think your belief is limiting your ability to understand the change in organizational power that comes with adopting the German model of bureaucracy and the education that goes with it. — Athena
Tocqueville foresaw a change, away from family order to bureaucratic order. Do you have any thoughts on what makes the two possible forms of social organization different? — Athena
That defines the enemy we fought against. Then we turned around and adopted this enemy's bureaucratic organization and later the enemy's education for technology for industrial and military purpose. — Athena
The Plutocracy is speaking and the government is listening. — James Riley
Soros and the Koch brothers are only the beginning. — Michael Zwingli
If such people do have as much influence as you suggest, though, whose fault is that? — Michael Zwingli
Is it not the fault of we the electorate, who continue to reelect the same politicians that allow themselves to be influenced, and their votes to be bought? — Michael Zwingli
we cannot blame them for seeking to exert themselves in realizing their will. — Michael Zwingli
We all want to see our individual wills done, do we not? — Michael Zwingli
If we as an electorate do not do that, then whose fault is the continuing situation regarding political influence? — Michael Zwingli
In some indigenous communities, the counter-intuitive case of the person giving away the most somehow continued to have the most. A great warrior returns with more buffalo than anyone else and he gives it all away to those who can't hunt. Somehow he keeps stumbling on largess and keeps giving. Broad shoulders, lifting, carrying, working hard for the sake of work, philanthropy in silence, without recognition, doing the right thing when no one is watching, honor, integrity, dignity, community, grace, gratefulness. I *think* those are the old "family values", "community values" we sought. — James Riley
Not that I want to romanticize the tribe and the clan, but there seems to myself to have been a certain social cohesion which created an environment of shared responsibility, and which is absent from the context of the state, wherein there is no discernible social cohesion, but rather a "shared isolation" and mutual, universal distrust. — Michael Zwingli
That is unfortunately true. The leadership of the Third Reich (who probably never even read Nietzsche) cherry-picked utterly uncontextualized terms and phrases from his writings, and applied them in grotesque ways as suited their own purposes. Nietzsche was a highly analytical and complex thinker who dealt with some of the more difficult questions of the philosophy of mind, and had the misfortune while publishing his thoughts, of being a highly introverted personality which was itself urgently suppressing the effects of a latent mental illness. This has made him an easy mark for characterization as some type of "Proto-Nazi" monster by those who have not bothered to study and come to grips with the meanings presented within his opera. There is a good presentation of Nietzsche's personality online here if you are interested: https://wn.rsarchive.org/Books/GA005/English/RSPI1960/GA005_c01_1.html — Michael Zwingli
My belief is not limiting my ability to understand your continued reference to the German model of bureaucracy. Did you know that this is like the fifth time you've brought this model up? — James Riley
This is where I am going to stop because I see no reason to think you understand the difference between the bureaucratic order we had, that made the individual very important, and the bureaucratic order we have today that crushes individual liberty and power. When this is not understood, nothing else of importance can be understood stood. — Athena
However, I don't think we've really tried very hard to have a state of us, where we view us as family, looking out for each other. — James Riley
I have already shown, in several parts of this work, by what means the inhabitants of the United States almost always manage to combine their own advantage with that of their fellow-citizens: my present purpose is to point out the general rule which enables them to do so. In the United States hardly anybody talks of the beauty of virtue; but they maintain that virtue is useful, and prove it every day. The American moralists do not profess that men ought to sacrifice themselves for their fellow-creatures because it is noble to make such sacrifices; but they boldly aver that such sacrifices are as necessary to him who imposes them upon himself as to him for whose sake they are made. They have found out that in their country and their age man is brought home to himself by an irresistible force; and losing all hope of stopping that force, they turn all their thoughts to the direction of it. They therefore do not deny that every man may follow his own interest; but they endeavor to prove that it is the interest of every man to be virtuous. I shall not here enter into the reasons they allege, which would divert me from my subject: suffice it to say that they have convinced their fellow-countrymen. — Tocqueville
It's probably good that you stop. Because it's apparent that you don't understand that I DO understand what you are saying — James Riley
Prove it. — Athena
I did. I stipulated to it. Like umpteen times. But apparently not to your satisfaction. — James Riley
I have tried to teach you HOW that came to be but you don't understand. — James Riley
Please refer me to where you have paraphrased what I said about everything being controlled by policy instead of by individuals and I will pick up from there. What are the good reasons for changing the powers of government? Why is social security possible today and not in the past? — Athena
When was the change made and why? — Athena
Rome, totally blew it with their white togas. Imagine how much better their economy could have been with a wide variety of clothes and seasonal changes in what we wear. — Athena
The power and glory of Rome. Why do we admire it?
I think we can assume he was not a liberal when it comes to property rights. — Athena
I am not terribly worried about the poor if they can continue to have the essentials of life, such as family and community, — Athena
But a pultocracy does nothing to change family order. — Athena
How about this one. — Athena
Ah, perhaps then you agree with Jesus when he said the poor will always be with us. He's been interpreted as saying that we should accordingly be generous to them. But we're not a generous people, are we? Except perhaps sporadically and by impulse. We care far too much about ourselves, our rights, our property, to trouble ourselves with others, and resent it when we're made to even indirectly. Why should other people have the benefit of our money? Here in God's favorite country we're not that far away now from the times in which John Steinbeck's character Tom Joad lived, and are different only to the extent that social welfare programs exist. — Ciceronianus
There is nothing funny about our military spending. — Athena
It is economically essential and right now China has far more advanced military technology and is in a position to win a nuclear war. We are seriously vulnerable right now. — Athena
There is not enough to meet the growing need for assistance, but paying for more is a challenge, — Athena
In the past, we didn't have any of that. Family had to depend on family and charity — Athena
Cicero...he was killed by order of the second triumverate... — Ciceronianus
We care far too much about ourselves, our rights, our property, to trouble ourselves with others, and resent it when we're made to even indirectly. — Ciceronianus
Well, just make sure you keep blaming the government while those who are responsible laugh all the way to themselves. — James Riley
The term plutocracy is generally used as a pejorative to describe or warn against an undesirable condition.[2][3] Throughout history, political thinkers and philosophers such as Winston Churchill, Alexis de Tocqueville, Spanish monarchist Juan Donoso Cortés and Noam Chomsky, have condemned plutocrats for ignoring their social responsibilities, using their power to serve their own purposes and thereby increasing poverty and nurturing class conflict; corrupting societies with greed and hedonism. — wikipedia
Very accurately and succinctly said. I am very torn on this issue. I don't like the government compelling private citizens to do anything, but we must provide relief and hope to the less fortunate. I feel that the central problem is that of our culture, which is too individualistic and not communal enough to override basic human nature and the defensive mechanisms of the human mind. — Michael Zwingli
Here is what you are saying — Athena
This thread is about social order, and especially about relying on the government for our needs or our families. — Athena
I have said in the past our social order was based on family order and independence of government, that this is no longer true. — Athena
I do not see your argument as addressing the family matter. — Athena
How would you say a plutocracy determines our social order and family values? — Athena
Nobody is laughing, except the MIC (Plutocracy). — James Riley
If you don't like government/bureaucracy and what it is doing, that is primarily because you, the family and the community don't control it. As stated, the problem is not big government. The problem is who controls it. — James Riley
This is off topic but you do understand what oil has to do with all industrial economies and what military might has to do with controlling oil, right? What does the plutocracy have to do with those realities? — Athena
but what do they have to do with our family values and social order? — Athena
Great, what is it about the bureaucracy I do not like? How was the bureaucracy different before adopting the German model? — Athena
This is off topic but you do understand what oil has to do with all industrial economies and what military might has to do with controlling oil, right? What does the plutocracy have to do with those realities?
— Athena
You got me. You win. The Plutocracy couldn't possibly have anything to do with the economy, oil, or the MIC.
but what do they have to do with our family values and social order?
— Athena
Nothing. You got me. You win.
Nothing to see here, folks. Move along. If you have a problem, blame government. — James Riley
Well, before families got together and decided to adopt the German model, families used to run everything. After families adopted the German model, an evil government/bureaucracy arose to subdue them, oppress them, turn them against each other, and milk them like a borrowed cow. Now families, oil companies, CEOs, majority shareholders and other common, salt-of-the-Earth folk suffer; while evil bureaucrats are each worth millions and billions of dollars, setting policy and regulations and forcing to common working oilman to send in all his hard earned money to keep the bureaucrats in the standard of living to which they want to become accustomed. — James Riley
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.