There seems to be a lot of debate on the various forums about Americans being right or wrong. Basically you can devide the two opposing groups as such:
In the "right" corner:
- Religious
- Capitalist
- American
- Army
And in the "Wrong corner:
- Secular
- Socialist
- Non-American
- Liberal (as in view points on drugs, abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality).
It looks, basically, like an American vs non-American divide. And it got me to thinking, could it possibly be that the two groups are so opposing that never the twain shall meet? At first I got a little worried and then a few simple truths dawned on me. What if we take basic morality and test it by both groups:
Is killing good or bad?
Both groups state that killing is bad.
Is raping good or bad?
Both groups state that raping is bad.
If you are starving, is it okay to steal to feed your children?
I couldn't answer this.
If somebody is beating you up, should you turn the other cheek?
Both groups would state that you should hit back. (so much for Jesus...)
I carried on with various statements along the lines of: Cheating on your partner, washing your hands after going to the toilet and happiness being more important than succes.
I think I can conclude that when it comes to simplistic moral values both groups are basically in agreement, but when more complicated social issues come into play, the two groups start to drift apart. For instance:
Is theft good or bad?
Both groups find theft bad.
Yet, when you ask: Is theft bad if you are starving, have no money and want to feed your children?
The answer becomes a hell of a lot more complicated and I can see cracks in the solidarity on the issue. Perhaps not even in the US - non-US divide.
So, if we're all so basically agreed on the fundamental issues, how come we so oppose each other when it comes to politics and such?
After thinking long and hard about the issue (which in my case isn't very long and certainly not very hard) I decided:
To judge morality you have to take a situation in which nobody is really involved. Like a football match. The referee is never from one of the two teams.
So, I picked sci-fi. Star Wars and Star Trek, arguably the two greatest sci-fi empires in the world. And I came to a startling conclusion:
How can it be that most Americans, when watching Star Wars, will support the Rebels over the Imperials, yet be so opposed and scared of terrorism?
and:
How can it be that most Americans, when watching Star Trek, will reckon the Federation a force for good, yet so vehemently oppose and fear communism?
How interesting is that then?
Basically the core values are EXACTLY the same as mine when watching sci-fi films, yet in reality it all goes weird on us.
How can it be that when watching Star Wars we'll support the same side, yet in reality we are on opposing sides of the fence?
What do you reckon?
This is what I think:
When watching sci-fi you are not involved, you're government is not involved and the media is not involved.
In reality the media indoctrinates you (This is good and this is bad, this you should support and this you should oppose), the government indoctrinates you (to support their stand on issues, without being open about the various agendas they're trying to persue) and in reality you and your children can die. So you're scared.
And as I've written 100 times, people who are scared act irrationally.
So my conclusion on the US is "Right" and the US is "wrong" divide is that it's not a moral issue at all. It's an indoctrination issue, as we can prove that in an objective setting we basically agree with each other.
Sorry to bore ya's all, I was just thinking out loud!
🙂
Originally posted by NyxieRussia (or Soviet Union) was State capitalism (the State took on the role of the multi-nationals in Western society).
Four legs god, two legs baaa-aad
Russia = communism
Star trek = socialism
Communism is from the word commune and is basically a social order based on dialectic materialism. Socialism is an economic model also based on dialectic materialism.
The two words are generally inter-changable because the social order and economic model go hand in hand and stem from the same philosophy (friction causes progression).
Originally posted by shavixmirBut Star trek was a representitive socialistic state, I don't think the ussr was.
Russia (or Soviet Union) was State capitalism (the State took on the role of the multi-nationals in Western society).
Communism is from the word commune and is basically a social order based on dialectic materialism. Socialism is an economic model also based on dialectic materialism.
The two words are generally inter-changable because the social orde ...[text shortened]... economic model go hand in hand and stem from the same philosophy (friction causes progression).
- Joined
- 20 May 05
- Moves
- 2728
Yesterday I watched a discussion between the front guy of the party which formerly was the SED (THE party in the former DDR).
He spokes about the neoliberalism which has mainly one target to let the capital grow.
Instead of this one and only target of todays governments he very much would like to see that other topics like social and education, science etc. should dominate.
He thinks of himself as a democratic socialist and when asked what that should be he replied: A socialistic government based on democratic values officially elected. He further says that the socialicsm powered buy oppressions of the state has lost but he denies to see the neoliberlism as the last and only idea.
We here in Germany have a difficult situation and they are expected to make it into the Bundestag (our house of lords or senate).
in my opinion he is damn right (and i am from formerly western germany).