Reply
Mon 15 Dec, 2003 08:18 am
Americans are living in a fantasy world created by filtering reality that would pose a moral dilemma to those with conscious or religion. We live in a nation where people are economically, socially and psychologically interdependent. Whatever we are and whatever status or rank we obtain it is greatly influenced by the existence, contact and juxtaposition with other humans. Having status and feeling good about oneself in this culture is largely relative, with resulting in a hyper competition for rank. However, competition is relative, which creates a zero sum game for competitors. Thus, winners create the equal and opposite effect of losers, the creation of success creates failure and the rich means there is the poor. Competition is a normal part of all life, however, ethics and morality is thus the only thing that can constrain humans from sabotaging the competition. As the great Carthaginian General Hannibal once noted “ It is not that I must succeed, it’s that others must fail”.
Say for instance that you are in a classroom with 50 other students and you all are getting the results back from an exam that was scaled from 0 to 100. You learn that you answered 65% of the questions correctly. At that instant, your first thought is likely to be that you have failed and, consequently, not likely feeling very good about yourself. However, you later learn that your 65% was the highest score of the class and miraculously…. you know feel better, even though your absolute performance is the same. Why? The reason being is that much of the way we feel about ourselves is due to our relative rank when juxtaposed with others. Had you scored 100 on the exam, your initial reaction would be a good feeling. However, if you then learned that everyone scored 100, and then your good feeling would likely be reduced. This is all due to the nature of seeing other humans as competition.
Americans benefit from the misery of others in many ways, even if they are not complicit in the creation of the misery. The act of seeing other people struggle often makes us feel sympathy, but also fortunate or better about our lives in comparison. Americans love to think of our nation as the greatest nation in the world. The reasoning being is that since we are Americans, than what is true of the whole is thus true of its parts. Therefore, we can then see ourselves as being superior to humans outside America. Within America you have this same phenomenon between social classes and races. The existence of the lower class and the disproportionate representation of non-whites in the lower class reinforce traditional notions of class and racial superiority. Implicit in the social and economic hierarchy is the assumption that higher order and rank is due to superiority in effort and or intellect, in other words, working harder and smarter. It is a conflict of interest for those in higher rank to acknowledge any benefit they received from past or present immoral acts that put others at a competitive disadvantage. In a relative system, every action produces an equal and opposite reaction. Thus, the creation of disadvantage produces advantage. Thus, if one is not a member of the disadvantaged group, they are by default, a member of the advantaged and thus benefit.
Americans in superior condition and hence social status and rank want to feel that their or their groups rank is purely the result of merit, for that allows them to feel truly superior in effort and or intellect and worthy of what they have earned and accumulated. They also like to feel, by the same token, that, as a general rule, people are poor due to merit as well, in other words, working less hard and less smart. Such a mindset is self-serving because the cognition are biased toward finding a rational to maintain a sense of superiority, as well as, providing a pretext to not be their brother’s keepers, despite many considering themselves practicing Christians. In reality, rank in the secular competition takes precedent over any religious doctrine or blue print. However, religious people cannot see themselves to be of such a mindset. Therefore they convince themselves that those in relative deprivation are there via laziness, irresponsibility, inferiority or some other condition that will allow them to be written off from assistance. The result, not coincidentally, is the conserving of relative and absolute status and rank or the status quo.
Consequently, many Americans of status have taken a vow to see no evil, here no evil or speak no evil that in any way presents a moral due to the correlation between past or present unrighteousness and their current status. This is partly why there can never be true healing and reconciliation between the races in America, because it is a conflict to the nature of competition to help people who will then use that assistance to compete against you and possibly alter your relative status and rank. Thus, we are lead to believe that 300 years of racial oppression produced no reaction of racial disadvantage upon the present and thus, no racial advantage to the present as well. People therefore can hold to the fallacy of meritocracy and fair competition, in order to preserve a sense of superiority and to hold onto all assets accrued from years of advantage. Thus, the current problems of African Americans are purposely placed in a vacuum unrelated to the prior 300-year history in this nation, as if to say the present is not related to the past and that black problems today are the creation of blacks today.
It has become taboo to mention the negative historical facts of this nation, which helped to produce its current status and wealth, most profoundly being the story of Native Americans and African slavery and apartheid. Many Americans will not come to reconcile the truth about how their European ancestors benefited from happened to the Natives and Africans. Without those events, the history and lives of many Americans of European descent would be radically altered, given that most immigrated to America for a better life. That better life was greatly influenced by immoral acts against the Natives and African people, as well as others. However, despite this fact, somehow the story is that African Americans should be glad that they are not in Africa, meaning that they should feel fortunate that there ancestors were enslaved for centuries here. Such a twisting of history is done by those who simply seek to continue feeling good about themselves and maintain their relative status, which could be challenged if the truth was told and accepted.
In conclusion, competition is a nature part of the existence of life. However, balance is a goal of the universe and when balance Is not maintained, disharmony results. American culture has become to competitive and greedy, which is eroding moral and ethics to fuel victory and status.
Whoa. I think you may have a point here and there, but i must say that you have guts to post this kind of topic.
Where to start? Noah, I will actually try to address you seriously here. I don't have time to pick apart your entire post, so I'll just make a couple of points that stuck out to me. First, the 'universe' has no 'goal', nor is it 'balanced'. It would be more accurate to say that it is in a state of constant flux, always in a tug-of-war between order and chaos. Second, given that, what makes you think that the situation on earth, in America, all over the world, the chaos, the order, the constant struggle, isn't the way 'balance' is supposed to work? Just a question.
I wish you good luck.
Posting long essays rather than suggesting areas for discussion seldom work out well in these kinds of forums -- but perhaps this will be an exception.
If you ever decide to do the Readers Digest version of this thing, I'll be part of it.
I am not going to have a tangential debate with you that detract from the substance of my thesis. The universe is in a state of flux because it is always oscillating around the state of balance. It never achieves the state of balance, but physical laws work to promote it. Regardless, that is not even germane to the substance, as you are just looking to divert attention away from what is really relevant.
Is that the case, Noah, or are you just unfocused yet again?
Your attention deficit disorder (ADD) is really (IDD), which is interest deficit disorder. You are not INTERESTED in reading anything that is contradictory to your system of beliefs, because it does not make you feel good. Intellectual exchanges are detailed, while entertainment is superficial and short. If you are looking to be entertained than its best that you stay away from this topic.
everything we do we learned from our European ancestors. Im an Ostrogoths nephew..
Most self made Americans would surprise you as to how greatful they are because they were fortunate to make it big. I have some very big named clients who rush through business meetings and put the decisions on their subs , just so they can spend quality time with favorite 'giving back" projects. Your perception is based on a few real scumheads like Ley and the president of Tyco
Most Americans of status would shock you as to how much of their wealth they just throw away at such meaningless pursuits as equal education and scholarships, grants for medical coverage,and homes, fighting AIDs and other scute illnesses.
dr and mrs Rowan, for example, bought an entire college in new jersey(formerly Glassboro state teachers college) and opened it as an elite school for all folks. true, some , like the Duponts fund more 'elitist' endeavors but they too spend friggin bozillions on childhood diseases in US and in 3rd world. The theory that people give back to the land that secured their opportunity is working nicely. and believe it or not, its not for the tax deductions. Many of your overpaid celebs and jocks get their own ideas to give back in such proportions too, we have even a bigger pile to help out.
when youve done as much as some of these, you come back and start your rant over.
Thank you, my African shrink. Please note that I never said that you had no valid points before you insult me again.
Sounds like a thread where a lot of words will pass back and forth, Cav.
Enjoy yourself -- and I'll look in from time to time.
But I think this thing has a better chance of being classified as a lecture than a discussion.
Oh, you mean like most of Noah's posts Frank? Nah, I don't have the time for his rants. I also guess that he will soon accuse me of being intellectually inferior, uninterested, and a white supremacist.
Farmerman, there is no such thing as “Self Made”. Life is created and maintained via other life. Success is created and maintained via interactions and exchanges between humans. To imply that people are “Self Made” implies that they had no assistance from others. Economics is the interdependency and interaction between owners of capital, workers and consumers. Without this convergence, one could not accumulate income or wealth. To profit is simply to get more out of the convergence than one has put in. If one is getting more out than the value of the energy placed in, then others are getting less out than the value of their energy put in.
You might can note the behavior of some philanthropist, but that is not the general rule. If it were the general rule, the gap between the wealthiest and poorest 5th of the population would not be increasing, but rather, decreasing, which it is not.
you have a lot of love in there my friend.
You know the meaning of the word self made in its context. I dont need any economics lectures from another poster on a chat line.
DO SOMETHING YOURSELF MAN. DONT jUS BITCH.
Be a force yourself. Or would that take effort?
i just read an article in one of the sunday mags about a series of entrepreneurs who made themselves wealthy by "exploiting" the masses by creating such saprophytic industries as
a Cleaning service
wOman owned salsa sompany
gourmet cheesecakes (sorry cav, its their words not mine)
a soft pretzel company
it went on. all these people had an idea and went for the dream. they hocked their homes and followed a business plan and succeeded.
PLEEEZE, if ya want to feel sorry for yourself, dontmake it a universal norm or societal exploitation. youre just flat full of it.
scuse me i have to go to a meeting
If this is Monday's rant, God help us on Tuesday!
I was thinking the same thing.
Did you check in last week, Joe ? So far, this is rather tame. We haven't all been labelled white supremacists, as of yet . . . give it time i guess.
Home, home on the rant
Where the queer and the antisocial play
Where never is heard
A well-considered word
And the skies are eternally gray . . .
It'll happen there Setanta. I'm sure of it. If I'm going to share my supposed white "wealth", my creditors come before Noah and his brethren, thank you very much.
Another "I know every word in the dictionary but don't know how to put them together " post from Noah The Low Selfesteemian....ho hum......
Agree: the relative theory to analyse part of the social problem but not all the situation you indicate.
Disagree: There is no balance in the world, so that would not be the goal in universe. Even you try to balance the word, it would fail. Just like everyone born from different background and live in different surrounding, taking differentiable faith based on their culture,education and religion. yep,someway we can change it, but it takes time, energy, substances. Time is equal to everybody and human`s nature is somhow `greedy `and try to acquire the max benifits for individuals ( everyone want live better and make big money - what we need to be alive in this world, althout the moral and spirit is important too), so competiotion exsits.
Dont you think the competition is the way try to matain balance.?They are not the opposite. What we need do is not make the richest rich and poorest poor people. How big the gap is? Just not start up the war will be ok. Coz War didnt take any benifits to both side, why bother??
Only my personal opnion, maybe I am too young to discuss this.
btw, I smell some fire here.
Cav, "wealth" hardly describes my situation. I have a sufficiency--almost. Last evening, the frame of my glasses broke. Now i'm wearing a 15-year-old pair, and they are giving me eyestrain. However, i've got about $1000 in dental bills before the end of the month, so glasses will have to wait. I probably shouldn't have bought the new monitor, but that was before i knew what my dental work was going to cost.
Because others have less than i do, does not convince me that i am either wealthy, or that i should attempt to "share" more of my substance than the few hundred dollars per year which i give to charity.