Romaq @Romaq@qoto.org
Grinnin' Ferret
Joined Nov 2022
My understanding of the crux of the discussion was your promotion of "social consensus to improve social problems." I do not hold "social consensus" to be a worthy target for me to promote my values within the world. Indeed, I find "social consensus" antithetical to the promotion of my values. Chomsky's focus, as far as I know, was on the political authority side, the "big picture" of the equation. I'm not clear he had any such lectures.
It appears you are specifically speaking of "consensus for workgroup tasks" which is outside the scope of "social consensus" to be found in small groups of people, such as at a bar or dinner, or two couples playing cards at a meal.
When dealing with "workgroup tasks," a proper "workgroup" will be focused on the specific "task to be achieved." It shouldn't have political or social theory involved. If it's a group as small as my mom & dad preaching to my aunt and uncle who simply don't wish to hear about Jesus & Trump at every belch or fart during dinner, how small does it need to be to be "too small?"
The "outside influence" is passed on to "True Believers" who in turn press "The Faith" into social groups. Some people proselytize that more than others. My Dad wants you to know about Jesus and hey what do you think of the Conspiracy against Our President Trump and doesn't it bother you that LGbalfabet is teaching our kids in Public Schools and getting them all caught up in this perversion stuff?
The "outside influence" is only limited by people in small groups willing to actively challenge nonsense in such small groups as it rears its head. Of course, I'm willing, but this does tend to have me excluded from small social groups. Fortunately, I don't care for small group socializing. I have little in common with most people or small group socializing bullshit, and I find social jockeying tiresome.
Extremists... heh...
As far as I'm aware, we are understanding it in the same meaning. Winning an election is "by consensus." The most people agreed, so that is what we will do and we all agree (so it is said, even if we don't) to accept the policies promoted by the winner because "we agreed by consensus."
"Consensus of opinion" is exactly the point of "Manufactured Consent" as discussed by Noam Chomsky and explained in that video link. "Consensus", and thus "consent for policy" manufactured by those in charge or their opposition powerful enough to be a factor.
I do not deny being worthy of the title, "extremist within the US." But I'm not clear how that impacts the meaning of "consensus" or how my view affects its usage in this context.
@freemo
I am my own best chance and my only chance to express, promote, and enjoy my own values. "Social Consensus" in my mind is saying nothing while GQP maniacs push the destruction of anyone who disagrees with them, just to keep the peace "by consensus." That ain't me. It isn't my nature to just shut up and be cowed, particularly for the sake of "consensus."
"Cannons at work in our country!"
Employers have the authority to dismiss, which forms a decent "cannon" to force compliance. With the authority to dismiss, employers have the authority to form corporate policy. Employers also face various laws and ordinances: comply, or your business will be fined or potentially shut down by force.
But as an example of "a good consensus", that does happen in the work place among task groups delegated to resolve certain issues and problems that come up. How can we increase production? How can we decrease waste? How can we have a workplace that encourages employee retention? Those are problem solving issues that usually are not policy. On those types of issues, consensus by the working group tasked to resolve the problem is usually the best way forward, or at least provides management with leads on resolution.
All the above is devoid of political (governing authority) considerations. Governance is a separate beast that requires the consent of the governed. If "consensus" (and thus consent) is not apparent, then consent must be manufactured. Noam Chomsky wrote on this, for which there are many videos about it. I found https://youtu.be/34LGPIXvU5M to be useful on the topic of "Manufactured Consent."
As to "better understanding of others who think similarly," there are instances in which I do make that genuine attempt and grow in my understanding because of it. Twitter, as such, has been useful for me.
For example, I had wondered, "What's the big deal in the American Black Community concerning authority in general and the police specifically?" Then I encounter threads like ... I'm not finding the thread I saw last night, but the ongoing abuse of minorities... Yeah, I've had far too much education on exactly why, and so I've changed my mind. Racist policies are "by consent." I do not give my consent. As far as "understanding," I need only ask my dad about his grievances. He now has five grandchildren of African American descent. To keep the peace, we do have things we do not discuss. "President Trump is the Greatest President since... well, the greatest in *MY* lifetime!" We don't discuss that either. I *DO*, in fact, judge, and YES, in fact, it's exhausting.
Concerning Libertarians, as far as I can see with interaction with them on Twitter, and on the whole, they are bonkers. Many look forward to a civil war within the US with delusions of adequacy and a fig leaf of being "preppers" with guns. I shall not forgive the GOP, and I will not forgive the current LP for pandering to QAnon fantasies. If I'm to vote at all, it will have to be Democratic Party. Scratch voting is still very much an option on the table. It's a question of how hard the Democrats are going to convince me they don't need or want my vote. Again.
"If it's going fast enough, a feather can absolutely knock you over."
It boggles my mind in such an event, if you are within a few AU, the neutrinos alone will kill before anything else has a chance to do you harm. :)
https://snews.bnl.gov/popsci/tycho-kepler.html "De Stella Nova" 1572, "The New Star" :)
I aspire to become a totally worthless person someday.
"Just gets more complicated the more you look."
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/12/25/universe/
The quote and its permutations make an interesting read. My life is an open invitation, but certainly not anything I wish to compel people to.
Back to the "Wizard's First Rule" quote... there are "players" on the world scene. They *are* skillful manipulators. That's what "players" do.
"Players only love you when they're playing" --Fleedwood Mac, Dreams
I will apologize as appropriate for when I'm wrong. But I will not apologize for being *me*. And that is something "community" tends not to abide.
Listening to others that hate my values and wish me harm? Ain't happenin'. "Consensus not made by force?"
The Cannon Law: He who hath the cannon maketh the law.
I value trade, exchange of goods, value for value. Use of force is not how trade works. That's how thugs work, and I want no part of that.
I strive to be the change I wish to see in the world, and I also strive to invite people to share in my values. When in a social group that meets some particular need of mine, I will (and should) keep the consensus in mind. I have to do that at work, or I am unemployable. But I'm being *paid* for that. I tend not to engage with very many social groups. Hell, while I'm philosophically Libertarian, the Libertarians don't want me. If I see something stupid in what they are doing, and I say so. Currently, the LP is behaving as if they are the stoners in the bleachers of the Republican Party cheering when the QAnon freaks parade on stage. I'll have none of that thank you very much. Consensus with them on that? Nope. Never.
@freemo
Cheers! I'll respond to the other messages, but the point of this is you can come back to it *later*, so do that, and get good sleep. :D
@freemo
"Sounds like most people."
Yes.
"Wizard's First Rule: people are stupid." Richard and Kahlan frowned even more. "People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People's heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."
"Because of Wizards First Rule, the old wizards created Confessors, and Seekers, as a means of helping find the truth, when the truth is important enough. Darken Rahl knows the Wizard's Rules. He is using the first one. People need an enemy to feel a sense of purpose. It's easy to lead people when they have a sense of purpose. Sense of purpose is more important by far than the truth. In fact, truth has no bearing in this. Darken Rahl is providing them with an enemy, other than himself, a sense of purpose. People are stupid; they want to believe, so they do." --Terry Goodkind, Wizard's First Rule.
That's why I don't care to have "the community" make important life decisions for me.
"Improve stuff" is tricky. That's a value judgement. Some people think "improving stuff" means eliminating or at least pushing some form of control over "people not like me."
If you wish to "improve" anything, that's a value judgement. *YOUR* values. *YOUR* judgement. Own it, and don't feel apologetic about it. Best as you find those of like mind who *share* those values to work with and have company on the road you travel. But those are still *YOUR* values. You can't get away from that.
"Whatever the community decides" is, in my opinion, a huge problem.
"The community thinks Slavery is acceptable, or if evil, a necessary evil."
"The community decided to elect President Clown Shoes to the office."
"The community is repulsed that 'those people' should have the same rights and privileges as regular folk, and should have their freedom curtailed so as not to spread their depravity."
I really don't think much about what "The Community" thinks. I care about what I think, my values.
As to "suffering," I have to make that judgement as I see it, but on the whole, my values are worthy of my pursuit and interest in spreading them, "the community" be damned.
They claim to be flat earthers on Twitter. Some portion are Poes (from https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/poes-law/) but some seem to be genuine, and very determined not to see reality. Some are scammers who know, but are busy fleecing the rubes and don't want anyone to kill the golden goose.
The problem is how it's used as a conduit for plugging people into the anti-vax, anti-jew, anti-science, anti-reality club.
Yes. Me. At least from *MY* perspective. "YOU" should be the beautiful reason to exist, from *YOUR* perspective.
They are flerfs, and hopeless. But I meet cool people and new things from them. Those who are *NOT* flerfs, that is.
Repeating the same slur within the first few minutes is a pretty good indication. They aren't even creative enough to come up with fresh new slurs in a single sitting.
Grinnin' Ferret
Joined Nov 2022
Romaq's choices:
