Poltics isn't common Good

Vishagan

"He who has only his own interest or the partial interest of a certain group in mind and not the general interest of all citizens is not acting politically".

p.15 Grundkurs Philsophie band 6

In the case of nazi germanies eradication of the jews, the traditional idea of politics being an effect of the interrest of the entire population fails. Interest of the germans as a whole were not affected but only germans with specific racial traits.

I think politics is more specifically the interest of one social group's attempt to manipulate another specific social group or itselves undesired properties into another more desirable trait. This could range from eradicating the mere existence of a group such as the holocaust or wealth distribution trying to change the properties of low income earners ( a social group ) of their property of low income into one that of higher income.

Agent Smith

You know what, it's not that politicians are not up to the mark; it's that politics (statecraft) is (just too) complex. Would you blame anyone for not being able to prove Fermat's last theorem (problem posed in the 1600s, proven only in the 1990s - 3 centuries later - by Andrew Wiles)?

180 Proof

I find conceptual shorthands can be a clarifying as they are (overly) simplifying at the start of discussing a complex topic like this one. Perhaps in descending order of antiquity:

Religion is organized submission.

Politics is organized dissension.

War is organized aggression.

It seems that religion has always justified politics (i.e. war preparations / reparations) and war has always been a policy of failed politics (and therefore, of failed religion) by other means.

NB: [Religion [ Politics [War ]]]

Agent Smith

↪180 Proof

:fire:

There must be, there's got to be, a simple yet effective, as in beneficial to all, way to govern.

180 Proof

↪Agent Smith

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/502217 :nerd:

Agent Smith

↪180 Proof

:nerd: Nerdview.

Yohan

There must be, there's got to be, a simple yet effective, as in beneficial to all, way to govern. — Agent Smith

Its called self-government.

Agent Smith

Its called self-government. — Yohan

Detailed files on self-government, if you have 'em please.

Yohan

↪Agent Smith

If I find any, I'll pass 'em on.

Seems like common sense though that self government is the only legitimate form of government.

I don't want anyone to govern me, therefore I ought not to govern others?

Has governing others ever been a success?

Deus

Politicos is left to politicians the decision making process has to meet some end

Banno

A series of politicians operating in bad faith have undermined trust in democratic practices. Hence threads such as this.

Politics ought be about the common wealth. When it is about the wealth of this or that group, we are doing it wrong.

Deus

↪Banno

worth considering then without naming names but yes it ought to be for the benefit of all mankind not the selective needs of the few

Tom Storm

I think politics is more specifically the interest of one social group's attempt to manipulate another specific social group or itselves undesired properties into another more desirable trait. — Vishagan

Decades of neoliberalism have poisoned minds into thinking individualism is the only truth. We all live on one world and we share it, so it seems clear that cooperation, partnership, solidarity and empathy is a better way to a fairer and sustainable future.

“Neoliberal democracy. Instead of citizens, it produces consumers. Instead of communities, it produces shopping malls. The net result is an atomized society of disengaged individuals who feel demoralized and socially powerless. In sum, neoliberalism is the immediate and foremost enemy of genuine participatory democracy, not just in the United States but across the planet, and will be for the foreseeable future.”

- Noam Chomsky

180 Proof

“Neoliberal democracy. Instead of citizens, it produces consumers. Instead of communities, it produces shopping malls. The net result is an atomized society of disengaged individuals who feel demoralized and socially powerless. In sum, neoliberalism is the immediate and foremost enemy of genuine participatory democracy, not just in the United States but across the planet, and will be for the foreseeable future.”

- Noam Chomsky — Tom Storm

:fire:

Agent Smith

I don't want anyone to govern me — Yohan

It looks like you're forgettin' the part where a government does its thing for your benefit. No single individual is powerful enough to defend himself, his interests i.e. we need help (from the government).

Mikie

↪Tom Storm

Hear hear. :clap:

Where is the Chomsky quote from?

Tom Storm

↪Xtrix

Profit over People - Neoliberalism and Global Order 1999 It's up there with Manufacturing Consent.

schopenhauer1

↪Tom Storm

Even worse than simple profiteerism is the sort of mythology of the economic Nietzschean ubermensch via Ayn Randian type libertarianism. That's either delusional or intellectual dishonesty. It's more pernicious because, you see, the entrepreneur deserves whatever he can, whilst his workers are simply adjunct tagalongs, to be discarded or ignored. They didn't earn it you see like the brilliant lights called the "entrepreneur".

Everyone can trash on the soulless investment group.. but people still have a soft spot for that ole entrepreneur who rendered their own ideas and fashioned it into tangible goods to be sold. See how they add value and the worker just maintains the template they rendered. They are but poor shadows to the true ideal sparkling entrepreneur and his bold will-to-power over thought and materials to fashion it into useful products for humanity. You see?

javi2541997

Politics ought be about the common wealth. When it is about the wealth of this or that group, we are doing it wrong. — Banno

:up: :100:

↪Tom Storm

Good quote of Chomsky :up:

Tom Storm

↪schopenhauer1

:100:

Mikie

↪Tom Storm

Oddly enough, I own it. Right there on my bookshelf. I guess it’s been a while…

Appreciate it.

Agent Smith

trust in democratic practices — Banno

:rofl: Surely you're joking, Mr. ~~Feynman~~ Banno.

Yohan

I don't want anyone to govern me
— Yohan

It looks like you're forgettin' the part where a government does its thing for your benefit. No single individual is powerful enough to defend himself, his interests i.e. we need help (from the government). — Agent Smith

Would you not help your family, friends, or community voluntarily?
Government keeps people divided.
If the people were united, we could protect each other.

javi2541997

Government keeps people divided.
If the people were united, we could protect each other — Yohan

Exactly. This is how I want a society. Instead of living in a state we can try to achieve a community where we share goods and act with responsibility.

Agent Smith

Would you not help your family, friends, or community voluntarily?
Government keeps people divided.
If the people were united, we could protect each other. — Yohan

That's what I call a noble vision. All we're missing now is a method to turn that into reality. Don't look at me though, not my area of expertise. Bonam fortunam nevertheless - with a fair share of luck, things usually fall into place just the way you want it to. Not in my experience though, it just feels possible.

Chance favors the prepared mind. — Louis Pasteur

Yohan

↪Agent Smith

Big plans rarely succeed. The more complicated a method is, the more things can go wrong.

We may do better to start at the ground up, with simple common sense principles, than top down with theoretical models.

with a fair share of luck, things usually fall into place just the way you want it to. — Agent Smith

We will all make mistakes, that's how we learn.

But what could be more risky than giving a small group of people the power to govern the masses?

The idea of government seems a lot more like a "noble vision" than the idea of letting humanity self-organise.

Shrug

Agent Smith

I'm afraid I've run out of things to say. Paraenesis - report back to us if anything interesting happens, ok?

NOS4A2

↪Vishagan

It cannot be any other way. That’s why the “common good” is a myth and collectivism fails. No man can know what’s best for others—he can hardly sort out his own life—let alone the sum total of human beings in any given territory. No man should ever be forced to live under another man’s schemes for that reason.

Poltics isn't common Good

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions