I believe one of the best things one can hope for, and indeed ought strive towards, is to have had a lasting positive effect in the life of someone else.
Even if this effect is through a kind word, a single conversation or a one time act of kindness.
Alternatively, one ought be grateful for those in one's life who have already had such an effect on oneself.
Saturday, August 20, 2016
Monday, August 1, 2016
Pensée 54
Patriotism within Criticism
Within the current political climate of the United States, I find it necessary to underline that political criticism is one of the most patriotic forms of love for one's country.
Simply put, it is loving one's country so much so that one comments on the things that are wrong, the systems that clearly are malfunctioning and elements within the society or political climate than need changing.
Unfortunately the US suffers from a bipartisan system wherein people identify themselves by who they voted for in the last election. This is at least one of the factors that contributes to why political criticism could be mislabel and misconstrued as unpatriotic.
Furthermore, criticism lies at the heart of freedom and democracy. It is by this very criticism that democracy functions as political discussion (which arises from the criticism of one party to another) is the very essence of a liberal democracy (when compared with authoritarianism for example).
Therefore, surely a nation that calls itself the "leaders of the free world" and the "arsenal of democracy" would have some tolerance for criticism within the ideals they claim to believe in and uphold. There is nothing unpatriotic about criticism.
One could of course argue that there is a fine line between justified criticism and unjustified or unjustifiable dissent and the actions that that can lead to. Vandalism, rioting and violent demonstrations are not directly justifiable. This however is dependent on the political climate, the nation, the leadership of the nation in question as well as the political history of that nation.
Within the current political climate of the United States, I find it necessary to underline that political criticism is one of the most patriotic forms of love for one's country.
Simply put, it is loving one's country so much so that one comments on the things that are wrong, the systems that clearly are malfunctioning and elements within the society or political climate than need changing.
Unfortunately the US suffers from a bipartisan system wherein people identify themselves by who they voted for in the last election. This is at least one of the factors that contributes to why political criticism could be mislabel and misconstrued as unpatriotic.
Furthermore, criticism lies at the heart of freedom and democracy. It is by this very criticism that democracy functions as political discussion (which arises from the criticism of one party to another) is the very essence of a liberal democracy (when compared with authoritarianism for example).
Therefore, surely a nation that calls itself the "leaders of the free world" and the "arsenal of democracy" would have some tolerance for criticism within the ideals they claim to believe in and uphold. There is nothing unpatriotic about criticism.
One could of course argue that there is a fine line between justified criticism and unjustified or unjustifiable dissent and the actions that that can lead to. Vandalism, rioting and violent demonstrations are not directly justifiable. This however is dependent on the political climate, the nation, the leadership of the nation in question as well as the political history of that nation.
Wednesday, May 18, 2016
Pensée 53
The Rousseau-an Machivellian
I find the concept of a blend between Rousseau-an and Machivellian approaches to be most intriguing. I would describe this combination as such:
The ends justify the means, however it is foolish to pursue means that are proven not to work. Simply because one can justify the use of mass surveillance or torture to extract information, does not mean one must or ought pursue them. I find it is vitally important that the social contract be upheld at all costs. This is not to be confused with puritanical, escapist Kantian absolutism. The most important elements are equality before the law and the relationship between the individual and the State.
Thanks to G. Marshall for the discussion and critique
I find the concept of a blend between Rousseau-an and Machivellian approaches to be most intriguing. I would describe this combination as such:
The ends justify the means, however it is foolish to pursue means that are proven not to work. Simply because one can justify the use of mass surveillance or torture to extract information, does not mean one must or ought pursue them. I find it is vitally important that the social contract be upheld at all costs. This is not to be confused with puritanical, escapist Kantian absolutism. The most important elements are equality before the law and the relationship between the individual and the State.
Thanks to G. Marshall for the discussion and critique
Pensée 52
I find there are few things finer than a good meal and time well spent with close and trusted friends. The bond created by sharing a meal, sharing stories and enjoying the company of one's friends is to be valued.
Pensée 51
The Necessity of Opposition
Although it is surely easier and preferable to go through one's life without opposition or facing resistance, I find it is vitally necessary to be challenged, opposed and confronted.
It is opposition and confrontation that makes one better. Any challenge to one's ideas, beliefs, policies and plans act as a refining fire if the criticism is reasonable and justified.
The lack of criticism is potentially a dangerous thing. Although order and efficiency are both necessities, a state that suppresses the voice of criticism, no matter how much it might disagree, runs the risk of totalitarianism.
There is a distinction to be made between opposition and dissent. Dissent implies the situation is so far gone that words and and peaceful challenge are no longer a viable option. the difference lies between reform and revolution.
In recent conversation some of the above used terms have come to be defined more clearly:
- Opposition is to be understood as legitimate resistance through existing channels, including but not exclusive to referendum, debate, petition and peaceful protest/rallies.
-Dissent is the significant disapproval of an existing regime or power structure however not necessarily aligned with legitimate opposition, although not overtly anti-authoritarian. This could include paramilitary wings of political parties, lobbies or special interest groups.
-Revolution is the wholehearted disapproval or hatred for policy resulting in overarching political, social, economic and religious change.
Thanks to G. Marshall for the excellent conversation, critique and collaboration.
Although it is surely easier and preferable to go through one's life without opposition or facing resistance, I find it is vitally necessary to be challenged, opposed and confronted.
It is opposition and confrontation that makes one better. Any challenge to one's ideas, beliefs, policies and plans act as a refining fire if the criticism is reasonable and justified.
The lack of criticism is potentially a dangerous thing. Although order and efficiency are both necessities, a state that suppresses the voice of criticism, no matter how much it might disagree, runs the risk of totalitarianism.
There is a distinction to be made between opposition and dissent. Dissent implies the situation is so far gone that words and and peaceful challenge are no longer a viable option. the difference lies between reform and revolution.
In recent conversation some of the above used terms have come to be defined more clearly:
- Opposition is to be understood as legitimate resistance through existing channels, including but not exclusive to referendum, debate, petition and peaceful protest/rallies.
-Dissent is the significant disapproval of an existing regime or power structure however not necessarily aligned with legitimate opposition, although not overtly anti-authoritarian. This could include paramilitary wings of political parties, lobbies or special interest groups.
-Revolution is the wholehearted disapproval or hatred for policy resulting in overarching political, social, economic and religious change.
Thanks to G. Marshall for the excellent conversation, critique and collaboration.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)