3 ms·
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.
by 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 agoMost, 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 agoResponding 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.