Let us dispose of the tradtional view of tyrrany from here on out. For that view is outdated, at least in terms of our present society. Tyrrany, for the colelctive purpose of this arguement is nothing but the oppression of the common man. Let us not waste time mincing words and deffinitions about a single word. Let it represent its basic meaning, which is, oppression. We cannot hold to the idea of a tyrant in our society in the true sense unless we wish to say that out tyrant has the ability to fall only to be replaced with a new tyrant whenever the people decide. No, while the notion is absurd in some regards, it is not wholly inaccurate, however, it cannot serve as a true foundation for this argument at hand.
Democracy is indeed the perfect form of tyrrany because of its subtlety. How does the ruling party stay in power? How does the opposition gain power? Fearmongering to a mass population of, for the most part, uneducated working class members. It is with this fear that there is control. One may argue that anyone with the education can become a president or a prime minister, however, by the time that the person in question has reached such a lofty height they are no longer who they first were. Indeed they have been changed by society itself into the shape that power in our society must take. And that is someone who will not always be around. Someone who the people can remove if they so wish it. However, this is but an illusion in some regards. In a traditional state of tyrrany you have the tyrant. The tyrant is a visible force of oppression. Something and someone that is a symbol of all the suffering and troubles of the society in which he rules over. However, in thos senario the common man can only be pushed so far until he eventually wakes up to realize that there is more of him than there is of the tyrant and the tyrant's ruling class. Once the tyrant is removed however, society either creates a new visible tyrant on one of subtler nature, something more...democratic. In democray it is true that a party can rise and fall at the whims of the people. Or so it seems. The people are largely undereducated on the politics and policies of the opposing parties and often vote either out of habit, coercion from surrounding individuals, or the fearmongering campaigns launched by the parties. Often the former and latter situations are the most prevailent. So with this in mind then the commonality is caught in a blissful illusion of power that is fueled by the politicians themselves. However, it is the rich and powerful who pull the strings by feeding the commonality with the deceit and lies that are required to either stay in power or remove their foes from the power they covet. Let us take a look at our ecomonic system.
A small upper class A medium middle class A large lower class
This hierarchy provides the balance the ruling class needs to maintain its grip on society. Often times the poor are uneduacated in many regards and thus fear and the idea of salvation from this fear are key motivators. While the middle class is educated to a decent extend in some regards they still lack, largely, the political education required to make informed choices, this is in fact a form of oppression. The oppression of knowledge. Many will argue the internet solves this, however, the key motivator is still fearmongering. The threat of an enemy either real or imagined, or simply blown our of proportion will do the work for the politicians and rich. This system has created a society based around the idividual wants and needs of the person, not the collective needs of the community. Thus we suffer from apathy, a lack of morality and the chains of debt and poverty, yet we would call it freedom. Had I the ability I'd bring this system crashing down and replace it with an ideal form of society. True equality, where no one leads and other help eachother for the morality of it instead of the self serving interests we see today. However, I know this ideal is nothing short of impossible unless humans change fundamentally in a social manner. Also, how does one take down such a system as this? Oh I have my solution, however, it is once more, another impossibility.
Ah, so you're talking about representative democracy it sounds.
This hierarchy provides the balance the ruling class needs to maintain its grip on society. Often times the poor are uneduacated in many regards and thus fear and the idea of salvation from this fear are key motivators. While the middle class is educated to a decent extend in some regards they still lack, largely, the political education required to make informed choices, this is in fact a form of oppression.
I don't understand how you can think the middle class is uneducated. What is your philosophy behind education? What is it that the people aren't being taught? What levels of education are you talking about? Why do people choose not to go to school?
What if I were to tell you that today's schools are a form of oppression?
However, it is the rich and powerful who pull the strings by feeding the commonality with the deceit and lies that are required to either stay in power or remove their foes from the power they covet. Let us take a look at our ecomonic system.
Well, you have the free market where businesses should not be able to intervene when it comes to politics. However, politicians accept bribes from businesses and these politicians create laws to help these businesses remain huge. When the government gets involved, it is no longer a free market rather than it is corporatism. Politicians take advantage of the problems they cause by blaming the free market (when it's their fault), and they suggest to the people that the government gets even more involved.
In a nut shell, the government creates a problem through intervention. The intervention causes problems. The government blames someone else. The government suggests more intervention to fix the problems.
"The government is good at one thing...it knows how to break your legs, and then hand you a crutch and say 'see if it weren't for the government you wouldn't be able to walk.'" -- Harry Browne
Thus we suffer from apathy, a lack of morality and the chains of debt and poverty, yet we would call it freedom. Had I the ability I'd bring this system crashing down and replace it with an ideal form of society. True equality, where no one leads and other help eachother for the morality of it instead of the self serving interests we see today.
What if I were to tell you that today's schools are a form of oppression?
I would whole heartedly agree. Students in our current system are confined to what they learn. And society has built the idea that true success is in the form of a university or college degree. This idea is seductive enough to lure many people who do not have the financial means to achieve such goals, and in the ends they often fall by the wayside either because they lack the intelligence, or, because they can do nothing with the degree they have. Why? Because they have no "experience". And even then these people are often chained by debt for decades, if not life. Because to start in debt leads you to accumulate more debt in the basic day to day life that they lead.
In a nut shell, the government creates a problem through intervention. The intervention causes problems. The government blames someone else. The government suggests more intervention to fix the problems.
Precisely. And yet they create the illusion that the common man has the power to remove their government should they so wish it. However, even doing this does little because the opposition would not easily give up power over the people even if it stands against their parties ideals. No they simply invent a lie to maintain this control.
I'm curious to hear what this idea is.
I truly am an idealist in this idea, because my idea goes against all of human nature's need to dominate. The idea is simple: people live their lives in true equality, everyone has enough food and water, a form of shelter, and, should they need it, medical care. People are helped for the sake of needing help.
As I said it is nothing but an idealists dream because to do this would mean to reconfigure our current financial system from the ground up. Also, in such a society money would almost be pointless. Humans would simply destroy this idealist world because humans have a need to dominate those around them.
I have ideas on how to bring our system down, however the execution would take generations, and you'd need to find consecutive people all driven by the same goal. In theory the idea is simple, amass as much physical wealth as possible. In fact, amass so much that the country begins running short on money, and if they print more than simply flood the market with your own equity. Of course you would need multiple unwitting front men and businesses to do this. Also, in this age of electronic currency (more or less) it would be even more challenging. However, doing this would lead to an economic colapse and ensuing anarchy.
Nice. The unwitting business man is already one pawn in the arsenal of the current world leaders (the identity's of whom I have no idea) and it works like a terrorist cell. Independent but for the same cause.
I would love for this idea to come about without the need for a collapse. This would inevitably lead to civil wars etc.
Oh and my uncle quoted a famous saying the other day, not sure who came up with it, but it fits my feeling on the matter quite superbly...
First this is the true american shape, a cirle small lower class, large middle class, small upper class Acually democracy and tyrany culd not be more diffrent democracy is in constant motion, tyrany is landlocked democracy allows for the public opion to come first, tryany supresses it the closes cracy to democracy is olicracy followed by aristocracy monarcy then tyrany
I truly am an idealist in this idea, because my idea goes against all of human nature's need to dominate. The idea is simple: people live their lives in true equality, everyone has enough food and water, a form of shelter, and, should they need it, medical care. People are helped for the sake of needing help.
Well, there's communism...
The problem with this system is that it would require coercion. Equality for everyone sounds great, but forcing those who do succeed to take care of those less fortunate than themselves is actually unfair as well. Equality means even and when you apply such to a social system it's hard to argue against even as even is associated with being fair.
I would whole heartedly agree. Students in our current system are confined to what they learn. And society has built the idea that true success is in the form of a university or college degree. This idea is seductive enough to lure many people who do not have the financial means to achieve such goals, and in the ends they often fall by the wayside either because they lack the intelligence, or, because they can do nothing with the degree they have. Why? Because they have no "experience". And even then these people are often chained by debt for decades, if not life. Because to start in debt leads you to accumulate more debt in the basic day to day life that they lead.
Any ideas on how to fix this problem?
However, doing this would lead to an economic colapse and ensuing anarchy.
Anarchy is the only escape from government coercion that I can think of.
What makes you think anarchy would cause the economy to collapse?
I thought that this topic was going to be good, but when I read the post, I was incredibly disappointed. Your post points to the idea that the poor are "economically oppressed" and the wealthy are therefore the "economic oppressors."
Democracy is a tyranny of the majority because a true democracy allows the majority to have power over those who are not in the majority. Thus, a Bill of Rights is necessary to give the citizens rights, and government's power needs to be curbed.
There is nothing inherently good about democracy - it's only that the other forms of government are inherently evil.
democracy is in constant motion, tyrany is landlocked democracy allows for the public opion to come first, tryany supresses it
As I said let us do away with the traditional definitions. Democracy gives the illusion of power for the people. And look at the American system, is that not landlocked? Two parties ever back and forth, public opinion swaying ever in a pendulum.
Any ideas on how to fix this problem?
Aside from breaking the system? I suppose gathering numerous people to push for change in the current system, however, that risks becomming corrupted in your goals.
What makes you think anarchy would cause the economy to collapse?
No, the colapse would casue the anarchy. Try to imagine a country where hard coin is almost impossibly scarce.
I thought that this topic was going to be good, but when I read the post, I was incredibly disappointed. Your post points to the idea that the poor are "economically oppressed" and the wealthy are therefore the "economic oppressors."
If you wish to be base about it then yes, to some extent, however the government also oppresses through media and fearmongering, or and control of the education system.
it's only that the other forms of government are inherently evil.
That is an ignorant view point.
I'm so sorry to have disappointed you, yet ironically you agree with me in many regards.
Try to imagine a country where hard coin is almost impossibly scarce.
Or a country where you can have 1 million hard coins and it's not enough to buy a slice of bread.
yet ironically you agree with me in many regards.
I may agree with you in some ways, but I also disagree with you in the economic sense. This is what I was trying to get at. I thought this was going to a Mill-ish Tyranny of the Majority thing, but it was as Marx-ish Class Struggle thing.
As I said let us do away with the traditional definitions. Democracy gives the illusion of power for the people. And look at the American system, is that not landlocked? Two parties ever back and forth, public opinion swaying ever in a pendulum.
To be fair, every country is run under a system that is, to some degree, tyrannical.
