Asklemmy

43984 readers

783 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What can we do to re-shape society for the better? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by testman@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

89 comments fedilink hide all child comments

If top of the society is immoral psychopaths with power, and most of the society is composed of people with good intentions, then there is not much hope for "beta uprising" until things go way beyond point of recovery, because powerful psychopaths will not let their power get taken away.

Not sure if this is just evolutionary biology, but this cycle of psychopaths at the top has been going on since when, at least ancient Egypt. And in all these thousands of years, the system that enables this cycle got way more reinforced than it got dismantled.

So is it maybe better idea to put benevolent people's energy towards designing and preparing a new societal system that will have built-in mechanisms for preventing corruption and malevolence? "prepare" as in get ready to implement for when the current messed up system is about to grind to a halt and collapse? Well, it would be best to figure out how to go full Benevolent Theseus™ by replacing parts of currently failing system with the corruption-proof ones.

What are some resources related to this topic? Recearch on societal dynamics, designing political systems, examples of similar revolutions that already happened, etc. Post any links that you consider relevant

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] purahna@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Exactly. So we can't just "Treat stupidity as a type of malice", because nobody can agree on what is and isn't stupidity.

[–] darq@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Alright I don't know who you are talking to, but it's very clearly not me.

[–] purahna@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Alright, from the very words of your own comment:

At some point, does it matter?

in direct response to my comment

Who decides what is stupid and what isn’t?

Yes, it does matter. If you want to "Give people the resources to educate themselves", you have to have a definition of stupid and not stupid that guides your choice of what is and isn't good education; in order to "Give them the benefit of the doubt, once", you have to have a criteria for when they've stopped being stupid.

[–] darq@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Nobody decrees who is stupid or not. That's a judgement everyone makes for themselves.

If you want to “Give people the resources to educate themselves”, you have to have a definition of stupid and not stupid that guides your choice of what is and isn’t good education; in order to “Give them the benefit of the doubt, once”, you have to have a criteria for when they’ve stopped being stupid.

No. I don't.

When I hear people talking about climate change like it doesn't exist, or has "concerns" about transgender people existence, or something like that, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they are just ignorant. I'll be willing to talk to them, and maybe explain some of the misconceptions they might have.

But if they aren't willing to listen, then they... Are either stupid or malicious. But the difference isn't meaningful. They act exactly the same, either way.

They don't have to agree me thinking they are either stupid or malicious. It literally changes nothing if they disagree.