|
| Thread: Intentions |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV |
|
kayna
Supreme Hero
|
posted April 23, 2014 06:39 PM |
|
Edited by kayna at 18:40, 23 Apr 2014.
|
If you find my argument "childish" then let me tell you that most people defending the intentions of their governments are "naive". Evil -did- evolve, like almost everything else on this planet. You evolve to survive. Exactly as you said ( and as I insinuated, why have I this feeling that you misunderstood my words ? ), axe wielding barbarians can't ride in Canada or elsewhere without being brutally shot down, so evil, to succeed, has to employ more subtle manners, like joining the law, keeping a facade of goodness, etc etc.
And to make a link back to the original subject of this thread, one of those ways is to implore pity and forgiveness through the excuse of good intentions. The original poster posed an interesting question because he was talking about a single person which made this "intention" more... quantifiable? Examinable? ... But then this thread twisted to intentions of a government, which is to me completely absurd. Governments don't have souls, why bother understanding their intentions, to judge if their souls are worthy of a second chance?
The closest you will find in governments to "souls that needs to be judged to see if they re worth a second chance or not through their intentions after commiting an evil act" are their workers, and that draws us into an extremely complex and moot subject to which my opinion ( which is an extremely rebellious one that I cant state without cursing anyways ) doesn't really matter. Why ? Simple ! The government is a machine made to replace those that failed, aka, those that got caught in the act. You took a bribe, you got caught? You get replaced by someone with a fresh face, ready to snow people again until he she get caught, replace, rince, repeat.
Too long didn't read :
Seeking the intentions behind an individual's mistake is worth it; seeking the intentions behind a government is absolutely pointless and naive, even.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 23, 2014 07:09 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 19:11, 23 Apr 2014.
|
Yes, but take the example of the recent economical crisis in US, they actually bailed out the ones responsible and lower classes suffered. On their defense, they said the intention was to prevent the system from totally collapsing, leaving everyone under the rubble.
If you look at my original post, you'll see good and evil are terms I find inadequate to define human actions. Even a glimpse at any network of relationships will show you that the motivations, conflicts, intentions and interactions of any people on any level (personal, communal or national) are far too complicated to categorize as pure evil or pure good. These are just terms that make everyday decisions a little more simple, that's their primary function but for anything beyond that, they are useless. Say, you're a sociologist examining Nazi Germany for example, could your study be something like "those people were very bad people so they wanted to do evil'" of course not. So, while arguing about the importance (or insignificance) of intentions, I think good and evil is quite a flawed duality to begin with anyway.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 23, 2014 07:43 PM |
|
|
there was this book about corporations acting as psychopaths (which doesn't mean that people making them are psychopaths) and it's probably not very different for governments. I guess, when an organisation reach some size and complexity, it begins to rot, maybe because people don't see the grand picture anymore, and it becomes hard to spot disfunctions and prevent them from corrupting the system.
yesterday, I saw a documentary, about how USA prepared the recent colored revolutions, and that was interesting, cause they interviewed several guys that were paid by US government to organize it all, and they seemed honest and proud of what they did, they seemed convinced they were going to free people from tyranny. there was an interesting bit, about people making a propaganda newspaper, in Ukraine or Serbia, with advices on how to make a revolution, and the guy said they didn't really like George Bush, but since they received their money from US government, they would only publish articles that make him look good.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 23, 2014 08:43 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 20:44, 23 Apr 2014.
|
I actually know a person who worked on "strategic communication" (read: propaganda) in Iraq and she's very much an idealist, caring a lot about the values of liberty.
I also agree with you Fauch that the true idealists are many times actually the realists, since these are actually able to change things.
As for government, that's just organized evil.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 23, 2014 08:51 PM |
|
|
"my momma always said, evil is, as evil does."
lol. evil. what is this, the dark ages? you guys want to hunt "witches" next? give me a break. 
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 23, 2014 10:41 PM |
|
|
|
it wasn't stated clearly in the documentary (at least, I don't think so) but I was under the impression that what fell short in the good intentions of those idealists, is that they absolutely wanted to free their nation from some tyrants, but you actually didn't know if they ever thought of what would happen after. as if removing a single men would magically solve everything. by "freeing" their nation, all they do is actually let the room vacant for another tyrant. it's actually quite obvious when you organize a revolution in order to have anticipated elections.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 23, 2014 10:47 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 22:48, 23 Apr 2014.
|
The Arab Spring is a great present-day example of the rise and fall of revolutions.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 24, 2014 12:02 AM |
|
|
|
Arab Spring is an uprising not a revolution. It's not a social class taking the power from another opressive class, it's simply fed up people taking down some leaders and their staff.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2014 12:25 AM |
|
Edited by xerox at 00:26, 24 Apr 2014.
|
Revolution is a fundamental change of power in a short period of time. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with "class warfare". Just look at the American revolution which was hardly particulary proletarian.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2014 12:46 AM |
|
|
|
you probably noticed that we sometimes cause more harm when we want to help. I'm not thinking about artu's exemple, where that man was in danger of death and in urgent need of help, but those idealists who want to free the people. but what do they know? they have no clue if the people actually want to be freed or not. those people may not even know themselves. disasters happen because some people decided they absolutely had to help other people who never asked anything.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 24, 2014 01:21 AM |
|
|
xerox said:
Revolution is a fundamental change of power in a short period of time. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with "class warfare". Just look at the American revolution which was hardly particulary proletarian.
No, revolution is a fundamental change of THE REGIME in a short period of time. That's what makes it different than an uprising or a coup. Unless there are some very special conditions, that usually invoves class conflict this way or the other. Struggle between individuals or hubs of power are usually not transformative enough to change regimes that fast.
|
|
kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2014 04:56 AM |
|
|
|
He rolls his eyes. "Maybe we should merge all threads into one and call it the political thread."
|
| |
|
|
