4 ms·

Is that acceptable for a potential death of millions? (Let's say) To use a cliche or overly simple examples, if no one can understand the importance of governa

Is that acceptable for a potential death of millions? (Let's say) To use a cliche or overly simple examples, if no one can understand the importance of governance and economic coupling, then why not just try to make a Soviet union and see what happens? I'm not making a farce, I think that just removing things to see what happens can potentially be more negative than it is positive. We should be looking to tweak and change some traditions slowly but surely to make sure that whatever spinning plates happening at a super meta level - is still spinning at the end of it. We don't know what we would be throwing out.

msla 4y ago
With government, we have heuristics honed over millennia for detecting things which are likely to end extremely badly, and we can explain them in logical terms. For example, resurrecting the USSR is bad because the USSR was an empire lead by a succession of dictators and oligarchies, and we have good, logical reasons founded on plenty of history telling us why empires, dictators, and oligarchies are all bad. The illogical reasons are the ones which reduce to "It's bad because it's new" and "It's good because it's old" with no further content, just rhetorical smoke bombs and hand-waving.
- drekipus 4y ago
  Most, if not all forms of government end up extremely badly. Society is just difficult to manage. The reasoning why it's bad is usually after the fact, no one willingly chooses the bad option. But yes, I agree with you that saying "it's good because it's old, bad because it's new" is illogical. I don't think many people are saying that though. If people are convinced that a new thing is good, the change happens. I think people are much more likely to suggest that change is good simply because it is new, which is also dangerously illogical. People were convinced that the new USSR was good, so it happened. Dictators will undoubtedly happen again, and they don't get there by keeping things the same.
  - drekipus 4y ago
    Responding to my own comment because I'm just thinking about this a little more. I think it's very much the reason why God/tradition "appoints the king/queen". - The age old tradition is larger than any individual's life, and theoretically keeps the "dictator" in line (as long as we all respect that tradition). If there is a new period of change with a new leader then anything is possible, subject to human motivations.

msla 4y ago

With government, we have heuristics honed over millennia for detecting things which are likely to end extremely badly, and we can explain them in logical terms. For example, resurrecting the USSR is bad because the USSR was an empire lead by a succession of dictators and oligarchies, and we have good, logical reasons founded on plenty of history telling us why empires, dictators, and oligarchies are all bad. The illogical reasons are the ones which reduce to "It's bad because it's new" and "It's good because it's old" with no further content, just rhetorical smoke bombs and hand-waving.

drekipus 4y ago
Most, if not all forms of government end up extremely badly. Society is just difficult to manage. The reasoning why it's bad is usually after the fact, no one willingly chooses the bad option. But yes, I agree with you that saying "it's good because it's old, bad because it's new" is illogical. I don't think many people are saying that though. If people are convinced that a new thing is good, the change happens. I think people are much more likely to suggest that change is good simply because it is new, which is also dangerously illogical. People were convinced that the new USSR was good, so it happened. Dictators will undoubtedly happen again, and they don't get there by keeping things the same.
- drekipus 4y ago
  Responding to my own comment because I'm just thinking about this a little more. I think it's very much the reason why God/tradition "appoints the king/queen". - The age old tradition is larger than any individual's life, and theoretically keeps the "dictator" in line (as long as we all respect that tradition). If there is a new period of change with a new leader then anything is possible, subject to human motivations.