two different thoughts
First: I tend to dislike when a literary or cinematic hero (100% of them male) says "It's too dangerous for me to stay, I have to leave".
Let's get over the apparent tragic hero sacrifice-gasm that that presents to the male mind and consider: being on our own, or as the leader of a small band of warriors is EXACTLY where we want to be as males. How is that being sacrificial? That's being selfish. A male is in his element outside of civilized society, and is out of his element when he needs to adhere to a social contract not written by himself. You want to show heroism? Try mixing it with realism. I want Vin Diesel to say something like "It's too dangerous for me to go out on my own and neutralize this or that threat. I have to stay with you so we can be together."
If only because it would mean Vin Diesel used the word "neutralize" which is 2 syllables longer than any word he's ever said before.
---------------------------------
Second is about politics:
I am completely convinced that I am a fiscal conservative. The problem is, I'm a cynical fiscal conservative, and the effects of my cynicism is that I present as liberal, at least where it comes to Big or small Government. I think we need a small government. However, we have a few more industries, a bit more range of products and services, and a whole whackload more ways by which one of us may abuse another. As a result, it's perfectly obvious that we need a relatively Big Government. It should be small relative to the number of items it needs to manage. Is that too common-sense to be apparent to the right side of the aisle?
A council of, let's say, 5 elders can manage a village in rural Africa, where the only things that really that need managing are managed on a small scale. Your hunting, farming, and mating functions involve maybe 100 people's agendas, most if not all of whom share the same cultural context. So 5 is enough.
But in a society where there are no universal cultural contexts, and more to the point, the basic functions of our society are no longer basic by any definition; where business creates a customizeable conglomeration and balance of our three basic functions, where every individual is, in a way, on the council of elders, well, a simple tribal council just won't work.
It is a slippery slope from developing creative business practices/solutions in order to maximize profit to being clever about it. And a short distance from being clever to being manipulative. And from being manipulative to deceptive. From being deceptive to being oppressive. In short, it is a slippery slope from opportunism to exploitation. We are hard-wired to seek out the limitations of our circumstances so that we may develop work-arounds for them and gain advantage over our competition, whatever the arena may be. It is the very same trait that allowed us to evolve past monkeys in the first place. It is fundamentally ingrained in our psyche, and therefore will never be removed. The need for oversight, even flawed and corrupt oversight is eternal.
If we dissolved government, even the current concept of "government" on Monday, a new version of government would be in place on Tuesday.
Let's get over the apparent tragic hero sacrifice-gasm that that presents to the male mind and consider: being on our own, or as the leader of a small band of warriors is EXACTLY where we want to be as males. How is that being sacrificial? That's being selfish. A male is in his element outside of civilized society, and is out of his element when he needs to adhere to a social contract not written by himself. You want to show heroism? Try mixing it with realism. I want Vin Diesel to say something like "It's too dangerous for me to go out on my own and neutralize this or that threat. I have to stay with you so we can be together."
If only because it would mean Vin Diesel used the word "neutralize" which is 2 syllables longer than any word he's ever said before.
---------------------------------
Second is about politics:
I am completely convinced that I am a fiscal conservative. The problem is, I'm a cynical fiscal conservative, and the effects of my cynicism is that I present as liberal, at least where it comes to Big or small Government. I think we need a small government. However, we have a few more industries, a bit more range of products and services, and a whole whackload more ways by which one of us may abuse another. As a result, it's perfectly obvious that we need a relatively Big Government. It should be small relative to the number of items it needs to manage. Is that too common-sense to be apparent to the right side of the aisle?
A council of, let's say, 5 elders can manage a village in rural Africa, where the only things that really that need managing are managed on a small scale. Your hunting, farming, and mating functions involve maybe 100 people's agendas, most if not all of whom share the same cultural context. So 5 is enough.
But in a society where there are no universal cultural contexts, and more to the point, the basic functions of our society are no longer basic by any definition; where business creates a customizeable conglomeration and balance of our three basic functions, where every individual is, in a way, on the council of elders, well, a simple tribal council just won't work.
It is a slippery slope from developing creative business practices/solutions in order to maximize profit to being clever about it. And a short distance from being clever to being manipulative. And from being manipulative to deceptive. From being deceptive to being oppressive. In short, it is a slippery slope from opportunism to exploitation. We are hard-wired to seek out the limitations of our circumstances so that we may develop work-arounds for them and gain advantage over our competition, whatever the arena may be. It is the very same trait that allowed us to evolve past monkeys in the first place. It is fundamentally ingrained in our psyche, and therefore will never be removed. The need for oversight, even flawed and corrupt oversight is eternal.
If we dissolved government, even the current concept of "government" on Monday, a new version of government would be in place on Tuesday.