[HN Gopher] The Language of Democracy
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Language of Democracy
        
       Author : samclemens
       Score  : 18 points
       Date   : 2023-05-06 14:56 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.dissentmagazine.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.dissentmagazine.org)
        
       | johnea wrote:
       | I very much agree with a lot of the conclusions. But the
       | descriptions of experience, such as education just serving
       | individual students whims, as opposed to providing rigorous
       | knowledge of topics, I find completely counter to my personal
       | experience.
       | 
       | I went to university during the era or the writings, early 1980s.
       | My course work in electrical engineering was very techincally
       | rigorous. i got no credit for "radio programs", or anything like
       | that.
       | 
       | Even the few humanities electives I was reequired to take (I
       | chose "History of Eastern Religions", "Survey of Art History",
       | among others) where difficult courses requireing ressearch and
       | informed writing.
       | 
       | I consider myself very left aligned politically, but I do agree
       | on the distruction currently being caused by DEI policies.
       | 
       | The modern idea that one primarily needs to affiliate with a
       | specific identity, this being practiced both among the wing-nuts
       | and the woke-nuts, does appear very present, salient and central
       | to the disintegration described as "the reign of universal
       | ignorance" in the article.
        
         | zztop44 wrote:
         | I graduated in the early 2010s and mostly studying philosophy
         | and gender studies. In my experience of that time period, these
         | too were difficult courses requiring research and informed
         | writing. Certainly, doing well at school required knowing the
         | material and having something to say.
        
       | cassepipe wrote:
       | From wikipedia's Christopher Lasch entry, here is a quote from
       | his:
       | 
       | ``` A feminist movement that respected the achievements of women
       | in the past would not disparage housework, motherhood or unpaid
       | civic and neighborly services. It would not make a paycheck the
       | only symbol of accomplishment. ... It would insist that people
       | need self-respecting honorable callings, not glamorous careers
       | that carry high salaries but take them away from their families
       | ```
       | 
       | This is very dishonest to me it seems to weaponize an existential
       | seemingly anticapitalist critique ("The goal of life is not to
       | accumulate money but to answer a calling) _against_ feminism.
       | Feminists were not disparaging motherhood or unpaid work like if
       | it was _above_ them to do it. They criticized the fact that it
       | was considered _their_ work and had indeed no opportunity for
       | other _callings_
       | 
       | That's not even an interesting angle of attack against capitalism
       | because it tells you capitalism is only about people trying to
       | get richer. Sigh, I'll pass.
       | 
       | Addendum: This seems to fit "Romantic anticapitalism" as defined
       | by Michael Lowy. He had some interesting takes about it IIRC.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Lasch
        
         | whitemary wrote:
         | > _Feminists were not disparaging motherhood or unpaid work
         | like if it was above them to do it._
         | 
         | Were? When are we talking about? This sounds like Lasch, in the
         | 90s or maybe 80s, comparing 3rd wave feminism to 2nd wave
         | feminism. I think you are talking past him either way, but it
         | helps to be specific. Ultimately, your claims aren't
         | contradicting his.
        
       | 7373737373 wrote:
       | Also recommended: "The Language of the Third Reich" - the
       | language of authoritarian fascism. It's scary to see aspects of
       | it being used all around the world.
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTI_%E2%80%93_Lingua_Tertii_Im...
       | 
       | This is taught in German schools, but should be taught everywhere
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTI_%E2%80%93_Lingua_Tertii_Im...
        
       | nico wrote:
       | What democracy?
       | 
       | Please show me a true democracy
       | 
       | The US is not it
        
       | local_crmdgeon wrote:
       | Is democracy a good idea? Is it working out for India and Mexico
       | and the rest of the middle-income countries?
       | 
       | We're all supposed to love Democracy by default but ... I don't
       | know anymore.
        
         | dragonwriter wrote:
         | > Is democracy a good idea?
         | 
         | Yes, but being a periphery state in the neoliberal economic
         | order is not.
        
         | krapp wrote:
         | Many people believe that every human is essentially equal to
         | every other and has an equal right to life, liberty and the
         | pursuit of happiness, and that a government that represents the
         | will of the people, even imperfectly, is preferable to a
         | dictatorship.
         | 
         | I don't know why you would say we're all supposed to love
         | democracy "by default" as if there weren't centuries of
         | history, philosophy and bloody conflict behind that point of
         | view.
        
           | woooooo wrote:
           | Many people say that. Revealed preference raises its head
           | when it comes to the real world, and it turns out American
           | interest is a better predictor.
        
             | krapp wrote:
             | Americans, despite their bellyaching, live in a democractic
             | republic and can afford to indulge in romantic fantasies
             | about benevolent dictatorships (as they often do about
             | civil war and revolution,) while remaining safe from
             | (edit:likely) ever having suffer their consequences. People
             | who have actually lived under dictatorships, meanwhile,
             | very rarely seem to recommend it over democracy.
        
         | zztop44 wrote:
         | Government is a thing that forces everyone to follow their
         | rules. You can't opt in or opt out. On face value that's
         | extremely coercive and bad.
         | 
         | I think of democracy as a "good idea" being not necessarily
         | about being the system that delivers the best governance
         | outcomes, but rather about providing some measure of legitimacy
         | for the coercion inherent to government.
        
         | jeezfrk wrote:
         | Democracy is the worst form of government....
         | 
         | except for all the other ones (including unstable anarchy).
        
         | theklub wrote:
         | You want a monarchy?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-07 23:00 UTC)