5 ms·

> I sometimes wonder if we could design a better system today [...] optimizing for values we have today like freedom, balance of power and equality of opportuni

by Terr_ 1y ago

> I sometimes wonder if we could design a better system today [...] optimizing for values we have today like freedom, balance of power and equality of opportunity. I think it's important to point out that some people... don't seem to share the same ground-assumptions, and it's forming a rather sharp divide in modern US politics. There's a model for analyzing "how could you think that" disagreements which I've found useful, from a (leftist) video essay: > See, when you talk to our conservative friend, you operate as though you have the same base assumptions [...] > Since we live with both of these frameworks [democratic egalitarianism, capitalist competitive sorting] in our minds, and most of the things we do in our day-to-day lives can be justified by either one, we don't often notice the contradiction between them, and it's easy to imagine whichever one tends to be our default is everyone else's default as well. [...] > Your conservative friend thinks you're naive for thinking the system even can be changed, and his is the charitable interpretation [...] Many conservatives assume liberals [...] know The Hierarchy is eternal, that there will always be people at the top and people at the bottom, so any claim towards making things equal must be a Trojan-horse for something that benefits them. [...] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agzNANfNlTs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agzNANfNlTs

throawaywpg 1y ago
There used to be a name for this. "Everyone is different." How people have forgotten this basic fact is beyond me.
bongodongobob 1y ago
Our current regime lies through their teeth daily. Like obvious, completely made up lies. Every. Day. It's not a misunderstanding. One side is pushing for authoritarianism, one is not. One can be negotiated with by voting, the other, violence. I'm so fuckin tired of pretending there is just some kind of misunderstanding between both "sides".
- idle_zealot 1y ago
  No, the video makes the point that it's not really a misunderstanding, there are fundamentally different values in tension. If you believe in and value hierarchy then authoritarianism is natural and desirable, the lies are just for assuaging your less committed or more sensitive allies and befuddling your enemies.
  - vintermann 1y ago
    But people do not value hierarchy for its own sake. They value hierarchy when they're on top of it, or at least in the top half. There are not actually fundamentally different values, but different interests.
    - Terr_ 1y ago
      It's a mistake to assume that it's just about advantage or greed. People even relatively far down may believe The Hierarchy offers predictability and stability—even if I think their belief is incorrect. Authoritarians tend to be fearful, and it offers a partial answer to those fears.
- DeathArrow 1y ago
  >One can be negotiated with by voting, the other, violence. Violence like shooting political opponents for voicing their opinions?
  - immibis 1y ago
    Proof by counterexample: I think it would have been a good decision to shoot Adolf Hitler for his opinions, don't you?
    - esafak 1y ago
      Simpler example: WWII happened, causing more than Hitler to be killed. Wars are political acts.
      - immibis 1y ago
        Sure would have been good if someone had killed Hitler before he started the war.
        esafak 1y ago
        I would have made a donation to his art school in return for admitting him and keeping him busy.
cjfd 1y ago
This analysis is highly muddled. "making things equal" != democracy. Capitalism can both create and break hierarchies. The concepts of democracy and capitalism have a far greater reach than the current US political climate where both are malfunctioning. The US is a superpower attempting to become a third world country and corruption and incompetence are a great way to reach that goal.
- TFYS 1y ago
  There's no other way to have a true democracy than to make things as equal as possible. As soon as you allow any level of inequality to exist, the power differentials caused by it will be used to increase the power differential and inequality even more, and over a long period of time you'll end up with a dictatorship. Once you have extreme concentration of power, it's only a matter of time until someone that should not have it comes to have it. This is what every system so far has succumbed to. We need a truly equal system where all concentration of power is avoided unless absolutely necessary for the functioning of society to avoid an eventual collapse of the system.
  - cjfd 1y ago
    This is nonsense. Most/all democracies have laws that only certified doctors can practice medicine. This makes doctors unequal from other people. Is this incompatible with democracy?
    - TFYS 1y ago
      Depends on what the doctor can do with that inequality. If it means the doctor gets paid 20 times more than others then yes that is incompatible with democracy, as over time that wealth difference will be used to increase the inequality. But if the power is limited to only decisions about health, which is necessary for healthcare to function, then it should be acceptable. You'd still have to make sure that even that level of power is not used to gain more power, though.
      - cjfd 1y ago
neilv 1y ago
> > that there will always be people at the top and people at the bottom, so any claim towards making things equal must be a Trojan-horse for something that benefits them. They're right... when the other is someone like them. And they have a blind spot for an other who is not like them. Meanwhile, what is the blind spot of the people who are not like that (i.e., who believe in equality)? Is their blind spot that they can't imagine so many people who are trying to gain advantage, and being deceitful about it?
DeathArrow 1y ago
>that there will always be people at the top and people at the bottom, so any claim towards making things equal must be a Trojan-horse for something that benefits them That's true even in the most leftist and forcefully egalitarian regimes like communism. There are a few taking the ultimate decisions and there are some that benefit.

by Terr_ 1y ago

throawaywpg 1y ago

There used to be a name for this. "Everyone is different." How people have forgotten this basic fact is beyond me.

bongodongobob 1y ago

Our current regime lies through their teeth daily. Like obvious, completely made up lies. Every. Day. It's not a misunderstanding. One side is pushing for authoritarianism, one is not. One can be negotiated with by voting, the other, violence. I'm so fuckin tired of pretending there is just some kind of misunderstanding between both "sides".

idle_zealot 1y ago
No, the video makes the point that it's not really a misunderstanding, there are fundamentally different values in tension. If you believe in and value hierarchy then authoritarianism is natural and desirable, the lies are just for assuaging your less committed or more sensitive allies and befuddling your enemies.
- vintermann 1y ago
  But people do not value hierarchy for its own sake. They value hierarchy when they're on top of it, or at least in the top half. There are not actually fundamentally different values, but different interests.
  - Terr_ 1y ago
    It's a mistake to assume that it's just about advantage or greed. People even relatively far down may believe The Hierarchy offers predictability and stability—even if I think their belief is incorrect. Authoritarians tend to be fearful, and it offers a partial answer to those fears.
DeathArrow 1y ago
>One can be negotiated with by voting, the other, violence. Violence like shooting political opponents for voicing their opinions?
- immibis 1y ago
  Proof by counterexample: I think it would have been a good decision to shoot Adolf Hitler for his opinions, don't you?
  - esafak 1y ago
    Simpler example: WWII happened, causing more than Hitler to be killed. Wars are political acts.
    - immibis 1y ago
      Sure would have been good if someone had killed Hitler before he started the war.
      - esafak 1y ago
        I would have made a donation to his art school in return for admitting him and keeping him busy.

cjfd 1y ago

This analysis is highly muddled. "making things equal" != democracy. Capitalism can both create and break hierarchies. The concepts of democracy and capitalism have a far greater reach than the current US political climate where both are malfunctioning. The US is a superpower attempting to become a third world country and corruption and incompetence are a great way to reach that goal.

TFYS 1y ago
There's no other way to have a true democracy than to make things as equal as possible. As soon as you allow any level of inequality to exist, the power differentials caused by it will be used to increase the power differential and inequality even more, and over a long period of time you'll end up with a dictatorship. Once you have extreme concentration of power, it's only a matter of time until someone that should not have it comes to have it. This is what every system so far has succumbed to. We need a truly equal system where all concentration of power is avoided unless absolutely necessary for the functioning of society to avoid an eventual collapse of the system.
- cjfd 1y ago
  This is nonsense. Most/all democracies have laws that only certified doctors can practice medicine. This makes doctors unequal from other people. Is this incompatible with democracy?
  - TFYS 1y ago
    Depends on what the doctor can do with that inequality. If it means the doctor gets paid 20 times more than others then yes that is incompatible with democracy, as over time that wealth difference will be used to increase the inequality. But if the power is limited to only decisions about health, which is necessary for healthcare to function, then it should be acceptable. You'd still have to make sure that even that level of power is not used to gain more power, though.
    - cjfd 1y ago

neilv 1y ago

> > that there will always be people at the top and people at the bottom, so any claim towards making things equal must be a Trojan-horse for something that benefits them. They're right... when the other is someone like them. And they have a blind spot for an other who is not like them. Meanwhile, what is the blind spot of the people who are not like that (i.e., who believe in equality)? Is their blind spot that they can't imagine so many people who are trying to gain advantage, and being deceitful about it?

DeathArrow 1y ago

>that there will always be people at the top and people at the bottom, so any claim towards making things equal must be a Trojan-horse for something that benefits them That's true even in the most leftist and forcefully egalitarian regimes like communism. There are a few taking the ultimate decisions and there are some that benefit.