Printable View
First of all I would not call it mild brianwashing, but it is rather heavy brianwashing and I am a Misanthrope, so the simple fact is I rather have 90% of the people starve to save the planet Earth and all other non-human living creatures.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
Than have myself subjected to being brainwashed just so the populace can have some illusionary idea of happiness.
Still opposed to a handful of people using drugs, mind-control tech, force, deception to shape society against the people's will. In particular, I am a fan of human rights, and the rights of the individual. We should live in circumstances of increasing freedom and self-expression, with more opportunities for responsible choice. I don't think the solution is to, essentially, steward a simplified network of undifferentiated pleasure-measuring devices.
There are societies where people are not starving. People can live with dignity. Drugging or lobotomizing people miles away from the starvation isn't the obvious path to fixing things. Drugging people across the planet is, however, a wonderfully simple reduction of the state of affairs, the ultimate "Why doesn't everyone just be like me?" In fact, things could be much simpler if we just injected sheep DNA into the coming generations.
And why not make freedom less illusory? It is wrong to discount the differences between someone with voting rights working 45 hours a week in an office building; a person working in a sweatshop; and a person in chains getting whipped, humiliated, commoditized as chattel, and made to work for free. If the current "slavery" problem under discussion is corporate manipulation of humans for the attainment of extremely primitive goals, then something could be done about corporations.
We don't need to destroy the concept of the individual in order to improve our condition. It is easy to be fearful, and maybe want to give up on humanity as it is, but I think we can get our crap together.
That explains it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
I think we already do shape society against people's wills. Conditioning ensures that people think their will is being enforced, but is it really? Orwellian conditioning in our society means that most people don't even recognise their choices.Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
I agree that we should live in those circumstances, but I don't think the majority of the population does, or ever will.Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
Well, the ones who aren't starving, maybe - I see little dignity in starvation. Also, how much dignity does a man or woman have when they work 60 hours a week on the minimum wage and still cannot provide adequately for their family?Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
Hey, you leave the sheep DNA in NZ where it belongs!Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
:D
Couple of points: Utopia in BNW isn't brought about through drugging - the acceptance of the world and way it is has been brought about by programming the foetuses. The drugs are used as a means of entertainment and enjoyment.
Every morning, I look at the local weather site, which includes traffic cams to show the congestion on the roads. And every morning I see thousands of cars sitting bumper to bumper travelling at 10-15 km/hr. I think we have more in common with ants than sheep - endless lines of workers going about their duty, only to return by the same lines later in the day.
To me, that's a robotic lifetsyle.
Again, I'd love to believe you were right, but I see no means of overcoming the state of affairs.Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
Let's look at corporate slavery - for want of a better term - where corporations basically own people because most of them live week by week and cannot see past the next pay check. That could only be changed by granting ownership of the corporations to the employees. If that happened, who would put up the capital for new enterprises? No capitalist is going to stump up half a billion bucks to start up a major company only to give the shares away to his staff and let them run the organisation.
Funnily enough, I think the only was to improve our condition as a species is to destroy the concept of individual.
African Love, I think you need to read the book and form your own concept of the story and what Huxley is conveying. I read it years ago and found it very thought-provoking. I re-read it a few years back and perhaps saw it in a new perspective. I would probably read it again someday; I have his "Chrone Yellow" and hope to read that sometime soon. I really liked and the ideas Huxley conveyed. I also read his "Brave New World Revisited" and found it dated, but still very interesting.
I would choose individualism over any sort of idea of Utopia any day.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
I prefer to live in an interesting world with suffering and pain than an idealistic world that is sterile.
@ TA, we are apparently in agreement about starvation being an undignified state. I think, however, that BNW is not the only (or even an obvious) path to ending starvation.
We agree also in regards to the programming of people that already goes on (TV and radio, in particular, but in many other ways as well). In the U.S., there is a variety of media (with crazies at each end) that people might encounter, and it is difficult to keep people away from books that they might want to look into. This could be a great situation. Unfortunately, the programming is warped by corporate profit-driven strategizing, and so entertainment and real information are getting blurred, and useless habits are being created in viewers. More than informing and educating, the news is courting viewers that are comfortable with a particular perspective, and capitalizing on addictive behaviors. The leaders themselves are leveraging the power to misrepresent, etc. but I don't think there is any particular organization in control of the entire population via the media.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
It sort of seems to be, in a sense, a public health issue, in which broadcaster dollars and a divorce from reality ascend hand in hand. I figure something could be done about it--we are close to the point of insanity and mass stupidity regarding various public issues, and it is when one's back is against the wall that things often end up getting dealt with. The TV (and the internet) are extremely effective mind-control devices, and people need to be better educated about how to use them, as well as protected from criminal abuses. Without censorship. Maybe a TV-watching course, with a final exam in rhetorical gimmickry? 1984 is great in the high schools, but a lot of kids would probably be better off with a few half-hour documentaries on TV, combined with discussion and some "spot the B.S." exercises or something, I don't know. Anyhow, the solution doesn't have to be "dumber and malleable" is better. But current TV does sort of create that mindset.
Also, ants is a great analogy. And robots. Bees. Not to malign any of those, but humans can seek to be something else.
I don't think there is anything wrong with an individual having employees who get paid a salary. I think a social safety-net is a worthy goal, however. And there should be protections against abuse, maybe vacation hours, safety/health regulations... A lot of it is in place in different countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
The real damage (over and above such "slavery") is done when a corporation chooses company profit over the interests of a community. When crap is marketed sparklingly to gullible children (and adults). When management watches numbers go up as orders are passed down through layers of staff to the level of human exploitation in distant countries. When a meeting in a shiny office building rubber stamps a powerpoint presentation that neglects to mention that the product is a waste of the consumer's time or money, or is harmful, etc. I once heard corporations described as a dumb, reptilian entities. The concept of "incorporation" in fact involves giving the company rights equivalent to those of a human being. That its brain is extremely primitive (make the numbers go up) and its moral conditioning is at odds with humanity is the real problem. What to do? Not my expertise, but increasing corporate responsibility and introducing some forms of government oversight might help.
Not to harp on corporations, however, because it isn't the only problem by any stretch.
Anyhow, with the complaint being that our population is too mind-controlled and ant-like, and that corporations are manipulating behaviors and incentives away from actual human interests, I fail to see how further devaluing of the individual (a la BNW) would address the problem, other than perhaps representing the ultimate embrace of the problem in some sarcastic or ironic way?
Remember, if anybody wants virtual sex or blissful drugs, I don't think we necessarily need a dumb, herd-like populace for those things to be made available to them. The attractiveness of those sorts of things might make them very effective tools for controlling people, of course. But they could also be employed in a society that was working toward greater freedom, creativity, diversity, intelligence, etc.
Has anybody here read Island, by Huxley? That was his idea of how he envisioned a "good" utopia, from what I understand. Again, I only have indirect knowledge about it.
No, I agree entirely. The part I meant was that I don't believe any non-autocratic system will overcome it. Whether such a system is possible is unknown, but none of the ones we've tried so far have worked.Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
Sure, I'm no conspiracist and I haven't ever seen any evidence of acting in concert. I think it's just human nature that we ignore that which doesn't directly affect us.Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
Oh, I wish.
Even just a course in critical thinking would work fine, but thinking's bad for you, so that'll never happen.
Yep, and as usual, we're at the forefront of a lot of those issues, but I find that the implementation is happening slowest in the lowesy-paid jobs where the people don't have power.Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
If a doctor stops working for better conditions, health boards and employers have to listen; if the cleaners go on strike, they get replaced.
No, although the faceless kind of publicly listed corporations are certainly a large part of the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
Your ideas on better governance are right, but there's no political will to sort them out.
Yes, we just need to find a balance. If it's there....Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
I've tried to buy a copy a few times without success. It might be available online, so now you've reminded me, I'll go and look and let you know if I find it.Quote:
Originally Posted by billl
The interesting aspect of this argument is that it is actually addressed in the novel itself. The idea of the "individual" or a "boring" culture is something you value or de-value because you are bombarded with these concepts on a daily bases. You surround yourself with medias and artistic expressions which then feeds into your desire to proport this same society and same surrounding.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
The thought that life is not worth living if one could not obtain a copy of Othello or listen to a recetation of Poe is tainted by your own basises. Now I am not saying that I would love to live in the brave new world, but that is because I have adopted simular philosophies based on simular medias and surroundings. But it is important to note that we have all, at one point or the other, been the babies that were electrified when reaching for the flower.
As for the idea that there would be no Einstien or Obama, the leaders themselves expose themselves to all the arts and even contribute to them themselves, and that is why they are the ones choosen to lead. The idea that the outstanding would cease to exist is naive, Socrates existed in a society that was not "free" and he was exicuted, but existed none the less. Simular things can be said of thousands of others across the human race for all of its history, as a matter of fact some of the greats forms of art are created to subvert censorship and bend what is deamed acceptible, look at the folk-rock movement in the mid-late 60s or even some of Shakespheares works. In some cases if there ws no opression then there would be no art. But I degress