5 ms·

I guess it is kind of obvious but the 21C is a fight between totalitarianism and individual rights. It's weird that the side I want to be on tries very hard to

I guess it is kind of obvious but the 21C is a fight between totalitarianism and individual rights. It's weird that the side I want to be on tries very hard to stop being a single unified "side".

shadowgovt 4y ago
> It's weird that the side I want to be on tries very hard to stop being a single unified "side". I'm not exactly sure I catch your meaning, but assuming I do: the self-defeating aspect of many supporters of individual liberty is that they don't recognize how to wield collective action because the psychological tools effective movements employ smell to them of coercion. It's a similar problem to how democracies and anarchies historically get steamrolled by dictatorships and autocracies because those systems are simpler to use for organization and deployment of vast amounts of violent power.
- whatshisface 4y ago
  >democracies and anarchies historically get steamrolled by dictatorships and autocracies Is that actually true? Probably not in the 20th century.
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    No longer in the 20th and 21st, due to a lot of effects. Probably the most significant are communication technology and transportation technology; democratic organization is a lot easier across vast territory when something like the telegraph has come along. The crazy accident of an (eventually) continent-spanning empire setting up a representative democratic structure of government and then going militarily unchallenged long enough (mostly due to geography and technological distribution) to build up into a formidable military power unchallenged should also not be overlooked. But earlier than that, European history in particular is rife with small communities and larger republics or representative democracies eventually getting devoured by the military ambitions of the few and the many who follow them as divine leaders or power-mongers.
    - inawarminister 4y ago
      If I'm not mistaken, Plato's political cycle is monarchy replaced by oligarchy replaced by plutocracy replaced by democracy, which in turn is replaced with mob rule / anarchy then tyranny and return back to monarchy.
      - bee_rider 4y ago
        Plato probably had a different conception of what a democracy is than we do now. My suspicion is that the more open and egalitarian and a democracy is, the more resistant it is to corruption, and the more faith the people have in it. The US was denying like half of our population (women) voting rights until like 1920, so it is hard spot trends in such a short time scale. I mean it is probably just a coincidence of history and geography that we’ve been absurdly successful since then. Nowadays I’d be more worried about the trajectory: Democracy->Oligarchy->Populist backlash/Mob rule->Tyranny. Although I guess that’s really tied to concerns about the long term trajectory for the US (hey at least it isn’t tied to ancient concerns about the trajectory of Athens or whatever).
        somenameforme 4y ago
        Plato's Republic might surprise you then. If nothing else, check out chapter 8 [1]. That particular translation also has side notes offering extremely brief paraphrasings of each section, if you'd prefer to skim. It also includes an introductory section with a more modern rephrasing of each chapter. The oft repeated "drone" refers to individuals primarily driven and motivated by endless self indulgence. Plato frequently uses bees as a metaphor throughout the text. His view is not that systems collapse due to some immediately apparent failing, but rather due to an excess of the strength of any given system. In democracy that strength, and excess, is freedom. So, for instance, he observes how freedom trends towards a disdain for authority which, taken to its natural extreme, tends to lead to chaos and lawlessness. Another is class warfare. In democracy, the political class is largely comprised of the most effective of the "drones." They will make their way to power, actively looting the wealth of the nation; spreading a taste to the masses for support, while keeping the lion's share for themselves. But of course the wealth of the "nation" is, in reality, the wealth of other people. Those negatively affected tended to start pushing back. They, in turn, are demonized by the drones in power and next thing you know, there's class conflict. And quite an ironic one at that, as it's led by rich politicians pretending to be part of the masses. Ultimately the end of democracy, and transition to tyranny, comes about when the masses manage to elevate somebody they see as genuinely representing them. And this person is first struck down by the powers that be for fear of what he might to do them, only to come back ever more empowered - and eventually seizing on all of power, something actively cheered on by his supporters. ---- Reading Plato is largely what made me realize that "history repeats itself" is not some abstract concept where things kind of repeat the same patterns if you squint hard enough. It is completely literal. We keep repeating the exact same things, over and over again, with little more than technology providing a change of scenery. My description above sounds like I'm retrofitting current events into Plato. I am not. Current events just fit his text in a completely uncanny fashion. [1] - https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55201/55201-h/55201-h.htm#BookVIII https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55201/55201-h/55201-h.htm#Bo...
  - chrisco255 4y ago
    The first half of the 20th century was a pretty dire time for democracy, I'd say. This is when communism and fascism took off. To be fair, some of that was a response to monarchy/oligarchy and imperialism, but as an example the Weimar Republic in Germany was democratic and it got steamrolled by the Nazis.
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      The Weimar Republic didn’t get steamrolled by Nazis, it failed politically, right? It turns out fascist propaganda is unfortunately attractive to some folks. The real steamrolling happened a couple years later, and it went the other way—it turns out fascist propaganda does not magic up a factory that can produce a bomber an hour.
      - chrisco255 4y ago
        A steamroller is a large machine that flattens everything in its path. The republic was steamrolled by Hitler. But he's hardly the first authoritarian in history to steamroll an elected body.
      - readthenotes1 4y ago
        Would you have accepted "the Weimar Republic was burned down by the Nazis" as a more literal metaphor? By the way, as a natural born quibbler, I upvoted your post.
        bee_rider 4y ago
        How about usurped? If we want to involve fire, I’m not sure… freer, more open societies seem to result in better productivity. Maybe there’s some analogy about burning a workshop to have a big bonfire.
        readthenotes1 4y ago
        Hitler started it by burning down their parliament building and then taking over to quell the lawlessness
  - corbulo 4y ago
    It is. See Philip II of Macedon vs Athens. It's not true today because of how OP the US is in geography+natural resources, but also from alliances like NATO. Without NATO European states would be getting flipped one by one (as seen by what happens to states not in it). Rome also benefitted from her geography immensely. Same for the Swiss. Isolated democracies are really vulnerable to outside manipulation. Philip II was famous for buying off all the Athenian actors+politicians who love to hang out with his courtiers. The story of Demosthenes is a Cassandra-style tragedy. Federalism was a giant patch that massively increased the robustness of democracies/republics.
MattPalmer1086 4y ago
That's because the side that supports individual rights has a wide diversity of opinions. Including those who would like a more totalitarian state!
- lannisterstark 4y ago
  As should be. Even shitty opinions have a right to be expressed - I don't have to agree with them.

I guess it is kind of obvious but the 21C is a fight between totalitarianism and individual rights. It's weird that the side I want to be on tries very hard to stop being a single unified "side".

shadowgovt 4y ago

> It's weird that the side I want to be on tries very hard to stop being a single unified "side". I'm not exactly sure I catch your meaning, but assuming I do: the self-defeating aspect of many supporters of individual liberty is that they don't recognize how to wield collective action because the psychological tools effective movements employ smell to them of coercion. It's a similar problem to how democracies and anarchies historically get steamrolled by dictatorships and autocracies because those systems are simpler to use for organization and deployment of vast amounts of violent power.

whatshisface 4y ago
>democracies and anarchies historically get steamrolled by dictatorships and autocracies Is that actually true? Probably not in the 20th century.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  No longer in the 20th and 21st, due to a lot of effects. Probably the most significant are communication technology and transportation technology; democratic organization is a lot easier across vast territory when something like the telegraph has come along. The crazy accident of an (eventually) continent-spanning empire setting up a representative democratic structure of government and then going militarily unchallenged long enough (mostly due to geography and technological distribution) to build up into a formidable military power unchallenged should also not be overlooked. But earlier than that, European history in particular is rife with small communities and larger republics or representative democracies eventually getting devoured by the military ambitions of the few and the many who follow them as divine leaders or power-mongers.
  - inawarminister 4y ago
    If I'm not mistaken, Plato's political cycle is monarchy replaced by oligarchy replaced by plutocracy replaced by democracy, which in turn is replaced with mob rule / anarchy then tyranny and return back to monarchy.
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      Plato probably had a different conception of what a democracy is than we do now. My suspicion is that the more open and egalitarian and a democracy is, the more resistant it is to corruption, and the more faith the people have in it. The US was denying like half of our population (women) voting rights until like 1920, so it is hard spot trends in such a short time scale. I mean it is probably just a coincidence of history and geography that we’ve been absurdly successful since then. Nowadays I’d be more worried about the trajectory: Democracy->Oligarchy->Populist backlash/Mob rule->Tyranny. Although I guess that’s really tied to concerns about the long term trajectory for the US (hey at least it isn’t tied to ancient concerns about the trajectory of Athens or whatever).
      - somenameforme 4y ago
        Plato's Republic might surprise you then. If nothing else, check out chapter 8 [1]. That particular translation also has side notes offering extremely brief paraphrasings of each section, if you'd prefer to skim. It also includes an introductory section with a more modern rephrasing of each chapter. The oft repeated "drone" refers to individuals primarily driven and motivated by endless self indulgence. Plato frequently uses bees as a metaphor throughout the text. His view is not that systems collapse due to some immediately apparent failing, but rather due to an excess of the strength of any given system. In democracy that strength, and excess, is freedom. So, for instance, he observes how freedom trends towards a disdain for authority which, taken to its natural extreme, tends to lead to chaos and lawlessness. Another is class warfare. In democracy, the political class is largely comprised of the most effective of the "drones." They will make their way to power, actively looting the wealth of the nation; spreading a taste to the masses for support, while keeping the lion's share for themselves. But of course the wealth of the "nation" is, in reality, the wealth of other people. Those negatively affected tended to start pushing back. They, in turn, are demonized by the drones in power and next thing you know, there's class conflict. And quite an ironic one at that, as it's led by rich politicians pretending to be part of the masses. Ultimately the end of democracy, and transition to tyranny, comes about when the masses manage to elevate somebody they see as genuinely representing them. And this person is first struck down by the powers that be for fear of what he might to do them, only to come back ever more empowered - and eventually seizing on all of power, something actively cheered on by his supporters. ---- Reading Plato is largely what made me realize that "history repeats itself" is not some abstract concept where things kind of repeat the same patterns if you squint hard enough. It is completely literal. We keep repeating the exact same things, over and over again, with little more than technology providing a change of scenery. My description above sounds like I'm retrofitting current events into Plato. I am not. Current events just fit his text in a completely uncanny fashion. [1] - https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55201/55201-h/55201-h.htm#BookVIII https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55201/55201-h/55201-h.htm#Bo...
- chrisco255 4y ago
  The first half of the 20th century was a pretty dire time for democracy, I'd say. This is when communism and fascism took off. To be fair, some of that was a response to monarchy/oligarchy and imperialism, but as an example the Weimar Republic in Germany was democratic and it got steamrolled by the Nazis.
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    The Weimar Republic didn’t get steamrolled by Nazis, it failed politically, right? It turns out fascist propaganda is unfortunately attractive to some folks. The real steamrolling happened a couple years later, and it went the other way—it turns out fascist propaganda does not magic up a factory that can produce a bomber an hour.
    - chrisco255 4y ago
      A steamroller is a large machine that flattens everything in its path. The republic was steamrolled by Hitler. But he's hardly the first authoritarian in history to steamroll an elected body.
    - readthenotes1 4y ago
      Would you have accepted "the Weimar Republic was burned down by the Nazis" as a more literal metaphor? By the way, as a natural born quibbler, I upvoted your post.
      - bee_rider 4y ago
        How about usurped? If we want to involve fire, I’m not sure… freer, more open societies seem to result in better productivity. Maybe there’s some analogy about burning a workshop to have a big bonfire.
        readthenotes1 4y ago
        Hitler started it by burning down their parliament building and then taking over to quell the lawlessness
- corbulo 4y ago
  It is. See Philip II of Macedon vs Athens. It's not true today because of how OP the US is in geography+natural resources, but also from alliances like NATO. Without NATO European states would be getting flipped one by one (as seen by what happens to states not in it). Rome also benefitted from her geography immensely. Same for the Swiss. Isolated democracies are really vulnerable to outside manipulation. Philip II was famous for buying off all the Athenian actors+politicians who love to hang out with his courtiers. The story of Demosthenes is a Cassandra-style tragedy. Federalism was a giant patch that massively increased the robustness of democracies/republics.

MattPalmer1086 4y ago

That's because the side that supports individual rights has a wide diversity of opinions. Including those who would like a more totalitarian state!

lannisterstark 4y ago
As should be. Even shitty opinions have a right to be expressed - I don't have to agree with them.