SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Maybe it's just me, but I've been getting this vibe (it's strong here, but I'm feeling it elsewhere too) that there are folks who would like to see our entire society come crashing down.
Perhaps they think we can build something better, and like the Phoenix, emerge from the ashes, strong and vibrant.
And I guess I can see the attraction. Our government has been co-opted by the monied interests, our waking lives seem to be either being tracked by corporations or one government agency or another, the same monied interests seem determined to depress wages to keep us docile and hungry for the resources we need to keep ourselves and our families alive. And on and on. It's as if our society has been taken over by greedy, corrupt and amoral scumbags.
And to an extent, all of this is true. Which begs the question: What can/should we do about it?
There is one thing most of us can agree upon: That those elected to administer our governmental systems aren't acting in the best interests of the greater populace. Rather, they seem to be taking their marching orders from those with the resources to command their attention, their wallets and their votes.
There's quite a bit of agreement about that. The problem is that there are large groups of people on various sides of this question with different prescriptions for solving these problems:
Some think we need to strip the Federal government of most of its power and leave things to the states/counties/municipalities.
Some think we need to reform our existing political systems to reduce the influence of money on our elected officials (at all levels of government).
Some think it's just a lost cause and we need to just tear it all down and start over.
The biggest issue, IMHO, is that those same folks who are controlling our political systems for their own benefit use these differences of opinion to divide us. This keeps us from putting aside our differences so we can work together to create the kind of society of which we can all be proud.
Which brings me to the folks who want to tear our system down. With what shall we replace it?
Destroying one of the bulwarks of our society seems like we're creating change. But what are the consequences of doing so, intended or otherwise?
History (cf. all the infighting and problems with the Articles of Confederation) tells us that a strong central government was necessary back in the late 18th century, and (again, IMHO) is even more important today.
Could government be more distributed than it is? Possibly. Should there be stronger controls on how the central government treats its citizens? Almost certainly.
But if we destroy the "beast in DC" to punish those who have so egregiously abused it, who will pay the price when chaos ensues.
Just some semi-random thoughts.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Thursday July 14 2016, @04:07PM
Au contraire, mon frere.
*Equality of opportunity* is what's important. That is the basis of true liberty.
Standard of living, objectively defined or not is just a trope, and not a very good one. As Heinlein put it, we are not "producing-consuming economic animal[s] but [men]."
As humans, when we are unable (by circumstance or design) to develop and use our innate abilities, we are diminished and emasculated.
What's more, taking such a narrow view with respect to the value of human life demeans us all and deprives us of the creativity, ingenuity and good works of a large swath of humanity.
Which is made even more tragic when equality of opportunity is arbitrarily denied based on irrelevancies such as geography, melanin content or ancestry.
I understand the "Fuck you, jack! I got mine." attitude. Perhaps with the addendum "Go get your own!"
This assumes that we should treat all things like a zero-sum game. Fair enough.
However, I'd posit that by providing equality of opportunity we can allow those with talent and drive to maximize their potential vis a vis inbred, lazy, and most of all, idle trust fund kids who contribute nothing to society.
tl;dr: Equality of opportunity is an essential tenet of a society that values individual liberty. However, equality of opportunity is not equality of outcomes. The cream will rise to the top. Give each person the chance to maximize their potential and we *all* benefit.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday July 14 2016, @09:35PM
It most certainly is not. If I choose to spend the sweat of my brow to make the lives of my children easier, that is both my right and none of your business.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 15 2016, @12:06AM
Why not increase copyrights to 200 years while your at it. Surely that hit song you wrote deserves a few extra generations at least.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday July 15 2016, @09:32AM
Copyright is not a natural right like property. If it exists at all it should be severely limited.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.