4 ms·

State power usage in political agenda's needs to be carefully evaluated, or it can lead to revolutions or disintegration. When state power is used to serve pol

State power usage in political agenda's needs to be carefully evaluated, or it can lead to revolutions or disintegration. When state power is used to serve political agendas, it can be easily abused for personal or party gain. This can lead to corruption, nepotism, and favoritism, which undermines the integrity of the government and erodes public trust in the system. Something we already see in many states, California's project to build a bullet train failed after millions and millons of dollars. Using state power to serve political agendas can have serious negative consequences for democracy, governance, and society as a whole. It is essential that political leaders prioritize the interests of the people and use state power for the greater good rather than for their own personal or party gain. The "greater good" isn't a ironic or strange concept either just like the "noblesse oblige", these represent the contract between the governed and rulers. The disintegration of these concepts in a nation lead to civil war or separation.

giraffe_lady 4y ago
I know but "the interests of the people" is just as vague as "the greater good." When you get to the point of actually defining those interests and deciding what will further them, you're at political agenda.
- norwalkbear 4y ago
  Seems a bit pedantic here. But partisan political agendas like in CA and TX are clearly not the same as a neutral political agenda. I think most people here understood political agenda as partisan term here.
  - giraffe_lady 4y ago
    What I'm workings towards is that that just isn't a useful distinction. You can't form any kind of useful framework for evaluation or action out of "political and therefor bad" vs "non-political and therefor good." Some of these things are bad because they are bad, and you have to take a side opposing them on those grounds rather than invent these justifications that allow keeping your neutral purity intact.
    - stuckinhell 4y ago
      The problem is without shared values, you can't define "bad" at a national level. Both sides believe they are on the "right side of history", that's the problem here. The "greater good" is "political" in nature, but it's not something that's hyper-partisan like what we seeing occur in the nation. We need a minimum set of neutral rules in nation with a very very wide variety of beliefs to maintain our technological nation. You can and should think of the greater good in terms of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs at population level. If you don't have food to eat and energy to keep you warm, self actualization or individuality really don't matter.

giraffe_lady 4y ago

I know but "the interests of the people" is just as vague as "the greater good." When you get to the point of actually defining those interests and deciding what will further them, you're at political agenda.

norwalkbear 4y ago
Seems a bit pedantic here. But partisan political agendas like in CA and TX are clearly not the same as a neutral political agenda. I think most people here understood political agenda as partisan term here.
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  What I'm workings towards is that that just isn't a useful distinction. You can't form any kind of useful framework for evaluation or action out of "political and therefor bad" vs "non-political and therefor good." Some of these things are bad because they are bad, and you have to take a side opposing them on those grounds rather than invent these justifications that allow keeping your neutral purity intact.
  - stuckinhell 4y ago
    The problem is without shared values, you can't define "bad" at a national level. Both sides believe they are on the "right side of history", that's the problem here. The "greater good" is "political" in nature, but it's not something that's hyper-partisan like what we seeing occur in the nation. We need a minimum set of neutral rules in nation with a very very wide variety of beliefs to maintain our technological nation. You can and should think of the greater good in terms of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs at population level. If you don't have food to eat and energy to keep you warm, self actualization or individuality really don't matter.