Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Unknown Target on April 11, 2011, 08:36:51 pm
-
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/04/20114118540870935.html
Very interesting read.
From the article:
"In Tunisia and Egypt the ruling systems were bigger than the rulers themselves. Their survival and interests were not completely tied to the leaders who became the symbols against which the people's anger was directed.
And so, at a certain point, Ben Ali and Mubarak could be sacrificed in order to preserve the system, or more precisely the power and wealth of elites whom it was constructed to benefit.
Publicly this was seen as a triumph of democratic protest, but particularly in Egypt, the reality of the system's continuity becomes clearer each day."
In other news, an Egyptian blogger got 3 years in prison for criticisng the army;
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110411/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt
-
Yeah, it was a bit unrealistic to expect a (relatively) bloodless change of hands when you really think about it.
-
I think the point of the article is to say that it's not pointless to think that, it's just that we're at a crossroads right now with the direction the movements will take.
-
Egyptian protesters were just useful idiots...
-
...for...?
-
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on... the Pharaoh changes, the pyramids stay.
-
Such a passionate response from this board when the revolutions started, but such a whimper when the effort is really needed.
-
Yeah bro, we're going to effect some major change in Egypt with our goodpoasts
-
Such a passionate response from this board when the revolutions started, but such a whimper when the effort is really needed.
Do I support political reform in Egypt? Most certainly. Can I -REALLY- do anything about it? Nothing more than talk, which is practically worthless.
-
Such a passionate response from this board when the revolutions started, but such a whimper when the effort is really needed.
Do I support political reform in Egypt? Most certainly. Can I -REALLY- do anything about it? Nothing more than talk, which is practically worthless.
Talking about it, proposing solutions,trying to come up with ways to help, ways to make sure that this doesn't repeat itself in Egypt or in other countries, etc - all these things fall under the purview of "talk".
-
And are all equally useless.
-
So you define talking to others and trying to figure out a way where we can fix things...that's useless?
So then what do you define as useful talk, Scotty?
-
Such a passionate response from this board when the revolutions started, but such a whimper when the effort is really needed.
Do I support political reform in Egypt? Most certainly. Can I -REALLY- do anything about it? Nothing more than talk, which is practically worthless.
Talking about it, proposing solutions,trying to come up with ways to help, ways to make sure that this doesn't repeat itself in Egypt or in other countries, etc - all these things fall under the purview of "talk".
Except that the only solutions that are going to matter are the ones the elites of the world are willing to back. What can us ordinary folk do? Beyond volunteering to go fight for the rebels there is exactly nothing we can do. After all, America has been helping to bankroll the army that crushed the protesters for a number of years now.
-
So then you discuss how to tackle the problems within America. How to organize, how to make the "elites" listen to you.
-
So then you discuss how to tackle the problems within America. How to organize, how to make the "elites" listen to you.
Get rich, give donations?
-
The problem is that
1. popular protest hasnt worked,
2. armed insurrection is morally out of the question though chances are if you manage to hold a good part of the country for a few weeks the international community will bomb the daylights out of government forces for you.
3. removed to prevent flame/troll
so what do you do?
-
so what do you do?
If I had the answer, do you think I'd be asking you guys to talk about it and try to come up with one? I would have already started doing it by now.
I ask for debate because I am of the mindset that anybody here could come up with a good idea, or at the very least the discussion would help me come up with one.
Currently, I'm involved in trying to get a goal/results orientated group together on another website to try and change things at home in the US. My immediate hope is that some level of sanity can be restored to the society in the US, and from there the country can begin to help and repay other countries abroad. I'm currently trying to figure out how to get a project going that I think will solve a lot of problems, and it starts with returning our debt to Japan in the form of assistance.
That's what I'm doing.
-
So then you discuss how to tackle the problems within America. How to organize, how to make the "elites" listen to you.
Get rich, give donations?
Get guns, throw molotovs.
Or just acknowledge that your first step isn't getting at the elites, it's the average middle American Tea Partyer who is adamantly opposed to voting in their economic self interest. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but that's a discussion for another thread.
Interestingly, it was the US that played a large role in funding the uprising in Egypt (http://www.newstimeafrica.com/archives/15699) before it abruptly turned around and cut off this support (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3877893,00.html). Now it seems like the US has given up on Mubarak but it is looking for a managed transition in Egypt on its own terms. Egyptians have been promised an election within the next six months, but people in the opposition are saying this is not nearly enough time to establish strong opposing parties and adequate democratic institutions. It seems to me like Egypt is headed the way of Russia after 1991, with heavy foreign support combined with clever political maneuvering and government media control to ensure the survival of the regime. The IMF and, indirectly, the United States eventually lost what control it had over Russia once they were able to pay off their debts, but they did succeed in influencing policy during the 90s and preserving the Yelstin regime from populism.
-
The Who - Won't Get Fooled Again (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgojY1Q)
Oh, sorry I thought this was the what are you listening to thread.
-
Donate RPG stockpiles get tax deductible.
-
How about setting up collectives in more developed countries to send food and supplies to the protesters camping out in Tahrir Square?
-
The elite don't give a **** about you. They don't give a **** about you. They don't give a **** about you. Or me. Or anyone but maybe their families and buddies. Nothing will ever be achieved by trying to convince the political and corporate elite to act in the interest of human society. They don't give a **** about society. They got theirs so **** you.
The real problem at the root of all our societal woes is human greed and selfishness, and those won't go away any time soon. To really solve all this ****, you'd have to fundamentally restructure society, and you'd have to somehow work it around greed so that greed works to society's advantage somehow.
Hell if I know how to do it though.
-
Radical posthuman engineering!
-
Or put JC Denton/Helios in charge.
-
The elite don't give a **** about you. They don't give a **** about you. They don't give a **** about you. Or me. Or anyone but maybe their families and buddies. Nothing will ever be achieved by trying to convince the political and corporate elite to act in the interest of human society. They don't give a **** about society. They got theirs so **** you.
The real problem at the root of all our societal woes is human greed and selfishness, and those won't go away any time soon. To really solve all this ****, you'd have to fundamentally restructure society, and you'd have to somehow work it around greed so that greed works to society's advantage somehow.
Hell if I know how to do it though.
The writers of the Constitution did that with the three branches of US government; they counted on people's desire for power to keep the branches separate, as any movement of one branch to gain power would encroach upon another's.
As for your first point; that honestly is something that's in all parts of the US society, and frankly it annoys me greatly. I actually had someone flat out say to me "while your idea sounds great, I don't see any gain for me or my family so why should I do it" - of course, not realizing that a gain for all is a gain for them too.
The problem with US politics atm is that everyone's been sectioned off into their own little interest groups so all they care about is them and their own, and they don't see any reason to change. Some people say that it's human nature. I'm not like that, and I know a lot of other people who aren't like that either. Unless you want to start saying you're human and people who care about other people somehow aren't human, then you've got to deal with the fact that it's YOU who's the greedy bastard, and you can't hide behind a limp wristed excuse of "oh it's human nature, we're all greedy".
For the record that "you" isn't directed at you redsniper. :) Just in general, in fact it's more directed to the person I'm referring to, if anyone.
-
I think one error in your reasoning may be that you think something is wrong now as if something's changed from 100 or 200 years ago.
-
The writers of the Constitution did that with the three branches of US government; they counted on people's desire for power to keep the branches separate, as any movement of one branch to gain power would encroach upon another's.
As for your first point; that honestly is something that's in all parts of the US society, and frankly it annoys me greatly. I actually had someone flat out say to me "while your idea sounds great, I don't see any gain for me or my family so why should I do it" - of course, not realizing that a gain for all is a gain for them too.
The problem with US politics atm is that everyone's been sectioned off into their own little interest groups so all they care about is them and their own, and they don't see any reason to change. Some people say that it's human nature. I'm not like that, and I know a lot of other people who aren't like that either. Unless you want to start saying you're human and people who care about other people somehow aren't human, then you've got to deal with the fact that it's YOU who's the greedy bastard, and you can't hide behind a limp wristed excuse of "oh it's human nature, we're all greedy".
For the record that "you" isn't directed at you redsniper. :) Just in general, in fact it's more directed to the person I'm referring to, if anyone.
No, people are all greedy bastards for the most part. That's my point. No matter how many times you overthrow the government or bourgeoisie or whoever, the system that replaces it will end up just as bad, as evidenced in the beginning of this thread.
The other thing is, it's easy to be nice to the people you know, and to the people you interact with day-to-day. Those bastard CEOs and politicians I'm railing on, are probably quite decent people in person, at least some of them. For all I know they could be great spouses and parents BUT I would also say with confidence that most of them wouldn't bat in eye if hundreds of their employees had to be laid off, wouldn't pause for a heartbeat to let thousands of third-worlders die if it could boost their profits by a few fractions of a percent.
Talking, voting, killing can't fix any of that. I figure you have to either harness those bad qualities of people somehow or find a way to drive it home that ALL people are worth treating well, some way to get that feeling of in-person interaction, but with everyone.
-
The other thing is, it's easy to be nice to the people you know, and to the people you interact with day-to-day. Those bastard CEOs and politicians I'm railing on, are probably quite decent people in person, at least some of them. For all I know they could be great spouses and parents BUT I would also say with confidence that most of them wouldn't bat in eye if hundreds of their employees had to be laid off, wouldn't pause for a heartbeat to let thousands of third-worlders die if it could boost their profits by a few fractions of a percent.
Talking, voting, killing can't fix any of that. I figure you have to either harness those bad qualities of people somehow or find a way to drive it home that ALL people are worth treating well, some way to get that feeling of in-person interaction, but with everyone.
:yes:
I read a good article about the problem with Dunbar's Number on Cracked once. It's just so easy for most people to not care about other people's feelings if you don't interact with them personally, which as you say we need to try to change.
-
I've noticed the internet sort of helping with that. Sure it helps lots of people to be complete dicks anonymously, but it also helps show that most people around the world want more or less the same things. I mean right here we have people from all over the place united by a common love of blasting Shivans, you know?
-
Indeed, which can only be a good thing. Of course, there's still a long way to go and you'll always have one or two people who will be not nice to others because they can be anonymous, but yeah. :)
Perhaps I should have put "society" or something instead of "we", since I didn't mean that HLP itself had problems with it.
-
So then what do you define as useful talk, Scotty?
There is none. Action is direct, talk is circular and accomplishes nothing useful. What form the action takes is another question.
-
so talk of the form "go perform this action" to which the other person responds positively, is not useful?
-
Of course not. No action has taken place.
-
Of course not. No action has taken place.
I think you might be a little confused here.
Without words, action would be impossible to coordinate.
-
This thread is turning dumb. You need both talk and actions. You need talk to plan your actions, but then you must actually act on your talk. Talk without action is useless.
-
Talk without action is useless.
This is more what I meant than what I said.
-
My greatest issue at the moment is that I have absolutely no cash. I still haven't been able to find a job to support myself during the summer, and many others I know have the same problem.
I doubt that I'm the only one with this issue. It's kind of a cyclical problem; the people who would be most willing to try radical change can't do it without monetary resources, and half the reason they're willing to try that chance is because they don't have those resources. :\
Personally I don't know what to do about it.
-
My greatest issue at the moment is that I have absolutely no cash. I still haven't been able to find a job to support myself during the summer, and many others I know have the same problem.
I doubt that I'm the only one with this issue. It's kind of a cyclical problem; the people who would be most willing to try radical change can't do it without monetary resources, and half the reason they're willing to try that chance is because they don't have those resources. :\
Personally I don't know what to do about it.
Except that once you get monetary resources you have a vested interest in things as they are, and seek to resist change.
So what can you do? Run.
EDIT: One thing that needs to be pointed out is that the elites also use their control over the media to actively manipulate public opinion towards their ends.
-
My greatest issue at the moment is that I have absolutely no cash. I still haven't been able to find a job to support myself during the summer, and many others I know have the same problem.
I doubt that I'm the only one with this issue. It's kind of a cyclical problem; the people who would be most willing to try radical change can't do it without monetary resources, and half the reason they're willing to try that chance is because they don't have those resources. :\
Personally I don't know what to do about it.
Except that once you get monetary resources you have a vested interest in things as they are, and seek to resist change.
So what can you do? Run.
Only if you want to keep them.
-
Aye. I only want those said monetary resources to work towards not needing those resources anymore. I would much prefer to live with no money than to acquire money and struggle to keep it or grow it for the rest of my life.
What I would love to do is get enough people together to start a self-sustaining community. The idea being that a lot of people (myself included) can't afford to go off and protest for days because they're to worried about losing their job or not being able to feed themselves. A self sustaining community would allow people to do this - it would provide a safety net so that people can actually get out there and start working to make things better.
In terms of protests, I had the idea to set up a protest camp in the middle of a city and keep this sort of sustaining thing going, with the aim of staying there until goal of X is accomplished. Beyond that then I would hope to get a voice to actually say "look at all these good ideas we can do" or at least get some sort of real discourse at the upper levels going, by real experts (not just "experts") who are willing to try new ideas. Look at nuclear power in new ways, in solar power in new ways, in education in new ways. Basically people that are willing to let go of the last 50 years of history and try again.
The world is really stuck in a false Cold War mindset and it's strangling us.
-
Aye. I only want those said monetary resources to work towards not needing those resources anymore. I would much prefer to live with no money than to acquire money and struggle to keep it or grow it for the rest of my life.
So you're in favor of some sort of neo-primitivism?
What I would love to do is get enough people together to start a self-sustaining community. The idea being that a lot of people (myself included) can't afford to go off and protest for days because they're to worried about losing their job or not being able to feed themselves. A self sustaining community would allow people to do this - it would provide a safety net so that people can actually get out there and start working to make things better.
Sounds like a throwback to the hippy communes of the 60's and 70's.
-
So you're in favor of some sort of neo-primitivism?
Define "primitivism"? Not sure what you mean. But, the Romans managed to have hot and cold running water without electricity - yet we require it and complex manufacturing processes to produce the pumps and generators required to do it. How much more advanced are we, really?
Sounds like a throwback to the hippy communes of the 60's and 70's.
The hippies were stupid.
It's not a hippie pipe dream to have functioning, stable communities wherein people work together for the common good and are able to sustain their own settlement via methods that don't rape the environment around them.
But in the US, everyone kind of just assumes that working and living together in communities ("communes") automatically equals hippies - even forgetting the country's own history with local townships, settler posts, and native american tribes. No, everyone remembers a bunch of long haired stoners with extraordinarily bad fashion sense.
-
Define "primitivism"? Not sure what you mean. But, the Romans managed to have hot and cold running water without electricity - yet we require it and complex manufacturing processes to produce the pumps and generators required to do it. How much more advanced are we, really?
Because instead of electricity they had armies of slaves to pump whatever they needed and huge deforestation campaigns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_during_the_Roman_period#Fuel) to heat the water. Energy doesn't come from nothing. Primitivism means essentially turning the clock back a couple hundred years before industrialization.
It's not a hippie pipe dream to have functioning, stable communities wherein people work together for the common good and are able to sustain their own settlement via methods that don't rape the environment around them.
But in the US, everyone kind of just assumes that working and living together in communities ("communes") automatically equals hippies - even forgetting the country's own history with local townships, settler posts, and native american tribes. No, everyone remembers a bunch of long haired stoners with extraordinarily bad fashion sense.
Communes are equated with hippies because they were the ones who did it. Such things sound nice in theory, but in reality "for the common good" has never panned out. Many nations built their economies on that idea, the Soviet Union, India, China, Warsaw Pact and to a lesser extent pre-thatcher UK and latin america. The result? Every one of these economies essentially stagnated and went bankrupt resulting in traumatic reforms. And frankly given that people only had a life expectancy of less than 50 in those townships you describe back in the day I'm not willing to go back to it.
Localization sounds good until people realize that would mean giving up the ammenities and lifestyle they are accustomed to. I'll give the Unabomber credit for one thing, he actually did live this kind of "oneness with nature" he was preaching by living in the middle of nowhere in a shack without electricity, running water, or indoor plumbing.
-
The new regime is holding up the old regime as a scapegoat:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110414/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt
-
Well, they are adopting the trappings of modern democracy, then. Blame the other guy, while doing exactly the same thing as him.
-
Indeed.
It's time the concept of "modern democracy" changed, methinks.
-
Indeed.
It's time the concept of "modern democracy" changed, methinks.
To what, exactly?
-
Well, they are adopting the trappings of modern democracy, then. Blame the other guy, while doing exactly the same thing as him.
That's not the trappings of a modern democracy. Unless the democracy I live in is vastly outdated...
-
Well, they are adopting the trappings of modern democracy, then. Blame the other guy, while doing exactly the same thing as him.
That's not the trappings of a modern democracy. Unless the democracy I live in is vastly outdated...
Right, you are! I've too greatly generalized. Allow me to offer a fix:
Well, they are adopting the trappings of modern American democracy, then. Blame the other guy, while doing exactly the same thing as him.