4 ms·

I think this is an easy position to state but difficult to hold and defend. Norms and traditions are important just look at America right now when the president

by xphos 1y ago

I think this is an easy position to state but difficult to hold and defend. Norms and traditions are important just look at America right now when the president decided the norms established by a bunch of dumb dead people don't matter. I think the position is easy to state because a lot of people of the past did horrible things in the context of the present. But they also at many different generations opposed horrible things when no one else did. What Thomas Jefferson said for example in the declaration of independence all Man are created equal mattered for the emancipation in 1865 and also mattered to woman 1920. The words of dead people shape a tremendous amount of law and norms that make the world better. The importantance incrementalism cannot be overstated nor can the infuration at that said incrementalism can be overstated, in the past and now. To say we don't care because we can't see the relevance is observational error. I'd be curious of your country of origin because I guarentee you have legacy members of culture that matter politically speaking. But there are also examples of mathematicians long dead that have had lasting effect on things we still teach today. They are founders of a different field of sorts.

tavavex 1y ago
> just look at America right now when the president decided the norms established by a bunch of dumb dead people don't matter. The current administration isn't taking the US in some completely random direction, they very knowingly exploit the unquestioning reverence for old-time America to their advantage. Thanks to originalism, the US has its best shot at going back in time by being able to shake the foundations of modern laws. The conservatives' best chance at snapping away some of the civic rights that were granted in the 20th century isn't actual policy proposals, its reinterpretations of old laws and rulings. The US has never been as concerned with what dead people wanted as it is now, because dead people can't speak for themselves, and the US admin will exploit it by putting words in their mouths through reinterpretations of old writings. It's the strongest argument, because it lets them get away with not arguing anything important, but rather rely on the near-religious love for all things "old America" and then justify that this is what the people would have wanted, this is true freedom as they envisioned it. They aren't moving away from their legacy, they're weaponizing it with full knowledge of just how unshakable the civil religion is. While all countries have their beloved figures, I can't think of any place quite like the US where so much air is wasted arguing not on the merits of things, but what someone thinks these dead people would've thought about in the past. Being able to tie your proposal to the founders in some way is a very strong argument for you, regardless of anything else. There is a difference between revering the mathematicians that discovered fundamental truths that we're building on to this day or writers who have laid the groundwork for modern culture, and thinking that (undoubtedly influential and intelligent) politicians from over two centuries back have had godlike foresight to set the one true course for all of society forever, and that questioning or altering any of their decisions is completely unacceptable.
ViscountPenguin 1y ago
I actually agree that Norms and Traditions are important, but I don't think they have a functional link to the beliefs of historical figures. Norms are better understood, I think, in the same vein as oral tradition; passed down directly from one generation to the next, slowly changing over time. On the other hand, I'm not particularly invested in the personal moral evil or good of people in the past. When I see similar opinions to mine expressed by Americans, they often give an argument of that ilk, but it seems to me to be rooted in the same belief that these long dead people should somehow have a say in the present. The fundamental reason their opinion is irrelevant isn't because they're evil (a subject which I haven't studied, and won't present an opinion on either way), but because they've been dead for a couple hundred years. I'm Australian, and while like all countries we have important historical figures, the culture surrounding them isn't at all like what I observe from the United States. While, for example, you'd be hard pressed to find someone arguing that Edmund Barton wasn't an important figure, I don't think anyone in the modern day really gives a shit what they thought. The most mythologized figures in Aussie history would probably be: Captain Cook, Curtin, and Whitlam; but I don't think anyone views them in a similar vein. I suspect the reason we don't have similar figures might come down to our lack of a civil war. We separated peacefully from the UK, and didn't really come out with any heroes to mythologize.

by xphos 1y ago

tavavex 1y ago

> just look at America right now when the president decided the norms established by a bunch of dumb dead people don't matter. The current administration isn't taking the US in some completely random direction, they very knowingly exploit the unquestioning reverence for old-time America to their advantage. Thanks to originalism, the US has its best shot at going back in time by being able to shake the foundations of modern laws. The conservatives' best chance at snapping away some of the civic rights that were granted in the 20th century isn't actual policy proposals, its reinterpretations of old laws and rulings. The US has never been as concerned with what dead people wanted as it is now, because dead people can't speak for themselves, and the US admin will exploit it by putting words in their mouths through reinterpretations of old writings. It's the strongest argument, because it lets them get away with not arguing anything important, but rather rely on the near-religious love for all things "old America" and then justify that this is what the people would have wanted, this is true freedom as they envisioned it. They aren't moving away from their legacy, they're weaponizing it with full knowledge of just how unshakable the civil religion is. While all countries have their beloved figures, I can't think of any place quite like the US where so much air is wasted arguing not on the merits of things, but what someone thinks these dead people would've thought about in the past. Being able to tie your proposal to the founders in some way is a very strong argument for you, regardless of anything else. There is a difference between revering the mathematicians that discovered fundamental truths that we're building on to this day or writers who have laid the groundwork for modern culture, and thinking that (undoubtedly influential and intelligent) politicians from over two centuries back have had godlike foresight to set the one true course for all of society forever, and that questioning or altering any of their decisions is completely unacceptable.

ViscountPenguin 1y ago

I actually agree that Norms and Traditions are important, but I don't think they have a functional link to the beliefs of historical figures. Norms are better understood, I think, in the same vein as oral tradition; passed down directly from one generation to the next, slowly changing over time. On the other hand, I'm not particularly invested in the personal moral evil or good of people in the past. When I see similar opinions to mine expressed by Americans, they often give an argument of that ilk, but it seems to me to be rooted in the same belief that these long dead people should somehow have a say in the present. The fundamental reason their opinion is irrelevant isn't because they're evil (a subject which I haven't studied, and won't present an opinion on either way), but because they've been dead for a couple hundred years. I'm Australian, and while like all countries we have important historical figures, the culture surrounding them isn't at all like what I observe from the United States. While, for example, you'd be hard pressed to find someone arguing that Edmund Barton wasn't an important figure, I don't think anyone in the modern day really gives a shit what they thought. The most mythologized figures in Aussie history would probably be: Captain Cook, Curtin, and Whitlam; but I don't think anyone views them in a similar vein. I suspect the reason we don't have similar figures might come down to our lack of a civil war. We separated peacefully from the UK, and didn't really come out with any heroes to mythologize.