4 ms·

Precisely why China needs to be a whole lot less important to the world. Freedom and personal liberty actually are ideologies. They don’t encompass every ideolo

Precisely why China needs to be a whole lot less important to the world. Freedom and personal liberty actually are ideologies. They don’t encompass every ideology that doesn’t make sense at all. I’d say CCP and many other governments like Russia and Ukraine are FAR more corrupt than the US. Your argument really doesn’t make sense.

A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
Dude the US is insanely corrupt, it's just that a lot of the corruption is called "lobbying" and "consulting." Sometimes also certain forms of "legal counsel." It's whitewashed and normalized.
- dullcrisp 2y ago
  I’ll admit to having engaged in some of those activities if pressed.
  - MeetingsBrowser 2y ago
    Seems like you just did, unprompted.
    - dullcrisp 2y ago
      You got me!
  - A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
    Oh, I didn't even mention the dinners: > https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/trump-reportedly-suspends-nvidia-h20-export-ban-plan-after-usd1-million-dinner-with-jensen-huang https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell... Or the "speaking fees," the insider trading, etc. I could go on all day. You think that sort of thing isn't corruption? The US has elevated official corruption into high art.
    - dullcrisp 2y ago
      I think Trump hosting million dollar dinners deserves to be called out more than the concept of consulting, which I’m sure is used for both good and nefarious purposes. If you’re referring to actual instances of former politicians being paid exorbitant consulting fees by corporations that they helped regulate, though, I’d be interested in better understanding what’s going on there too.
      - A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
        If you're in the business of selling to the government, you might find that it's impossible to make anything happen unless you hire "the right consultants." (Usually small firms that have hired ex-regulators or insiders.) That's what I meant. Not that generic firms like McKinsey are angels, though!
walleeee 2y ago
> Freedom and personal liberty actually are ideologies. Feyerabend in particular would likely differ, and say instead that freedom and liberty are what emerge when mature adults democratically order their societies, irrespective (or in spite) of any ideologies used to bind them
- analog31 2y ago
  I'd love to know the reference for that. I've read a couple of Feyerabend's books, but it was years ago, and I gave them away, but would not mind taking another look.
  - walleeee 2y ago
    he says something like this in Science in a Free Society, I'll see if I can find it.
    - walleeee 2y ago
      Some bits and pieces from part 2.1 ("Two questions") > [i]n a free society there is room for many strange beliefs, doctrines, institutions. > There is nothing in science or in any other ideology that makes them inherently liberating. Ideologies can deteriorate and become dogmatic religions. They start deteriorating when they become successful... their triumph is their downfall. > A democracy is an assembly of mature people and not a collection of sheep guided by a small clique of know-it-alls. > The reasons were explained by Mill in his immortal essay On Liberty. It is not possible to improve upon his arguments.
- egberts1 2y ago
  Yes Paul Feyerabend, a philosopher of science, argued that true freedom and liberty arise when individuals actively and democratically shape their societies, free from the dominance of any single ideology, including science. He contended that science, often regarded as the ultimate path to knowledge, is merely one of many traditions and should not hold a privileged position in society. Feyerabend advocated for a “democratic relativism,” emphasizing equal rights for all traditions and proposing a separation between the state and any specific ideology, akin to the separation of church and state. He believed that this approach would allow individuals to live according to their own values and beliefs, fostering a more inclusive and liberated society. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00201748008601890 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0020174800860189... Feyerabend, P. (1980). Democracy, Elitism, and Scientific Method. Inquiry, 23(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00201748008601890 https://doi.org/10.1080/00201748008601890

A_D_E_P_T 2y ago

Dude the US is insanely corrupt, it's just that a lot of the corruption is called "lobbying" and "consulting." Sometimes also certain forms of "legal counsel." It's whitewashed and normalized.

dullcrisp 2y ago
I’ll admit to having engaged in some of those activities if pressed.
- MeetingsBrowser 2y ago
  Seems like you just did, unprompted.
  - dullcrisp 2y ago
    You got me!
- A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
  Oh, I didn't even mention the dinners: > https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/trump-reportedly-suspends-nvidia-h20-export-ban-plan-after-usd1-million-dinner-with-jensen-huang https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell... Or the "speaking fees," the insider trading, etc. I could go on all day. You think that sort of thing isn't corruption? The US has elevated official corruption into high art.
  - dullcrisp 2y ago
    I think Trump hosting million dollar dinners deserves to be called out more than the concept of consulting, which I’m sure is used for both good and nefarious purposes. If you’re referring to actual instances of former politicians being paid exorbitant consulting fees by corporations that they helped regulate, though, I’d be interested in better understanding what’s going on there too.
    - A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
      If you're in the business of selling to the government, you might find that it's impossible to make anything happen unless you hire "the right consultants." (Usually small firms that have hired ex-regulators or insiders.) That's what I meant. Not that generic firms like McKinsey are angels, though!

walleeee 2y ago

> Freedom and personal liberty actually are ideologies. Feyerabend in particular would likely differ, and say instead that freedom and liberty are what emerge when mature adults democratically order their societies, irrespective (or in spite) of any ideologies used to bind them

analog31 2y ago
I'd love to know the reference for that. I've read a couple of Feyerabend's books, but it was years ago, and I gave them away, but would not mind taking another look.
- walleeee 2y ago
  he says something like this in Science in a Free Society, I'll see if I can find it.
  - walleeee 2y ago
    Some bits and pieces from part 2.1 ("Two questions") > [i]n a free society there is room for many strange beliefs, doctrines, institutions. > There is nothing in science or in any other ideology that makes them inherently liberating. Ideologies can deteriorate and become dogmatic religions. They start deteriorating when they become successful... their triumph is their downfall. > A democracy is an assembly of mature people and not a collection of sheep guided by a small clique of know-it-alls. > The reasons were explained by Mill in his immortal essay On Liberty. It is not possible to improve upon his arguments.
egberts1 2y ago
Yes Paul Feyerabend, a philosopher of science, argued that true freedom and liberty arise when individuals actively and democratically shape their societies, free from the dominance of any single ideology, including science. He contended that science, often regarded as the ultimate path to knowledge, is merely one of many traditions and should not hold a privileged position in society. Feyerabend advocated for a “democratic relativism,” emphasizing equal rights for all traditions and proposing a separation between the state and any specific ideology, akin to the separation of church and state. He believed that this approach would allow individuals to live according to their own values and beliefs, fostering a more inclusive and liberated society. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00201748008601890 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0020174800860189... Feyerabend, P. (1980). Democracy, Elitism, and Scientific Method. Inquiry, 23(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00201748008601890 https://doi.org/10.1080/00201748008601890