Morning thought
Conservative ideology seems to be founded on a number of counterintuitive axioms, which require you to believe that everything is the opposite of what it seems; the "but-it's-really"s. For instance:
Giving people things, like money, food, or housing, may seem like it's benefiting them, *but it's really* harming them in some less tangible but, supposedly, more important way, e.g., taking away their self-respect.
+
Similar axioms are that helping people out of a jam may seem good, *but it's really* making them weak and dependent.
Getting people politically involved may seem like it makes them more powerful *but it's really* enslaving them. And so on.
Part of the attraction of this kind of thinking, I suppose, is that it both allows you to deflect any thoughts of doing something positive by telling yourself that it's "really" negative, and lets you think that you've tapped into a superior way of thinking.
In that respect, I suppose the closest analogy to these conservative "but-it's-really" axioms is Marxist dialectic, which also can produce any result you like, but whose real charm is the sense of intellectual superiority it gives its practitioners.
More generally, inverted, topsy-turvy thinking lends itself to conspiracy theories, since both start from the "everything you know is wrong" premise. If evil is "really" good, and down is "really" up, then gravity can be "just a theory"...
+
@DavidSalo Ive seen it argued that Marxism is a failed religion. I can definitely see it.
@PeaceMob @DavidSalo This makes sense to me. It seems clear he correctly identified the way Capitalism exploits and degrades, but as you said, the solutions proposed, do not work, and have yielded horrifying results on the world stage.
I know capitalism has done a lot of damage as well, but restraining it through regulation, while having a robust and well guarded system of individual rights in place seems more functional at this moment.
@NiveusLepus @DavidSalo Functional? Yes. Sustainable? I think it can be argued when it is given free reign as we've seen in the last 40 years or so in the US that it is not--and the end of that particular gravy train draws near. To your point, I think any organizing principle in the future will probably *need* to be based on the idea of a free market, but also will need to focus on some type of worker ownership, to keep the wealth inequality problem in check.
@PeaceMob @DavidSalo No argument. The second law of thermodynamics and human nature shows that anything left be will increase in disorder.
There is and never will be a perfectly static answer that can be put in place. That's a myth, and its one that has gotten us into trouble time and again
To often we take the ideologies that revolutionized the past and come to view them dogmaticly
The free market works, worker ownership works. Taking what works is how we make a better, fairer system for all
@NiveusLepus @DavidSalo I totally get your point. Dogma is not a strictly religious phenomenon by any means. This "we're still here, so it must be right" justification for accepting systems and the explanations for them is definitely limiting. My thought is that most of the solutions *can* be found in history, but the means probably shouldn't be repeated. In other words a NEW STORY is required for the future, one that can't be dismissed by saying "just look at Venezuela..."
@PeaceMob @DavidSalo Agreed, a hybridized approach, that uses the past as a teacher instead of a judge.
@NiveusLepus @DavidSalo Nicely put! Innovation, we can see in modern times, is often revolutionary, but is far less creative than invention. Innovation usually involves a simple solution that is closely adjacent to something we've already learned. That dogmatic perfection you mentioned that makes it 'sacrilegious' to question (or not) some bit of human experience is very limiting, but often without any practical reason.
@PeaceMob @DavidSalo What cannot question, what cannot be challenged becomes an anchor that holds us back.
No sacred cows. ^_^
@NiveusLepus @DavidSalo Hear, Hear! By all means, question everything! Though the 'untouchable' answer may be good enough, the *best* answer may be sitting right next to it, and you only get there by being curious enough to question it.
@PeaceMob @DavidSalo Without struggle, there can be no progress- Frederick Douglas.
We are never complete, and that is a good thing, there is always a new horizon to reach, a bar to be stretched for.
We have the ability to take everything that we were given, and use it as a foundation to go further than ever before in terms of rights, freedoms, innovation.
We honor our legacy by doing so.
@NiveusLepus @DavidSalo What's rough about Marxism is that many of us think Marx's assessment of capitalism was spot-on, and is to this day, but his thoughts on the more perfect organizing principles fall way short--particularly if you consider them in a modern context. Put another way; he nailed the problem squarely, and proposed solutions that scare the hell out of people and make them think he was crazy.