Europeans ‘would accept climate change curbs’

[Duker]

Thanks for the insight everyone. I will definitely try to read some more to broaden my perspective. I already purchased "Secret History of the World", but just haven't read it yet.

Mike

 

[Tigersoap]

Thanks for the replies. Want to propose something here and see what you think. Let's say that I to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that certain chemicals are harming the planet. I can disseminate this information and hope that people will accept it, and hope that they stop using the chemicals.

Suppose that I also know that these chemicals have a detrimental effect on humans, but the proof is not as conclusive. My agenda is to stop the chemicals from destroying the planet, but I approach the subject by writing a book, about how these chemicals affect people's health (and ignore the effect on the planet, although the two may be linked in some way). Many people stop using the chemicals to improve their health as a result of the book, but my real agenda was to stop them from using the chemicals to help the planet.

By being manipulative, I have achieved a goal that ultimately will be good for the planet AND the vast majority of the people. However, it may not be good for the chemical companies that sell these products, and the few that work there and the shareholders who profit at the expense of others.

I do think it's manipulative.

Why would there be a need to lie about something you discovered and that is objectively true ?

Trying to lead people into doing something (subjectively good or bad) without them knowing the full story is still STS.
Free will is removed from them to actually make the decision by themselves.

I think to empower people with the right to make their choices in knowing all sides of the story is better imho.

How many times do we think we are acting for the "good" when at the same time we know, deep inside that it's only for the little "I" that we are doing it.

Your agenda may be good to start with, but who knows, if you go with that manipulative attitude, how do you know when you will be yourself used to do things that in the end will result in more harm ?
How many people started with the "right" agenda (And right is a subjective term) to be co-opted later on ?

Just a few thoughts.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

But why do you think that you decide what is for the "good" of the planet? This is entirely subjective, and it is not ultimately for the good of anyone or anything when someone else decides for them what is "for their own good". This includes the planet, osit. Sometimes dying, being damaged, or being hurt in some way is in fact ultimately "for the good" of someone or something. It is not STO to make that decision for them and try to change the planet or a person to conform to how *you* want it to be. And you're not helping anyone but tricking them into doing what you want. They're not learning anything, you do not cause them to care about the planet by fixing it behind their backs. Maybe when the planet gets a little "annoyed" and shows it by inflicting even more suffering on humanity than humanity has already inflicted upon itself, people might begin to care about the planet. But the planet in and of itself doesn't matter - it's not good to save it, it's not good to destroy it, it's neither. If humanity decides to save it, that's humanity's subjective choice based on what priorities humanity has, osit. What's wrong with giving people all the information you have and letting them choose based on that? Are you afraid that if it does not concern people's personal well-being, they won't care? Well if they don't care about the planet, why do you? It's just a space rock. It's there to help us learn our lessons, which can easily include being destroyed if we're just that ignorant and selfish, osit.

On the original topic though, I think Capitalism is the ultimate form of "not accepting any curbs". The sky is the limit, everyone and everything else be damned as long as *I* get what I want. I think curbs are good, and we shouldn't have the freedom to fulfill every selfish urge we happen to have without care for consequences. I mean we can, but then we'd basically have the situation we have right now in the world - big fat chaotic pyramid of control.

 

[gaelen]

I do think it's manipulative.

Why would there be a need to lie about something you discovered and that is objectively true ?

Trying to lead people into doing something (subjectively good or bad) without them knowing the full story is still STS.
Free will is removed from them to actually make the decision by themselves.

I think to empower people with the right to make their choices in knowing all sides of the story is better imho.

How many times do we think we are acting for the "good" when at the same time we know, deep inside that it's only for the little "I" that we are doing it.

Your agenda may be good to start with, but who knows, if you go with that manipulative attitude, how do you know when you will be yourself used to do things that in the end will result in more harm ?ve as to what we can offer a person who is asking, based on individual history and background. For example, I wou
How many people started with the "right" agenda (And right is a subjective term) to be co-opted later on ?

Just a few thoughts.

Quite true. However, seeking to disseminate information in the way that characterises the different subjects on Cass/Signs one could say it has an "agenda" behind it in terms of allowing this broader info to be understood in context. The agenda or perhaps a better word, intent, is to share freely all information in the most effective way possible. Context is very important for grasping all the issues involved. So, we don't need to lie about anything, sure, but we may have to be naturally selective sometimes both on the net and in our daily lives. l wouldn't necessarily jump into an anarchist forum and start talking about alien abduction or hyperdimensional realities - I would start with Political Ponerology. In this way it is an adaption which allows a more gentle introduction based on belief and conditioning. That was the meaning behind my reasoning in that particular example. Though it is true the intent to manipulate still remains overall, hence the continuing use of the word...

But I think you're right to raise that particular point in this context. It can be a subtle thing and I think it deserves more thought as to when be "Wise as Serpents and gentle as Doves"...

G.