5 ms·

I don't think they said they were "bad people". But it's a fair objection that anyone who is content to sign away their personal autonomy to a violent organizat

by dTal 2y ago

I don't think they said they were "bad people". But it's a fair objection that anyone who is content to sign away their personal autonomy to a violent organization may not represent "the best" of us, in some philosophically meaningful sense. Insofar that it's true that "a strong military is a requirement for a free society", it's because people like that exist.

shiroiushi 2y ago
>Insofar that it's true that "a strong military is a requirement for a free society", it's because people like that exist. Yes, but there's no way to change that; it's human nature. Without a military, other countries with strong militaries will happily impose themselves on you: Nazi Germany, Russia/SU, etc. History is full of accounts of what happens when people don't have enough military power to resist invasion by a country of evildoers with their own powerful military. Similarly, police frequently suck, but the alternative is even worse. There's no shortage of people who would be happy to ignore laws and prey on others if they didn't have to worry about police enforcement.
- boffinAudio 2y ago
  [flagged]
- mtalantikite 2y ago
  > Yes, but there's no way to change that; it's human nature. I think this is a dangerous idea, that humans are just violent and abusive by nature and it's impossible to change. It's something that is learned and taught and passed down, like anything else, which means it can be changed. I'll just quote Thay because he does it so well: "We often think of peace as the absence of war, that if powerful countries would reduce their weapon arsenals, we could have peace. But if we look deeply into the weapons, we see our own minds- our own prejudices, fears and ignorance. Even if we transport all the bombs to the moon, the roots of war and the roots of bombs are still there, in our hearts and minds, and sooner or later we will make new bombs. To work for peace is to uproot war from ourselves and from the hearts of men and women. To prepare for war, to give millions of men and women the opportunity to practice killing day and night in their hearts, is to plant millions of seeds of violence, anger, frustration, and fear that will be passed on for generations to come." Thich Nhat Hanh from Living Buddha, Living Christ
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    >I think this is a dangerous idea, that humans are just violent and abusive by nature and it's impossible to change. All evidence points to this being the case. We have many millennia of history showing it to be true, over and over. >It's something that is learned and taught and passed down, like anything else, which means it can be changed. How and what to eat is also something that is learned and taught and passed down, but it's not something that can be changed without radically changing human physiology. >and sooner or later we will make new bombs. Of course, because if you don't, someone else will. Just look at Russia and North Korea. >To work for peace is to uproot war from ourselves and from the hearts of men and women. Good luck with that. As long as people enjoy dominating and exploiting others, it can't change.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >History is full of accounts of what happens We don't even need to look back, Ukraine can tell us all about that today.
Iulioh 2y ago
>anyone who is content to sign away their personal autonomy to a violent organization Honestly non-physical violence is sometimes overlooked. Economic decisions cause way more violence is mpre subtle ways. A new policy in banking or from insurance companies can lead to more deaths than a what an entire branch of the military. Hell, i think high decisions from Google can cause deaths in prioritizing certain arguments over others. So i don't think that just begin a part of the system makes you bad, making the decisions does.
- dTal 2y ago
  Right, we all have a responsibility to act ethically in all parts of our lives. Refuse to work for organizations that do unethical things; if you are in an organization, refuse to do unethical things even if it gets you fired. Do not facilitate the doing of unethical things in any way. The difference with the military is you can be put in prison for behaving this way.
  - Iulioh 2y ago
    From the other side of the argument >>Refuse to work for organizations that do unethical things Is a easy way to ensure that said organizzation won't ever change.
    - dTal 2y ago
      Not at all. If enough people refuse to compromise their principles, the labor supply will shrink for that org, and therefore their hiring costs will increase, leaving them fewer resources to achieve their unethical deeds. "I'll change it from the inside" is a lie people tell themselves, but in reality they get steamrollered by the internal processes. If you don't have a backbone at hiring time, why would you grow one down the line when you're already dependent on them for your livelihood? No - do your part and refuse to play.

by dTal 2y ago

shiroiushi 2y ago

>Insofar that it's true that "a strong military is a requirement for a free society", it's because people like that exist. Yes, but there's no way to change that; it's human nature. Without a military, other countries with strong militaries will happily impose themselves on you: Nazi Germany, Russia/SU, etc. History is full of accounts of what happens when people don't have enough military power to resist invasion by a country of evildoers with their own powerful military. Similarly, police frequently suck, but the alternative is even worse. There's no shortage of people who would be happy to ignore laws and prey on others if they didn't have to worry about police enforcement.

boffinAudio 2y ago
[flagged]
mtalantikite 2y ago
> Yes, but there's no way to change that; it's human nature. I think this is a dangerous idea, that humans are just violent and abusive by nature and it's impossible to change. It's something that is learned and taught and passed down, like anything else, which means it can be changed. I'll just quote Thay because he does it so well: "We often think of peace as the absence of war, that if powerful countries would reduce their weapon arsenals, we could have peace. But if we look deeply into the weapons, we see our own minds- our own prejudices, fears and ignorance. Even if we transport all the bombs to the moon, the roots of war and the roots of bombs are still there, in our hearts and minds, and sooner or later we will make new bombs. To work for peace is to uproot war from ourselves and from the hearts of men and women. To prepare for war, to give millions of men and women the opportunity to practice killing day and night in their hearts, is to plant millions of seeds of violence, anger, frustration, and fear that will be passed on for generations to come." Thich Nhat Hanh from Living Buddha, Living Christ
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  >I think this is a dangerous idea, that humans are just violent and abusive by nature and it's impossible to change. All evidence points to this being the case. We have many millennia of history showing it to be true, over and over. >It's something that is learned and taught and passed down, like anything else, which means it can be changed. How and what to eat is also something that is learned and taught and passed down, but it's not something that can be changed without radically changing human physiology. >and sooner or later we will make new bombs. Of course, because if you don't, someone else will. Just look at Russia and North Korea. >To work for peace is to uproot war from ourselves and from the hearts of men and women. Good luck with that. As long as people enjoy dominating and exploiting others, it can't change.
Dalewyn 2y ago
>History is full of accounts of what happens We don't even need to look back, Ukraine can tell us all about that today.

Iulioh 2y ago

>anyone who is content to sign away their personal autonomy to a violent organization Honestly non-physical violence is sometimes overlooked. Economic decisions cause way more violence is mpre subtle ways. A new policy in banking or from insurance companies can lead to more deaths than a what an entire branch of the military. Hell, i think high decisions from Google can cause deaths in prioritizing certain arguments over others. So i don't think that just begin a part of the system makes you bad, making the decisions does.

dTal 2y ago
Right, we all have a responsibility to act ethically in all parts of our lives. Refuse to work for organizations that do unethical things; if you are in an organization, refuse to do unethical things even if it gets you fired. Do not facilitate the doing of unethical things in any way. The difference with the military is you can be put in prison for behaving this way.
- Iulioh 2y ago
  From the other side of the argument >>Refuse to work for organizations that do unethical things Is a easy way to ensure that said organizzation won't ever change.
  - dTal 2y ago
    Not at all. If enough people refuse to compromise their principles, the labor supply will shrink for that org, and therefore their hiring costs will increase, leaving them fewer resources to achieve their unethical deeds. "I'll change it from the inside" is a lie people tell themselves, but in reality they get steamrollered by the internal processes. If you don't have a backbone at hiring time, why would you grow one down the line when you're already dependent on them for your livelihood? No - do your part and refuse to play.