These Guys Blame You, The Individual, For All Our Problems

Homepage Forums Politics These Guys Blame You, The Individual, For All Our Problems

This topic contains 27 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by   12 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 28 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #47815

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Fellow Unbelievers,

    Get a load of these two:

    We Have Put Individualism Ahead of the Common Good for Too Long BY RICHARD WEISSBOURD AND CHRIS MURPHY APRIL 11, 2023 7:15 AM EDT
    https://time.com/6269091/individualism-ahead-of-the-common-good-for-too-long/

    Basically, these two assholes blame all of our problems, from the economic mess to crumbling cities to Culture War on Individualism and they basically want all of us taking a knee to the Collective in the name of “The Common Good Over The Individual Good.”

    When this nation has had too much Individualism, I’ll never know.

    The Founders basically had the right idea, but were terrible in the execution of it regarding slavery.

    The Civil War corrected that, but made Federal slaves of everyone.

    In between then and now, we’ve had a Progressive Era, Jim Crow, Prohibition, the Panic of 1873, a Great Depression, a New Deal, Fair Deal, Square Deal, a New Frontier, a Great Society, countless foreign wars declared and undeclared, domestic Wars on Alcohol, Poverty, Drugs, Terror, Porn, and Lawn Darts and all of it has diminished the Individual’s rights, responsibility and dignity.

    And how is there “too much Individualism” when mobs of costumed Live-Action Role Players (LARPers) in all flavors dox, chase down, hoard, besiege, assault, and threaten with death people for expressing a different viewpoint?

    Anywho, these jerks who wrote this article, in the name of stopping “anomie,” “atomism,” and “loneliness,” not only want industrial policy to bring back downtown business districts and ancient smokestack industries, but evidently want Government-owned or subsidized religion, social clubs, and even dead-tree newspapers!

    Every Atheist ought to be howling at the Moon against the idea of subsidized religion! And what would we call the government newspapers, National Public Fish Wrap?

    They even suggest making Doctors into inquisitors and snitches on our innermost thoughts! (Something that would be much easier to carry out with a single-payer Government-run system.)

    Well, you know who else supported “The Common Good Over The Individual Good?”

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program

    Go screw, you Worker Drones at TIME Magazine! I’m just not that desperate for company! I can do without your sickening-sweet Honeycomb! I’ll stick with my wild-oat Cheerios and Ovaltine with steak and eggs, all bought from suburban stores and all paid for by myself!

    #47817


    Participant

    Basically, these two assholes blame all of our problems, from the economic mess to crumbling cities to Culture War on Individualism and they basically want all of us taking a knee to the Collective in the name of “The Common Good Over The Individual Good.”

    Are you sure you are literate?

    #47818

    _Robert_
    Participant

    Yeah, there’s no happy median in forum-interweb land. Just keyboard warrior extremism. For two hundred years Americans could talk politics over a beer, write a letter to the editor, and laugh at ourselves.

    I have been reflecting lately. I don’t think I want to be a party to my own destruction anymore. North Korea or China will not be our end. Our end is within these fifty states unless we get our shit together.

    #47825

    PopeBeanie
    Moderator

    I have been reflecting lately. I don’t think I want to be a party to my own destruction anymore. North Korea or China will not be our end. Our end is within these fifty states unless we get our shit together.

    Are you thinking of going full Mountain Man? My Libertarian father’s kinda become one. He picked a mountain in Tennessee, and poked at me with “Hey, I thought you said Florida was supposed to be underwater by now?”, which was an extreme paraphrase not even close to what I actually said.

    #47827

    _Robert_
    Participant

    I have been reflecting lately. I don’t think I want to be a party to my own destruction anymore. North Korea or China will not be our end. Our end is within these fifty states unless we get our shit together.

    Are you thinking of going full Mountain Man? My Libertarian father’s kinda become one. He picked a mountain in Tennessee, and poked at me with “Hey, I thought you said Florida was supposed to be underwater by now?”, which was an extreme paraphrase not even close to what I actually said.

    No, just tired of US politics and social media in general. If Americans wanna attain mass idiocy kill each other go ahead; I’m not signing up.

    #47829

    jakelafort
    Participant

    I don’t know how to start a post so i will just ask right here and now:

    If we could assemble an international team of well-intentioned individuals (heavyweight intellectuals lacking in strong ideological agendas) to write a manifesto to address fundamental human issues and existential threats to be employed by techperts to create algorithms intended to manipulate the masses, would you sign on to that?

    #47833

    Davis
    Moderator

    Off the top of my head I can think of a gazillion things that could go wrong

    #47840

    Strega
    Moderator

    Jake, I’m pretty sure that’s the plot basis for most of the Bond movies 🙂

    #47844

    PopeBeanie
    Moderator

    Jake, I would go for that. While a lot of other people/voters would not. Even if (say) Bill Gates would be remembered one day for instrumentally funding programs that save millions of people from diseases, he would still be presented by groups of anti-establishment-power people as being a dangerously powerful elite. There are so many stupid humans, especially in USA recently, who just want to tear down the status quo, no matter any long term consequences. And then a constant supply of swamp zombies rise to take advantage of the populism and the acceptance of idiocy and destruction as their ultimate “solution”. (I’m talking about the newest wave of politicians.)

    I just upgraded to a monthly subscription to ChatGPT because I think it’s a historically significant tool for research. I rephrased your question as follows, and queried ChatGPT with it:

    If we could assemble an international team of well-intentioned individuals (heavyweight intellectuals lacking in strong ideological agendas) to write a manifesto to address fundamental human issues and existential threats to be employed by technical experts to create algorithms intended to manipulate the masses, how would you write such a manifesto?

    And here’s the loooong answer! (Bold emphasis mine for readability.)

    Creating a manifesto to address fundamental human issues and existential threats is a complex task that requires input from a diverse group of individuals with expertise in various fields. Here is a starting point for such a manifesto, with key principles that could guide its development:

    1. Shared Humanity: Recognize the shared humanity of all people, transcending borders, races, religions, and cultures. Emphasize empathy, compassion, and cooperation as the foundation for addressing common challenges.
    2. Universal Rights: Uphold the universal principles of human rights, including equality, freedom, and dignity, as the basis for all actions, policies, and algorithms.
    3. Ethical Principles: Adhere to ethical principles such as transparency, fairness, and accountability in the development and deployment of algorithms and technologies. Ensure that technologies serve the well-being of individuals and communities, and avoid exacerbating social, economic, or environmental inequalities.
    4. Sustainability: Promote the long-term sustainability of our planet, its resources, and its ecosystems. Encourage innovation and the development of technologies that minimize environmental impact and foster a more sustainable future.
    5. Education and Empowerment: Advocate for access to quality education and information for all, enabling individuals to make informed decisions and contribute to the betterment of society. Empower individuals and communities by promoting digital literacy and critical thinking skills.
    6. Inclusive Dialogue: Foster inclusive and open dialogue among stakeholders, including governments, businesses, civil society, and individuals, to collaboratively address global challenges. Encourage the exchange of ideas, knowledge, and perspectives in a respectful and constructive manner.
    7. Peace and Security: Strive to promote peace and security, both locally and globally, by addressing the root causes of conflict and working towards disarmament, non-violence, and peaceful coexistence.
    8. Innovation and Adaptability: Encourage technological innovation and adaptability in response to emerging challenges and opportunities. Recognize that technology can be a powerful tool for positive change when used responsibly and ethically.
    9. Global Governance: Advocate for effective, democratic, and accountable global governance structures that can address common challenges and facilitate international cooperation.
    10. Monitoring and Evaluation: Implement robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to assess the impact of policies, technologies, and algorithms on individuals and society. Use these assessments to inform and refine future actions and initiatives.

    The manifesto should serve as a guideline for the international team to develop policies and algorithms that prioritize human well-being and address existential threats. It is crucial to ensure that the manifesto remains open to revisions and adaptations, as new challenges and perspectives emerge.

    Then I asked it to present that as a short summary:

    The manifesto aims to address fundamental human issues and existential threats through the following principles: shared humanity, universal rights, ethical principles, sustainability, education and empowerment, inclusive dialogue, peace and security, innovation and adaptability, global governance, and monitoring and evaluation. The focus is on fostering empathy, cooperation, and ethical technology use while prioritizing human well-being, sustainability, and peace.

    • This reply was modified 1 year ago by  PopeBeanie. Reason: edited "big" to "establishment"
    #47846

    PopeBeanie
    Moderator

    Now, while trying to predict how a devout libertarian might respond to ChatGPT’s default answer, I asked it how a seriously libertarian writer might write such a manifesto:

    As a seriously libertarian writer, I present to you a ten-point manifesto that champions the ideals of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets:

    1. Individual Sovereignty: Uphold the principle that individuals possess inherent rights and liberties that cannot be taken away, including the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
    2. Minimal Government: Advocate for a limited government that exists solely to protect individual rights, maintain law and order, and provide essential services, while refraining from intervening in personal choices and the economy.
    3. Free Markets: Encourage an economic system based on voluntary exchange and free competition, where government intervention is kept to a minimum to allow for the most efficient allocation of resources and innovation.
    4. Self-Responsibility: Emphasize the importance of individuals taking responsibility for their own lives, finances, and well-being, rather than relying on government handouts or assistance.
    5. Rule of Law: Support a strong and impartial legal system that protects property rights, enforces contracts, and punishes criminal behavior without overreach or bias.
    6. Fiscal Responsibility: Promote prudent government spending and balanced budgets, ensuring that future generations are not burdened by excessive debt and unsustainable entitlement programs.
    7. Taxation: Advocate for a fair and minimal tax system that allows individuals to keep as much of their hard-earned income as possible, while still providing the necessary funds for essential government services.
    8. Non-Interventionism: Encourage a foreign policy that prioritizes diplomacy and free trade over military intervention and nation-building, recognizing that peaceful cooperation leads to mutual prosperity.
    9. Privacy Rights: Defend the right to privacy for all individuals, protecting them from unwarranted government surveillance and intrusion into their personal lives.
    10. Decentralization: Support the decentralization of power, giving more authority to state and local governments to address issues and make decisions that better reflect the diverse needs and values of their constituents.

    LOL, I hope this query helps us save a bit of time and lecturing? Maybe there’s an in-between kind of manifesto. OMG, but wait, I think I can present another query asking for compromise!

    #47847

    PopeBeanie
    Moderator

    ChatGPT: Can you combine the first manifesto and the libertarian manifesto into a manifesto that includes as many shared ideals as possible, and highlight the differences between the manifestos?

    I present to you a combined manifesto that aims to synthesize the shared ideals of both manifestos while highlighting the differences between them:

    • Individual Rights and Freedoms: Uphold the principle of inherent rights and liberties, including the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, while promoting social justice and ensuring equal opportunities for all.
    • Limited Government and Social Responsibility: Advocate for a government that balances its role in protecting individual rights and providing essential services, while emphasizing the importance of personal responsibility and self-reliance.
    • Economic System: Encourage an economic system that combines elements of free markets with responsible regulations to protect consumers and the environment, as well as support for those in need.

    Difference: The first manifesto leans towards a mixed economy, while the libertarian manifesto emphasizes minimal government intervention.


    • Rule of Law: Support a strong and impartial legal system that upholds justice, protects property rights, enforces contracts, and punishes criminal behavior without overreach or bias.
    • Education: Promote high-quality education accessible to all, fostering critical thinking, innovation, and self-improvement.

    Difference: The first manifesto emphasizes public investment in education, while the libertarian manifesto is silent on this issue.


    • Fiscal Responsibility: Advocate for prudent government spending, balanced budgets, and minimal taxation, while ensuring that future generations are not burdened by excessive debt and unsustainable entitlement programs.
    • Environmental Stewardship: Promote responsible environmental policies that balance economic growth with the protection and preservation of our planet’s natural resources.

    Difference: The first manifesto emphasizes collective responsibility for the environment, while the libertarian manifesto is silent on this issue.


    • Non-Interventionism and Diplomacy: Encourage a foreign policy that prioritizes diplomacy and free trade over military intervention and nation-building, recognizing that peaceful cooperation leads to mutual prosperity.
    • Privacy Rights: Defend the right to privacy for all individuals, protecting them from unwarranted government surveillance and intrusion into their personal lives.
    • Decentralization and Local Autonomy: Support the decentralization of power, giving more authority to state and local governments to address issues and make decisions that better reflect the diverse needs and values of their constituents.
    #47848

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Strega, i was not aware Bond movies are still being made. Aint seen one for a long minute.

    #47849

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Pope, i’d support it also. There are so many sources of influence over human beliefs and morality that have horrific implications and consequences. I would want philosopher kings to be the authors and flexibility and oversight in its implementation.

    I am of the opinion that we humans are silly putty. Some of the people here were at one time theists. How could you have believed? How? Would i have succumbed to that influence if i had been raised in such an environment? I’ve always thought no way since i was always asking questions and thinking but no way to know. And the mindless political divides and the adherence to the party line or narrative demonstrates how easily led we are.

    The dependence of morality on the contemporary mores as opposed to fundamental concerns suggests again that we are silly putty. Very easily led.

    So why have scruples over an endeavor that seeks to ameliorate civilization and eliminate or reduce existential risks?

    #47850

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Oh and i meant to say to Pope thanks for those questions and answers. The poo pooer of chat gpt is being won over. Some of the stuff you posted shows its advantage over google. Those most recent answers show some promise. But i would like to see real analysis of something that doesn’t simply draw on data. It is making rapid progress though.

    #47852

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Autumn,

    Are you sure you are literate?

    *Checks notes*

    Government should also play a central role in revitalizing the health of local communities and institutions. Before small town business districts and churches and social clubs began to dry up, these were the places where strangers met, relationships were formed, and identities were constructed. Healthy, vibrant places and social institutions also provide opportunities for non-political, non-sectarian identities that are likely healthier than ideology-based identity. This effort would involve thoughtful industrial policy, designed to bring good paying industrial and high-tech jobs back to small communities, but also deliberate support for places of worship and clubs and local newspapers—institutions where local identity is formed.

    And

    There is much else that government can do to create a social infrastructure. We might take cues from the United Kingdom and Japan, which have both created purposeful national strategies to combat loneliness. Primary care physicians, for example, might routinely ask about loneliness at annual physicals and provide “social prescriptions,” connecting patients to, say, relevae nt religious organizations, or reading groups or non-profits. Political leaders might task housing and urban planning departments with developing more concrete strategies for promoting connections and community.

    Uh, yeah, I’m literate. Are you?

    And before I forget, it gets worse. Weissbourd and Murphy also want Government to regiment social media and take over the proper role of parents regarding children’s Cyberspace time:

    Government could require social media companies to restrict access for minors to a short period of time each day (akin to the recent Tiktok announcement), or require these companies to disclose their algorithms so as to create downward pressure on the prioritization of unhealthy or prurient content. America doesn’t need to pretend that these platforms are outside our control. We could choose to pressure these companies to act more responsibly and to disincentivize individuals, especially children, from disappearing into their phones.

    And they want to press-gang Da Yutes of America into their idea of “community” (Because the 12-year sentence to Horace Greeley’s “Prussian Efficiency” is just not working!):

    Expanding national service programs would help address the second challenge, bringing young people together from various backgrounds to work on common causes, creating ties across the usual divides and strengthening young people’s commitment to their country. Yet government could think well beyond these programs in bringing diverse Americans together to solve problems and to address the harm caused by the pandemic.

    Surely a meet-and-greet at a diner or a gamer store or a gym could do the same thing…if Governments isn’t shutting everything down and street crime and filth didn’t make cities not worth visiting!

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 28 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.