'Democracy' is not a practical aim, it's an abstract ideal. Which is why it's so easy to hijack the word and make it mean 'Colonial rule by an installed thug' - and keep a straight face.
'Open access to policy influence without filtering by cash or caste' is more of a practical aim.
Of course it's not any kind of philosophical absolute. But it doesn't need to be - it just needs to create results which everyone can experience directly.
That, then turns ethics into a political problem because you need to get a large supermajority of the population to agree to the practical aims before they can agree on what constitutes ethical behaviour.
Individual sovereignty, however unrealistic and ultimately destructive, is an easy sell. A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
That, then turns ethics into a political problem
Ethics is always a political problem - abstract ethics become meaningless without practical relationships with other people and the environment.
Individual sovereignty, however unrealistic and ultimately destructive, is an easy sell.
Exactly. But it's inherently and automatically corrosive to practical relationships - unless it's tempered with some other more inclusive ethical basis.
One of those relationship types has to be a comprehensive innoculation against charismatic leader/follower relationships.
It would probably be better still to round up all the predators and keep a close and permanent eye on them.
If you deal with the predators effectively, I think everything else gets very much easier. It's the predators who parasitise tribalism, and without out them it becomes much less of a problem.
I'm not sure what 'deal with' would mean in practice. I'm certainly not proposing shooting them all - more some sort of formal oversight and rechanneling of energies, with limited freedom for those who can't contribute.
Of course this seems draconian, and it goes against our indoctrination into the mythology of perfect personal freedom. But it's less draconian than allowing Hitlers, Mugabes and Bushes to run things. Because all they'll do is round up people anyway - and probably kill them too, one way or another.
If you deal with the predators effectively
problem being that to do that you need predators, of an incorruptible character, to boot.
then how do you keep them honest?
eliot spitzer comes to mind... ~Government budget deficits are not nearly as dangerous as the deficits we have created in vital and complex natural systems.~ Naomi Klein.
i'd love to believe that, it would take genetic manipulation.
i hate it, the chinese do it, and we haven't for a while, (nuremberg notwithstanding) but execution would be the only fate that would put the fear of godde into them enough to stay on the straight and narrow, and even then some psycho risk-junkies would crap out, just to see if they could.
it's just so hard to eradicate selfishness and the corollary disprespect once it's installed in the person's OS from childhood, until we raise everyone with a conscience people will act out, and never so much as when they can gamble everything on it...
same reasons priests rape kids, the thrill of what's taboo, sociopathic urge to push the envelope in living a double life...
if you can't find /or have blocked out real, then the ache of life lacking meaning can give rise to a compulsion in some to go to the other edge, to live life with greater complexity and inner drama than what most accept more or less grumblingly...
that's what happens when adult bodies encase immature, unevolved value systems, it's fucked but there it is.
extreme fear would keep them straight, until we raise enough generations right, without implanting the terrible fears and insecurities, the existential dread that then gets covered up by anger, slow or fast-burning, because. their. life. should. be. better. than. this. they. got. gypped. and. someone. is. going. to. pay.
whoa this sounds like i'm channeling tony perkins on his way to the shower...
raise 'em right, or have to go medieval on 'em later. cast secret ballots for who gets to be executioner, and of course cut him/her some slack over and above the fat paycheck (to pay for therapy?), hell they should have given eliot all the naughties he wanted, he was sticking it the Man, (as well as his 'escorts'!
semi-snark ~Government budget deficits are not nearly as dangerous as the deficits we have created in vital and complex natural systems.~ Naomi Klein.
It would probably be better still to round up all the predators and keep a close and permanent eye on them.If you deal with the predators effectively, I think everything else gets very much easier. It's the predators who parasitise tribalism, and without out them it becomes much less of a problem.
The problem is that those you call "predators" are not a specific, predetermined category. Most of the people, including probably you and me can become a "predator" (or behave like one) in certain situations. And it is impossible to predict if somebody could become a "predator" or not. History is full of examples of people who started as selfless idealists and, once in power (or after a certain time in power) started to behave as "predators"... "Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet
