Forum Post: Democracy = Mediocrity
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 10, 2011, 4:01 a.m. EST by nichole
(525)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Substantive posts become buried underneath meaningless chatter.
Re. "Democracy = Mediocrity", do you say that merely within the context of the posts & threads on this forum or is your's a general statement about 'Democracy' ?
Please be sure that the demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy which prevails in The U$A, with its faux choice between Demoblican & Republocrat & its notions of 'Corporate Personhood', are NOT your Only Terms of Reference.
ad iudicium ...
Please share with others what you just shared with me -- you get it!!!
If you are taken in by Ann Ryand, Ann Coulter, etc., you might want to follow this staged post.
Prized reptiles!!!
@ 'n' : Emphatic Ditto ... ;-)
If we can't agree regarding even the belief in democracy itself, then we will truely be so hopelessly divided that this movement will become a laughingstock. No one hay yet found a better system than democracy, despite its lamentable tendency to promote mediocity. We must try to stay on focus.
I was thinking that it is easy to become discouraged in the beginning since it has been so long since we have even attempted democracy. I'm hopeful that after this rotten period of awkwardness we may be able to lift ourselves, rather than sink .. which is what I am most fearful for. I do believe that we can raise ourselves.
I do believe you are right! I'm not discouraged, but I think there are a lot of people (mostly trolls) who are constantly putting forward these false dicotomys, like we can't form alliances with Democrats. Politics is all about formig alliances. We have to march, we have to occupy, and we have to vote. We must not get sidetracked from whatever we can do to deal with issues like corruption, environmental destuction, social inequality etc., before we run out of time. It's the goals that matter, not getting distracted by infighting. The Democrats are a huge group. Many will not forward our goals, many will not. Do we through those Democrats (such as Al Frankin to name one) out, by attacking Democrats as a whole? I find that sadly counter-productive.
When all are invited to the table, mediocracy, and even idiocy, must be weeded out before serious discussion can begin. This problem has been faced by all Occupy factions. It is one of the pitfalls of direct democracy. A world without editors where all voices can be equally heard. Trolls and scholars are thrown in the same room. Hopefully, a solution can be found to remedy the problem.
democratic-technocracy > direct democracy the value of a pianist in a surgical theater or a surgeon in as lead piano highlights how the right people need to be in the right places
This very problem was discussed in great detail 2,500 years ago in Plato's Republic. You might remember me as part of the cast ;-)
more specifically in canada no minister should be able to be appointed unless they possess some background in their respective silo. For instance BC had a minster of advance education who had never finished a post secondary degree (a career politician). Health ministers should be health professionals. An outsider would not know the trends in the field, would not be up-to-date on the literature, not have working contacts with experts nor would they have the knowledge to see if what they are implementing is workign
Indeed. Intelligent people with experience are more likely to make good decisions than people with less education and experience. All politicians should have PH.D's, or recognized to have equivalent critical thinking.
we are the squandered dream of the great minds of antiquity! A PhD level theoretical knowledge in any field is available through any computer with an internet connection yet for guys sport stats replaces real stats and cosmo serves as the sole reading for many a girl. Nothing can be done because in matters of mind there can be no compulsion
Interesting post, especially in The Light of this link : http://www.cosmolearning.com/ ! ... ~{;-)
And then, many who wish to climb out of the dark cavern of ignorance get caught up in conspiracy theories and new age feel good potions, often never to untangle themselves from these nets which snare the brain. Knowledge can be found on the Internet or in a library, no one needs to go to school for that. But many need the guidance to know what to and what not to feed their minds. This is where a good university professor or a good editor can help.
i would argue that new age beliefs as with conspiracy theories are two sides of the same coin-- its a human proclivity to wish to explain. Unless armed with reason or at least a desire to never reject a truth nor accept as truth a false you can fall victim to Alex Jone's tricks. To me Illuminati (or Freemasons and so on) are a modern manifestation of the human need to define and personify evil. As opposed to cloven hoof and pits of sulfur we get shadowy conferences with pervasive present, cunning and powerful people whose aim is to remove us of our liberty and privacy (these two being essentially the contemporary soul of modern man). New Agers exactly the same phenomena by taking science (the 21st century medium of miracles) and introducing mysticism to broaden explanatory scope it provides the same crutch mainstream religion does minus the historical value. Universities should offer all courses as challenges very inexpensively to address the issue that individuals may possess the knowledge but lack the all important accreditation
Passing off an idea as scientific when it is not should be illegal, or at least be forced to be accompanied by a critical warning. Shows like Monster Quest should be followed by Monster Quest Debunked. Just like warnings on cigarette packs.
Religions, conspiracy theories, and new age ideas are more dangerous for the mind than drugs. They all pull you in with a feel good promise.
The conspiracy theorist feels that he has uncovered something very special that nobody else knows. Like a man who finds a golden nugget lost in the mud. That is the only driving force, he does not care how that nugget was found, or what that nugget is, only that he holds the special knowledge of its existence. Once a reject from society, he suddenly feels special, almost god like. He's in the know.
I've been witnessing the pitfalls inherent in self-learning. Angry kids reading Marx, an older man holding onto Marx, Mao, even Stalin in the same way as a Christian Zealot. All this learning done in isolation is worse than learning never been done.
the more objective the field gets the more insulated you become from extremism. The notion of a fundamentalist chemist or mathematician is absurd The exception you take is not to the content of study but the confidence in their assumed rigor of study. If someone is incorrigible then there is nothing to be done for them whether they choose to peruse Marx or Maxim
Agreed. The problem is they acquire knowledge, but are missing a very important ingredient; critical thought. Whenever you finish reading a thinker's work, your first instinct should be to read his critics. No system or ideal is perfect.
As an example, every Occupy supporter should be encouraged to read all of David Graeber's works and also all his critics. Then they should be encouraged to hold open discussions about the issues raised in those works.
My biggest peeve with Occupy is that the movement is not transparent as to its origins or intents. This website should have links to various works from David Graeber and other anarchists, and links to their critics. However, it doesn't even mention the word anarchy.
How can we make a better world for everyone where transparency and the elimination of corruption are one of the main goals with a movement that is not explicitly clear about its intents?
No one to check their lunatic tendencies.
And, everyone is a lunatic to some degree.
Myself included, checks are welcome (especially those that can be cashed).