The wrong side must not win
POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Monday, August 26, 2024 17:12
VIEWED: 8309
PAGE 2 of 10
Hero:
I see no difference between parties.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
And if you vote for LESS evil every time, you get BETTER, you get GOOD, simply by voting against evil or choosing the least evil path."
That's only assuming that choices you are presented with don't get worse.
Imagine evil on a scale of 1-10:
Election 1: Evil = 5, Evil = 6.
You vote for Evil=5.
Election 2: Evil = 6, Evil = 7.
You vote for Evil=6.
Election 3: Evil = 7, Evil = 8.
You vote for Evil=7.
With each election, you are successively voting for more and more evil, even though it is always the less evil of the choices. Cause the choices themselves get worse, see?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Interesting. I had not considered the possibility that everyone in politics was getting more evil and corrupt. I assumed that each new politician starts idealistic then slowly turns as evil and corrupt as the previous candidate, because the system demands they compromise their ethics. I think the reason the system keeps getting more evil is that, once corrupted, the politicians just build on the preexisting evil, not that they themselves are more evil than those in the past.
For each candidate to be getting more evil and corrupt at the moment they start running for office, something would have have to be changing in the body politic and the party system itself, which preps the proto-candidates for office. I am not sure I see evidence of that, elections have always been petty and there's always been batshit crazy types running. This is one of the worst campaign seasons I have seen in my short lifetime, but since I believe that both parties are secretly in collusion with each other, I don't consider that a valid measure of corruption, just a measure of the amount of smokescreen they're throwing out.
It is possible that due to the evil we have established precedence for in the past, that they are growing bold with new evils. That would be a troubling prospect.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Interesting. I had not considered the possibility that everyone in politics was getting more evil and corrupt. I assumed that each new politician starts idealistic then slowly turns as evil and corrupt as the previous candidate, because the system demands they compromise their ethics. I think the reason the system keeps getting more evil is that, once corrupted, the politicians just build on the preexisting evil, not that they themselves are more evil than those in the past.
Pretty much the way I see it.
Also, consider that a lot of politicians probably figure that they have to play in the corrupt political system to even get elected so they can achieve goals they think are for the greater good. Unfortunately, by the time they reach that goal, the evil they had to do to get there often outweighs the good produced.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
My gawd, I agree with Geezer!
Also, consider that a lot of politicians probably figure that they have to play in the corrupt political system to even get elected so they can achieve goals they think are for the greater good. Unfortunately, by the time they reach that goal, the evil they had to do to get there often outweighs the good produced.
On the other part, not so much. I don't see all politicians as getting in to do good OR being idealistic. I see some of them as wanting power/money/celebrity, some of them being recruited by one party or the other, another bunch of them not caring one whit how much evil they have to do to achieve their aims, and some maybe INTENDING to do good in the beginning, but then learning how the system works and ceasing to care about doing "good", instead focusing on pleasing their masters so they can become lobbyists, etc., and make tons of money after leaving political life. I think the minority of them actually go in to "do good" and compromising because the system forces them to, and of those, the "good" they want to achieve isn't always in the interest of the country. Maybe I'm just too much of a cynic.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
I think the reason the system keeps getting more evil is that, once corrupted, the politicians just build on the preexisting evil, not that they themselves are more evil than those in the past.
Precisely.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I dunno guys, this strikes me as a nasty "reality is perception" argument. And that argument is fascistic. And it's misanthropic in that it suggests that people's convictions are purely tribal/partisan. Sure there's some of that at work and we can all go to our respective echo chambers to feel good about being biased.
But I think there are real differences in this election and every election. Will the Republicans winning mean the end of the world as I know it? No. But will it tangibly make things worse for people I care about? If they follow through on their intentions, you betcha!
Also it sets up a really malicious equivalence between Obama's birth certificate and Romney's tax returns. Obama submitted his birth certificate long ago but the birthers prefered their conspiracy theory. Romney has simply not submitted the tax returns in question. If he had, and the left doubled down and said they are all lies, then you'd have an our side = their side thing. But as it stands, ya don't. The whole piece is like this.
A "perception is reality" argument always serves the right/authoritarian cause. An "everyone is just as corrupt and bad as everyone else" argument serves the cause of apathy and disengagement, and that, again, serves the authoritarian cause. Y'all may enjoy looking down on your fellow humans, snicker at the ruinous folly of the ditto-head, but the ones looking down on all of us are laughing all the way to the bank.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
Once again, you say things as I would like to say, only with a lot more eloquence.
Yes the piece was amusing. Yes both sides sometimes use similar tactics, but both sides are clearly not the same. And not voting, or not caring because you see them as being the same is a dangerous and rather ignorant stance, ( not that we get that option here).
It may be that neither option appeals greatly, or neither reflects your views in entirety, but it will make a differenece to your life depending on who wins power.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hitler and Stalin are clearly not the same. But I would be hard-pressed to vote for either of them.
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
but both sides are clearly not the same.
I'd rather have a third or fourth choice. And I think that is the point of this piece.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah well, you think Somalia is a pristine example of the greatness that is anarchy.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Yeah well, you think Somalia is a pristine example of the greatness that is anarchy.
Um, no. I do not.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME