Why I give up on politics...

[Anonymous]

Morality will always be based on subjective preferences. These preferences are often based on a generalized view of the “best-interests” of all individuals. This is flawed for as long as individuals remain free-thinking or sporadic in their ways (to those who deny freewill) best interest can never be defined. It can only be objectively defined on an individual  basis and shall it remain.

To those who argue that we should all agree one day, I wish you the best of luck. I say live and let live and allow the individual to remain. As long as there are individuals, there will be conflicting interests. We should learn to accept this.

Why should I even bother fighting conflicting interests? Shouldn't I just focus on just sustaining myself happily among these war-mongers?

[kiba]

http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/

Politics is the mindkiller. Unfortunately, it seems to affect libertarians too.

[Anonymous]

http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/

Politics is the mindkiller. Unfortunately, it seems to affect libertarians too.

Heh, I read that article once before and didn't fully get it. Now I am embracing it.

[gene]

Morality will always be based on subjective preferences. These preferences are often based on a generalized view of the “best-interests” of all individuals. This is flawed for as long as individuals remain free-thinking or sporadic in their ways (to those who deny freewill) best interest can never be defined. It can only be objectively defined on an individual  basis and shall it remain.

To those who argue that we should all agree one day, I wish you the best of luck. I say live and let live and allow the individual to remain. As long as there are individuals, there will be conflicting interests. We should learn to accept this.

Oh, but by taking this attitude, you are still making a political choice.

Why should I even bother fighting conflicting interests? Shouldn't I just focus on just sustaining myself happily among these war-mongers?

"Why try to make the world a decent place? Why not just forget about that and take care of myself?"

This is consistent with your preferred political world view, which boils down to this:

Libertarianism. A simple-minded right-wing ideology ideally suited to those unable or unwilling to see past their own sociopathic self-regard.

-Iain Banks

[myrkul]

"Why try to make the world a decent place? Why not just forget about that and take care of myself?"

Thing is, if more people stopped trying to "fix" things, the world would be a better place.

Atlas, Stephan Molyneux suggests in Universally Preferable Behavior that While each individual makes his own morality, there are a few things which everyone would prefer not happen to them, and thus, shouldn't do to others. Give it a read, see what you think.

[ribuck]

... try to make the world a decent place ...

Oh but we are trying to make the world a decent place!

It's just that voluntarists know that different people have different ideas of what constitutes a "decent place". So our idea of a "decent place" is one where a coercive state does not impose its own idea of a "decent place" on other people.

[Bimmerhead]

I have no idea who Iain Banks is, but he seems to be implying that socialism is not suited to people unable or unwilling to see past their own sociopathic self-regard.

Generally, people regard themselves first.  This is not a result of their political orientation, this is an undeniable characteristic of human nature.  You can explain the origin of this fact from both a Judeo-Christian or evolutionary worldview.  Which also testifies to the undeniability of it's existence.

The political system which best incorporates this fact into it's schema will prove to be the most effective at producing desired outcomes.

That is why socialism has been a complete and utter failure in every country, every religion and every culture in which it has been perpetrated.

And the gall, the GALL of socialists to accuse conservatives, libertarians, free marketers etc. of being selfish or self-absorbed.

Anyone who has had the misfortune to have to deal with a labour unionist, a self-righteous poverty pimp, or a self-loathing limousine liberal or 'intellectual' will know that socialists have made pursuing self-interest their religion - since they have generally abandoned the practice of true religion - and they are expert at it.

The further difficulty is that the socialist has no qualms at all about using force to enrich themselves, while the libertarian reconizes your right to your own property.


But Atlas, these are not reasons to abandon politics.  The problem is that generally politics is seen as the fight over who gets the goods.  Politics needs to be reframed as the fight over whether or not there will be a fight over the goods.

[ribuck]

Politics needs to be reframed as the fight over whether or not there will be a fight over the goods.

That's problematic, because politics depends on promising goods to voters at election time.

Rather than politics needing to be reframed, I think it needs to be made irrelevant by being superseded by direct interaction amongst individuals and voluntary communities.

[myrkul]

Politics needs to be reframed as the fight over whether or not there will be a fight over the goods.

That's problematic, because politics depends on promising goods to voters at election time.

Rather than politics needing to be reframed, I think it needs to be made irrelevant by being superseded by direct interaction amongst individuals and voluntary communities.

A3, baby!

[Bimmerhead]

Politics needs to be reframed as the fight over whether or not there will be a fight over the goods.

That's problematic, because politics depends on promising goods to voters at election time.

Rather than politics needing to be reframed, I think it needs to be made irrelevant by being superseded by direct interaction amongst individuals and voluntary communities.

Yes of course that is the end goal.  I'm just saying that given it is 2011 and we live in a real world where we have to pay taxes or face jail time, free-thinking people need to stay engaged in the currently existing political process if we hope to ever move the debate in our direction.

As shown by the willingness of participants in this thread to cede coercive power to some unknown website purveyor retroactively, simple mass opting out of the current dominant political-economic framework is not necessarily going to lead to an arrangement favourable to freedom.

[kiba]

Morality will always be based on subjective preferences. These preferences are often based on a generalized view of the “best-interests” of all individuals. This is flawed for as long as individuals remain free-thinking or sporadic in their ways (to those who deny freewill) best interest can never be defined. It can only be objectively defined on an individual  basis and shall it remain.

To those who argue that we should all agree one day, I wish you the best of luck. I say live and let live and allow the individual to remain. As long as there are individuals, there will be conflicting interests. We should learn to accept this.

Oh, but by taking this attitude, you are still making a political choice.

Why should I even bother fighting conflicting interests? Shouldn't I just focus on just sustaining myself happily among these war-mongers?

"Why try to make the world a decent place? Why not just forget about that and take care of myself?"

This is consistent with your preferred political world view, which boils down to this:

Libertarianism. A simple-minded right-wing ideology ideally suited to those unable or unwilling to see past their own sociopathic self-regard.

-Iain Banks

You're just demonstrating the article's point by being irrational. To you, libertarianism is a "right-wing" sociopathic ideology not worth discussing.

The opposite of that would be 'Socialism is a "left-wing" ideology not worth discussing. It have no basis in reality.'


BAM! You just kill rational discussion. Politics is a mindkiller.

[NetCheck]

Atlas, personally I understand where you are coming from. I used to be quite active in the grassroots several years ago but I reached a point where you realize that most of the energy invested in such activities and causes pretty much goes nowhere. In that sense, the same amount of energy invested in your family, social life etc seem to bear more fruits and is thus more worth it. At least that has been my experience. The only things I really go out of my activism/political interest was getting to meet interesting people and making new friends. And oh yeah - leaning a lot of lessons. 

[Vicky22]

You can't be apolitical in today's world.

[rasmontalvo]

Just believe in things you see with your own eyes not someone other's

[unhlcvlt]

I can not stand when big cheeses manipulate people. Laying their minds with lies and cashing in on it.