Shinnecock Tribe wants to kick out the richers from the East End...

"The tribal notion of “the common good” has served as the moral justification of most social systems—and of all tyrannies—in history. The degree of a society’s enslavement or freedom corresponded to the degree to which that tribal slogan was invoked or ignored.

“The common good” (or “the public interest”) is an undefined and undefinable concept: there is no such entity as “the tribe” or “the public”; the tribe (or the public or society) is only a number of individual men. Nothing can be good for the tribe as such; “good” and “value” pertain only to a living organism—to an individual living organism—not to a disembodied aggregate of relationships.

“The common good” is a meaningless concept, unless taken literally, in which case its only possible meaning is: the sum of the good of all the individual men involved. But in that case, the concept is meaningless as a moral criterion: it leaves open the question of what is the good of individual men and how does one determine it?

It is not, however, in its literal meaning that that concept is generally used. It is accepted precisely for its elastic, undefinable, mystical character which serves, not as a moral guide, but as an escape from morality. Since the good is not applicable to the disembodied, it becomes a moral blank check for those who attempt to embody it.

When “the common good” of a society is regarded as something apart from and superior to the individual good of its members, it means that the good of some men takes precedence over the good of others, with those others consigned to the status of sacrificial animals. It is tacitly assumed, in such cases, that “the common good” means “the good of the majority” as against the minority or the individual. Observe the significant fact that that assumption is tacit: even the most collectivized mentalities seem to sense the impossibility of justifying it morally. But “the good of the majority,” too, is only a pretense and a delusion: since, in fact, the violation of an individual’s rights means the abrogation of all rights, it delivers the helpless majority into the power of any gang that proclaims itself to be “the voice of society” and proceeds to rule by means of physical force, until deposed by another gang employing the same means.

If one begins by defining the good of individual men, one will accept as proper only a society in which that good is achieved and achievable. But if one begins by accepting “the common good” as an axiom and regarding individual good as its possible but not necessary consequence (not necessary in any particular case), one ends up with such a gruesome absurdity as Soviet Russia, a country professedly dedicated to “the common good,” where, with the exception of a minuscule clique of rulers, the entire population has existed in subhuman misery for over two generations." Ayn Rand

 

yes, pumpey, thats right

slashdog no way 8 hour work day would be standard without some heavy pushing, point made

and I see your point about how 'unencumbered greed' is how most people picture capitalism, but lets put it this way:

everyone seems to think people cant govern themselves
but what makes you think a small group of people who either won a popularity contest (politicians) or were bullies or bullied and got poor grades in school (cops/soldiers) can govern everyone?

gvt will always f@ck up the economy, always,
economy is the sum of everyone's will, trading freely, not always rational (10 dollars a gram for dried flowers...RIDIC!!), thats why econ is not a science, despite medias' portrayal as such.

what makes you think they can predict what needs to be done
AND
what gives them the right to subvert peoples will to trade by (mis)managing trade rules and laws?

no easy answers kids, but the dialog amongst adults is what counts

and the common good is a myth, can you show it to me? can you weigh it?

is it ok to cannibalize 1 person so 2 people dont starve to death? if so thats an example of the common good

 

Key here being high skill. Why are you okay with the lesser skilled workers being abused like donkeys? If someone contributes 30 years of their life to a company, whether by mopping floors, answering phones, or taking reservations, they have worked 30 years to ensure the security and comfort of the owners. Why would they not deserve the same? Simply because they are more easily replaced?

I do agree that the world needs it's ditch diggers. But ditch diggers deserve dignity too, do they not?

Of course there is the prohibitively high expense of gaining workplace skills, the statistics that show poverty is difficult to escape no matter what intelligence level or work ethic one possesses, and the fact that more opportunities are available to the wealthy and white.

I would like to add that I have experienced Union BS at it's finest and do not believe they are the solution to these inequalities- just that they arose out of an abuse of power by business owners, not out of some government-coddling of the working class. Let us not forgot that the strikes of the initial unions were time and again broken by the police and military forces of the U.S. government, protecting the business interests of politicans and other elites.

 

Gordon Geko was right when he said that greed is good but not for the right reason. Greed motivates people to excel but can also serve to keep them in check from making bad decisions that will cost them.

The labor issues of the past were brought about by imbalance. First the devaluing of the workers then the over reaction and greed of the unions. We are finally starting to find a balance where skill and hard work are replacing artificial constructs like collective bargaining.

 

you da man

 

Slashdog, that janitor deserves dignity, but maybe not security, if he was there for 8 years or 38 years and someone will work for less, why would I not hire the person who works for less?

people are hired for the value they bring, not to give them money, if you cant bring value, what good are you?

 

really took off didn't it?
must be your mojo.

 

I will agree, doing or saying something is better than nothing. But unless you are literally "lobbying" for the police cams, and not just talking about it on a surf forum, no it doesn't count. That is like complaining about being broke when you don't work enough. If you are exhausting every avenue that you have to make change and such, then I will give you credit for that.

But the strongest thing that you can do, if you want to solve all these problems, is INFILTRATE. Become a cop. Become a politician. Change things from the inside out.

Not sure why you are grouping me in with "pop culture". Yeah, I watch sports on TV. That's it. Couldn't tell you who is who or what is what in hollywood. Don't care.

I am butchering this, but here is what I think you are trying to say:

There was a young boy on a beach one day, the tide went all the way out and the boy was walking along the beach. He saw a bunch of star fish, heating up in the sun, no where near the water.... So, the boy picks up the Startfish, walks it out into the sea and drops it in. When he gets back to the beach, an old man stops and says "Boy, what are you doing"? The kid replies "I am trying to save the start fish from dying". The old man says "Kid, look up the beach, there are hundreds of them, it's not going to make a difference"... The boy looked out at the ocean and said "Well, I sure made a difference for that one"...

So I get it, do what you can, bring light to what you can. Spend your money in a responsible manor and wish companies that do their best to lower their footprint and not take part in slave labor.... I get it. I am with you. This is not the first time we have had this conversation.....

But you are also blanketing people. You just said that every cop/solider was either a bully or bullied. You are just making preposterous statements to try and get a point across, and while I generally agree with what you say and probably what you believe, the delivery needs work.

So, good for you if you are out, lobbying against police brutality and if you are on the picket lines in front of the Tyson chicken plant... Whatever. Thats all great. But if all you do about it, is talk about it dinner and bring it up on a surfing website all the time, shame on you.

I hope your actions speak louder than your words, cause if that is the case and you are plenty loud, you may actually make a difference.

 

Please don't Ctrl+C an entire web page and pretend like it is a response to an intellectual inquiry. Your fandom of Ms. Raynd notwithstanding, that is some Shredmachine sh*t.

(Ayn Rand): "(The common good) .. It is not, however, in its literal meaning that that concept is generally used. It is accepted precisely for its elastic, undefinable, mystical character which serves, not as a moral guide, but as an escape from morality. Since the good is not applicable to the disembodied, it becomes a moral blank check for those who attempt to embody it.

You could say these exact same things about every pillar of society. Justice, Art, and Love are 'elastic, undefinable, (and) mystical.' The flexibility of these terms is not a justification for their dismissal, but a signifier of their importance to society!

If the common good, love, and justice were easily defined, like a common housefly, they would not be worth fighting and dying for! Definition is suitable for objects, not for Justice, Love, and the Greater Good. These are the very things which separate us from the rest of the animal kingdom.

Instead of staking a claim in the ever-elastic fight for what will define the human condition, you use a pretentious text to dismiss the importance of it, inadvertently supporting the elites and the fraudulently intellectual Ayn Rand.

 

And man, as broken as our government may be, WE CREATED IT. We vote these people in. The very people that everyone is calling so corrupt are the very individuals that reflect our community as a whole. We DO have the power. The majority of our nation put the people in office that are in office. Period. So, whatever you say about the government etc. is a direct reflection of the people in this nation.

So, if the majority of this country agreed with you, then things would already be different.

 

zach, I cant beleive how much faith you put in the political system, if voting actually mattered, it would be illegal.

like protesting, when protesting actually accomplishes things (shutting down a highway, or Brooklyn bridge) EVERYONE gets arrested, even though its 'legal' to peacefully assemble

what I said is no more ridic than you claiming Native American issues are in the past

I know not every cop is bully
but infiltrating and changing?
what happens to whistle blower cops and politicians? they are lucky if they are run out on a rail, unlucky ones have boating accidents.....

there is balance between advocating for a casue and foolhardly fighting for one, cause you cant tear the system down, you gotta build a new one that shows the old one for how irrelevant is worthless it truly is

slshdog, tell me about this:s it ok to cannibalize 1 person so 2 people dont starve to death?

 

If it costs me more to romance a woman through a series of dates than it does to date-rape young drunken women, why would I not take advantage of the people who give me what I want for less?

People are chosen and hired for the value they bring, but the vast majority of the working class is disproportionately valued to the elite class. I believe that all men deserve not only dignity, but a proportionate share in the fruits of their labor.

Working for a small company for 38 years should not guarantee a janitor the same house in Palm Beach that his boss has. But, if it does not guarantee some degree of security, while the owner receives complete security, then the janitor, or typist, or wall-framer is being denied the proportionate fruits of his labor and discarded as a tool or tractor- in other words- property. Sound familiar?

The working class is slowly but surely learning that the residue of serfdom has not entirely subsided. Treating men as property is not acceptable, not in any shape or form whatsoever.

 

poor analogy, date rape is not voluntary, employment is

 

NEW CONSPIRACY THEORY

MIS is CIA... His cover is perfect. Lets everyone know he hates all govt agencies all day then whacks people at night. Nobody would ever suspect him.

I'm on to you buddy

 

eh, Id have more money and less free time with a spook job

and slashdog, think of it like this, high turnover companies would end up putting out inferior products, so it would behoove corpos to treat people well so they made a good product

 

Exactly wrong, people are hired precisely to give them money. Large amounts of the work people do today could easily be replaced by robots and computers but if we were to do so while clinging to what we call capitalism there would be no way to keep money (value) circulating.

 

1) Yes, absolutely, and the NYPD has stellar examples of what happens to whistle blowers ... but we do live in a society where it is possible to organize and lobby for different rules in law enforcement, and different leaders. Ladies and gentleman, I give you Bill de Blasio, mayor of New York, and we have no more unwarranted 'stop-and-frisk' of the black and latino communities.

The odds are stacked against change for the better, and they are stacked high, but it is possible and this is but one example of it, local to me.

2) It is NOT okay to cannibalize one person so that two may live. It is justifiable but I do not agree with it. The 2 & 1 numbers are reductionist and simplistic, but nonetheless, here we have one of the inherent problems with certain versions of democracy; 49% of people may have to live under the conditions that 51% determined.

There are better alternatives and with 51 states and current technology, there is no reason why we couldn't implement a more responsive and varied democracy. The only thing inhibiting this is the same rich people fighting to keep the disproportionate amount of wealth and power they have- you know this well as you support campaign finance reform.

But back to the heart of the matter, depriving one person of life and liberty to ensure the continued life and liberty of two people is NOT okay. One person would have to submit themselves to the food mill in order for the other two to survive, or all three would die. This is, in essence, the possibility of government; we give up our ability to take from others in order to protect our own lives and property from being taken (Hobbes had this part correct initially but then he went off the deep end). I know you hate this part but I agree with it, in principle, wholeheartedly. I am just disgusted that, through a complex system with a veneer of transparency and justice, some people receive more protection for their lives and property than others.

_____

Ah. I knew someone would say this and forgot to pre-empt it. The ridiculously extreme rape analogy is inferring that employment is less voluntary for some than others, and that the business owners readily take advantage of this, much as we could take advantage of a drunken girl. People without money are desperate, as essentials such as shelter, food, and transportation to alternative sources of employment are prohibitively expensive in some areas (especially the areas where it becomes too cold to survive outside). The law that employment is voluntary and freely terminable by both parties is but a sham which asymmetrically protects business and property owners under the ruse that gainful employment is as abundant as valuable employees; there is no doubt an abundance of willing bodies and a shortage of appropriately rewarding positions.

 

didnt know Deblaisio actually fixed the gestapo stop and frisk, thats beerworthy

so what you are suggesting 'varied democracy' from what I understand is similar to barry goldwater and franchise governments.

betcha didnt see that one coming

Also, you say "This is, in essence, the possibility of government; we give up our ability to take from others in order to protect our own lives and property from being taken"
So, it is ok for gvt to take from us via taxation? is it ok to take just a finger for the foodmill? I'm a lil hungry

'We can eat half her Bum and she will be ok 'paraphrasing Candide/Voltaire

 

you are a business owner? likely not.

monetary velocity is flying like never before and we have 91+million Americans out of the labor pool seeking employment, robots are on the way, all you fast food workers trying to unionize and get higher wages are incentive-ing places to get robotic servers/ordering stations et al