The dumbing down of America

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

I'm don't know much about your political parties - but individualism is promoted by ALL current westernised political parties (some are likely just more obvious than others) that have any true organisation and power.

That means the political leaders promote it (usually even while demanding that their own party 'toe the party line')

Or when they claim that the government should manage damn near every aspect of life ala Obama and Bloomberg.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

I do notice that the more they 'individualise' society, the more individuals in society think the government exists to fix their every problem...where people relied on community, interactiveness, helping others, and respect (yes, there is more respect in community based societies)...the more they individualise, the more the individuals bypass those community based approaches and look to the govt to sort their ills.

Funnily enough - in promoting the individual at the expense of community, not only do they make the individual easier to manipulate - they both disempower the community (as a generalised statement) AND disempower the individual (if you are relying on govt to sort out problems that you would previously have done yourself, you are disempowered).

But...a group of 'it's all about me' individuals tend to be very critical of others (I'm human, but you the govt / doctors etc are here to serve me perfectly and not make a single mistake or I'll sue your arse / vote you out or the 'you're not allowed to intrude into my life - I'm calling in the govt - they'll sort it for me and show you what for !')...and being driven by his/her passion for his/her individual rights - any 'wrong 'decision by govt is magnified....and so politicians who are at the mercy of the vote become terrified of bad press...they now spend big on PR departments, and demand greater control over their own party....they are driven not just by power, but by the fear that results from their the repercussions of their own system of controlling the masses.

And altogether silly system - the only motivation that I can credit that could possibly drive people to adopt such an obviously dysfunctional system, is greed.

2 Replies

@vikorr,

I really very much enjoyed reading this post Victor couldn't say it any better then you did...

0 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

I do notice that the more they 'individualise' society, the more individuals in society think the government exists to fix their every problem...where people relied on community, interactiveness, helping others, and respect (yes, there is more respect in community based societies)...the more they individualise, the more the individuals bypass those community based approaches and look to the govt to sort their ills.

Why not vik? The government offered to fix our problems didn't it? When they were begging, pleading and wheedling to have our permission to govern. Where else do you think the $17 trillion (and rising) debt burden came from? They bought their power with the unborn's dough. It failed to consult the unborn because the unborn don't vote. It fails to consult them in the clinics as well. They don't come under the legal definition of "persons".

When people relied upon community, interactiveness, helping others, and respect (all assertions btw) we had rickets and so many other ghastly conditions that I forebear listing them on account of how long it would take and my natural reticence in not wishing to remind sensitive souls that they ever existed. Rickets is not that bad. It serves as a fairly polite collective noun to cover the whole, bleeding ****-hole.

I remember reading that when John Cooper-Clarke made a bit of dough out of his poem Chicken Town he decided to retire to a rural idyll searching for community, interactiveness, helping others, and respect. He was back in the city in very short order. He said that the rubes scared the living daylights out of him. Gauguin tried it so famously. As did the mutineers on The Bounty.

Whoever manipulated me into the position I am in, considering the raw material they were working with, has my whole-hearted gratitude.

It would be interesting if you offered an alternative. Something where greed has been eradicated. You sound like a posh version of a pre-adolescent girl stamping her foot in frustration at not getting all her own way. And that's serious individualism.

The project is only in its infancy.

2 Replies

@spendius,

I find it funny that you forget to expose about the damn utopia individualism can only be...enabling people to independence is one thing and growing individualism to extinction quite another...and yes I am not a rural happy communer either, but then that was not the point...

0 Replies

@spendius,

Hi Spendius - it's rather hard to tell if you're being facetious or not - your first paragraph appears to be entirely facetious, your second paragraph would sound logical if it was viewed in isolation and out of context of what I said (your second paragraph is incredibly flawed - hence I'm not sure if it's facetious), your third paragraph can reference my second paragraph.

At it's best, concern for individualism is balanced by concern for community. When I mention individualism above, I'm am talking about at the expense of community.

Quote:

It would be interesting if you offered an alternative.

See the first sentence of the above paragraph.

Quote:

Something where greed has been eradicated.

There's no need to eradicate greed - it serves a purpose (depending on how you like to define greed, the desire to improve ones lot in life requires the acquisition of more wealth...and this is the driving force behind innovation and invention). The issue with greed is in the degree, or more precisely, in the imbalance that usually accompanies it the higher the degree of greed. And at the lower levels, it is blind/self centred greed that allows manipulation...yes, you can want money for both you AND others (usually your family, but there are those that actually enjoy seeing others in the community grow wealthy), and yes you can want money in a way that also allows others to make money (it's often called win/win negotiations/transactions)

Quote:

You sound like a posh version of a pre-adolescent girl stamping her foot in frustration at not getting all her own way. And that's serious individualism.

Of course that image is...I would be most interested to hear an explanation of how you came to that conclusion. Unfortunately you have missed the entire gist of my post. Refer to my second paragraph.

2 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

Hi Spendius - it's rather hard to tell if you're being facetious or not

Spendius sometimes uses 'facetious' to hide the fact that he doesn't know anything about the topic under discussion.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

There's no need to eradicate greed - it serves a purpose (depending on how you like to define greed, the desire to improve ones lot in life requires the acquisition of more wealth...and this is the driving force behind innovation and invention).

Right then vik. Were you complaining about some people being good at it?

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

Spendius sometimes uses 'facetious' to hide the fact that he doesn't know anything about the topic under discussion.

I have read, studied even, Veblen's The Higher Learning in America which I assume you are yourself a finished article of like a toasted chocolate chip-cake cookie is a product of a toasted chocolate chip-cake production unit.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

I have read, studied even, Veblen's The Higher Learning in America

Wooooooo, "studied even". What then keeps you from giving anything presented to you more than a cursory glance, Spendi?

Quote:

which I assume you are yourself a finished article

Aren't you the observant one.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

Right then vik. Were you complaining about some people being good at it?

There's no such thing as being good at greed. It isn't a skill.

I do note though, that my whole paragraph already answered answered much of the intent of your post... and that in your leaving the latter half of my paragraph out of your quote of me (which latter half of my paragraph provided a balancing affect) - you have essentially dishonestly quoted in order to misrepresent my thoughts (by removing them from context - then using that lack of context to represent my thoughts as other than they in order to pose your question).

...Ie. you already know my thoughts relating to the intended direction of your question.

2 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

There's no such thing as being good at greed. It isn't a skill.

No it is not, but still it is a trait that might enable you to put your skills to good use not just to yourself but with your group of reference and social strata, its not like you can frame it in one particular side of the fence ...now of course none of it changes a damn thing regarding what you were talking about which simply regarded a need for balance.
Spendius belongs to that generation that still frames the world in black and white when from his height he decides to address the children hoping to make his twisted points across. Concerning power which is the first coin of all coins I wonder how would he frame "gang greed behavior" from which technocrats and scholars can be a perfect display...Spendius seems the kind of charitable chap that can spare a coin while attending Sunday's Church gatherings...I suspect in his Victorian world view charity instead of support was one of those needed miserable compromise solutions trying to conciliate the intrinsic contradictions that Individualism sprung up to keep the engine of the empire up and running, his idea of community doesn't go any further then that...no wonder he jumped on you. It suffices to say that empowering the individual should not equate with empowering individualism quite the opposite.

2 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

...now of course none of it changes a damn thing regarding what you were talking about which simply regarded a need for balance.

precisely

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

What then keeps you from giving anything presented to you more than a cursory glance, Spendi?

The format here and other calls on my time. What's your excuse?

0 Replies

@vikorr,

Had you refrained from using the word "dishonestly" I would not bother replying to your post vik. But you did use it and it is a lapse of manners.

You said. as a conclusion to the post that started this,--

Quote:

And altogether silly system - the only motivation that I can credit that could possibly drive people to adopt such an obviously dysfunctional system, is greed.

Right then-- I do not agree that we have a silly system. I do not agree that it is dysfunctional. And I do not know what we would do without greed.

The conclusion you drew was based on a very banal set of premisses. Vague generalities, assertions, waffle and cliches which we have all heard many times before. They were what is called "precious".

We have what we have. Swallow it whole, count your blessings and keep your fingers crossed.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

What's that all about Fil. It looks like a run-on smear to me. I'm no Victorian. And I would ban charity altogether. The government should provide. Why should someone suffering have to rely on somebody deciding, possibly to draw attention to themselves as a virtuous person, possibly on a whim, to get up a collection despite the well known inefficiencies of the activity.

I don't go to church but if I did for some reason I might place a coin on the table with a view to buying the officiating minister a drink in return for providing a ceremonial which encouraged the ladies and gentlemen to turn out in their "best" in the service of a dating agency which I find much more in keeping with human dignity than "Mature lady (48--22--46) seeks gentleman for dining out and foreign holidays. No unfortunate dispositions."

I frame "gang greed behaviour", such as that of the British Medical Association or the Olympic Committee, on the basis of "watch your wallet". There will always be gang greed behaviour and if we all become deluded into thinking it has been eradicated we will be at the mercy of the gangs like the just hatched turtles are at the mercy of the gulls when they make their dash for the surf. I'm for having it up front and in your face so that we all know where we stand.

Your writing would improve no end if you eschewed the unsupported assertion. I spent 4 hours yesterday watching the Andy Warhol documentary on U Tube. A Victorian would faint clean away had she seen that in a dream. And anyway, some standards are not discredited because they are Victorian. Before you use a word like "Victorian" to try to put somebody down you might consider what you mean by it rather than hoping to play upon the prejudices of unwary or unintelligent observers.

1 Reply

@spendius,

I didn't try to put anyone down Spendius you did to yourself jumping on Vic with a black and white portrait on Community vs Individualism...common, how simple was that to throw up in the air ?...plus if anything I always enjoyed your posts and your provocative style probably far better then most around, I just don't agree with you and I think I make it clear why, can't you take a little criticism ?...again you're mistaken no one suggested all was bad about Victorians and I still think you well know what I meant with that hyperbole, or should, so don't make a fuss about nothing...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

vik did equate individualism with "silly" and "dysfunctional" Fil. I merely sought to redress that black and white proposition.

Community vs Individualism is a very complex subject.

If I couldn't take criticism I would be long gone from here. I have been complimented on my ability to soak it up unflustered.

I did not make a fuss over nothing. I took issue with a vik something.

A2K fosters, encourages and is dependent upon dialectic.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

vik did equate individualism with "silly" and "dysfunctional" Fil. I merely sought to redress that black and white proposition.

No I did not. There have been a number of marks that directly contradict your claim (about what I said) here - my last post being among them. You can only say what you said (quoted) either having failed completely to understand what I was talking about, or alternatively, as is still my view - being dishonest.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Right then-- I do not agree that we have a silly system. I do not agree that it is dysfunctional.

So we disagree.

Quote:

The conclusion you drew was based on a very banal set of premisses. Vague generalities, assertions, waffle and cliches which we have all heard many times before.

Oh dear, vague, waffle, banal, clichés - it seems I drew the whole lot. Ah well, I guess that's what happens when one gets defensive.

Have you actually provide an argument against a single point? All I've seen so far is yourself removing statements from context and then saying how you disagree (and having removed it from context, you aren't even disagreeing with something I actually think)...it makes for pointless conversation.

How about you rephrase what I think...because at the moment you don't appear to comprehend it, and not comprehending it, are arguing against something entirely different to my opinion.

1 Reply

The dumbing down of America

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know