Walking to the shops ‘damages planet more than going by car’

[nothinghead]

Whether genes are or aren't that important, when the less... errr.. intellectually curious... keep popping those kids out the children hardly have a hope if they get a marvellous brain but are raised in an unsupportive environment, as far too often they are. It's a shame that its mostly the thinkers that are responsible enough to not have children and the morons with families of 10 and still waiting for that next $3000 government bucks or whatever it is.

thunk.

[gamma.goblin]

if everyone was IQ200 academic then who would wnat to clean toilets?

No-one, we would all be so clever that the toilets would clean themselves Besides, dumb people hate toilet cleaning just as much as the next guy, only the poor dumb fucker is unable to find a better path through life

[nothinghead]

Lets face it we need more lower class people then upper class, if everyone was IQ200 academic then who would wnat to clean toilets?

wtf? why can't people clean their own toilets???? being "smart" doesn't mean you can eschew personal or community responsibility.

[gamma.goblin]

You are forgetting public amenities, and private bathrooms for large buildings, and our sewer system etc...

[nothinghead]

I'm not. I agree with your point that the person with a low IQ or no money in the bank enjoys cleaning toilets about as much as a high IQ with a million bucks. I think if we're discussing how to improve society lumping the shitty jobs on the "lower classes" is a bigoted suggestion. Can't public amenities be cleaned by the community that uses them? Not in the current society, obviously, but that doesn't mean we should justify coercing people with less resources, be they intellectual, financial or otherwise, into doing these tasks that are not much fun.

[gamma.goblin]

As a society, we dont coerce people into it - a job is offered and people compete for it. As such the community does look after public toilets, its just not efficient or realistic to rely solely on an honour system where everybody cleans up after their own mess. Public health needs to be held in a higher priority than moral ideals when dealing with shit.

[nothinghead]

oh yeah! youre right - the fact that cleaners are generally immigrants or poor is just coincidence.

how does the community at present look after public toilets? and why would it have to be an "honour" system?

[gamma.goblin]

I wouldnt say all cleaners are poor, some make very good money from the fact that nobody wants to do the job. Taxes are how the community share responsibility in maintaining public amenities. I live in a -very- white demographic of Australia, most of the immigrants I know are very successfull, and most of the cleaners uneducated. Cleaning is a job that is easy to get when you are new to a country, everyone needs it done, all the time.

The 'honour system' remark was a response to your rhetorical proposal of the community looking after the public amenities. A drunk who pisses and vomits on the floor wont clean their mess. You have to ensure someone will though, or you risk public health hazards. So contracts are offered, and people take them up...

Edited August 21, 2007 by gamma.goblin

[nothinghead]

That's right, I wouldn't say all cleaners are poor either, and I didn't. I know a cleaner who makes decent money also, I wouldn't say good money considering the nature of the task and the hours involved. And I know of many, many cleaners who don't. In fact, I know that there is a lot of undercutting of job quotes done by recent immigrants who find it difficult to get other jobs because of language barriers, racism, and probably other reasons. The people who "need" cleaning done are few and far between, this is not a matter of need, it is a matter of relegating the shitty jobs to people who have few other choices.

I am not trying to categorically associate immigrants with low wages or lack of financial "success", and you saying that most of the cleaners you know are uneducated goes some way to validating my point that people who do not have other opportunities must take these types of jobs. This is a form of coercion.

And I disagree that paying taxes constitutes the community looking after public toilets. The act of paying taxes is so divorced from the reality of scrubbing a toilet that you cannot reasonably equate the two.

[Hagakure]

too exhausted from work to get stuck into this thread 100% right now but one thing i will mention is

robots

the japanese are working really hard to get robots up to scratch so they wont have to allow immigration into their country to be able to deal with massive labour shortages.

these robots WILL be developed sooner or later.

they will clean, construct whatever much more efficiently than humans and will eventually cost a fraction of a wage.

hese robots will fill voids in labour shortages but they will also kick a whole lot of people out of work too.

[Torsten]

hagakure, you missed the second part of my first sentence I think. I don't mean genes are irrelevant. My point is that most people who think they have good genes should really have a look at ALL of their family for a few generations back. The sort out what was actually just economic advantage and you're left with a very different picture.

In contrast go and have a look at the genetic make up of your local rich kid christian school. These people would claim to be pretty close to the top of the genetic ladder, yet most of those who will be successful will actually be successful based on money and poor morals.

The academic field of science is a good place to look for good genes. No amount of money will get you great adoration or respect here [although this is changing rapidly]. Yet most of the bright lights would have come from modest homes, instilled with hard work ethics, and some chance intelligence.

I don't think is is fair to pick one individual like jessica simpson and then compare the nurturing impact. Instead you need to take the whole simpson family [jessica's I mean] and see what potential they had. Any smart family can produce a dumbass like her just like she might actually become mother to a rocket scientist.

My point about genes is that they are all around. Due to travel and migration I doubt there are many genes that are truely unique and irreplacable. I take comofrt in that any 'improtant' genes I might have will probably be somewhere in my family and passe don that way. It is ridiculous to think that reducing the population will hurt the available genes or even let some genes slip away for ever. On the other hand, if we keep going the way we are and things like nuclear accidents, famine and epidemics wipe out whole populations then the chance of actual losing some genes is much more likely.

It's not like humans have ever acted to prevent such disasters with plenty of time. We are suppsoedly so advanced and have this ability to predict the future quite acurately, yet our selfishness and greed [and stupid drive to overpopulate] gets in the way of good science and common sense.

[Torsten]

re poor people doing jobs we don't like, I don't see this as any different to slavery. These people do those jobs because it is the only way they can survive.

personally when I don't want to do a job I find someone to do it and the more I dislike the job the more I pay them for it. I've never understood why the worst jobs pay the least. Then again, the last time we had to hire a cleaner it cost us $40 per hour, which is about what a well qualified audio engineer, a skilled tradesman, a graphic designeror, a low level consultant earns.

[gamma.goblin]

And I disagree that paying taxes constitutes the community looking after public toilets. The act of paying taxes is so divorced from the reality of scrubbing a toilet that you cannot reasonably equate the two.

You can disagree, but its a fact of life. Sure its not the same as scrubbing a toilet, but we dont clean toilets to teach lessons to people, we do it for sanitation. Ive done cleaning, I never felt stuck there or 'enslaved', and if it wasnt for the fact that I have RSI, I would do it again. Reason being, I can earn decent(&honest) money for transient work with no skills required. Compare the wage of your average cleaner to your average childcare worker for example...I dont know why you think people dont need cleaning? Do you live in a pig sty? Or does someone clean up? With more and more families expected to have both parents working, hired help in private domestic situations is on the rise.

the last time we had to hire a cleaner it cost us $40 per hour, which is about what a well qualified audio engineer, a skilled tradesman, a graphic designeror, a low level consultant earns.

exactly. Low social 'status' doesnt mean low pay.

Of course not many people are going to get super rich from cleaning, but thats the same in any industry. The higher you get, the thinner the ranks...besides, 'cleaning toilets' is just a general phrase meaning any 'shit job', and how many people really like their job anyway?

Edited August 21, 2007 by gamma.goblin

[teonanacatl]

lol my gf is actually a cleaner. I agree cleaners (which i just picked as an example) probably like doing it as much as I would, and the pay is pretty good (I am alot poorer then my gf). The thing is there are jobs in society that the majority of society doesnt want to do (some people would like cleaning). There is a ladder from there, increasing with the amount of training one has or experience. I never could even get a job at woolworths so I use to do slave labour $5-10/ hour for people in nurseries but I liked it. Now I could walk into a 80K + job if I wanted.

The same situation would occur if everyone had $1 million dollars, it would mean nothing, noone would be better off. There has to be social inequality for our system to work, overhual the system then maybe it will work better. Same thing with legalising drugs I think, its sad but I dont think there is hope at all, unless society overhauls its thinking, not just on whats evil and whats not but on how they utilise drugs.

In general I think there just has to be a cut down in breeding from all people.

[nothinghead]

You can disagree, but its a fact of life. Sure its not the same as scrubbing a toilet

You have contradicted yourself, in agreeing it is not the same, you agree with my point.

Ive done cleaning, I never felt stuck there or 'enslaved', and if it wasnt for the fact that I have RSI, I would do it again. Reason being, I can earn decent(&honest) money for transient work with no skills required.

You said you come from a wealthy white demographic, doesn't sound like you are in the category I was describing.

I dont know why you think people dont need cleaning? Do you live in a pig sty? Or does someone clean up?

Because I feel that cleaning up after oneself is as personal a responsibility as showering oneself. This is not something the average person should need.

The higher you get, the thinner the ranks...besides, 'cleaning toilets' is just a general phrase meaning any 'shit job', and how many people really like their job anyway?

Just because this type of capitalism is the ascendent system does not validate it ethically. Instead of accept the fact that we should all just settle for "shit jobs" we don't like, I think we should work towards a society where "work" is engaging and stimulating. If this means putting in a few less hours so we can clean up after ourselves and so forth, this seems a small sacrifice to make. We don't need the high-speed development that we observe in the world today. It would not hurt to slow down a little.

To clarify, I am not generally speaking about "cleaning", more about what we began talking about - scrubbing toilets and such. I am aware that professions such as house-cleaning can be quite enjoyable work and well paid too.

Teo - I agree with you, our current system relies heavily on social inequality and it will do at least as long as we consume an amount disproportionate to that which we produce. And I also agree that this will not change unless we overhaul the system (starting with capitalism).

[Hagakure]

heaps scattered at the moment so i apologise for the randomness of the topics discussed in the following post

.............................................................................................................................................................

torsten, i dont think occupation is a good indication of a good balance of genes. sometimes its smart to have a job that doesnt pay much but to use it to get by, lower your needs and enjoy life. you cant get a feel for who that person truely was.

perhaps your street begger relative was something of a mystic, perhaps he developed a mental illness due to some disease.

we need some onther way to look at this more effectively. if we take small generations that we know a lot about its quite clear that the influence of genes is pretty large. look at terence tao. really smart parents and a really smart brother aswell. of course the fact that he is now a mathematical genius is because his parents provided the stimulation he needed really well, there is no way he would be where he is today without environmental influences. that said no matter what environbment i was raised in i couldnt have blitzed through university maths by age 17.

and surely you would agree that social welfare programs that create a "more babies = more money from the government" mindset are doing no good for our population.

i would love to read an in depth analysis of the influence of WW1 on britain, khmer rouge on cambodia and the mass exodus of intelligence from china and india to see how these changes do influence population dynamics.

in the next generation will a greater number of above average kids appear around the silicon valley in comparison to places that have not had the influx of intelligence? my guess is yes.

could we see the loss in populations that lost a lot of their top talent. well thats probably a really hard question to answer. and yeah you have a point in this case that while a clever brother may have gone overseas, his sister and brother together have most of the genes he has if not all.

so will china with the one child policy suffer a lot more than india due to the brain drain?

im rambling a lot here but in essence what im saying is by all means we need to reduce the population of this planet. but if its done through those realising we have to decrease just not having babies then the balnce will shift to those who dont care.

i remmeber a mate telling me bout a sci fi novel he read. everyone had the right to 3/4 of a baby. you partner up and with your couple you have the right to 1 1/2 babies.

you can either have children, or trade your rights on a market or through personal transactions.

could then have gov granting higher rights to those who reach some excellence in their field. stuff like that.

interesting thought experiment but also pretty scary. i consider myself a bit of a libertarian these days and that policy would be anything but.

damn i have been typing a while. topics like this always sucker me in.

[gamma.goblin]

You have contradicted yourself, in agreeing it is not the same, you agree with my point.

heh, not exactly. I agree that paying taxes is not scrubbing a toilet, however Im in disagreeance with your argument that taxes/rates dont constitute community responsibility. Its no different to any other public service that such payments cover.

You said you come from a wealthy white demographic, doesn't sound like you are in the category I was describing.

Now you have a bit of misunderstanding and a bit of supposition there. I never said anything about wealth, I dont come from a wealthy area, I come from a white area. As in, you go out, the vast majority of faces are white. My reason for mentioning that was to say I cant speak from experience in regards to racial/language barriers being a contributing factor to the people I have observed in my time.

Because I feel that cleaning up after oneself is as personal a responsibility as showering oneself. This is not something the average person should need.

Thats fine, buts its not terribly realistic. For example, I dont want our politicians spending their time scrubbing toilets. Sure it would be funny, but its not what they are there to do. Same with a surgeon, their expertise is in high demand, I dont want them wasting time doing jobs that are not their specialty if Im on a waiting list. You think cleaning a toilet is bad, you should see someone cleaning out an absyss. How about removing foreign objects from peoples rectums every other saturday night? The stuff medical staff have to deal with is far more disgusting than human waste(which they have to deal with a lot of in the course of their work anyway). Yet medico's dont have the 'dirty' stigma attached to them in the same way that cleaners do. The filth is glossed over and the more appealing aspects romanticised: saving peoples lives, money, influence... Sanitation workers save our lives, just not directly at the operating table and as such are rarely credited. Then theres the whole spectrum of people who are not 'average' and actually require cleaning up after. Some examples are children, elderly, sick/injured, disabled, intoxicated, or just plain old fashoined pricks who like making other peoples lives more difficult.

Just because this type of capitalism is the ascendent system does not validate it ethically. Instead of accept the fact that we should all just settle for "shit jobs" we don't like, I think we should work towards a society where "work" is engaging and stimulating. If this means putting in a few less hours so we can clean up after ourselves and so forth, this seems a small sacrifice to make. We don't need the high-speed development that we observe in the world today. It would not hurt to slow down a little.

I think we do work towards a society were people can find work stimulating. However, delegation has been a part of our social structure for as long as we have had societies. If its unethical then so is pretty much all of human history, as well as the rest of the animal kingdom. With the technology, unfortunately we are hard wired competitors. If we slow down, we risk our opponents cutting our throats. The only way to do it is to convince everybody that it is for their own good, or we risk putting ourselves in a position where we no longer have the power to affect anything.

To clarify, I am not generally speaking about "cleaning", more about what we began talking about - scrubbing toilets and such. I am aware that professions such as house-cleaning can be quite enjoyable work and well paid too

Scrubbing toilets is hardly the nastiest thing you can come across in cleaning, its just that people get caught up in the whole image of it. Id rather scrub a toilet than a factory, and Im more scared of heights than poo, so window washing is out of the question. Besides, cleaning toilets can be well paid too, and I think the only people who regually enjoy the act of cleaning anything are disturbed, though if they are happy with the hours and pay then I can appreciate that they enjoy their job, as it facilitates whatever lifestyle they are chasing. Work to live not live to work...

I should point out that I feel being asked to clean anything without relevant OHS observations and pay under threat of dismissal would constitue exploitation/slavery. Though not the honest jobs, and I think its probably a little insulting to think like that about toilet cleaners in general.

our current system relies heavily on social inequality and it will do at least as long as we consume an amount disproportionate to that which we produce. And I also agree that this will not change unless we overhaul the system (starting with capitalism).

Its not just our current system, its our whole history...capitalism is hardly to blame. Are you saying capitalism should be completely replaced? If so, with what?

[nothinghead]

Now you have a bit of misunderstanding and a bit of supposition there. I never said anything about wealth, I dont come from a wealthy area, I come from a white area. As in, you go out, the vast majority of faces are white. My reason for mentioning that was to say I cant speak from experience in regards to racial/language barriers being a contributing factor to the people I have observed in my time.

You mention a largely white demographic where most of the immigrants you do know are "successful" by which I inferred that you meant they have gained significant finances, if this is so unless there is some kind of societal schism where you live you are likely to be in the same group, no? Regardless, as you say, you do not have a lot of experience encountering language barriers etc which still means you are not part of the demographic I was describing.

Thats fine, buts its not terribly realistic. For example, I dont want our politicians spending their time scrubbing toilets. Sure it would be funny, but its not what they are there to do. Same with a surgeon, their expertise is in high demand, I dont want them wasting time doing jobs that are not their specialty if Im on a waiting list. You think cleaning a toilet is bad, you should see someone cleaning out an absyss. How about removing foreign objects from peoples rectums every other saturday night?

Perhaps if more politicians cleaned their own toilets with a reduction in people being coerced into these types of jobs could (of course with a system of equal opportunity, not one that simply purports it) could get ahead and fill these types of positions so there would not be the high demand you state as a problem.

I am happy to include medical staff who deal with these fairly offputting tasks in this discussion too. You'll notice that the staff cleaning out abysses etc are not the surgeons that you mention, surgeons have one of the most sterile professions, while we are talking about dirt. It is partially nurses who do the "dirty work" and, while underpaid for the type of work they do, still get a decent wage. Moreover "dirty" types of tasks in the medical/carer professions are, by a large majority, dumped on the "lowest" echelons of this system, for example care of the elderly who cannot care for themselves is often done by people with no medical training at all, these people often do not have this training because of a lack of facilitation or opportunity, and so need to take these jobs some of us find disgusting in order to put food on the table. We are talking about a case here analagous to scrubbing public toilets in terms of a system that coerces the less fortunate into these tasks. If this were not so, shouldn't we see at least a small amount of workers who are wealthy who carry out tasks such as showering people less able to do so themselves? I am yet to see this, and it would be absurd to argue that it happened on a scale which

If its unethical then so is pretty much all of human history, as well as the rest of the animal kingdom. With the technology, unfortunately we are hard wired competitors. If we slow down, we risk our opponents cutting our throats.

Speaking about delegation in the animal kingdom makes as much sense as saying the cat oppresses the mouse. And the "cold war" style rhetoric may reflect a real fear present in the world, but it again, describing the way things are is not a whole lot of use if we merely use these descriptions to reinforce the way things are. Observations on the world should be used in an effort to imagine a better world, as I said in my last post, society does not need to develop at the monstrous rate it does, slowing down would not damage our collective lives, it would improve them. I agree with you that this presents a problem in convincing the greater community of this, and I think this problem is inherent in the nature of capitalism with its ostensible individualistic meritocracy - if people were not so obsessed with personal gain we could work in a co-operative manner for the good of all. We can already see this happening in small pockets of certain communities such as with diy kids, but this ethic of working together needs far more emphasis if it is to make any major impact outside these communities. Describing the current situation and being satisfied with it is the best way to go about stabilising the system, if you are happy with the way things are, so be it, but I think it's easy to be happy in a "first world" imperialist society where most of our comforts are provided at the enslavement of others.

Work to live not live to work...

I would endorse the direct opposite, I think if we are to spend most of our waking hours at a task we should enjoy and be passionate about what we do. Again, taking small responsibilities for ourselves such as cleaning up our own shit, leaves more opportunity for this to happen.

I think its probably a little insulting to think like that about toilet cleaners in general.

Let me be very clear - I am not thinking at all badly of toilet cleaners, quite the opposite, I am thinking badly of those who refuse to clean toilets.

Its not just our current system, its our whole history...capitalism is hardly to blame. Are you saying capitalism should be completely replaced? If so, with what?

This is an incredibly reductive statement. Our whole collective human history has been one of exploitation??? Hardly! An easy example to take is the Indigenous peoples of this land, whose "lifestyle" remained largely unchanged for around 35,000 years. While we can argue all day about things such as gender issues and social mores, what I am indicating is that no Indigenous Australian tribe has been known to have enslaved another tribe, or even to have coerced another tribe into, say, catching their food while they do something "more important".

I am definitely and emphatically saying that capitalism NEEDS to be replaced, my suggestion would be one or another style of anarchism. If you are not up with these political theories please read up.

[gamma.goblin]

You mention a largely white demographic where most of the immigrants you do know are "successful" by which I inferred that you meant they have gained significant finances, if this is so unless there is some kind of societal schism where you live you are likely to be in the same group, no? Regardless, as you say, you do not have a lot of experience encountering language barriers etc which still means you are not part of the demographic I was describing.

Oh yeah, I couldnt possibly be one of the cleaners I described right? The pigeon-holing is getting tiresome Yes, Im not one of the groups you are describing, Im describing my area, as an example where racism doesnt play a part, so can be removed as a factor. People who are uneducated are often that way becasue they dont want to further educate themselves. Its never too late to learn, but if you dont want to theres always a barrel-load of excuses you can give.

Perhaps if more politicians cleaned their own toilets with a reduction in people being coerced into these types of jobs could (of course with a system of equal opportunity, not one that simply purports it) could get ahead and fill these types of positions so there would not be the high demand you state as a problem.

Perhaps not. I dont think I described it as a problem, cleaning is and always will be a fact of life that has to be done on an ongoing basis.

I am happy to include medical staff who deal with these fairly offputting tasks in this discussion too. You'll notice that the staff cleaning out abysses etc are not the surgeons that you mention, surgeons have one of the most sterile professions, while we are talking about dirt. It is partially nurses who do the "dirty work" and, while underpaid for the type of work they do, still get a decent wage.

Thats just plain wrong. Anything that requires the surgeons steady hand will be done by the surgeon. Its true that nurses do the bulk of patient care, but no way in hell are they the ones who cop all the filth. And just becasue something may be sterile doesnt mean its not stomach-turning, and dealing with infection & disease is hardly working with sterility, even though its done in a sterile enviroment. And guess what, the nurses also outrank people who they get to delegate to.

Moreover "dirty" types of tasks in the medical/carer professions are, by a large majority, dumped on the "lowest" echelons of this system, for example care of the elderly who cannot care for themselves is often done by people with no medical training at all, these people often do not have this training because of a lack of facilitation or opportunity, and so need to take these jobs some of us find disgusting in order to put food on the table. We are talking about a case here analagous to scrubbing public toilets in terms of a system that coerces the less fortunate into these tasks. If this were not so, shouldn't we see at least a small amount of workers who are wealthy who carry out tasks such as showering people less able to do so themselves? I am yet to see this, and it would be absurd to argue that it happened on a scale which

Strangely enough, showering and wiping someones bum and cleaning up after them doesnt require any medical training Most people get training in that every day of their lives. Its not 'dirty' tasks that are relegated, its everything that the lower worker can do, to free up the higher trained and less numerous upper echelons to do their job. The low rung workers do the bulk of the work because they make up the bulk of the workforce. Very simple. Nurses love to bitch and moan about doctors, but they have the luxury of being in less demand. Doctors work ridiculous hours that your average nurse is not subjected to, and with a much greater level of responsibility - correct treatment starts with correct diagnosis. You may not see workers who are wealthy going out to find a job helping people shower, but you may just find them looking after their own parents for example, which is what you want anyway right?

Speaking about delegation in the animal kingdom makes as much sense as saying the cat oppresses the mouse.

Were we speaking about humans interacting with cows? No. Look at the social structures of creatures within their own species, delegation occurs.

And the "cold war" style rhetoric may reflect a real fear present in the world, but it again, describing the way things are is not a whole lot of use if we merely use these descriptions to reinforce the way things are. Observations on the world should be used in an effort to imagine a better world, as I said in my last post, society does not need to develop at the monstrous rate it does, slowing down would not damage our collective lives, it would improve them. I agree with you that this presents a problem in convincing the greater community of this, and I think this problem is inherent in the nature of capitalism with its ostensible individualistic meritocracy - if people were not so obsessed with personal gain we could work in a co-operative manner for the good of all. We can already see this happening in small pockets of certain communities such as with diy kids, but this ethic of working together needs far more emphasis if it is to make any major impact outside these communities. Describing the current situation and being satisfied with it is the best way to go about stabilising the system, if you are happy with the way things are, so be it, but I think it's easy to be happy in a "first world" imperialist society where most of our comforts are provided at the enslavement of others.

Saying 'the system needs to be overhauled' without offering any kind of insight in to how this might be accomplished isnt a whole lot of use either. If you think 'some kind of anarchism' is better than some kind of order with our current population levels, then I think you are crazy Anarchy means I shoot you in the face if you get too close to my stuff, or maybe coz I just didnt like your hair...I understand the status quo, and no Im not a fan of it, though do you put your money where your mouth is, or do you live a fairly western-developed-first-world lifestyle? I never said I was wholly satisfied with the system, Im just not satisfied at all by your arguments. Im not sure where you get the certainty to predict the future in the manner you are, but its another thing Im not in agreeance with. You like to blame capitalism, but you havent offered any kind of sane alternative. The blame lies in the way humans are. We are animals. Animals do whatever it takes to survive. Sure you can have enlightened, ethical sections of society, but we are not born that way.

I would endorse the direct opposite, I think if we are to spend most of our waking hours at a task we should enjoy and be passionate about what we do. Again, taking small responsibilities for ourselves such as cleaning up our own shit, leaves more opportunity for this to happen.

Yep, which is why I like to spend as much time as I can not working at all. You still seem to ignore the fact that there are many members of the public who require cleaning up after them.

Let me be very clear - I am not thinking at all badly of toilet cleaners, quite the opposite, I am thinking badly of those who refuse to clean toilets.

I bet you(like most people) probably owe your mum for quite a bit of toilet clenaing you havent wanted to do in your time, am I right?

This is an incredibly reductive statement. Our whole collective human history has been one of exploitation??? Hardly! An easy example to take is the Indigenous peoples of this land, whose "lifestyle" remained largely unchanged for around 35,000 years. While we can argue all day about things such as gender issues and social mores, what I am indicating is that no Indigenous Australian tribe has been known to have enslaved another tribe, or even to have coerced another tribe into, say, catching their food while they do something "more important".

Delegation does not mean exploitation. Our entire human history has been one of delegation. I find it somewhat ludicrous that you use tribal aboriginees as an example of a society you want. They had classes and jobs within their social order just like every other human culture, they were not anarchists, they had laws. You even seemingly aknowledge their failings in gender and social issues...They may not have evolved socially to the point of enslavement, but they certainly massacred the competition where they saw fit.

I am definitely and emphatically saying that capitalism NEEDS to be replaced, my suggestion would be one or another style of anarchism. If you are not up with these political theories please read up.

Sure, Ill read up, if you can actually find anything realistic for me to read. Any social structure must accept the way humans are wired from birth, not simply what we can become over time with insight and experience.

[nothinghead]

Oh yeah, I couldnt possibly be one of the cleaners I described right? The pigeon-holing is getting tiresome Yes, Im not one of the groups you are describing

So I was correct, right?

People who are uneducated are often that way becasue they dont want to further educate themselves. Its never too late to learn, but if you dont want to theres always a barrel-load of excuses you can give.

Yeah, lack of money is one of them, lack of availability is another. Just because metropolitan Australia has comparatively accessible facilities for education does not mean most places do.

Thats just plain wrong. Anything that requires the surgeons steady hand will be done by the surgeon. Its true that nurses do the bulk of patient care, but no way in hell are they the ones who cop all the filth. And just becasue something may be sterile doesnt mean its not stomach-turning, and dealing with infection & disease is hardly working with sterility, even though its done in a sterile enviroment. And guess what, the nurses also outrank people who they get to delegate to.

Strangely enough, showering and wiping someones bum and cleaning up after them doesnt require any medical training Most people get training in that every day of their lives. Its not 'dirty' tasks that are relegated, its everything that the lower worker can do, to free up the higher trained and less numerous upper echelons to do their job. The low rung workers do the bulk of the work because they make up the bulk of the workforce. Very simple. Nurses love to bitch and moan about doctors, but they have the luxury of being in less demand. Doctors work ridiculous hours that your average nurse is not subjected to, and with a much greater level of responsibility - correct treatment starts with correct diagnosis. You may not see workers who are wealthy going out to find a job helping people shower, but you may just find them looking after their own parents for example, which is what you want anyway right?

How often do you hear of a surgeon dying from golden staph? Thought so. Working in a sterile environment actually does mean working with sterility, thats the very point of it. Although there are diseases present, the point is to isolate the contaminant so it does not spread. I have already stated that a lot of the baser tasks are delegated by the nurses. And caring for, say the elderly, does not simply require a knowledge of how to shower someone. In case you are ignorant on this point, most elderly who are cared for are on multiple types of medication which require some medical knowledge to work with. This is not an incredibly difficult knowledge base, usually all it requires is an understanding of contraindications, however many of the "lower" workers may not be able to train at a university for 3 years to become a nurse and move up from the menial tasks they are assigned. And nurses work just as long as doctors, often in more demanding roles than your average GP. I think you completely missed my point on the wealthy people not doing menial tasks, while I think it is wonderful that they (in your opinion) look after their elderly parents, the point was that if you have the financial means to not do a menial job, chances are you won't do it. Therefore, again, having other people do it for you is a type of coercion. Please read carefully back over what I have written before you reply again.

 

Were we speaking about humans interacting with cows? No. Look at the social structures of creatures within their own species, delegation occurs.

Give me an example which is analogous to the type of "delegation" we are describing in humans.

Anarchy means I shoot you in the face if you get too close to my stuff, or maybe coz I just didnt like your hair...

Ignorance is no excuse in this case. Do some reading and you will find this is not at all the case in anarchist practice, you are really making a fool of yourself here.

I understand the status quo, and no Im not a fan of it, though do you put your money where your mouth is, or do you live a fairly western-developed-first-world lifestyle?

Obviously, otherwise why would I be arguing about it? If there were a chance for a position outside the capitalist matrices I would have no need to argue about why it needs to be changed. This is self evident. THINK before you post, please.

We are animals. Animals do whatever it takes to survive.

You've really put a lot of thought into this haven't you? Do you, by extention of this statement, justify things like the "War on Terror" to keep oil prices down? Is the Nazi regime justified since they believed decimation of the Jews was necessary to their survival as a race?

I bet you(like most people) probably owe your mum for quite a bit of toilet clenaing you havent wanted to do in your time, am I right?

Speak for yourself - I make a point of looking after my own responsibilities.

Delegation does not mean exploitation. Our entire human history has been one of delegation. I find it somewhat ludicrous that you use tribal aboriginees as an example of a society you want... they were not anarchists...They may not have evolved socially to the point of enslavement

You've failed to justify this in any way. Simply claiming something doesn't make it true. And where did I say I wanted our society to mirror Indigenous models? When did I suggest their society was anarchistic???? Evolved to enslavement huh? Now there's an evolutionary goal, and wrapped in a juicy layer of racism. Nice. Really, you should read a little more carefully, and consider things until you have something reasonable to say.

Since you seem to be exorbitantly ignorant on the matter and incapable of finding any reading material on anarchism, heres a few to start you often, maybe they can help you along to thinking for yourself and finding some more on your own:

-Chomsky, N., Chomsky On Anarchism

-Kropotkin, P., Anarchism

-Nozick, R., Anarchy, State and Utopia

Off you go, and please don't make another post about how anarchism means killing each other and that the Aborigines were unevolved until you've done a bit of research.

[gamma.goblin]

No you were not correct, Im white, I live in a white area, get it? Im not rich. Fucking hell, the two are not synonymous.

I dont goto school, and its not the only way to educate yourself. Im talking about attitude, yes some have more barriers than others, and Im more aware of them than you realise.

If a surgeon died of golden staph infection I would be very surprised given that they know how to recognise, contain and treat it. We obviously have very different experience with the hours of doctors and nurses, Ive never met a nurse who was on call 24/7. Yes I realise some people require medical and theraputic care, but what I mentioned doesnt. If someone has special medical needs, then of course they need a correctly trained professional, goes without saying. Ive also done work in nursing homes, so Im not ignorant of the situation.

Of course if someone can take a much higher paying job then in all likelyhood they will, but what do you propose, paying a shoe-shiner the same as a CEO? Equality is a nice principal we strive towards, but its not a reality. You could make all material things equal and our individual differences would still come into play, some people would accumulate more social status than others. Whether it be by virtue, charisma, beauty, intelligence or whatever. We rate, we judge, and we compare everything we come into contact with, and attach different levels of value accordingly.

A couple of examples of non-human delegation most would be familiar with are bees, and thanks to meerkat manor, those cute little buggers too. Also any species with a social structure that includes an alpha male, and any that have gender roles, like lions. I think if you type 'social hierarchy' and whatever animal name you can think of into google you will find examples.

Not the case at all in anarchist practice hey? You mean anarchy has rules? I might be making a fool of myself to anarchists with my 'ignorance' but everyone else thinks anarchists are fools You totally miss the point of humans are animals. War for Oil and the holocaust are symptoms, not justification. Its a reality that has to be dealt with in any society. If you try to build a social system that ignores the way humans are(ie: selfish), it will fail.

I did think before I posted about your lifestyle, it was a valid question, I was wondering how much you have tried to detach yourself from the society you loathe, and what steps you have taken towards your goal of a better one. Please dont be such a twat about it. If you are upset because you dont feel you can do anything, its hardly my fault.

Its great to know you are so concientious with cleaning, and seemingly have been since you were able to hold a toilet scrubbing brush. Three cheers, your mum must love you to bits!

Cultural evolution isnt always feel-good and pretty, and yes, slavery is a part of cultural evolution, as was its abolition by law. Im not going to apologise or feel bad for making the statement. Would I be racist too if I said that their culture had not evolved to the same technology level as the settlers? You can call me racist(you are really fishing for insults now), but I dont really give a flying fuck what you think there, as I get the feeling you will just paint me however you feel, regardless of what I say. I may live in a white area but I also live in Australia, being bigoted towards race is about as usefull as shooting myself in the foot. Besides, its not how I was raised. If Ive failed to justify my statement in any way, Im sorry, Im just totally unaware of any human culture that didnt involve hierarchy. Maybe you could enlighten me?

-Chomsky, N., Chomsky On Anarchism

-Kropotkin, P., Anarchism

-Nozick, R., Anarchy, State and Utopia

So I take it these guys do have a proposal on how we clean public toilets? I guess if they do you must have skipped over that part anyway, or you would have posted it by now

grab your toilet brushes folks, viva la revolution!

Edited August 22, 2007 by gamma.goblin

[nothinghead]

I really wish you would take one piece of advice I have given you over, and over in these last few posts: read! Almost your entire reply is either mindless conjecture, putting words into my mouth, or totally missing the point! Really, I don't know if you are playing stupid to avoid the topic of argument, or whether you are just incapable of slowing down your reading so you can understand before you begin to reply.

Point in case: You say that going to school isn't the only way to learn. That's a given. However, if you read my post, you will see that I was speaking about professions where school-based education is necessary for employment, such as nursing. If you cannot get a degree, you cannot be a registered nurse.

Point in case: I never proposed anything like paying shoe shiners the same as CEO's? You seem to again have completely missed the point. I think Torsten's ethic of paying an employee a wage based on the level of discomfort with doing the task is an excellent proposal. You are still taking a completely individualistic approach in your thinking, you have obviously not bothered to even browse any of the material I suggested, so you have continued to look the fool in this argument.

You have no knowledge of theories of anarchism, so stop arguing about it, and PLEASE stop with the conjecture that "everyone else thinks anarchists are fools" this is your personal, uninformed opinion, not the opinion of EVERYONE. I think its rather pathetic that the only thing between you shooting someone who comes near your stuff or whose hair you don't like is a punitive law. If you can't take some personal responsibility maybe I can start to understand why you're so into having others clean up after you.

Bees do not "delegate" tasks in the way humans do. Read a journal article or philosophy piece on the matter, there's plenty around. Wittgenstein says bees are "hired wired" into doing their tasks, this is not a form of delegation. Simply mentioning a TV show doesn't prove your argument either. I asked for an example, not a show to watch.

If you wish to sit back and say "well, war is just a symptom of being human, so be it" that's your own problem, another one tied in with a refusal to take some responsibility for yourself. Grow up.

No matter how you justify your comments on Aborigines being unevolved they were racist. That is unavoidable. Equally stupid was your comment that enslavement was an evolutionary goal.

Really, if you are going to ask for some sources to read, at least take a look through them if you are capable, which is looking less and less likely.

[nothinghead]

everyone else thinks anarchists are fools

So I take it these guys do have a proposal on how we clean public toilets? I guess if they do you must have skipped over that part anyway, or you would have posted it by now

grab your toilet brushes folks, viva la revolution!

By the way, playing the "everyone thinks" card doesn't work in an argument. If you can't come up with your own (valid) ideas on WHY anarchism is such a stupid idea you'd better to keep your silence and be thought and fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.... Oops! Too late!

If you had bothered to do any reading at all on this you would realise that any of those books would reccomend you thinking up your own solutions, instead of having everyone else tell you what to do. It might be hard at first, but it's worth it.

[gamma.goblin]

lol one childish insult deserves another, though I did try to keep mine tounge in cheek, I even used emoticons, look! you know what you can kiss right?

Think up my own solutions? Wow what an insight. Worked brilliantly for you so far hasnt it!

[nothinghead]

Tongue in cheek only really works when you know what youre talking about.