Politics

The good ol' anco does not talk much about politics ecxept on a basic basis. Songs like screens attacking todays obsession with needing to constantly be entertained by screens, Safer about people dealing with their fear and reverend green lementing the negative affects of city life and many more. But They aren't like Michael Franti making songs like "BARACK OBAMA! WEEEE! BARACK OBAMA! WEE LOVE YOU!!" Or even on john Lennons larger scale of politics shitting on capitalism. So as we are not inclined by the anco to take on political philosophies I'm curious as to what different views we have here. I know it's touchy in some areas. This discussion might turn to the upcomming US election but I'd rather discuess what our idea of an ideal system and world would be. THE MAN MAN!

Comments

  • ideal society to me would be voluntary free society where people do things on their own initiative and have individual rights and freedoms and the governments only purpose is to protect those rights. I sympathize with the complete opposite direction of communism but think That communistic government is kind of an oxymoron. I respect the sovereighnty of nations to decide whatever political system they want. A theocracy could be a good thing potentially. A democracy could be a good or bad thing. A republic could be good or bad. It depends on who is running it. Living in America I am fascinated with our own revolution and want to honor it. freedom is more important to me than a semi comfortable living lifestyle.
  • edited October 2012
    I think the band is talking about human experience. Those issues provide the basis for most things that have been produced by our culture, politics included. Because dealing in the realm of politics is by definition dealing in a realm of opinion -- division -- it's better to deal in self-reflective, honest communication about what's [i]really[/i] going on at the core of these issues. Prevention is better than cure. (After all, the wrench thrown in the spokes of every proposed ideal political solution is that there are not enough resources on the planet to fund an ever-expanding human civilization! Right there political systems become irrelevant and the next logical step in analyzing the problem seems to be elements of personal and overall human culture -- what's going on in our cultures and in ourselves that's leaving us with huge amounts of people overwhelming the earth's natural resources?) Alienation -- us from our neighbors, us from our friends, us from our parents, us from our countries, us from our cultures, us from our world. Alienation from ourselves. There seems to be this one uniform principle of division at the root of every so-called "civilized" culture. What's going on here? Are we really so special that we should be spending all our time discussing our own systems of governing? What have we done for our fellow inhabitants of this planet today? And what have we done for ourselves? [i]Truly[/i] done -- I don't mean satisfying momentary desires. I mean what have we done to make ourselves better off tomorrow? That seems as relevant a question as any when it comes to solving the human soul-sickness that political systems embody. Are we really that important? If we devoted more of our time, effort, and resources toward helping other people and helping other living beings on this planet and trusted in our own nature enough to not have to cling to systems and possessions, would we not be in a better situation to deal with these problems? And if we trusted in our own inherited ability to live prosperously and well, would we finally be able to throw off at last the systems of control we willingly accept (not just government -- external control of all kinds, even external control like the emotional ghosts that haunt many of our minds) and simply live for the benefit of the universe and existence in the way it's already been working for billions of years instead of for our own benefit (a system that just happens to have this human culture on the brink of collapse a mere 10,000 years after its rise)? Politics is an extension of this delusion that we buy. Discussing it as anything except a delusion to be rid of is simply to further the suffering it has been causing for thousands of years. ___________________________________________ Of course, we've been ingrained with this delusional cultural stuff, like that politics is [i]super super serial[/i] and, like, a valid/necessary thing for thousands of years! And our chosen (or self-appointed) masters continue to tell us subliminally "yes, we're necessary! Look at all the thigns we're doing! Look, this is all very important! A hurka durka der!" with their wars and trips to foreign embassies and various bits of theater. So what steps can we take to practically discovering our own true nature as children of an infinite universe? The ones I've found that have worked for me so far are: -Giving to others, be it yourself in a year (NOT NOW; that's just fulfillment of selfish delusion. Delayed gratification), be it other people, be it animals or plants. This can be done in so many ways, it's worth exploring. It doesn't automatically mean volunteering at a homeless shelter, even though that's a [i]great[/i] way to do it. -Being kind in our dealings with others and being kind to ourselves (after all, our most intimate relationships are with ourselves). -Listening, looking, feeling our bodies, tasting our food and our saliva, observing our minds, observing our surroundings. These things can serve as personal cures to the problem that politics is. Because it's a problem. And only an expert can deal with a problem. Fortunately, we're [i]all[/i] experts. If we stop feeding our senses of self with mindless consumption and clinging, we can fall into the beautiful system that is the universe and function with it in harmony. But if we continue to feed our senses of self and succumb to our own arrogant delusions (like we're the pinnacle of evolution -- like the whole universe was just waiting for [i]us[/i] to arrive! Hurray!), we'll continue with this suffering. If we do what we always did, we'll get what we always got.
  • that is a good point but i do not feel entirely satisfied.I help my neighbor but my neighbor does not live on the other side of the world. I am very opposed to going into Iran but am not entirely sure of the entire situation. A pretty country with pretty people. We have crazy religious people in our country but those people are relatively small in number and do not have much power. I want to know if Iran actaully does pose a threat or if we are being forced into war in order to collapse our own system of government.
  • [quote=Purplesage]ideal society to me would be voluntary free society where people do things on their own initiative and have individual rights and freedoms and the governments only purpose is to protect those rights.[/quote] The problem with this is that it engages those potentially attempting to take away naturally given rights and addresses the aggressors on their level, thus turning our mentality into the equivalent flip-side of "us against them." Regardless of whose views are "just", division exists. And if we get [i]deeper[/i] into division, there'll be no eventual triumph of good over evil, of our side over theirs (and, after all, how good [i]is[/i] our side at this point? Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who had no connection to ever harming an American citizen [i]murdered by American troops?[/i]) Has that happened yet? Have genocides become [i]less[/i] brutal and [i]more[/i] successful over the centuries? No, of course not! This has to be about a personal, self-reliant change, otherwise we'll continue to discuss possible successful systems of control [i]all the while continuing to willingly submit to control.[/i] Political systems are a waste of time. It's [i]not[/i] a waste of time to engage with them in terms of voting and standing up for what's right when the time is appropriate. But thinking that they're a valid solution is dangerous territory. What political system [i]has[/i] worked? After thousands of years of trying, don't you think that if there was [i]one[/i] magical solution, we might be getting closer by now? People are suffering now just as they have always been suffering. The voice of culture whispering in your ear and igniting the righteous fire in our bellies that "something must be done!" is a delusion. So, if we can engage in politics enough to take advantage of what freedoms we are allowed and, at the same time, make attempts within ourselves and within our immediate surroundings to become the perfect beings we already are and in the process cast off the dead weight holding us down, like internal attachments, like governments that represent their own pride and gluttony more than their people, then that seems like a step in the right direction.
  • edited October 2012
    [quote=Purplesage]that is a good point but i do not feel entirely satisfied.I help my neighbor but my neighbor does not live on the other side of the world.[/quote] Yeah, but my entire point was that [i]it's not about you![/i] It's not about me! It's not about any of us thinking about ourselves and our desires. What I'm saying is that worrying about Iran and worrying about shit happening [i]across the world[/i] (indeed) is useless. It's simply an internal drive instilled in you and everyone else by our marvelous culture. Deciding what to do about it, deciding what [i]action to take[/i] is different (and it requires no riling up of emotions; it can be done calmly and peacefully and without judgment, simply a thing that must be done). [i]That's[/i] the important part. But what action will a discussion about Iran spurn? I'm trying to discuss what we [i]can[/i] do right now! I can do nothing about Iran. It is out of my control entirely, and out of yours. Sometimes, there's the rare option to actually protest a government's action. But potential action against Iran has not caused that kind of reaction in the people. There's no way to force that. If there are anti-war protests at some point, I'll be there. Just like the FTAA protests, just like the Occupy protests. But talking about it is a waste of time. It only serves to further entrench us against "the other side". What tangible control do you have over our situation with Iran? What tangible control do you have over your choices? Do you like being in the system of aristocracy we have set up here (and everywhere), where people are represented by an elite few? If you're fond of it, then by all means, continue to fret about these things which you have absolutely no control over. Or another option is to aim to [i]become[/i] one of those people in power and have an [i]inordinate[/i] and [i]egotistical[/i] share of power! But, if you're not fond of it, then the only option is to work in any way that is true (it doesn't matter how, as long as it's based in selflessness -- don't take my word for it, try it!) in the direction of ridding ourselves of this toxic cycle that we continue to see. War, hatred, violence, abuse, enslavement. All of these can be worked against [i]only[/i] by personal choice and action. That's all we're given! Everything else is a delusion. We have this time, right now, of having a choice of what to do, of having free will. So, you can make a choice to do something for someone or something else, thereby working toward eliminating selfishness in the small way you and I and everyone are all naturally allotted, or you can spend your time getting worked up in positive and negative emotions about current events while you take no action and cause no active change in what's really happening. What I'm trying to say is that discussion of politics is, in essence, selfish. People get worked up, they feel united or oppressed, they take part in the grand drama. If we act selflessly, we can discuss these things without emotion. Take this conversation, for example: I feel slightly at odds with your point of view, and I'm portraying to you the importance of selflessness in a selfish way. Will my words have an effect? Maybe, but they'd be far more effective if I was sticking [i]only[/i] to what can be done and ignoring the self-based emotions and attachments to opinions (thereby removing myself from the realm of self in that hypothetical moment). That causes a momentary blow to the systems of selfishness we have set up here on earth. Enough of those and we have real change. There is no other way.
  • i would definetly protest. Is it possible to not have a government? In order for that to happen we would have to eliminate all human greed.
  • edited October 2012
    WORLD CONTINENT COUNTRY STATE COUNTY LOCAL HOUSE INDIVIDUAL
  • I think a really smart thing to do is to just focus your attention on the things that you can influence. Sadly, the way we are governed does not fall under this category.
  • edited October 2012
    [quote=Purplesage]INDIVIDUAL[/quote] Is all we have control over. The rest is perceived, but what direct control do you have? Over your house? Over your community? Over your county? Your state? Your country? Your continent? Your world? To take this man-made, artifically-wrought conceptual framework (the falsehood of dividing lines can be easily verified -- look around you. Do you see any countries? If those don't exist, then why do we so often view our houses, our communities, our continents, and our world with the same hard-line division that we do our different countries?) as reality is to to allow one's personal choice to be limited to functioning within the framework's boundaries. If you've submitted to a conceptual framework, what choice do you have then?
  • edited October 2012
    [quote=Purplesage]In order for that to happen we would have to eliminate all human greed.[/quote] Where do you think that would start? I'm not looking for a specific answer, not trying to put you on the spot. I'm asking what you think.
  • either have a system that forcefully does not allow one to obtain more than another. or develop respect for all. to unconditionally love ones neighbor one must not fear their neighbor. i feel as though we are very detached from our neighbors. the change to be more involved with neighbors would need to be cultural. social evelution? until thishappens i will continue to disallusion myself with the idea that a government should protect my liberties.
  • edited October 2012
    Well, we've had a lot of systems to coerce each other and force each other to have an equal share of things, and those have gone horribly wrong. But, even if a socialism-esque system was put in place that did work more than not, it doesn't eliminate all human greed. Developing respect for each other is a concept I find tantalizing and hopeful. You say that, to do that, we need to evolve. Could you tell me how this came to be? At this juncture, I wish to offer a respectful place for you to disengage from this dialogue (the story I wish to convey to you [i]is[/i] related to the root of political systems, but it's not a matter of political stances, and therefore perhaps not what you originally set out to discuss). Either way is cool with me. Please trust that you will do me no disservice if you don't wish to continue, and that I have no ulterior motive if you do wish to continue.
  • edited October 2012
    Double post
  • Obsessing over reality can lock in stubborness of mind #Philisophical bologna
  • edited October 2012
    The idea is related to anthropology, it's not a philosopical issue. If you're gonna bash it before even hearing what it is, at least call it by its right name. Edit: I guess it is partially philosophical. But you didn't give yourself a chance to know what the idea was before you passed a judgment! If you're closed, you're closed -- that's what I was talking about before when I offered to stop with the pattern of dialogue I was attempting (rather unskillfully) to engage in. But insulting it, too? Forgive me, but I think you're more capable of holding onto things as yet-unknowns than that.
  • edited October 2012
    Here's my political question: what's causing so many people in this world to keep choosing delusion over a simple truth? Isn't that [i]important?[/i] Why do we buy the lie that we're fundamentally flawed? How deep does it go? Where did it start? I think the idea that [i]we[/i] as [i]humans[/i] are flawed is a lie. It's something religions have picked up, but it predates those, too. Do you think it's [i]possible[/i] (I ask for no leap of faith -- merely the acknowledgement of a possibility) that we are innately [i]just fine[/i] and that there's an untrue principle deep within our one specific cultural system (the system with people who lock up all the food -- not all cultures are like this, but this one culture I speak of counts China and the United States and Indonesia and almost all other "civilized" peoples as its own) that's leading us into misery? If you still dismiss this as "philosophical bologna", then I hope you find another approach that works for you. But please do not think that looking to yet another political system as an answer will leave you anywhere except back where you started. If you think I'm wrong, look at human history. What political system has worked? Which one hasn't imploded? Which one hasn't had a small elite group in power hoarding and distributing resources increasingly unevenly in their favor? With what you're suggesting as an ideal political solution, you're already [i]so close[/i] to a simple default state of free action, but there's still the ruling class. [i]What do they actually do? What do they actually protect us from?[/i] From other people? But... If people aren't innately flawed, then from what are we protecting ourselves? How much longer do we want to keep playing the same game? I'm suggesting a small, radical change that helps cleanse and clarify political stances and transcends them. Something that's available to us all right here and now. It's nothing that needs to be reached outside of oneself for, nothing that needs to be grovelled at the feet of, nothing that requires obedience or enslavement. It offers boundless love and joy and asks only quiet contemplation and concentration. I think this basic human nature supersedes politics, a system devised for people who think of themselves as fundamentally flawed, and that our default state REQUIRES NO EXTERNAL GOVERNANCE. I need no evolutionary charts or diagrams or history books to prove the deep, overwhelming existence of this thing -- I simply stop and observe. I believe its existence can be proved to anyone else by stopping and observing as well. If you disagree, don't take my word for it. Try it! If it exists, where does the idea that we're flawed lie? Is it part of our innate human nature? Is it something foreign? I don't know! Only each person can find that answer for themselves, and the only way to answer the question for oneself and then truly [i]know[/i] is through observation. The Kingdom of God is now--or never.
  • I cannot express tone as well over words as I could while speaking, i said bologna half sarcastically not disparigingly. I admire your faith in humanity. It is hard to visualize a world where people are truly free and are governed by their own inhibitions and respect for each other. I would advocate a transitionary step of a government with only the job of defending liberties. I spose I have some inate fear that without goverfnment at this time the kkk or some crazy gang will rise and "clense" the world. Perhaps this fear has been instilled into me by the man man but maybe it is a possibility.
  • Hey, I feel I owe you an apology, Purp. I've been going about talking to you the wrong way, and I've been overbearing and overcritical for no reason having anything to do with you -- this is my issues running rampant.
  • kkkkkkkk, so whats your non partisan clear cut happy go lucky response?
  • edited October 2012
    Well, I've seen people do some pretty remarkable things, man. The transitionary steps of governance are something I agree with on the necessity of, if what I'm saying is true (and there's no real tangible proof, as yet, that it is, though it's a popular idea). As for the fear of some kind of ridiculous genocidal movement running rampant... Yeah. I know. That's the big fear for me, is that any movement toward vulnerability would get thwarted by malicious intent. I grew up with a particular kind of Jewish mindset where I was taught that I'm of a persecuted people, and that history has shown it's only a matter of time before it happens again, whether to my people or another. It is scary. By the same token, I guess I also feel that the incentives to fearlessly push on one small action at a time are great, while the disincentives to living in fear of others to whatever degree are also great. There's so much to be gained. So much to be gained and so much to be lost. From there, the logic becomes a lot less clear, and I think it gets more into personal preference (edit: personal choice more than preference).
  • There 'tis. Dude, I so wish you could see me in real life. I've got like a really depressive personality, I'm the least happy go lucky person. Hahahaha.... Man. Shows how much I (try to) filter the image.
  • while on shrooms the one thought that kept reocurring in my head was that all negative things spawn from fear. I think that fear typically has more of a negative impact than a healthy impact. For example, I know my past relationships have sometimes died because of fear (or lack of faith) and I apply a simular lesson learned to religion, politics, etc (or I try to). While this helps in some areas of my life it still does not move me out of my parents house. Perhaps thats the level I need to apply it on.
  • [quote=Purplesage]While this helps in some areas of my life it still does not move me out of my parents house.[/quote] This actually made me laugh out loud. I know this feeling. For sure, fear spurns nothing good, with the exception of survival/safety situations. But a lot of the time we carry fear for a long time after we're out of danger. I'm not really sure what I believe about faith (other than that I think it's important), but I do believe very strongly that fear is muck and not a good thing to pack in my suitcase.
  • [quote=Purplesage] While this helps in some areas of my life it still does not move me out of my parents house. [/quote] I love this as well. My feeling, though, is that asserting independence externally (by not living with parents) doesn't do as much for the state of your ineffable soul and spirit as asserting your internal independence. If that makes any sense. Meaning, I believe moving out of your parents home, while it is an American Rite of Passage, doesn't get you any further down the inner road.
  • Take it from someone who moved out of his parents' house on a whim -- she's right! It ended up being just the thing I needed, but only because I utterly imploded after coming here and became willing to work on some inside stuff I'd been neglecting because of the pain I caused myself.
  • I see??? I hope that my inside independence will reflect my outside independence. What of the possibility that I'm still not internally independent until I become externally independent?
  • Everything is possible. Even Nothing is possible. But sure, purpsie, there can be a connection between being wholly responsible for the welfare of the meat sack and achieving a sense of internalized independence. I'm just saying it may turn out to be more of an illusion, a rite of passage, rather than an actual Necessity for Growth. Trust me, you have decades ahead to hone your independence skills. The future is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay longer than you imagine. Do the work you can do in the comfort of a warm home before that internal work gets shoved aside so you can focus on Your Next Meal and There Is No Heat and My Roommate Is On Drugs. and then Shit She's Pregnant and then I Gotta Rob Me Some Diapers and then Where Are My Pills?
  • When you put it that way, it seems really fast!
  • hahaha, you're right! It seems fast, but "where are my pills" lasts a lot longer than you think.
  • Hahahahahaaha
  • Dave, your stance is interesting. I agree and disagree with you. I don't have faith in humanity, probably because I'm a Seventh-day Adventist and that standpoint is sort of cannon to our belief system. I'm pretty willing to explore other viewpoints, but I'll admit that this one is a HUGE stumbling block for me because it's sort of the centric idea to all my ideologies. Maybe I'm scared of an inevitable paradigm-shift. I DO agree that no political system is an solution. I feel that ALL systems are perfect on paper and would work wonderfully if it weren't for humanity (which will abuse whatever system is put in place). See, there I go with flawed humanity again.
  • what we need is a consciousness shift. People need to evolve but our current form of government only helps de-evolve the populace in my eyes. Or is it that people consciously choose to eat and watch and listen to shit? Communism would work well if everybody had the mindset but true communism can not come from government force, it's contradictory and kind of an oxymoron linguistics aside win. I believe in libertarian principals because I think it would be the most conducive for people to find enlightenment. I believe we have the human capacity to create a society where there is no laws or government or borders but our current humanity are like angry chimps who just desire dominance and fighting more than a better world or a better life. If we focus on individual rights then gay rights, womens rights, minority rights becomes irrelavant. People ask me my stance on gay marriage and I tell them it's messed up we are forced to purchase marriage licenses. Why is it sombody elses buissiness what I do if it's not infringing on anybody else?
  • If you want to have a socialist commune in a free society you will prosper If you want to have a free commune in a socialist society force will be initiated against you
  • DAT POLITIKS!
Sign In or Register to comment.