The Political Thread

[Greg M.]

Isn't the question more 'Why don't most of us murder?' You'd argue we innately don't want to - isn't it possible that it's because we've been brought up in a society of small-l laws and morals in which murder is taboo? Bring us up in a society without such qualms, and wouldn't we be happy to?

[The Legendary Shark]

Good points, JBC.

What I'm saying is that all cultures, no matter how dissimilar, are inevitably built on human nature, which is essentially social. Lots of things get built on top of that nature, some of them wonderful, some of them horrendous and others just plain confusing. If we want to have a human society, I think we have to base it on human needs and human character. The more fundamental the better.

You raise a good point in toxic beliefs such as in slavery or bigotry. I can't do anything about them, all I can do is try to rise above those things myself and hope I'm not the only one trying - as I'm sure I'm not. I can't do anything about other cultures, either, except try to understand them. I've said this before but I long ago realised that I can't change the world, I can only change
my world.

I suppose it all boils down to belief. I believe in people. There's not one of us perfect and a few are downright nasty but, on the whole, the majority of us are pretty cool - especially when things are going well. Before I can properly believe in other people, though, I must first believe in myself; and this is the hard bit. If I can learn how to live without harming others, how to take control of my own rights and responsibilities, then I think that's a worthwhile way to spend my time. Keeps me occupied, anyway.

[The Legendary Shark]

I'm not sure there's ever been a culture that practised casual murder. Ritual murder, yes (but magically made "not murder" by decree of the rulers), but as a rule people in all cultures know how to get through their days without killing one another. A society that committed murder as casually as breaking a speed limit wouldn't last very long.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

Shark.

Watch THIS DOCUMENTARY if you get the chance.

[The Legendary Shark]

Thanks, Mr P - sounds interesting.

[IndigoPrime]

IP - do you refrain from murder because you don't want to murder or because the government tells you not to?

I don't see how that's relevant. The point is, some people will, and without anyone being compelled to do anything about anything, they'd have more of a free rein.

Just because there isn't a bunch of unqualified sociopaths making the laws, that doesn't mean there'd be no Law. Just because that same group aren't controlling the police, courts and prisons that doesn't mean there'd be no police, courts or prisons.

But you've said throughout no-one should be compelled to follow anything they don't believe in. So who makes these laws? Why should anyone adhere to them?

[The Legendary Shark]

Who said nobody could ever be compelled to do anything? So long as one's actions do not violate the rights of others, there's no justification for compulsion. The only justification for any level of violence is, in my view, self defence. Every creature on Earth has the right to defend itself, and so do we. That can be done individually or collectively or through expert agencies. The right to self defence justifies a proportionate use of force to apprehend violent criminals.

Society makes the laws. People adhere to them because they know Law holds society together.

[JayzusB.Christ]

The second last episode of Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast is worth a listen too if you're interested in the changing tides of human morality.  It's essentially about the gleeful gusto in which public torture and executions were viewed by the masses, and how disturbingly recently such a phenomenon continued.

The most recent western version of the phenomenon he describes is the terrible torture, burning and lynching of Jesse Washington, the young (black, of course) man suspected of raping a (white) girl. The whole community of Waco, Texas came out to watch and celebrate, with photos of the mutilated youth being sent to loved ones as postcards. Bits of his body were handed out as souvenirs.

It was 1916; there are people alive today who were alive back then.  Historically speaking, we are within a very tiny minority of people who don't get our kicks from watching humilation, mutilation, agony and death. Makes me seriously question the existence of a universal and unchanging core sense of human decency.

[Funt Solo]

As regards the mutilation and torture: I don't think it's intrinsically human nature to want to do those things.  You need to be taught that it's okay. 

With the example you provided, the white society was taught that black people were subhuman.   I do wonder how many of the townsfolk didn't turn out for the public murder.  Or how many were secretly disgusted but played along so that they wouldn't be next in line.

One thing that humans find difficult is climbing down from being tricked.  I wonder how many people continue to convince themselves (against all evidence) that God (the Christian one) exists simply because their ego can't handle the climb down.  Imagine how much worse it would be if you'd acted on that information to harm others.  Now it's not just a climb down, but a confession of guilt.

Circumcision is still carried out in what are otherwise considered civilized countries (the UK and US being two).  Male genital mutilation.  And most everyone goes about their business as if there's nothing wrong with that.  Because they've been told it's okay by an organized movement.  You wouldn't just dream that up unless you were deranged and sadistic.

[The Legendary Shark]

One only need look at the Millgram Experiment to see how statist conditioning can force people to act in ways repugnant to their morality.

[Smith]

1) 90% of humanity is evil and they need the other 10% to guide them
2) 90% of humanity is good and the other 10% is there to corrupt them
Im not that optimistic about percentages either way.

[TordelBack]

Circumcision is still carried out in what are otherwise considered civilized countries (the UK and US being two).  Male genital mutilation.  And most everyone goes about their business as if there's nothing wrong with that.  Because they've been told it's okay by an organized movement.  You wouldn't just dream that up unless you were deranged and sadistic.

Excellent point, Funt.  I wouldn't remotely compare male circumcision to FGM in terms of seriousness, but it comes from exactly the same bizarre place, we just don't see it because it's normalised by acceptable religious tradition. The vague hygiene justification makes me laugh too, complete with references to soldiers on long deployment in the desert - the rest of us have access to soap and water thanks,  no need for ritual mutilation of babies,  ta very much.

I would however point yet again to the overwhelmingly positive and largely unbroken trend towards an OBJECTIVE reduction in cruelty, violence and oppression that the arc of human history demonstrates. The subjective perception that things are getting worse is just an indication that we are dissatisfied with the pace and degree of improvement.  From this I infer an inherent goodness that we are working towards articulating in our societies, a deeper goal that en masse we strive for. Whether that translates to innate morality or just the accumulating wisdom of our species,  I don't know.

[The Legendary Shark]

Probably both.

[IndigoPrime]

Excellent point, Funt.  I wouldn't remotely compare male circumcision to FGM in terms of seriousness, but it comes from exactly the same bizarre place, we just don't see it because it's normalised by acceptable religious tradition. The vague hygiene justification makes me laugh too, complete with references to soldiers on long deployment in the desert - the rest of us have access to soap and water thanks,  no need for ritual mutilation of babies,  ta very much.

It's also proven in recent history to be reversible in terms of attitude. Australia used to echo the US (and how the UK was a long while ago) regarding how common this was. They then switched guidelines, and within a generation the numbers dropped significantly. In the US, though, they still cling to this, offering all kinds of bullshit regarding hygiene, cancer risk, and even sex (with American women often cited as apparently preferring a cut bloke – probably because that's what they're used to).

I find it abhorrent that this still exists, and it's bizarre the response I've had from otherwise free-thinking and liberal Americans. Many are dead set on retaining this, in part presumably because "it didn't do me any harm". Well, actually it probably has, because it's fucked with your head and your sense of right and wrong regarding what's OK to do to a baby without consent. If you're 18 and want to hack a bit of your cock off, go right ahead, but no-one has any right to do that to a child.

I nearly had this done to me, as it happens. Mid-1970s. Circumcisions were becoming much rarer in the UK by then, but apparently some doctors were still pretty fucking gung-ho. One tried repeatedly to convince my mum that I needed it done, for various medical reasons that naturally turned out to be total bullshit (but that wouldn't later have been provable either way, obviously). Fortunately, she told him to fuck off.

[JamesC]

Excellent point, Funt.  I wouldn't remotely compare male circumcision to FGM in terms of seriousness, but it comes from exactly the same bizarre place, we just don't see it because it's normalised by acceptable religious tradition. The vague hygiene justification makes me laugh too, complete with references to soldiers on long deployment in the desert - the rest of us have access to soap and water thanks,  no need for ritual mutilation of babies,  ta very much.

It's also proven in recent history to be reversible in terms of attitude. Australia used to echo the US (and how the UK was a long while ago) regarding how common this was. They then switched guidelines, and within a generation the numbers dropped significantly. In the US, though, they still cling to this, offering all kinds of bullshit regarding hygiene, cancer risk, and even sex (with American women often cited as apparently preferring a cut bloke – probably because that's what they're used to).

I find it abhorrent that this still exists, and it's bizarre the response I've had from otherwise free-thinking and liberal Americans. Many are dead set on retaining this, in part presumably because "it didn't do me any harm". Well, actually it probably has, because it's fucked with your head and your sense of right and wrong regarding what's OK to do to a baby without consent. If you're 18 and want to hack a bit of your cock off, go right ahead, but no-one has any right to do that to a child.

I nearly had this done to me, as it happens. Mid-1970s. Circumcisions were becoming much rarer in the UK by then, but apparently some doctors were still pretty fucking gung-ho. One tried repeatedly to convince my mum that I needed it done, for various medical reasons that naturally turned out to be total bullshit (but that wouldn't later have been provable either way, obviously). Fortunately, she told him to fuck off.

I can't get my head around how the doctors or nurses actually do it. Just the thought of doing that to a baby makes my blood run cold.