3 ms·

Well, I kinda do not like Varoufakis, because he came off as an entitled know-it-all prick (a not so rare trait in academia). He made lots of bold claims but i

Well, I kinda do not like Varoufakis, because he came off as an entitled know-it-all prick (a not so rare trait in academia). He made lots of bold claims but in the end, nothing really got accomplished. EDIT: Regarding the fact that the public deserves to know, I disagree. The public can act completely irrationally against its own interests under FUD (I guess we have some recent examples from the UK and the US), and in a lot of cases, they are better off not knowing. That's why you elect representatives (that will get into all the details of the problem) and place your trust in them. If you do not trust you representatives - do not elect them. [1] https://www.cityam.com/greece-s-golden-boy-and-his-tragic-fall-grace/ https://www.cityam.com/greece-s-golden-boy-and-his-tragic-fa... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U4U7M4WOPU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U4U7M4WOPU

tsimionescu 7y ago
> The public can act completely irrationally against its own interests under FUD (I guess we have some recent examples from the UK and the US), and in a lot of cases, they are better off not knowing. FUD comes exactly out of not knowing. The more obscure the workings and negotiation of power are, the more mystique they hold and the more chances for spin they have. Democracy is not and must not be limited to choosing your representative once every four years - it should be a living system of dialogue, where you constantly offer feedback and hear back from your representative (not saying it has to be personal). This is the only way to build trust and have a responsive system.
sgift 7y ago
> Regarding the fact that the public deserves to know, I disagree. The public can act completely irrationally against its own interests under FUD (I guess we have some recent examples from the UK and the US), and in a lot of cases, they are better off not knowing Can you please clarify if I misunderstood you: You argue that people shouldn't know the truth, because when someone lies to them they act against their own interests?
atmosx 7y ago
> He made lots of bold claims but in the end, nothing really got accomplished. Depends on the perspective I guess. I believe he accomplished a lot, as he raised the awareness on how the EU is run indirectly by an unaccountable group of politicians serving specific interests. It's no small feat.

tsimionescu 7y ago

> The public can act completely irrationally against its own interests under FUD (I guess we have some recent examples from the UK and the US), and in a lot of cases, they are better off not knowing. FUD comes exactly out of not knowing. The more obscure the workings and negotiation of power are, the more mystique they hold and the more chances for spin they have. Democracy is not and must not be limited to choosing your representative once every four years - it should be a living system of dialogue, where you constantly offer feedback and hear back from your representative (not saying it has to be personal). This is the only way to build trust and have a responsive system.

sgift 7y ago

> Regarding the fact that the public deserves to know, I disagree. The public can act completely irrationally against its own interests under FUD (I guess we have some recent examples from the UK and the US), and in a lot of cases, they are better off not knowing Can you please clarify if I misunderstood you: You argue that people shouldn't know the truth, because when someone lies to them they act against their own interests?

atmosx 7y ago

> He made lots of bold claims but in the end, nothing really got accomplished. Depends on the perspective I guess. I believe he accomplished a lot, as he raised the awareness on how the EU is run indirectly by an unaccountable group of politicians serving specific interests. It's no small feat.