I received the following response from Sam in respect of my request for argument over the possibility of exploring a PPE degree on one’s own, or at least looking at the matter of political systems in the current climate. What is of course of greatest concern now is what will happen in Syria and the Middle East. The Putin Regime, because of its concerns elsewhere, have abandoned support for the Assad Regime, although they feel, clearly, the need to support him personally, and give him some measure of safety and respite in Russia.
The various factions now in control of certain sections of the country, will have to come up with some sort of interim government and provide stability and adherence to the rule of law. Just what law will rule is another matter. The indications given by the most prominent group is that a form of democratic and inclusive system of government will emerge under Shia law. This, in my view, does not bode well. Strict adherence to Shia is not a good look. Indeed, mixing religion and modern secular digital politics is not a good idea and will lead to certain sections of society being discriminated against. I refer in particular to Islam’s usual subjugation of women. Likewise any religion that requires anyone criticising its most sacred beliefs should be put to death is not something that should form any part of government. So just how strict the application of religion will be in a future Syrian democracy is still up in the air. The current Israeli government has indicated quite forcefully it will not wait for the dust to settle and has consequently bombed and extended its perimeters to provide a buffer zone between it and what they believe is coming next. Tension and violence are still ever present.
The advent of Trump in the coming months is equally disturbing. His idiotic, infantile and poorly educated view of world affairs is hardly likely to benefit anyone save hard-line influencers and leaders. Much to contemplate in the New Year.
In the meantime, if you can take the time, have a read of Sam’s view of the PPE question. All and any comments welcome.
The similarities between religious and mythological themes
throughout the worlds varied civilizations and attitudes to behaviour are not
the only things that Jung posited about ‘The Collective Unconscious’; in
‘Memories Dreams and Reflections’, I remember him discussing the character of
nation states reflected in their collective unconscious; especially in relation
to the likely coming world war (2nd) and different countries fear and reactions
to it..jpg)
Beatrice and Sidney Webb - Founders of the LSE in 1895
I suspect that you’re implying that it doesn’t have anything to do with my reasons for the illogical voting of the American public, but I still think it has a place in relation to Jung’s theory of the characterization of populations of nation states and their collective opinions, relevant to voting patterns.
If the archetypes are present in the subconscious then probably so is everything else and although not directly provable in a theory; most of the theories of dualities in science show that when combined, most things show signs of duality; things like wave particle duality for instance. Maybe a bit far-fetched for a proof of the unconscious, but interesting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality
I don’t think one needs to even go this far, and moving off topic.
If we think of American Culture, what is it; how do their opinions of their own culture reflect back on their own identity, then this already gives credence to a collective unconscious in culture, which like most things of the mind can be manipulated, think of hypnosis and other subconscious manipulation techniques as defined by Alfred C. Kinsey’s’ reports, the sections relative to advertising.
The American tech giants are known to use subconscious manipulation techniques, this is only really just coming out in the press’ awareness; of its full extent, but it’s there and provable if you look at the details of the Linux computer operating system (why wouldn’t people use a free operating system with free software that is better in many case’s than many of the packages the tech giants make)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution#Installation-free_distributions_(live_CD/USB)
And if all these things are reasonable to believe, then so to is the possibility that people do not want to believe the truth about the environment and what it means regarding population numbers and over consumption, especially with regard to America. Which becomes even more pertinent if you then posit that the loss of power of the rich is the only way to confront these issues as it is them that create the problem in the first place, but unfortunately many democracies are complicit in this, because economics dictates that profit needs to be made.
When you say that ‘establishing a political system or organizing a method which best co-ordinates the basic desires and needs of the group, is presumably what politics is about’; I feel that it doesn’t quite represent it’s fragility in relation to democracy and the effort that has historically and currently goes into the outcome of a country having a true democracy and which I would say; partially goes against the grain of the human condition in relation to its personal hierarchies in business and at home.
I don’t think politics & democracy have been formed (unless you mean formed by social evolution).
They have been fought over, usually to wrest control out of oligarchs and families, royal and otherwise. The road to democracy is paved in blood, I don’t think it’s something that forms naturally (although some might say that war is natural too, it does happen with other species, and the hierarchy of humans in all circumstances is always being fought over both sociologically and financially, interdependently, we; like all the animals, are creatures of desire and move in not necessarily conscious way to get what we desire, that is also partially the story of evolution, so in some-ways democracy is societies & humans greatest achievement.
I think for all the USA’s many institutions to balance and keep democracy in check; what ironically has been shown; unfortunately; is that in the end you need something, above the president; like the royal family (don’t tell anyone I said that, but alas, it is one of the things that a sitting prime minister does, they ask for permission from the head of state to form a government, can you imagine someone like Trump even being able to do that)
The reflection of the institutions that go into actually making up the American government is very interesting and does do a great job, but without the full support of the so called pillars of democracy; which is a reasonable simplification of the social structures that keep democracy afloat, on top of our animal instincts, but without mentioning the freedom of the press, the institutions of government by themselves can’t be maintained without bipartisan agreement, which as we know and can see is starting show signs of wobble and decay, this is partly because the press has started to also show signs that it is not free; especially on the right.
https://www.legit.ng/1172490-the-pillars-democracy.html
I really liked the details of the American and British bureaucratic systems of state, that I was not aware of; especially in relation to the independence of the States’ themselves, but worry that Federal law could be tweaked enough to erode that independence without effecting the constitution, with the sort cronyistic government make-up that Trump is proposing and currently making.
I think the four pillars of democracy is a reasonable way to state that the mechanics that were talking about is being eroded by Trump and his cronies; who don’t particularly like the idea of democracy, mainly because it means they might lose control of the mechanisms of power and some of their money, which is what you are saying.
It is very good to get a bit more detail on the houses and the legislation in relation to the constitution. I certainly wasn’t aware of each states independence in the way you are talking about it. I think that maybe the way the State react to his eventual disruptions will be very interesting, presumably the judicial system will throw a lot of filibusters into courts for the duration of his presidency to stop him dismantling too much.
Even though presidential power is limited by each state, in practice; does not federal law take precedence?
‘The Constitution is what keeps it all together, which is what the Civil War (1861-1865) was all about.’
Although I don’t believe a civil war will happen, it could be close, I think luckily the Army will always stand on the side of the institutions; as it is one (even when they are not allowed to)
But I think you are right that the previous balance between the left and the right is slowly toppling towards right extremism, extremism is everywhere; a sure sign of encroaching war.
In the original statement about the impossible conundrum of American consumption and its collective inability to face up to the fact that they are over cooking the engine of life and mother nature is choking and we don’t have anywhere else to go Mr Musk because that future is a few hundred years off.
The second world war never really finished; these are the final chapters; let’s hope it doesn’t finish us all off. I did once call Putin an Environmentalist when they invaded Ukraine (as an ironic bad joke, I hasten to add).
In the end no matter how much you reduce C02 output, it is our population level that relatively generates the most damage and as a bioproduct of Americas over consumption and their inability to see that they just have to stop consuming or reduce their numbers to balance the same equation.
And as much as Elon Musk thinks that continuing the capitalistic progress to Mars will counter these environmental conundrums; we are no way near ready to do that on the scales that are necessary, although I agree that it is something that we should continually aim for, but the time scales are all wrong.
In the end ‘The People’ hold democracy up in a balance with all the social institutions, which is why freedom of the press is part the four pillars of democracy. the countries collective unconscious is represented in those institutions not only in bureaucracy, but socially by the people that make the decisions to continually support and adjust it, change it; it’s also why there is a culture war, because some religious beliefs are so strong that they find it difficult to live under democracy as the final arbiter of right and wrong; but maybe they can beside it; they fear the power of democracy above any form social persecution; because losing their belief in their religion is somehow worked into this confrontation and that is what they fear most. Trump and Musk are zealots because of it in reverse and it does take two to tango. Any religion with monotheistic tendencies will find democracy very difficult to live within. But I think, even though personally I have suffered from this cultural confrontation, both sides have things to say that are beneficial to the whole, look at the world we live in, it’s a total mess and very unequal, with fundamental issues.
‘the party that seeks to provide as much welfare for the citizen as is deemed necessary for maintaining the overall health and safety of every member of society no matter what their circumstances. This is in keeping with the idea that any individual can become rich by being an entrepreneur or exercising their talent and expertise.’
Yes like humans, there are lots of contradictions in these processes, As much as I dislike the Windows operating system; if not least as the first of the tech giants monopolies that the American government failed to do anything about. But If you look at what Bill Gates did for global vaccine distribution and usage; he has saved millions upon millions of lives, and probably saved double that just for the world being partially prepared for Covid, especially when you look at the figures from the 1918 Spanish flu.
As you say in relation to the move to the American right, we hear about the odd state banning books for religious reasons, but your statement ‘there are also those who believe that the ruling party must regulate the behaviours of its citizens whilst at the same time supporting the most rich and powerful’ implies a whole different level of interference, but I suppose Margaret Atwood did image that America would get there; I might read it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid’s_Tale
‘Whether the tradition of States Rights keep the spirit of the Constitution alive is to be seen. The Federal Government could well be a lost cause, particularly in the light of a simpering and unresponsive supreme court which upholds criminality as opposed to anything approaching a check or balance on the executive.’
‘So grin and bear it is hardly in my thinking. This election is a disaster for the United States as it is for Western Democracies as a whole.’
I do agree with you, but on another contradictory note; the decent into a third world war looks remarkably possible and although there are benefits to such things for the environment, it would cause an amount of suffering that is difficult to imagine; so maybe we need the chaos of an idiot, because there are no real answers to our problems other than strict oversight that goes against many of the freedoms of democracy, especially for American consumption, although that is where the Turnip won’t help at-all.
The next four years will be critical for many reasons, politically & environmentally; I suppose war is politically, everything is connected, maybe Lovelock’s ideas of Gaia are true; although he always hated that they became so religiously upheld by the environmentalists – nature will get rid of us if become too out of balance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis
Any approach to political policy begins with personal philosophy/ Why are we here? What are we here for? does it matter? and what are we to do about it? There are any number of answers.
Separatists and Nationalists are not what is required, yet that appears to be all that is on offer.
Where do we go from here? Where does philosophy take us and whence the economic agenda to take us there beyond politics?
I’ve not really come up with any answers, just counter points, I suppose the future described by Iain M Bank’s with his invention of a society called the ‘Culture’ would be my dream answer, but it’s a few 100 years away. Anarchism with the robots
No comments:
Post a Comment