Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

The place for general political discussion.

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby broken robot » Sat Apr 26, 2014 11:21 pm

Saracen! Awesome to see you again brother, please stay. This is kalu. :D
The Subversives
User avatar
broken robot
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 2:11 pm
Location: CA
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 206 times
Been thanked: 234 times
Political Leaning: Socialist

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby eynon81 » Sun Apr 27, 2014 9:38 am

Saracen wrote:
eynon81 wrote:Assad bad....rebels probably more bad.

tis' the way of things.


Neither side has the moral clout to win my support, either.


I think the main thing we should be doing is supporting Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey as they care for refugees.
User avatar
eynon81
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 19475
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:38 am
Location: Golden, Colorado
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 3875 times
Been thanked: 1821 times
Political Leaning: Very Conservative

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby Kane » Mon May 05, 2014 12:55 am

Saracen wrote:
eynon81 wrote:Assad bad....rebels probably more bad.

tis' the way of things.


Neither side has the moral clout to win my support, either.


Moral clout, taken to the extreme, belongs only to the defeated and dead. Power neither knows nor cares about morality, power simply is.
Stephen Jay Gould wrote:When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.
User avatar
Kane
Governor
 
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:09 pm
Location: The Yay
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 474 times
Political Leaning: Rockefeller Republican

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby Saracen » Sun Jun 08, 2014 6:59 pm

Kane wrote:Moral clout, taken to the extreme, belongs only to the defeated and dead. Power neither knows nor cares about morality, power simply is.


...which makes power immoral in the eyes of the defeated or the dead.
Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic. - Frank Herbert
User avatar
Saracen
Mayor
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 2:32 pm
Location: Palestine
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 13 times
Political Leaning: Middle of the Road

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby Kane » Sun Jun 08, 2014 9:48 pm

Saracen wrote:
Kane wrote:Moral clout, taken to the extreme, belongs only to the defeated and dead. Power neither knows nor cares about morality, power simply is.


...which makes power immoral in the eyes of the defeated or the dead.


It always does.
Stephen Jay Gould wrote:When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.
User avatar
Kane
Governor
 
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:09 pm
Location: The Yay
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 474 times
Political Leaning: Rockefeller Republican

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby The Dharma Bum » Mon Jun 09, 2014 6:45 am

That's why any sane social order will take steps to ensure there is an equivalence of power between individuals. The problem with primitive ad hoc systems like feudalism or capitalism is that they allow a particular class the means to gain unlimited personal power and that's how 1% of the population ends up owning all the property.

The result of such a system can only be oligarchy.
Image
User avatar
The Dharma Bum
Vice President
 
Posts: 11594
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:31 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 3285 times
Been thanked: 617 times
Political Leaning: Anarcho Communist

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby Kane » Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:43 am

The Dharma Bum wrote:That's why any sane social order will take steps to ensure there is an equivalence of power between individuals. The problem with primitive ad hoc systems like feudalism or capitalism is that they allow a particular class the means to gain unlimited personal power and that's how 1% of the population ends up owning all the property.

The result of such a system can only be oligarchy.


What explains past instances of capitalism with a lower income inequality rate? Was that failure as well? Do you require absolute equality in order for it to be acceptable? The issue isn't inherent within capitalism itself if it's a well regulated mixed market economy.
Stephen Jay Gould wrote:When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.

These users thanked the author Kane for the post:
eynon81
User avatar
Kane
Governor
 
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:09 pm
Location: The Yay
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 474 times
Political Leaning: Rockefeller Republican

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby The Dharma Bum » Thu Jun 26, 2014 12:31 pm

The point of equality is so individuals cannot concentrate power and resources to use against other individuals.

So past forms of capitalism that had ostensibly less income inequality still follow a formula that led to the situation that currently exists, in which a tiny proportion of the population has been able to concentrated access to vastly disproportionate access to wealth and power. Which, of course, are being completely misused.

Another problem is our political economy is not "well regulated" in any way. It's intentionally designed to mystify and mislead the public about the goals of our social system.

Our problems are not insurmountable, they are self generated. Here's an interesting perspective:
Grof connects modern man's inability to fully and honestly grapple with his psychic conflicts to the contemporary ecological crisis:

"In the last few decades, it has become increasingly clear that humanity is facing a crisis of unprecedented proportions. Modern science has developed effective measures that could solve most of the urgent problems in today's world--combat the majority of diseases, eliminate hunger and poverty, reduce the amount of industrial waste, and replace destructive fossil fuels by renewable sources of clean energy. The problems that stand in the way are not of economical or technological nature. The deepest sources of the global crisis lie inside the human personality and reflect the level of consciousness evolution of our species."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Grof


Unless we are willing to work on that, there's not much point.
Image
User avatar
The Dharma Bum
Vice President
 
Posts: 11594
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:31 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 3285 times
Been thanked: 617 times
Political Leaning: Anarcho Communist

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby eynon81 » Thu Jun 26, 2014 12:47 pm

we must build a new person....a better person.
User avatar
eynon81
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 19475
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:38 am
Location: Golden, Colorado
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 3875 times
Been thanked: 1821 times
Political Leaning: Very Conservative

Re: Syrian Civil War: Assad Gains Ground

Postby Kane » Thu Jun 26, 2014 1:17 pm

The Dharma Bum wrote:The point of equality is so individuals cannot concentrate power and resources to use against other individuals.


Equality comes in degrees. There can be no equals in any political system that distributes power unevenly. The only thing that you'd be in favor of within that set of parameters in a more contemporary setting would likely be direct democracy. That's simply not feasible or desired as evidenced by the small instances of direct democracy within CA and other US states over the past decade via propositions. Electing representatives forces the general population to consider alternative theories to a degree greater than they may on their own due to a need for compromise in order to get more equal representation. Direct democracy creates islands of people, each with their own ideas, each seeking out their own agenda free of the constructive criticism necessary to create a functional state. We can hold those that we elect to a higher standard than we will hold ourselves if we're all voting on every single issue the state and/or the nation faces. It's a highly inefficient model that creates the necessity for ultimate transparency on all issues in order to make an educated vote and would require an inordinate amount of time to be achieved by any single actor (Unless we begin to rely on knowledge/information databases to assist in our decision making which would just evolve into ideologically driven databases that fit what the voter feels at the time).

In any other political system power is concentrated inherently, it is by design. The primary factor that mitigates excessive use of such power is the means through which these people are given that power and the degree to which existing laws constrain them (And how well the system was developed to create other actors of power to self constrain those with similar means).

Your point here is moot if that is the only way in which you believe true equality can be met and is demonstrably false in the face of historical evidence showing a period of time where inequality was far lower and social mobility far higher. You are operating in extremes that are neither practical nor realistic given the current circumstances faces by the electorate.

The Dharma Bum wrote:So past forms of capitalism that had ostensibly less income inequality still follow a formula that led to the situation that currently exists, in which a tiny proportion of the population has been able to concentrated access to vastly disproportionate access to wealth and power. Which, of course, are being completely misused.


And within those periods there was an eventual reversion, power was reigned in, and inequality regressed while social mobility improved. Think about our systems as something fluid, always in motion, there will be periods of instability and vacillation but they will always return to the mean. The issue is how far from the mean we deviate, I would say we are at a tipping point once more and that the political polarization is reminiscent of such a possibility.

The Dharma Bum wrote:Another problem is our political economy is not "well regulated" in any way. It's intentionally designed to mystify and mislead the public about the goals of our social system.


If you're a conspiracy theorist or conflate things to fit your pre-rendered analysis of events, yes. But independent developments can come about at the same time to create a perfect storm of events. Some might even require it in order to come to fruition. It's a classic case of correlation vs. causation. Furthermore, any consideration of the goals of social system suggests there is one singular goal of such a system in the first place - there is too diverse a culture at this point (Within the US anyways) to make such an assumption. Different ideological demographics desire different social systems. Some are more inclusive than others. Immigration, Gay Marriage, abortion, etc are all social issues that are highly contested indicating there is not one true set of goals of a given social system. There will always be fractures in a social system that seeks a diverse population.

The Dharma Bum wrote:Our problems are not insurmountable, they are self generated. Here's an interesting perspective:
Grof connects modern man's inability to fully and honestly grapple with his psychic conflicts to the contemporary ecological crisis:

"In the last few decades, it has become increasingly clear that humanity is facing a crisis of unprecedented proportions. Modern science has developed effective measures that could solve most of the urgent problems in today's world--combat the majority of diseases, eliminate hunger and poverty, reduce the amount of industrial waste, and replace destructive fossil fuels by renewable sources of clean energy. The problems that stand in the way are not of economical or technological nature. The deepest sources of the global crisis lie inside the human personality and reflect the level of consciousness evolution of our species."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Grof

Unless we are willing to work on that, there's not much point.


What does he want worked out? Is that some kind of subliminal message? He can argue over the way in which we choose to distribute resources but without providing some kind of alternative his point is one that's been made since the dawn of time. What kind of incentive structure does he bring forth in place of one that's monetary? How do we transition? Etc.

Waxing and waning about current issues are fine and dandy but until realistic plans are laid out that take current factors into account, factors which he believes to be responsible for the inefficiencies within our distributive model as a species, nothing more can be said or done. He has simply point at man and said "he is greedy." Well no shit.
Stephen Jay Gould wrote:When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.
User avatar
Kane
Governor
 
Posts: 6781
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:09 pm
Location: The Yay
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 474 times
Political Leaning: Rockefeller Republican

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: exploited and 1 guest