4 ms·

I’m saying I can hardly support a regime by virtue of not caring about politics. A new born child doesn’t understand and can’t care about politics. Would you s

by jpttsn 9y ago

I’m saying I can hardly support a regime by virtue of not caring about politics. A new born child doesn’t understand and can’t care about politics. Would you say this child supports the ruling party? Never mind whether politics affects the child or vice versa.

wpietri 9y ago
You can say that, but you're wrong. A newborn child takes no actions and makes no statements. It is utterly dependent, contributing nothing. Is that you? It's perfectly reasonable to say that you are happy enough with the status quo to support it. It's also reasonable to be afraid enough of the status quo to refuse to be in visible opposition to it. What's unreasonable is to be a beneficiary of and contributor to an intricate system of economy and authority and then act like it has nothing to do with you.
- jpttsn 9y ago
  Luckily, I never claim politics has nothing to do with me. Politics, sanitation, planetary orbits all affect me, and I contribute. But I don’t necessarily care about them all. Your central thesis, that there “is no neutral”, is unworkable. Examples that fly in the face of it abound. Carve out the special cases, like you did for children, and there will be nothing left.
  - wpietri 9y ago
    If you believe it is unworkable, demonstrate it. I'm making the claim for the average adult participant in the socioeconomic system, so I believe there's plenty left. You claim you don't care; let's grant that for the moment, even though your energetic participation here suggests otherwise. Nobody's saying people can't not care. They are saying that taking a "not caring" stance while both benefiting from the status quo and contributing to the status quo is in effect supporting the status quo. If you want to support the status quo, godspeed. There are many good things about it. I only object to people pretending the status quo has nothing to do with them when they quite obviously are an active part of it.
kiliantics 9y ago
Say you're living in 1930s Germany and you have the opportunity to either vote for or against the National Socialist German Workers' Party. If you're Aryan, you may have the luxury of thinking, "meh, same shit either way, I don't really care about politics". Other people in that society - Jews, Roma, homosexuals, etc. - don't have such a luxury. As minorities, they depend on what you and the rest of the electorate choose. One could argue therefore, that you have some of the burden of blame to bear if that outcome does end up impacting them with some kind of negative consequences...
- jpttsn 9y ago
  Trolley problem. If I don’t pull the lever, maybe I can be blamed for it. But does it mean I support trolleys?

by jpttsn 9y ago

wpietri 9y ago

You can say that, but you're wrong. A newborn child takes no actions and makes no statements. It is utterly dependent, contributing nothing. Is that you? It's perfectly reasonable to say that you are happy enough with the status quo to support it. It's also reasonable to be afraid enough of the status quo to refuse to be in visible opposition to it. What's unreasonable is to be a beneficiary of and contributor to an intricate system of economy and authority and then act like it has nothing to do with you.

jpttsn 9y ago
Luckily, I never claim politics has nothing to do with me. Politics, sanitation, planetary orbits all affect me, and I contribute. But I don’t necessarily care about them all. Your central thesis, that there “is no neutral”, is unworkable. Examples that fly in the face of it abound. Carve out the special cases, like you did for children, and there will be nothing left.
- wpietri 9y ago
  If you believe it is unworkable, demonstrate it. I'm making the claim for the average adult participant in the socioeconomic system, so I believe there's plenty left. You claim you don't care; let's grant that for the moment, even though your energetic participation here suggests otherwise. Nobody's saying people can't not care. They are saying that taking a "not caring" stance while both benefiting from the status quo and contributing to the status quo is in effect supporting the status quo. If you want to support the status quo, godspeed. There are many good things about it. I only object to people pretending the status quo has nothing to do with them when they quite obviously are an active part of it.

kiliantics 9y ago

Say you're living in 1930s Germany and you have the opportunity to either vote for or against the National Socialist German Workers' Party. If you're Aryan, you may have the luxury of thinking, "meh, same shit either way, I don't really care about politics". Other people in that society - Jews, Roma, homosexuals, etc. - don't have such a luxury. As minorities, they depend on what you and the rest of the electorate choose. One could argue therefore, that you have some of the burden of blame to bear if that outcome does end up impacting them with some kind of negative consequences...

jpttsn 9y ago
Trolley problem. If I don’t pull the lever, maybe I can be blamed for it. But does it mean I support trolleys?