Saturday, February 23, 2008
Democracy, a stupid system?
Democracy
My idea of today’s democracy is that it is not democracy at all but merely a dictatorship of stupidity. Everybody can argue with me, but this is really what I think.
My short explanation goes as follows: If there are elections and there are only two candidates for the office (whatever office), one is university professor and the other is a mason. When the professor makes his speeches only few highly educated people understand what he says. The others who do not understand usually react in a way as “he is stupid”, this is nonsense” etc. The reason for this type of reaction is the fact that they do not understand but do not want to admit this fact so they ridicule the ideas they cannot understand. And do not forget one fact: there are only 1000 university professors but several millions of simple people.
So when this simple man is speaking the vast majority of people will understand and even will have the feel of the ideological sameness and therefore this vast majority of people will vote for the mason. The professor will lose.
So at the end the group of university professors must obey the political directions of some masons. Isn’t that shocking? To me it is. As I perceive this situation as dictatorship of stupidity.
This example is a virtual setup. But there are plenty of examples in real life that this really is so. Joschka Fischer, former German vice chancellor, was a taxi driver, even more former minister for social things and family was a metal worker, etc. Several years ago, in the Czech Republic, all the addressed university professors when offered the office of president of the republic refused.
There are psychological and sociological studies made in Germany that show similarity. If you are a member of working class but you pass all the elite economic schools you will be never accepted as the top manager as you are missing something. This something is the way of thinking that was given to you when you were a baby, and this something will be recognized by people who might promote you to certain position, but because you differ they will not do that, and spite your knowledge you will be only assistant to some CEO, regardless the fact that you know 5x more than he does.
The next example to think about is the organization of democracy in the Roman Empire. Only few were allowed to vote. Elections were not for everybody. Only free citizens having certain status were eligible to go and vote. Slaves were not allowed to vote, some free citizens of lower status were also not allowed to vote.
My idea of today’s democracy is that it is not democracy at all but merely a dictatorship of stupidity. Everybody can argue with me, but this is really what I think.
My short explanation goes as follows: If there are elections and there are only two candidates for the office (whatever office), one is university professor and the other is a mason. When the professor makes his speeches only few highly educated people understand what he says. The others who do not understand usually react in a way as “he is stupid”, this is nonsense” etc. The reason for this type of reaction is the fact that they do not understand but do not want to admit this fact so they ridicule the ideas they cannot understand. And do not forget one fact: there are only 1000 university professors but several millions of simple people.
So when this simple man is speaking the vast majority of people will understand and even will have the feel of the ideological sameness and therefore this vast majority of people will vote for the mason. The professor will lose.
So at the end the group of university professors must obey the political directions of some masons. Isn’t that shocking? To me it is. As I perceive this situation as dictatorship of stupidity.
This example is a virtual setup. But there are plenty of examples in real life that this really is so. Joschka Fischer, former German vice chancellor, was a taxi driver, even more former minister for social things and family was a metal worker, etc. Several years ago, in the Czech Republic, all the addressed university professors when offered the office of president of the republic refused.
There are psychological and sociological studies made in Germany that show similarity. If you are a member of working class but you pass all the elite economic schools you will be never accepted as the top manager as you are missing something. This something is the way of thinking that was given to you when you were a baby, and this something will be recognized by people who might promote you to certain position, but because you differ they will not do that, and spite your knowledge you will be only assistant to some CEO, regardless the fact that you know 5x more than he does.
The next example to think about is the organization of democracy in the Roman Empire. Only few were allowed to vote. Elections were not for everybody. Only free citizens having certain status were eligible to go and vote. Slaves were not allowed to vote, some free citizens of lower status were also not allowed to vote.
What does it mean to be human II
This is my response to the author of the post called: What does it mean to be human?
Your ideas are really good, and it seems that you are sort of stunned by the discrepancy between the notion that people are image of god and the evolutionary notion that humans stem from animals due to evolution. Well, I can understand it, most probably you were raised as believer, I was raised as atheist, so I think this is where the difference comes from. I do not have the questions you have, but I believe I can suggest you an answer to this question.
It is a matter of hierarchy. Humans as a group when developed a bit away from the animals might start using the word animal as pejorative one against some other members of their group, and thus trying to make difference between themselves and the others who did not behave alike. This is also valid for the differentiation among groups, saying that animals are lower creatures than humans.
If you will follow this notion of hierarchy, you may find it functioning perfectly well in today’s human life. You can see it everywhere, just recall status symbols; just recall specific addressing with all the titles and names of functions by top people, so differentiating themselves from the “plebs” below. Any kind of racism stems from xenophobia and is based on the notion of hierarchy. Have a look at the setup of any society, say Americans or people in UK, in Germany, and you will find extreme differentiation among group inside these societies. If you look at all the humans all over the world you will find also grouping of these societies, and hierarchy among them.
9/11 might be seen as an example of an attempt to show that some nation that is perceived as top nation, at the top of the human extra-group hierarchy can be “sort of lowered and equalized” to the lower position of another group in the human extra-group hierarchy. The explanation is as follows: when I can do you any harm and you are unable to protect yourself then you are not so great, I have lowered your position by attacking you successfully. Then I feel better, because you do not appear any more as GOD, you are vulnerable and “I“can cause you this harm.
So using wording that god made humans to his picture is nothing else than an attempt of humans to make clear that hey are higher in the hierarchy then the creatures called animals. But is that really so? And if so, in what sense exactly? We should look at this a bit more differentially.
You may also want to read some of my other ideas that you may find here.
Your ideas are really good, and it seems that you are sort of stunned by the discrepancy between the notion that people are image of god and the evolutionary notion that humans stem from animals due to evolution. Well, I can understand it, most probably you were raised as believer, I was raised as atheist, so I think this is where the difference comes from. I do not have the questions you have, but I believe I can suggest you an answer to this question.
It is a matter of hierarchy. Humans as a group when developed a bit away from the animals might start using the word animal as pejorative one against some other members of their group, and thus trying to make difference between themselves and the others who did not behave alike. This is also valid for the differentiation among groups, saying that animals are lower creatures than humans.
If you will follow this notion of hierarchy, you may find it functioning perfectly well in today’s human life. You can see it everywhere, just recall status symbols; just recall specific addressing with all the titles and names of functions by top people, so differentiating themselves from the “plebs” below. Any kind of racism stems from xenophobia and is based on the notion of hierarchy. Have a look at the setup of any society, say Americans or people in UK, in Germany, and you will find extreme differentiation among group inside these societies. If you look at all the humans all over the world you will find also grouping of these societies, and hierarchy among them.
9/11 might be seen as an example of an attempt to show that some nation that is perceived as top nation, at the top of the human extra-group hierarchy can be “sort of lowered and equalized” to the lower position of another group in the human extra-group hierarchy. The explanation is as follows: when I can do you any harm and you are unable to protect yourself then you are not so great, I have lowered your position by attacking you successfully. Then I feel better, because you do not appear any more as GOD, you are vulnerable and “I“can cause you this harm.
So using wording that god made humans to his picture is nothing else than an attempt of humans to make clear that hey are higher in the hierarchy then the creatures called animals. But is that really so? And if so, in what sense exactly? We should look at this a bit more differentially.
You may also want to read some of my other ideas that you may find here.
What does it mean to be human
Evolution, humans, animals and traits
Today I came across extremely interesting posting in a blog of biologist and a vet. The basic idea of this biologist is that there are many traits in different kinds of animals now being slowly discovered that correspond with our human traits. This can be seen as the next piece of evidence for the fact that we really stem from animals and we have a lot in common with them. Actually, we have extremely much in common with animals. Why? Well, the answer is simple: we are animals too, only slightly differently evolved.
A time ago there was a posting in one blog about an article saying that Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior. This, of course, is too simple. If you go to this blog you may find my response there as anonym with the title morality in primates and in other animals. You may also want to read the other contributions there.
I would advice to all who are at least slightly interested in the topics of evolution, and seeking the answer for the question “where do we come from?” to read these both offered links including all the other links shown there. There is a lot of information that can be used for better understanding of evolution, and also of our human evolution. It is also reasonable to follow what is happening on this field on daily basis, as there is constantly new information presented on the internet.
The only obstacle I see is the vast flood of information on this field as it unites several scientific fields, including genetics, epigenetics, neurology, biology, semiotics, memetics, linguistics, neuroeconomics, chemistry, physics, quantum physics, ethology and many others.
Today I came across extremely interesting posting in a blog of biologist and a vet. The basic idea of this biologist is that there are many traits in different kinds of animals now being slowly discovered that correspond with our human traits. This can be seen as the next piece of evidence for the fact that we really stem from animals and we have a lot in common with them. Actually, we have extremely much in common with animals. Why? Well, the answer is simple: we are animals too, only slightly differently evolved.
A time ago there was a posting in one blog about an article saying that Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior. This, of course, is too simple. If you go to this blog you may find my response there as anonym with the title morality in primates and in other animals. You may also want to read the other contributions there.
I would advice to all who are at least slightly interested in the topics of evolution, and seeking the answer for the question “where do we come from?” to read these both offered links including all the other links shown there. There is a lot of information that can be used for better understanding of evolution, and also of our human evolution. It is also reasonable to follow what is happening on this field on daily basis, as there is constantly new information presented on the internet.
The only obstacle I see is the vast flood of information on this field as it unites several scientific fields, including genetics, epigenetics, neurology, biology, semiotics, memetics, linguistics, neuroeconomics, chemistry, physics, quantum physics, ethology and many others.
