Jump to content
The Corroboree
Halcyon Daze

Trump Watch

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Northerner said:

 

People are actually able to police themselves and live in relative harmony.

Love button needed

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Northerner said:

you are allowed to define your own morality

I love and share your enthusiasm for anarchy, but your argument is flawed by optimism. You are talking about a negative free society that contains people with positive freedom values and morals. While that may be the case in the beginning how can it last? 'Lord of the Flies' (I recommend the book and first film) is a good look at what happens to peoples morals, once you let negative freedom off its leash. The truth is, like all extremism, both extremes of freedom lead to slavery. On the left, we oppress our selves with regulation and political correctness. While on the right we give the powerful the ability to, literally, enslave us all.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's significant that most of the Utopian societies depicted in film and literature, these idyllic places that resonate with so many people, are anarchist or near anarchist societies that lean ever so slightly to the left. While the repeated motif to portray a bad guy or an evil place is the far right. That's where I think Trump belongs. He should give up politics, go back into showbiz and take his place along side Daffy Duck, Satan and Emperor Palpatine.

Edited by Crop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Crop said:

I love and share your enthusiasm for anarchy, but your argument is flawed by optimism. You are talking about a negative free society that contains people with positive freedom values and morals. While that may be the case in the beginning how can it last? 'Lord of the Flies' (I recommend the book and first film) is a good look at what happens to peoples morals, once you let negative freedom off its leash. The truth is, like all extremism, both extremes of freedom lead to slavery. On the left, we oppress our selves with regulation and political correctness. While on the right we give the powerful the ability to, literally, enslave us all.

It wasn't just an argument, it was also a real anecdote of a province in Africa I lived in that allow these sort of freedoms whilst still maintaining a hand upon greater issues. Larger crime, issues and infrastructure issues that can't be dealt with by common people need an agreed authority to deal with them. I also found very similar levels of freedom in Switzerland. Although there is much legislation in place there it is rarely called upon and most issues are left to be dealt with socially rather than being enforced with policing.

I totally agree with you that extremes of both ends of the spectrum are fraught with danger and end in slavery. Extremes of anything always end badly. It's where we draw these lines between personal and societal freedoms that makes the difference. Freedom to do what we will with our bodies and our homes, for example, are highly prized freedoms. Also freedom to defend ourselves, freedom of passage, freedom of speech... and other people's freedom to call us a dickead if they disagree. Many others that we miss here too.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Crop said:

I love and share your enthusiasm for anarchy, but your argument is flawed by optimism. You are talking about a negative free society that contains people with positive freedom values and morals. While that may be the case in the beginning how can it last? 

 

Honestly, it just takes time, quite a lot of time probably.  How do you think the extremely stable long term anarchism of pre colonial Australia came to be? It likely took hundreds of generations of epic trial & error to establish the relative balance between groups & systems of laws which were based on an extremely nuanced understanding of the environment & the fundamental needs of survival & culture. 

 

Its a big ask to take the millions or billions of effectively institutionalised, spiritually & mentally crippled individuals ie the average modern human & expect that self governance will work in the short term without a great deal of carnage.  I don't think it's a realistic proposition as things currently stand in the world. People seem too far gone & not many people would be on board for that kind of extreme change.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Northerner said:

It wasn't just an argument, it was also a real anecdote

I get what your saying, ya gotta love government inaction but that's different from good policy. The whole top end was like that when I was growing up, now you have to go more remote to be free.

 

16 hours ago, paradox said:

How do you think the extremely stable long term anarchism of pre colonial Australia came to be?

I've been out on this island for a bit over 20 years. When I first got here it was a beautiful, stable, socialist society, sure it had problems, less than most and a lot more free. Then the intervention came, the local governance systems where undermined or totally dismantled, the people in Canberra think their in charge now. They don't think, remotely, the same ways as the people here. Even if they did know how to run this place, Big Brothers arm is just not long enough to reach out here on the periphery. We very quickly went from a far left anarchy to a far right one. We passed Lord of the Flies long ago. There are still many people with the same values and morals, but 'everyone for them selves' is becoming the norm. The government spends all their time, either trying to stop the local people from taking back control, or doing publicity stunts to try and convince Canberra their in control. The latest one involved film crews and big wigs, in private charters flying all over the place hanging huge banners proclaiming how we are all going to work together to stamp out drink driving. As I watched several elders tried to tell the Pollies that it was a dry community, that they needed to go to the mainland to drink which would make it pretty hard to drive home. The Polies just smiled shook their hands, got their photos and got back on their plane. Meanwhile Rome burns. At work I've lost 7 kids in the last 2 years alone. Only 1 was to natural causes and even that 1 should have been easily prevented. On a positive note, there has be no reports of drink driving since they hung their banners.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah man, it's a god damn mess.  I have a good mate who works with struggling kids in Alice. He has a lot of similar stories to tell.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/01/2018 at 11:16 PM, paradox said:

 

Honestly,

 

Its a big ask to take the millions or billions of effectively institutionalised, spiritually & mentally crippled individuals ie the average modern human & expect that self governance will work in the short term without a great deal of carnage.  I don't think it's a realistic proposition as things currently stand in the world. People seem too far gone & not many people would be on board for that kind of extreme change.

 

 

 

but can a resurgence in individualism, seemingly brought about by the internet itself existing (now wiring up all the average humans around the world) could the average modern human begin to rise up out of their institutions. like controlled carnage? the people who know how to ride it for maximum profit individually come undone because the people in favour of the collective win?

 

i dunno, absolute democracy? is that the roman system petering itself out.the spectators decide? actually? finally? 

 

i'm going to hide now 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe man, who knows what's possible.. It seems pretty impossible to predict how things might swing..  Problem is, 'the average human' is so prone to disinformation & the Internet has been shown to be so manipulatable by centralised power structures & post modernist tribalism (in the worst sense of the word) so easily leads people down  whatever reality rabbit hole they happen to accidentally go down. The carnage is already upon us & doesn't seem particularly controlled except by the ones who understand & manipulate that game for personal gain.

 

the Internet has some profound potential like you say but I think the problem lies again with 'the average modern human' being inadequately equipped to effectively deal with the huge level of responsibility, intelligence & discipline nessacary to navigate the complex anarchy of the Internet without being sucked down some convoluted tribalistiv rabbit hole.. Which is just another form of institutionalisation.. 

 

Its sort of the same problem as democracy.  For it to work in any real sense it requires a truly informed & intelligent public.

 

i haven't given up hope though

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, freakazoid said:

a resurgence in individualism, seemingly brought about by the internet itself

Freakyfella I think your on to it, but I don't think it's a resurgence in individualism that the internet is providing, more the sense of community that has been missing from so many lives. Of course we have got to find ways around the misinformation problem paradox talks about, not to mention censorship. 

 

Now I want to go hide to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the question of how did we lose that sense? When did the breaking away from community begin?

Has the internet installed a false sense of community?

Is it really misinformation that is the problem or cognitive bias? People thinking they are woke? But to what? Their own cognitive bias still allows them to wear blinders only seeing what they want to see and interperet information accordingly.

So how do we break free from that to limit disinformation and cognitive bias?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, freakazoid said:

the people who know how to ride it for maximum profit individually come undone because the people in favour of the collective win?

 

 

Have a read of the article about Assange that ThunderIdeal linked to get a better sense of how this might or might not be possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah, read it, so basically, this guy...

 

1984.png

 

needs to become this guy...

 

NEO-refunds.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahaha I suppose. Given the way big data is being used to manipulate public opinion, people who are interested in equality/change need to start re-stratagising about the role social media and digital technologies play in their politics and opinions.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump holds a 'Telling' session disguised as a 'Listening' session after the Florida shooting.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-22/donald-trump-proposes-arming-teachers-to-stop-school-shootings/9473282

 

Trump tells victims that teachers need to be armed, while claiming that he 'hears' them.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here.   I wouldn't normally post a pragerU vid.  I dont trust them even though superficially they are often on the same page as me.  Thought it might aid the discussion above though.

 

 

 

I didn't let it embed before i posted, but it is five minutes on fascism, right or left?

Edited by ThunderIdeal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/01/2018 at 3:53 PM, Crop said:

I love and share your enthusiasm for anarchy, but your argument is flawed by optimism. You are talking about a negative free society that contains people with positive freedom values and morals. While that may be the case in the beginning how can it last? 'Lord of the Flies' (I recommend the book and first film) is a good look at what happens to peoples morals, once you let negative freedom off its leash. The truth is, like all extremism, both extremes of freedom lead to slavery. On the left, we oppress our selves with regulation and political correctness. While on the right we give the powerful the ability to, literally, enslave us all.

I think you're making a common mistake in thinking anarchy means "no rules" and not "no rulers"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Stu, not sure what makes you think that. I think from memory that particular discussion was to do with which side of the positive/negative freedom divide, anarchism sits. For the record, most forms of anarchy, I can think of, that have made it past the theory stage, have had some form of ruler or comity to handle the day to day mundane problems. Especially if there are large numbers of people involved. In the indigenous systems I have lived in, the elders filled this role. Major decisions required a community meeting where everybody, that wanted to, got a say. This was not a democracy, where the majority got their way. These meeting would go on and on, concessions would be made, until everyone was happy and there was consensus. I think this consensus is the secret to a stable anarchy, as it eliminates most resentments. removing the need to use force to enforce rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×