7 ms·

I am faving this comment. Huxley was a true visionary. However I dont agree with the "...new kind of non-violent totalitarianism..." Our democracies are non-vi

by urza 10y ago

I am faving this comment. Huxley was a true visionary. However I dont agree with the "...new kind of non-violent totalitarianism..." Our democracies are non-violent only if you obey. Otherwise they use violence and force to lock you up. Most people in prisons are there for victimless crimes like drugs. That is not a non-violent system in my opinion.

SFJulie 10y ago
euh... Don't confuse Republics and democracies. Letting the people vote is a not an equivalent statement to let the people rules. Condorcet has shown how voting systems can be unfair, and a quick look to every elected assembly from the G20 is showing a clear non representation of the demography of the people in the assemblies. We do not live under democratic systems, neither was USA in 1861. These are Republics. And Plato was firmly convinced that democracies were bad. After all he was sponsored by the wealthy ones that hated the people to have power.
- urza 10y ago
  Fair point, you are of course right. However I used the word in the way how it is used nowadays by public. I am from Europe and people here will tell you we have "democracies".
- mseebach 10y ago
  Thats a fairly irrelevant objection. Both the NYT, Huxley and the GP are referring to the system still in place in the US and Europe today (and so were Churchill in the "worst system, except for all the others that has been tried" quote), whether correctly identified as 'democracy' or not.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  I mean, of course we don't actually have democracy. That's the problem.
- curried_haskell 10y ago
  Republic and democracy are not mutually exclusive... I think you are confused if you think they are. According to Wikipedia, "It is a constitutional republic and representative democracy." Perhaps it's less of a democracy then we think it is, but it's not wrong to call the US a democracy.
erikbye 10y ago
It is often said that Huxley's Brave New World prediction was more accurate than Orwell's 1984, but Orwell actually got the boot-stomping-your-face prediction right: even peaceful protests are met with full riot gear and ends being peaceful as soon as that first baton-swing hits someone's skull. Police murdering unarmed citizens with their arms raised. The mass imprisonment of citizens who's only committed what most people consider a minor offense.
- eevilspock 10y ago
  Aldous Huxley vs George Orwell: http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/huxley-orwell-amusing-ourselves-to-death.jpg http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/huxley-or... (The creator, Stuart McMillen, felt compelled to remove it from his own website. He explains: http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/blog/cartoon-blog/amusing-ourselves-to-death/ http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/blog/cartoon-blog/amusing-ours...)
- humanrebar 10y ago
  > even peaceful protests are met with full riot gear and ends being peaceful as soon as that first baton-swing hits someone's skull ...except the police officers murdered in Dallas this year didn't wear riot gear on purpose and the violence started when a sniper started shooting officers. Some crazy person executed two officers in Iowa three days ago. I'm not advocating riot gear, but there are holes in your narrative.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
    A police officer or two killed says nothing about police brutality.
    - humanrebar 10y ago
      It says a lot actually. Police officers are humans who want to go home to their kids. Hence the riot gear. We can blame them for being too fearful, but we can also recognize that they have reasons to be afraid. These reasons don't fit into "because The Man" narratives without some explanation.
rayiner 10y ago
I mean that's verifiably not true if you look at the statistics. A majority of prisoners are not in for drug crimes. The ones that are are overwhelmingly in for drug trafficking, which is violent (selling something that physically hurts people). You can argue that consent should make the act legal, but that doesn't make it non-violent.
- pessimizer 10y ago
  > drug trafficking, which is violent (selling something that physically hurts people). Only if selling sugar, rifles or skateboards is violent.
  - rasengan 10y ago
    Beat me to it! ;)
  - douche 10y ago
    Distributors of those legal products are rarely gunning each other down over the monopoly on distribution on a particular street corner. Driving it underground and making it illegal forces people to return to older, more traditional forms of conflict resolution...
    - ycmbntrthrwaway 10y ago
      Sometimes they are driven to the internet where they use superior conflict resolution mechanisms, such as arbitration and other mechanisms that work in the absence of violence.
  - rayiner 10y ago
    All of those things have non-violent uses much more important than their violent ones. Cigarettes are a better analogy--I think there is definitely a case to be made that is a violent activity.
    - narrowrail 10y ago
nathanvanfleet 10y ago
Not to mention if you are just protesting the wrong thing, you get arrested, pepper sprayed or worse. And somehow the media coverage is way less too.
- zanny 10y ago
  Like the Dakota Access Pipeline protest right now. No mainstream network talks about it at prime time, despite it probably being the most significant US national political event right now next to the email leaks. Which they also ignore, beyond claiming they are Russia's fault.
  - mzw_mzw 10y ago
    > Like the Dakota Access Pipeline protest right now. The one where they were shooting at cops, you mean? True, that part didn't get a lot of coverage.
tptacek 10y ago
Most people in prison are not there for victimless crimes. This is well studied, and what you just said is a canard. Ranked, reasons for incarcerations go: 1. Violent crime 2. Property crime 3. Everything else Where "violent crime" is comprised of those crimes we all agree are violent --- particularly: domestic violence, which accounts for a plurality of all incarcerations in major metro areas. The overwhelming majority of incarcerated felons victimized somebody else. It's also worth considering that the majority of those incarcerated for property crimes victimized those people in society least able to absorb the harm: rich white people live in low-crime neighborhoods with 2x the police coverage.
- zanny 10y ago
  Depends on your definition of "overwhelming" 1 in 5 convicts are in prison for drug related offenses[1]. Almost four hundred thousand US citizens behind bars for plant byproduct possession or distribution is heinous. There are around 320k prisoners for property crime, by comparison, so no, nonviolent drug offenses are #2 in terms of incarceration blocks, though the numbers are close, and violent offenses are over twice drug offenses. [1] http://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2016.html http://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2016.html
  - tptacek 10y ago
    It is not my argument that because drugs account for only 15% of incarcerations, our drug policy is OK.

by urza 10y ago

SFJulie 10y ago

euh... Don't confuse Republics and democracies. Letting the people vote is a not an equivalent statement to let the people rules. Condorcet has shown how voting systems can be unfair, and a quick look to every elected assembly from the G20 is showing a clear non representation of the demography of the people in the assemblies. We do not live under democratic systems, neither was USA in 1861. These are Republics. And Plato was firmly convinced that democracies were bad. After all he was sponsored by the wealthy ones that hated the people to have power.

urza 10y ago
Fair point, you are of course right. However I used the word in the way how it is used nowadays by public. I am from Europe and people here will tell you we have "democracies".
mseebach 10y ago
Thats a fairly irrelevant objection. Both the NYT, Huxley and the GP are referring to the system still in place in the US and Europe today (and so were Churchill in the "worst system, except for all the others that has been tried" quote), whether correctly identified as 'democracy' or not.
eli_gottlieb 10y ago
I mean, of course we don't actually have democracy. That's the problem.
curried_haskell 10y ago
Republic and democracy are not mutually exclusive... I think you are confused if you think they are. According to Wikipedia, "It is a constitutional republic and representative democracy." Perhaps it's less of a democracy then we think it is, but it's not wrong to call the US a democracy.

erikbye 10y ago

It is often said that Huxley's Brave New World prediction was more accurate than Orwell's 1984, but Orwell actually got the boot-stomping-your-face prediction right: even peaceful protests are met with full riot gear and ends being peaceful as soon as that first baton-swing hits someone's skull. Police murdering unarmed citizens with their arms raised. The mass imprisonment of citizens who's only committed what most people consider a minor offense.

eevilspock 10y ago
Aldous Huxley vs George Orwell: http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/huxley-orwell-amusing-ourselves-to-death.jpg http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/huxley-or... (The creator, Stuart McMillen, felt compelled to remove it from his own website. He explains: http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/blog/cartoon-blog/amusing-ourselves-to-death/ http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/blog/cartoon-blog/amusing-ours...)
humanrebar 10y ago
> even peaceful protests are met with full riot gear and ends being peaceful as soon as that first baton-swing hits someone's skull ...except the police officers murdered in Dallas this year didn't wear riot gear on purpose and the violence started when a sniper started shooting officers. Some crazy person executed two officers in Iowa three days ago. I'm not advocating riot gear, but there are holes in your narrative.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
  A police officer or two killed says nothing about police brutality.
  - humanrebar 10y ago
    It says a lot actually. Police officers are humans who want to go home to their kids. Hence the riot gear. We can blame them for being too fearful, but we can also recognize that they have reasons to be afraid. These reasons don't fit into "because The Man" narratives without some explanation.

rayiner 10y ago

I mean that's verifiably not true if you look at the statistics. A majority of prisoners are not in for drug crimes. The ones that are are overwhelmingly in for drug trafficking, which is violent (selling something that physically hurts people). You can argue that consent should make the act legal, but that doesn't make it non-violent.

pessimizer 10y ago
> drug trafficking, which is violent (selling something that physically hurts people). Only if selling sugar, rifles or skateboards is violent.
- rasengan 10y ago
  Beat me to it! ;)
- douche 10y ago
  Distributors of those legal products are rarely gunning each other down over the monopoly on distribution on a particular street corner. Driving it underground and making it illegal forces people to return to older, more traditional forms of conflict resolution...
  - ycmbntrthrwaway 10y ago
    Sometimes they are driven to the internet where they use superior conflict resolution mechanisms, such as arbitration and other mechanisms that work in the absence of violence.
- rayiner 10y ago
  All of those things have non-violent uses much more important than their violent ones. Cigarettes are a better analogy--I think there is definitely a case to be made that is a violent activity.
  - narrowrail 10y ago

nathanvanfleet 10y ago

Not to mention if you are just protesting the wrong thing, you get arrested, pepper sprayed or worse. And somehow the media coverage is way less too.

zanny 10y ago
Like the Dakota Access Pipeline protest right now. No mainstream network talks about it at prime time, despite it probably being the most significant US national political event right now next to the email leaks. Which they also ignore, beyond claiming they are Russia's fault.
- mzw_mzw 10y ago
  > Like the Dakota Access Pipeline protest right now. The one where they were shooting at cops, you mean? True, that part didn't get a lot of coverage.

tptacek 10y ago

Most people in prison are not there for victimless crimes. This is well studied, and what you just said is a canard. Ranked, reasons for incarcerations go: 1. Violent crime 2. Property crime 3. Everything else Where "violent crime" is comprised of those crimes we all agree are violent --- particularly: domestic violence, which accounts for a plurality of all incarcerations in major metro areas. The overwhelming majority of incarcerated felons victimized somebody else. It's also worth considering that the majority of those incarcerated for property crimes victimized those people in society least able to absorb the harm: rich white people live in low-crime neighborhoods with 2x the police coverage.

zanny 10y ago
Depends on your definition of "overwhelming" 1 in 5 convicts are in prison for drug related offenses[1]. Almost four hundred thousand US citizens behind bars for plant byproduct possession or distribution is heinous. There are around 320k prisoners for property crime, by comparison, so no, nonviolent drug offenses are #2 in terms of incarceration blocks, though the numbers are close, and violent offenses are over twice drug offenses. [1] http://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2016.html http://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2016.html
- tptacek 10y ago
  It is not my argument that because drugs account for only 15% of incarcerations, our drug policy is OK.