3 ms·

I’m waiting to hear solutions … or do you only have criticisms? And how far do you take that? We can’t produce a world without deviance so we should just let i

I’m waiting to hear solutions … or do you only have criticisms? And how far do you take that? We can’t produce a world without deviance so we should just let it slide?

namaria 3y ago
It's very common to state 'bring solutions or shut up' but that is just a way to stop the conversation short. I made a valid contribution, pointing out that knee-jerk "tough on crime" responses to news of criminal behavior is not only naive but counter productive. I don't have to provide a fix for a deeply complex issue - class relations - to point out that grabbing the pitchfork is a reaction that is expected of the populace and used by the elites to keep us down. What we should do, in my opinion, instead of crying out for tougher enforcement of laws, is to acknowledge that anti social behavior is a socialization issue, not a criminal issue. Punishment is self serving - I want to feel like those who exploit our good nature suffer for it. Cultivating higher morals is hard and won't change statistics overnight. But a world without corruption is a world without greed, not a world with harsh punishment for those caught stepping out of the line.
- malux85 3y ago
  It’s a very common state to throw criticisms and theories with no solutions - it’s called “the bloodless intellect” - and since it offers no solutions and takes no actions, it is almost always the worst option. Granted sometimes a bad solution is worse than no solution, but the vast majority of times, no solution is the worst option. The only thing being a bloodless intellect protects is the ego of the person, because their identity is so tied to their intellect they dislike it when their theories are actually evaluated, because the chance that they might be wrong materialises, and that would damage their fragile ego and deeply associated self identity, so better to act snidy and offer no solutions than to offer something that might be wrong, and call into question their self identity. I grant that you do make a contribution, a tiny, tiny one - because without action, your ideas will never be bigger than the few tiny brain cells they occupy. Saying "its' complex, I dont have any solutions" is a cop-out, do you think if everybody did that the corperate tax avoidance and greed would get better or worse? Or do you think if harsher punishments are introduced and enforced it might make the executives who are in the grey area of activity think twice? Compare more legal countries like the US with corrupt countries where this isn't enforced (e.g. Pakistan) it's clear that enforcement and the threat of punishment vastly helps mitigate corruption, and while there are no absolute silver bullets, threats of punishment are good for keeping the "lawful evil" in line, because it forces them to factor punishment into the risk equation, which otherwise, is only about profit.
  - namaria 3y ago
    > your ideas will never be bigger than the few tiny brain cells they occupy. Woah calm down man. You're taking this personally and turning to insults? That's not acceptable. Suppressing discourse unless accompanied by a plan of action is just a sure fire way to get demagogy and harsh plans that just make things worse like the endless "harsh on crime" mess of putting people in jail for decades over joints. Besides, Legal America has been committing war crimes and abetting corruption across the globe for decades so get out of here with this spectrum of bs of yours.
    - malux85 3y ago
      Woah calm down man. It was not an insult at all, I was being literal. Ideas without action do only occupy a few brain cells (and nothing else) and brain cells are tiny. It's a Arnold Glasow quote thats common in the startup ecosystem as a joke and critique about inaction. You’re the one that incorrectly interpreted it as an insult (even if you dont know it's a quote, if you read it properly it's a comment on the ideas and not a comment on brain size or anything else), then you wrote a knee jerk response, complaining I insulted you when I didn’t, and then summarising a bunch of vague generalisations - and then finishing with an angry ending to a post you started with "Calm down man" actual lol. If you cannot interpret simple responses correctly (or worse - interpret them as insults) it makes me question your critical faculties and invalidate your other conclusions on more complex topics.

I’m waiting to hear solutions … or do you only have criticisms? And how far do you take that? We can’t produce a world without deviance so we should just let it slide?

namaria 3y ago

It's very common to state 'bring solutions or shut up' but that is just a way to stop the conversation short. I made a valid contribution, pointing out that knee-jerk "tough on crime" responses to news of criminal behavior is not only naive but counter productive. I don't have to provide a fix for a deeply complex issue - class relations - to point out that grabbing the pitchfork is a reaction that is expected of the populace and used by the elites to keep us down. What we should do, in my opinion, instead of crying out for tougher enforcement of laws, is to acknowledge that anti social behavior is a socialization issue, not a criminal issue. Punishment is self serving - I want to feel like those who exploit our good nature suffer for it. Cultivating higher morals is hard and won't change statistics overnight. But a world without corruption is a world without greed, not a world with harsh punishment for those caught stepping out of the line.

malux85 3y ago
It’s a very common state to throw criticisms and theories with no solutions - it’s called “the bloodless intellect” - and since it offers no solutions and takes no actions, it is almost always the worst option. Granted sometimes a bad solution is worse than no solution, but the vast majority of times, no solution is the worst option. The only thing being a bloodless intellect protects is the ego of the person, because their identity is so tied to their intellect they dislike it when their theories are actually evaluated, because the chance that they might be wrong materialises, and that would damage their fragile ego and deeply associated self identity, so better to act snidy and offer no solutions than to offer something that might be wrong, and call into question their self identity. I grant that you do make a contribution, a tiny, tiny one - because without action, your ideas will never be bigger than the few tiny brain cells they occupy. Saying "its' complex, I dont have any solutions" is a cop-out, do you think if everybody did that the corperate tax avoidance and greed would get better or worse? Or do you think if harsher punishments are introduced and enforced it might make the executives who are in the grey area of activity think twice? Compare more legal countries like the US with corrupt countries where this isn't enforced (e.g. Pakistan) it's clear that enforcement and the threat of punishment vastly helps mitigate corruption, and while there are no absolute silver bullets, threats of punishment are good for keeping the "lawful evil" in line, because it forces them to factor punishment into the risk equation, which otherwise, is only about profit.
- namaria 3y ago
  > your ideas will never be bigger than the few tiny brain cells they occupy. Woah calm down man. You're taking this personally and turning to insults? That's not acceptable. Suppressing discourse unless accompanied by a plan of action is just a sure fire way to get demagogy and harsh plans that just make things worse like the endless "harsh on crime" mess of putting people in jail for decades over joints. Besides, Legal America has been committing war crimes and abetting corruption across the globe for decades so get out of here with this spectrum of bs of yours.
  - malux85 3y ago
    Woah calm down man. It was not an insult at all, I was being literal. Ideas without action do only occupy a few brain cells (and nothing else) and brain cells are tiny. It's a Arnold Glasow quote thats common in the startup ecosystem as a joke and critique about inaction. You’re the one that incorrectly interpreted it as an insult (even if you dont know it's a quote, if you read it properly it's a comment on the ideas and not a comment on brain size or anything else), then you wrote a knee jerk response, complaining I insulted you when I didn’t, and then summarising a bunch of vague generalisations - and then finishing with an angry ending to a post you started with "Calm down man" actual lol. If you cannot interpret simple responses correctly (or worse - interpret them as insults) it makes me question your critical faculties and invalidate your other conclusions on more complex topics.