URGE you to shoot me.

So, I think we should leave all religion and philosophy behind (or start a different thread for that) and start the brainstorming. It's 10 o'clock, I have homework, but who cares? Saving the world should always come first [!--emo&:P--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/tongue.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'tongue.gif\' /][!--endemo--]. We should start with..umm...I really have no idea. Hmmm, As SL said, the people need a strong voice.ut in order for that to work, we need an educated people. First order of business: Education. It should be highly funded and all children should attend it.A country without a good educational sistem is doomed from the begining. This is a major problem here in Romania, as wages are low, not many people are interested in becoming teachers, thus the education level drops and then we wonder how our country got in the shape that it's in. We need an educated people, so that they know who to vote, or what to decide. But for that, they need informations. They should be clear, up-to-date, complete and un-alterated by oppinions of the publishers. Second Order of business:total independence of the press.

This is easier than I thought [!--emo&:P--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/tongue.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'tongue.gif\' /][!--endemo--]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top