I appreciate this point of view. In 2016 it seems like there was a lot of rhetoric about "vote in your own best self-interest" as a way to try to increase turnout or focus on why any individual should take voting seriously.
Working at LANL for 27 years I heard *way* too many people there voting for War Hawks because it was "good for (nuclear weapons) interest" which was good for the lab's/county's budget... etc. I've never voted for my specific self-interest (supporting school bonds because my kids were of school age or against them because I had none or they were done with that) but with an idea toward a larger self-interest of "what kind of world do I want to live in?"... which has progressed with age from one where perhaps there was a lot of scrappy scrapping going on where I could "get ahead" to one where "as few people are under acute stress and misery as possible such that everyone (human and non-human everyones) rises to be their best selves". I know this is very Pollyanna at some level... But I so much prefer to ignore my baser instincts of "greed and fear" in deference to something a little more "enlightened". I have always been appalled by the admonition "If you are not liberal while young and conservative when old, there is something wrong with you". I refactored it to "idealistic while young and practical when old". My *practicality* says that my life is improved by the lives of my family, friends, neighbors, and beyond being improved, and as Marcus reflects here, that works mainly/only/best for those of us NOT living under dire threat of privation of abuse, but I would claim that the bulk of that "threat" is an illusion in the first world. We all have spare capacity to "rise above" if we choose to. - Steve On 11/4/20 11:54 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Nick wrote: > > < I know two trump supporters quite well. Mind you, we don't talk politics > that much. Both are owners of small businesses who have led the highly > regulated lives that folks must lead if they are going to make money in a > politically diverse community. Both [thought they] saw gains from the Tax > Cuts. I think both think the economic policies have been good for them and > they find the crazy stuff kinda fun. > > > Let me just give you my visceral response: If one is doing ok -- not having > your neck crushed under the knee of a cop or starving -- then I have the > expectation that a person persuade on the basis on what is good for everyone, > not what is good for them. I don't care how they make money. That is > their problem. I did fine under Bush, Obama, and even Trump. I'm a lucky > one. It would never occur to me to use minor trends up or down in my income > for a reason why someone should run the most powerful democracy in the world. > I find it petty and appalling that people do think of making this > connection. Yes, I would cancel them if I had subscribed to them, but I > never did subscribe to them. > > Marcus > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
