3 ms·

They were sold security. Bow to authority, relinquish individual responsibility, receive a steady paycheck and a base standard of living. Here are your ethics:

by lhnz 15y ago

They were sold security. Bow to authority, relinquish individual responsibility, receive a steady paycheck and a base standard of living. Here are your ethics: "Accept your place in life; don't fight for yourself: we'll fight for you. Turn on the TV and kick back. Be docile. We'll look after you." Now they're still repeating their original mistake: they're asking others to fix their situation. But the game has changed while they had relinquished control: real economic damage has been caused (Tragedy of the Commons). Of course, as usual, now there is a call to arms and a protest at authority, but they still don't understand: instead of asking for handouts they should fix their situation by putting in effort, taking responsibility and standing up for themselves and each other.

nhaehnle 15y ago
instead of asking for handouts they should fix their situation by putting in effort, taking responsibility and standing up for themselves and each other. Isn't that exactly what they're doing? Taking responsibility can take many different forms. No, those people are not taking an individualist entrepreneur route that most here on this particular forum are probably more comfortable with. However, the individualist approach cannot solve every problem. Sometimes, a different route is needed. The Occupy Wall Street protests are exactly the kind of process by which people are taking responsibility. Ideas are fermenting there, people are activated, becoming involved at whichever level (political or otherwise). This is not a uniform process - certainly, many people will just be there out of rage, not really becoming activated, but at the same time, many people undergo transformations, gaining knowledge, forming goals, talking about and then attempting concrete steps to get what they want. This is hard to believe if you've never actually been in touch with a movement like this, mostly because it is impossible to see such developments from the outside. I've been personally involved in similar things when I was younger (though at a smaller, local scale), and even I can't see what's going on as an outsider. But believe me, if you think those people are all shouting for somebody else to fix everything for them, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.
- lhnz 15y ago
  > Isn't that exactly what they're doing? Okay, yes. In a way. But they're taking responsibility to try to get other people to do something for them. You're right, I do have an individualistic perspective on this. I don't think it works well. The only control they will get over the situation will be the control they're given by the government/big industry. > But believe me, if you think those people are all shouting for somebody else to fix everything for them, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. I'll take the bait. What are they doing other than protesting for a government response/solution to their woes?
  - nhaehnle 15y ago
    What are they doing other than protesting for a government response/solution to their woes? First of all, I think we have to make sure we understand each other what the question is here. Most of the griefs of the protestors, as far as I understand them, can almost by definition only be solved by a government solution. (Assuming you accept their claim that they are not protesting for their individual well-being, but are instead protesting against systemic issues in society.) Bank regulation comes to mind - obviously, banks cannot be regulated by individuals. The same thing applies to macroeconomic problems such as mass unemployment. Once you recognize that a given problem can only be resolved by government changing its behavior, there remains the question of how you proceed. Do you simply shout about it on the street, or are you trying to do more? It is this "more" that I was talking about, which usually happens in movements like this. Of course I cannot give you concrete examples since I am not involved in the whole Occupy Wall Street thing, and outside observers can only see them after the fact, if they have been successful. It usually starts with people genuinely interested in learning. Groups form where people teach each other and become creative. People spend a lot of time thinking about how to fix the problems, and trying to reach out to those who are already in a position to implement their plans. Some may go on trying to run for office themselves. And so on. This is often unsuccessful for obvious reasons - changing the behavior of government is extremely difficult. But it's not unsuccessful for a lack of trying. More often, the greatest problem is the fact that the people involved are simply inexperienced in dealing with those type of power structures, and therefore fail to acquire enough social influence to really effect a change.

by lhnz 15y ago

nhaehnle 15y ago

instead of asking for handouts they should fix their situation by putting in effort, taking responsibility and standing up for themselves and each other. Isn't that exactly what they're doing? Taking responsibility can take many different forms. No, those people are not taking an individualist entrepreneur route that most here on this particular forum are probably more comfortable with. However, the individualist approach cannot solve every problem. Sometimes, a different route is needed. The Occupy Wall Street protests are exactly the kind of process by which people are taking responsibility. Ideas are fermenting there, people are activated, becoming involved at whichever level (political or otherwise). This is not a uniform process - certainly, many people will just be there out of rage, not really becoming activated, but at the same time, many people undergo transformations, gaining knowledge, forming goals, talking about and then attempting concrete steps to get what they want. This is hard to believe if you've never actually been in touch with a movement like this, mostly because it is impossible to see such developments from the outside. I've been personally involved in similar things when I was younger (though at a smaller, local scale), and even I can't see what's going on as an outsider. But believe me, if you think those people are all shouting for somebody else to fix everything for them, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

lhnz 15y ago
> Isn't that exactly what they're doing? Okay, yes. In a way. But they're taking responsibility to try to get other people to do something for them. You're right, I do have an individualistic perspective on this. I don't think it works well. The only control they will get over the situation will be the control they're given by the government/big industry. > But believe me, if you think those people are all shouting for somebody else to fix everything for them, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. I'll take the bait. What are they doing other than protesting for a government response/solution to their woes?
- nhaehnle 15y ago
  What are they doing other than protesting for a government response/solution to their woes? First of all, I think we have to make sure we understand each other what the question is here. Most of the griefs of the protestors, as far as I understand them, can almost by definition only be solved by a government solution. (Assuming you accept their claim that they are not protesting for their individual well-being, but are instead protesting against systemic issues in society.) Bank regulation comes to mind - obviously, banks cannot be regulated by individuals. The same thing applies to macroeconomic problems such as mass unemployment. Once you recognize that a given problem can only be resolved by government changing its behavior, there remains the question of how you proceed. Do you simply shout about it on the street, or are you trying to do more? It is this "more" that I was talking about, which usually happens in movements like this. Of course I cannot give you concrete examples since I am not involved in the whole Occupy Wall Street thing, and outside observers can only see them after the fact, if they have been successful. It usually starts with people genuinely interested in learning. Groups form where people teach each other and become creative. People spend a lot of time thinking about how to fix the problems, and trying to reach out to those who are already in a position to implement their plans. Some may go on trying to run for office themselves. And so on. This is often unsuccessful for obvious reasons - changing the behavior of government is extremely difficult. But it's not unsuccessful for a lack of trying. More often, the greatest problem is the fact that the people involved are simply inexperienced in dealing with those type of power structures, and therefore fail to acquire enough social influence to really effect a change.