Chaos, Anarchy, and a place for order
- Thread starter Trapp
- Start date
What I meant by this statement is that there is a definate separation between the government and the people. We see it everyday. I believe in Capitalism, but being rich and in the government, or getting rich by being in government is NOT Capitalism. The government shouldn't be divided/comprised of/by "parties". It should be by "social classes" if anything. Maybe I am ignorant on the subject, but there are no "Blue collar politicians" right? There are different "Social classes" in America right? Maybe I am using the these terms incorrectly, but hey! it makes sense in my head.
This is all fine and well if you're starting a new society, or rebuilding one. But there is a real limit on the amount of creativity one can exercise in addressing a society that is fully functional.
Many of the problems we're having with police and the like are best addressed with the courts. Citizen groups should begin suing local governments for waste and abuse when they utilize grossly unnecessary manpower for serving a warrant, for instance. That is a way to punish and establish policy that is effective, and works within the system.
Protests and civil disobediance are only effective if you have enough of the population all doing the same thing. Southern blacks and the Indians were united enough to not just make news - they were changing the economies of their oppressors. Gun owners, for instance, don't have that kind pull with each other. They're better off using the other means I mention.
Tyme's mention of Snowcrash as an anarchist model is interesting. I doubt the auther, Neal Stephenson, or other previous visionaries like Willam Gibsion would offer that world as a model, but more as the unfortunate result of corporate pressures and a breakdown in Democracy. That future is best avoided, and avoided through active participation in all parts of our society.
One thing I'd like to see, in terms of reform, is public reporting of lawsuits. Perhaps some of the ridiculous wins juries are awarding would turn the other way if their decision making was held up for public scrutiny in the press. That's a process you can start with a letter to the editor.
We don't take enough ownership of our country. This goes all the way down to people being unwilling to even complain to the right people when something is wrong. Customer service, local government, whatever could use your PERSONAL input rather than resignation. But many more people are going to have to find their voice for change to start.
I think we need to legislate much less. Abortion shouldn't be a legal issue - fewer people would get an abortion if they felt it was more of a moral, ethical issue than a polarized legal issue. Bipartisan politics creates never more than two, opposite sides to any issue. But public discussion allows a broader band of acceptability without forcing anyone to pick an extreme and stick to it. This process results in things like good manners, that aren't a rule, but usually followed anyway. But a society that attempts to let law take the place of mores is not a healthy one.
Many of the problems we're having with police and the like are best addressed with the courts. Citizen groups should begin suing local governments for waste and abuse when they utilize grossly unnecessary manpower for serving a warrant, for instance. That is a way to punish and establish policy that is effective, and works within the system.
Protests and civil disobediance are only effective if you have enough of the population all doing the same thing. Southern blacks and the Indians were united enough to not just make news - they were changing the economies of their oppressors. Gun owners, for instance, don't have that kind pull with each other. They're better off using the other means I mention.
Tyme's mention of Snowcrash as an anarchist model is interesting. I doubt the auther, Neal Stephenson, or other previous visionaries like Willam Gibsion would offer that world as a model, but more as the unfortunate result of corporate pressures and a breakdown in Democracy. That future is best avoided, and avoided through active participation in all parts of our society.
One thing I'd like to see, in terms of reform, is public reporting of lawsuits. Perhaps some of the ridiculous wins juries are awarding would turn the other way if their decision making was held up for public scrutiny in the press. That's a process you can start with a letter to the editor.
We don't take enough ownership of our country. This goes all the way down to people being unwilling to even complain to the right people when something is wrong. Customer service, local government, whatever could use your PERSONAL input rather than resignation. But many more people are going to have to find their voice for change to start.
I think we need to legislate much less. Abortion shouldn't be a legal issue - fewer people would get an abortion if they felt it was more of a moral, ethical issue than a polarized legal issue. Bipartisan politics creates never more than two, opposite sides to any issue. But public discussion allows a broader band of acceptability without forcing anyone to pick an extreme and stick to it. This process results in things like good manners, that aren't a rule, but usually followed anyway. But a society that attempts to let law take the place of mores is not a healthy one.
Capt. Charlie
Moderator Emeritus
EEEEEYOW!!! At first, I thought "Naw, I couldn't be that far off base!"
.......but, it turns out, I was
.I took a course in Native American Anthropology while in college, but... that was more than 30 years ago. I took that from 30 yr. old memories, when I'm lucky to remember what I had for dinner yesterday
.It just adds credence to Rich's saying, "Think twice, post once". Amend that to "research twice...".
Apologies folks, and thanks for pointing that out, Hal.
An appropriately contrite Capt Charlie, shutting up now.