3 ms·

Yeah they can because social laws are not beholden to the kind of logic used in science. Laws are thought ending semantic games invented by aristocrats to mani

Yeah they can because social laws are not beholden to the kind of logic used in science. Laws are thought ending semantic games invented by aristocrats to manipulate the masses. Read James Madison; government exists to protect the opulent minority from the poor majority. Laws as our society knows them are aristocratic obligations put in people. Our social meme obliges us to kowtow to the owners, just as religion obliged us to kowtow to the masters of the sacred texts.

jazzyjackson 5y ago
I'd like to subscribe to James Madison's newsletter... can you recommend a starting point?
- mikepurvis 5y ago
  This is the common starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers
AnimalMuppet 5y ago
That sounds rather unlike Madison. Where, specifically, did he say that?
- chmsky00 5y ago
  My bad; he wrote the Senate not “government”, should protect the opulent minority. Aristocratic protectionism is built into the American political system. https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/8793/what-did-james-madison-try-to-say-when-talking-about-agrarian-reform https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/8793/what-did-j...
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  The actual quote referenced is: > Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body. This quote comes from a statement Madison made at the Federal Convention of 1787 (https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0044 https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-004...), and is basically pointing out that a Democracy is susceptible to a Tyranny of the Majority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority), and needs a balancing force (the Senate). The comment you are replying to is from a user named "chmsky00" which gives a hint about how some, in particular Noam Chomsky, have interpreted this quote by Noam Chomsky (https://chomsky.info/commongood02/ https://chomsky.info/commongood02/).
  - chmsky00 5y ago
    I take a physics perspective first view of reality, and see Chomsky’s work as a field theory of linguistics. Trade to support biological life is one thing, and is something I feel should be unencumbered by servicing memes like “Jeff Bezos is worth billions of dollars.” An idea my math education informs me is built on abstraction the public cannot understand. It’s little different than conquering indigenous people with language like “My God commands it!” Bezos isn’t a savior or genius; he had help from our social field theory in the form of rich relatives and friends who gained in a higher tax era, then changes the rules. Paulo Freire and countless others offer similar metaphors for applying economics to social behavior. We call it behavioral economics now. IMO the public should be holding out at scale, and only enabling the building of long lived solutions rather than lowest bidder public works, and social agency bent towards consumer waste creation and cleanup, while letting a minority LARP being above the daily work that enables their life. Simple.

jazzyjackson 5y ago

I'd like to subscribe to James Madison's newsletter... can you recommend a starting point?

mikepurvis 5y ago
This is the common starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Federalist_Papers

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

That sounds rather unlike Madison. Where, specifically, did he say that?

chmsky00 5y ago
My bad; he wrote the Senate not “government”, should protect the opulent minority. Aristocratic protectionism is built into the American political system. https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/8793/what-did-james-madison-try-to-say-when-talking-about-agrarian-reform https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/8793/what-did-j...
throwawaysea 5y ago
The actual quote referenced is: > Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body. This quote comes from a statement Madison made at the Federal Convention of 1787 (https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0044 https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-004...), and is basically pointing out that a Democracy is susceptible to a Tyranny of the Majority (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority), and needs a balancing force (the Senate). The comment you are replying to is from a user named "chmsky00" which gives a hint about how some, in particular Noam Chomsky, have interpreted this quote by Noam Chomsky (https://chomsky.info/commongood02/ https://chomsky.info/commongood02/).
- chmsky00 5y ago
  I take a physics perspective first view of reality, and see Chomsky’s work as a field theory of linguistics. Trade to support biological life is one thing, and is something I feel should be unencumbered by servicing memes like “Jeff Bezos is worth billions of dollars.” An idea my math education informs me is built on abstraction the public cannot understand. It’s little different than conquering indigenous people with language like “My God commands it!” Bezos isn’t a savior or genius; he had help from our social field theory in the form of rich relatives and friends who gained in a higher tax era, then changes the rules. Paulo Freire and countless others offer similar metaphors for applying economics to social behavior. We call it behavioral economics now. IMO the public should be holding out at scale, and only enabling the building of long lived solutions rather than lowest bidder public works, and social agency bent towards consumer waste creation and cleanup, while letting a minority LARP being above the daily work that enables their life. Simple.