Interesting questions on Joe Stack

[shiny!]

Re: Interesting questions on Joe Stack

A small percentage (perhaps 2 or 4 percent) of the world's people are sociopaths (aka psychopaths.) They are more likely than the rest of us to seek positions of power and they tend to promote their kind. The end result is that large organizations, especially those with substantial power, have a strong tendency to become deeply corrupt. The rest of us naive patsies can usually be coerced, cajoled, conned or confused into going along. Stubborn patsies are sealed off from any essential knowledge, or they are discredited, imprisoned, destroyed, silenced or killed.

I'm sorry Ghent12, but your assumption is wrong; very, very wrong.

Well said!

[Ghent12]

Re: Interesting questions on Joe Stack

Have you seen the documentary 'The Corporation'? Also deconstruction is not in and of itself the criterion for knowledge. If corruption is systemic ' but it is not extensively pervasive -what is your point ? A system is generally a cohort of parts that work together to produce an output- if one says and acknowledges it is systematic - then it obviously go through its separate parts and is in the output. The minute distinction entitles one to to an angry retort about how the other person is generalizing?

As for being 'held' down by the man -do you dispute the fact that most of the jails are filled with non-violent offenders- a readily confirm-able fact. How much evidence would you need -a preponderance appears to be grossly insufficient. Why is that- does this reflect disquietude which is transformed into a rigid and strident demand for 'absolute' proof. How many historically documented events would suffice (many of them only confirmed decades or centuries after the acts) ?

Have you heard of Edward Bernays, or the acknowledged CIA experiments project MKUltra, Operation Northwoods, Iran/Contra, the Maine, the Tonkin incident?

This call for seeing good in most men -really did the American Indians a lot of good -remember Thanksgiving? Surely -your not suggesting we throw out skepticism and caution, past history and even plain deduction out the window because it doesn't conform to an all or none principle of truth or some exactingly rigid standard evidential proof. You must be aware that when people engage in illegitimate, unethical and illegal acts they go OUT of their way to ensure such a standard can never be produced? I am sorry -but on this I can not agree.

Yeah, we're the most imprisoned population on Earth, and I hate that. So what?

The existence of such a small number of bad incidents merely reinforces my point; humans are in charge and they do human things. Yet you translate these past events into some world view that every motivation they have is evil. That is far and away too simple of a world view. Tell me; is Arne Duncan evil because of MKUltra? How about Ray LaHood for the massacres of natives a century ago?

Your connection of dots is not even tenuous at best; you cannot connect anything.

[iyamwutiam]

Re: Interesting questions on Joe Stack

Yeah, we're the most imprisoned population on Earth, and I hate that. So what?

The existence of such a small number of bad incidents merely reinforces my point; humans are in charge and they do human things. Yet you translate these past events into some world view that every motivation they have is evil. That is far and away too simple of a world view. Tell me; is Arne Duncan evil because of MKUltra? How about Ray LaHood for the massacres of natives a century ago?

Your connection of dots is not even tenuous at best; you cannot connect anything.

The placement of the Shah of Iran/Pinochet and the remoal of Zayala are not tenuous at best. The role of Chiquita (once United Fruit Company)/ Alcoa are far from tenuos. Notice -as I sadi earlier, these are now seen as self-evident. There are a literal tome of such incidents that are CLEARLY documented in many NON FICTION books -try Chomsky's Hegemonny or Survival as probably the shortest one.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer

You had a very good point and still do -that one can not be habituated to using the broad brush of poor conclusions and generalizations -to that I agree. However -to argue or even attempt to support the counter -that most of the actions of the US or any government (particularly colonial ones) should be given a broad swathe of good intention is clearly insupportable.

[Ghent12]

Re: Interesting questions on Joe Stack

You had a very good point and still do -that one can not be habituated to using the broad brush of poor conclusions and generalizations -to that I agree. However -to argue or even attempt to support the counter -that most of the actions of the US or any government (particularly colonial ones) should be given a broad swathe of good intention is clearly insupportable.

Well thank you, but it appears that you are again making an assumption about my position. Having re-read the thread, it appears this assumption was made previously and I failed to correct it earlier as well.

1) I do not assume good intentions.
2) I do assume that "they" are human actors with human motivations.
3) "Human motivations" does not mean, nor even imply, good intentions.

Unless you believe that to be human is to have good intentions, which I believe is blatantly false at prima facie to the point of long ago reaching stage 3 of your quote, then you have fundamentally misread my position.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Interesting questions on Joe Stack

... I do assume that "they" are human actors with human motivations. ...

Well, in one sense, this is about as close to tautological as we get in real life. Assuming we aren't dealing with Space Aliens, David Icke's Reptiles, advanced Artificial Intelligence Robots or some other literally inhuman form here, then indeed we're dealing with humans and their motivations.

However your phrasing, here and above, hints at some more common basis or form for such human motivations than some of us cynics might find accurate.

In more ordinary language, some people are just lying, conniving, deceitful bastards, through and through.