Society's Ills - A study in the perceived inequalities between the "haves" and the "have nots" - The Bear and Badger

LarryDavid

It came up on twitter and blew me away me with it’s stupidity.

EDIT: bastard page turn

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2018/11/11/surging-wealth-inequality-is-a-happy-sign-that-life-is-becoming-much-more-convenient/#428b3e5664ca

hunk

That first sentence tho. Lol.

pantyfire

That sounds just like trickle down theory to me but in another guise. And it's bullshit.

JonB

Trickle down bullshit? Nasty.

hunk

The article reminds me of Bioshock (first one).
The man seriously needs to build his own underwater utopia.

Diluted Dante

Read that as underwear utopia.

hunk

Pervert.

Brooks

Most wealthy people are pretty easily identified by their lack of talent.

‘Talent’ being a concept notwithstanding criticism anyway.

Facewon

Check out @mattmfm’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/mattmfm/status/1062802853687889920?s=09

Short vid. So worth it.

Facewon

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/the-alternative-to-ideology/

Tangent a bit. But quite good.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/11/dystopia-in-fiction-and-in-fact

Just good.

JonB

Facewon wrote:

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/the-alternative-to-ideology/ Tangent a bit. But quite good.

Skim read that. It annoys me that this kind of argument can still be made, and the fact that it can shows a real inability for the people involved to reflect on ideology and how it works.

Someone saying 'I'm rejecting ideology and doing X instead' is one of the surest signs of an ideology you can get, just one that will never recognise itself as such. He goes on to mention pluralism (an actual -ism) as an alternative and then 'moderation', as if that's not a very clearly liberal concept the way he defines it.

So this is a commitment to self-reflection and pragmatism (these are principles BTW), but one that by defining itself as definitely not an ideology has already made sure it will never really reflect on its own core beliefs. It can't, simply because it assumes they aren't ideological. It also can't understand that the definition of what counts as an ideology and what doesn't is ideological.

Facewon

Heh. Be nice. For a former libertarian he's doing ok.

hunk

Ideology/religion isn't the real problem anyways. If anything ideology and religion define us as human beings. The true culprit is and always will be ....human nature. Or rather humanity's seeming inability to balance vice vs virtue.

WorKid

Damn dirty humans.

JonB

Blaming human nature for our problems is also ideological.

hunk

So it is.

Brooks

I love the ideologies that are good, personally.

LivDiv

Excess wealth to the detriment of others is essentially greed combined with a lack of empathy.
Seems like a more animalistic trait than human to me.
An animal may share in it's pack or blood line, but that's it. (There are probably a few outside cases like certain pigs or orangutans)
In fact don't half these cunts talk about it being survival of the fittest?

Human nature, as in pre-neanderthal is indifferent to animal nature because you have to go back to the point when we weren't separated from the animals to justify those traits.

GooberTheHat

We should just kill anyone that seeks power.

hunk

Was thinking more along the lines of everyone having an inner yin and yang and having to accept and balance it. You know, that philosophy Lucas cribbed for the Force. If you can't you'll just be an insufferable cunt to others around you.

hunk

LivDiv wrote:

Excess wealth to the detriment of others is essentially greed combined with a lack of empathy.
Seems like a more animalistic trait than human to me.
An animal may share in it's pack or blood line, but that's it. (There are probably a few outside cases like certain pigs or orangutans)
In fact don't half these cunts talk about it being survival of the fittest?

Human nature, as in pre-neanderthal is indifferent to animal nature because you have to go back to the point when we weren't separated from the animals to justify those traits.

Hey livdiv, welcome back!

Humans are just animals anyway. We just evolved to have a huge (prefrontal) cortex.
To think we are better than other life is misguided imo. More complex but not better...
We like to project ourselves outside of the ecosystem when in fact we're still very much a part of it.

JonB

Everything we do, good or bad, altruistic or selfish, is part of human nature. And nature is an evolving thing, not some fixed condition that predates civilisation and culture.

Also, different forms of social organisation and living conditions bring out certain aspects more than others. There's less need to be competitive when everyone has access to what they need, for example.

It's not a coincidence that Hobbes's concept of the 'state of nature' - a sort of dog eat dog existence - is so heavily emphasised in current neoliberal politics, economics and culture, which makes a big deal out of success through self-interest and competition. It's an ideology that wants us to believe any attempt to organise is doomed to failure, because it's beyond our make-up as humans.

In effect, it tells us that there is no alternative except to rely on the neutral mechanism of the market to regulate things, and when that doesn't work it tells us that's the fault of particular corrupt people, not the system itself. This is why the cynical or pessimistic concept of human nature is ideological.

hunk

Though at times I may sound like a grumpy pessimist I mostly agree with jonb. We may have evolved from animals but that doesn't mean we don't have ethics. The free market is not a neutral mechanism, it's policy driven and favors the group who decides on....policy. Which means it favours the ruling class and the wealthy.

WorKid

It doesn't need to mean that though.

Especially if coupled with policies which enhance social mobility, free healthcare and free education being the key ones imo.

LivDiv

Hey Hunky

Lord_Griff

JonB wrote:

Everything we do, good or bad, altruistic or selfish, is part of human nature. And nature is an evolving thing, not some fixed condition that predates civilisation and culture.

Also, different forms of social organisation and living conditions bring out certain aspects more than others. There's less need to be competitive when everyone has access to what they need, for example.

It's not a coincidence that Hobbes's concept of the 'state of nature' - a sort of dog eat dog existence - is so heavily emphasised in current neoliberal politics, economics and culture, which makes a big deal out of success through self-interest and competition. It's an ideology that wants us to believe any attempt to organise is doomed to failure, because it's beyond our make-up as humans.

In effect, it tells us that there is no alternative except to rely on the neutral mechanism of the market to regulate things, and when that doesn't work it tells us that's the fault of particular corrupt people, not the system itself. This is why the cynical or pessimistic concept of human nature is ideological.

I think you've got Hobbes wrong.

mistercrayon

The animal metaphors are to a one only used by people to justify meanness.

Last time I checked no dolphin made a computer.

Unlikely

Lord_Griff wrote:

JonB wrote:

Everything we do, good or bad, altruistic or selfish, is part of human nature. And nature is an evolving thing, not some fixed condition that predates civilisation and culture.

Also, different forms of social organisation and living conditions bring out certain aspects more than others. There's less need to be competitive when everyone has access to what they need, for example.

It's not a coincidence that Hobbes's concept of the 'state of nature' - a sort of dog eat dog existence - is so heavily emphasised in current neoliberal politics, economics and culture, which makes a big deal out of success through self-interest and competition. It's an ideology that wants us to believe any attempt to organise is doomed to failure, because it's beyond our make-up as humans.

In effect, it tells us that there is no alternative except to rely on the neutral mechanism of the market to regulate things, and when that doesn't work it tells us that's the fault of particular corrupt people, not the system itself. This is why the cynical or pessimistic concept of human nature is ideological.

I think you've got Hobbes wrong.

Tell him why.

Lord_Griff

Why?

Yossarian

Why, Delilah.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories