I would also suggest spending a few years in Scandinavia. The distance
to power is not anything like it is in the States; there is a strong and
independent press that does a very good job of uncovering the occasional
scandal and corruption; all of which is bolstered by highest literacy
rates and an astonishingly civil "debate climate" as it is called here
among the _nine_ significant political parties. Materially supported by
strong social-welfare systems that keeps inequalities to a minimum while
maintaining strong economies (contra the anti-tax dogmas of those in the
US).
It is probably also necessary, however, to have a relatively small
population - 5 million or so each in Norway and Denmark, the countries
of my primary experience - who also enjoy the highest levels of mutual
trust on the planet: 71% of Norwegians say yes to questions like "do you
think you can trust most people to do the right thing," starting with
fulfilling their promises and obligations to others - vs. 38% in the US.
This should not be a surprise. James Carey (1989) has pointed out that
the US has been shaped by an emphasis on communication since the
Federalist Papers' discussion of Plato's problem of "the natural limits
of democracy" - i.e., participation in deliberation and debate required
physical co-presence; establish a travel limit of one day by foot or
animal to get to the places of deliberation and it rounds out to a state
of some 50 square miles (if memory serves). Government-funded roads and
canals were argued to be solutions to the problem - communication
technologies followed suite. (This is also part of the source of our
shared optimism in "liberation technology" - starting with communication
technologies, as having the potential for enhancing democracy,
emancipation, etc.)
Whatever the advantages and disadvantages of such technologies - thank
you, Cambridge Analytica - these countries and peoples enjoy far more of
a sense of physical co-presence than is possible in the US: "Denmark is
not a country, it's a tribe," one US anthropologist determined after
some 20 years there.
As well, there is a different sense of what it means to be a human
being. "Mature human beings" are understood to be both individual and
relational. The atomistic senses of individualism in the US - resting
ultimately on Hobbes, Adam Smith, and their shared presumptions from
Augustine that Original Sin has made each of us desire-driven and
utterly selfish - see relationship with others as a threat to one's own
possible freedom: we can only be free _from_ the constraints others
impose - leading, without an authoritarian state to keep us under
control, to the war of each against all. Here, there are many ways in
which we are more free _through_ our relationships with one another,
rather than against one another.
The latter is understood at some sort of theoretical level in the States
- and instinctively attacked and rejected by many, of course, first of
all as it goes against their enculturation, whatever their political
views may be.
Sorry, such relational selfhood is real and, here at least, it works in
ways fully consistent with individual freedom and flourishing. (Free -
and usually excellent - public education, including university education
is especially helpful, contra the highly class-dependent systems in the
US.)
But you'll likely have to live here for some years to come to fully
experience it "on your own body" as it is said in the Germanic languages
to get a good sense of it beyond the theoretical outlines.
Hope this is helpful -
- charles
On 08/01/2020 04:37, Rand Strauss wrote:
> The Great Scam known as Democracy... its trick, lure, fraud, and
forever unfixable...
Democracy isn’t a scam. So far, it’s a theory and a myth.
We don’t have a democracy. Humanity has never had a true representative
democracy of any large number of people.
And the US political system is less democratic than most.
In a true democracy, the people have power. For that to happen in a
representative democracy, the representatives must be accountable to the
people. Very, very few people know what accountability is, so it’s not
surprising that most don’t realize it’s missing.
Ever since the founding of the US, many have had an idea about
accountability. Democracy works pretty well when representatives and
voters believe representatives are accountable and when they make
efforts to /be/ accountable, even though at best they deliver very
little accountability. Without accountability, democracy becomes
increasingly unstable, and representatives are increasingly accountable
to others, to ideologies, to the wealthy and to the parties. This
fake-democracy is where we find ourselves today.
"Political Science" isn’t really a science. It tries to study the
political organizations that exist, but with the myth that it’s somewhat
representative of what’s possible. It’s not. When sciences are
fruitful at all, they give rise to engineering disciplines. This hasn’t
happened with politics. Political Science is in its infancy, like
medicine was 200 years ago. The "engineers" are charlatans, brandishing
snake-oil such as marketing slogans and advertising campaigns. At best,
they’re pollsters, pretending that the fast answers of surprised,
non-responsible people to much-too simplistic questions are indicative
of people’s desires.
Much more is possible. Plus, the political system can be pretty easily
fixed. But most people are deeply resigned— usually much more than they
realize— and would rather complain about their supposed insights into
the most shallow observations of the system’s problems than peer into
its depths where the clues to real solutions lie.
The claim that it’s "unfixable" is simply more shallow, cynical
guessing. If you think a problem isn’t fixable, it mostly tells you
that you haven’t thought deeply enough. It’s probably also true that
you’re thinking "inside the box," in the terms the status quo uses to
ensure it’s continuation. Try getting outside the box.
For instance, try thinking:
* Political campaigns are expensive because they use inefficient
communication.
* Representatives continually push messages to voters, which doesn’t
work. What happens if you reverse this paradigm?
* What’s a rigorous definition of accountability?
* What’s a rigorous /functional/ definition?
* Many voters are apathetic and ignorant because caring and learning
result in frustration.
* The media market doesn’t offer good, concise information because
people don’t need it.
* The shape of our /whole /political system- voters, elections, voter
registration, campaigns, polls, media, parties, incumbents,
representation, congress and the presidency- not the /fact/ that we
have these, but their separate and combined shapes and organizations
are a /perfect/ fit for the results we have, the lying, the
corruption, the lack of competition, all of it
What effects the shape of things most is its foundation. When a system
is so broadly broken, you’re not going to get very far fixing the
symptoms or complaining about the effects. Yes, this "car" goes 1 mile
an hour tops and guzzles tons of gas. Instead of complaining, you need
to look under and behind all of it to find the true cause or causes. A
"true" cause is one that a true solution can be applied to.
Get to the bottom of all of these, and a new possibility emerges. But
you’re not going to get there from an hour or two of thinking, much less
the ten minutes you’ll take reading this. Talking to people, it takes a
good 2-15 hours to reveal what’s hidden behind these statements.
-r
On Jan 7, 2020, at 12:48 PM, grarpamp <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Many here use libtech that blocks all the javascript garbage
on such sites making them inoperable. Any results will be
skewed, for that and other reasons, in various unknowable ways.
The Great Scam known as Democracy... its trick, lure, fraud,
and forever unfixable failure... abuses "voting" to wage immoral
force up to and including death against others.
Some of the truths democracy does not want you to know and liberate...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wclLGlSWwYI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbekNG6Azq4
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:7342aa7b328abec8c5f54fc84907b90b3944c9f8&dn=The_Most_Dangerous_Superstition
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6b70TUbdfs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy8S2xOKiwY
--
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major
commercial search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you
moderated: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe,
change to digest mode, or change password by emailing
[email protected].
--
Professor in Media Studies
Department of Media and Communication
University of Oslo
<http://www.hf.uio.no/imk/english/people/aca/charlees/index.html>
Co-chair & Editor, Internet Research Ethics 3.0
<https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf>
3rd edition of Digital Media Ethics out soon!
<http://politybooks.com/bookdetail/?isbn=9781509533428>
Postboks 1093
Blindern 0317
Oslo, Norway
[email protected]
--
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major commercial
search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe, change to digest mode,
or change password by emailing [email protected].
