NationStates Jolt Archive

I've suffered somthing of a turn around. I always used to believe that lying to the public was always wrong in democracy. But then I took economics for A-level, (English and Welsh exams, no idea what their US equivilants are) and became, after that and reading John Stuart Mill, a utilitarian and Hedonist. Morality, it seems to me is of no practical importance in a traditional sense, so if lying makes people happy people then I should lie. So if I construct a myth e.g. the importance of the nation state, the fear of terrorism then by lying to people I create social coehision and happiness then by God (another example) I must. Now excuse me I've got some commies to waste...

but if i create - or choose to believe - a similar myth that there is such a thing as natural morality in an effort to bring greater happiness to the world, are we not stuck in some kind of weird paradox? :confused: ;)


edit: i also studied economics a-level and at uni and it turned me into a commie. go figure :p

The search for truth should never be impeded by the search for pleasure. Your suggestion sounds much like Aldous Huxley's dystopian nightmare of Brave New World.

Also, I studied economics at A-level and my economic status became a variation of the UK mixed economy. Conclusion: Economics A-level has fuck all effect on the world.

I have few morals, but one of those few remaining morals is to demand Self-Honesty both for myself and others.

I am a Buddhist, but I am also a Hedonist.
I am a walking contradiction.
I want to rule the world so I can destroy it.
I only care about myself and the people I love, everyone else can go fuck themselves.
I fake empathy in order to get people to like me.

But I am at least honest about being a horrible person.

but if i create - or choose to believe - a similar myth that there is such a thing as natural morality in an effort to bring greater happiness to the world, are we not stuck in some kind of weird paradox? :confused: ;)


Well that simple certain people e.g. the government act Hedonistically ; the general populace carry on regardless. This does trouble me as it reminds me of the inner party from 1984 but it seems the logical conclusion to draw.

are we not stuck in some kind of weird paradox?
May I humbly suggest that Pure Metal is the paradox here? :D

I've suffered somthing of a turn around. I always used to believe that lying to the public was always wrong in democracy. But then I took economics for A-level, (English and Welsh exams, no idea what their US equivilants are) and became, after that and reading John Stuart Mill, a utilitarian and Hedonist. Morality, it seems to me is of no practical importance in a traditional sense, so if lying makes people happy people then I should lie. So if I construct a myth e.g. the importance of the nation state, the fear of terrorism then by lying to people I create social coehision and happiness then by God (another example) I must. Now excuse me I've got some commies to waste...

I know you're not being serious.. but on the off-chance you are, you should know that neoconservatism doesn't really involve an adherence to any single moral philosophy.. that is, if you're talking about the much-demonized American variety of neoconservatism.. maybe you've got another type over there.

Also, I studied economics at A-level and my economic status became a variation of the UK mixed economy. Conclusion: Economics A-level has fuck all effect on the world.

I just meant that it highlighted to me the theory of utility which lead me to read JS Mill.

The search for truth should never be impeded by the search for pleasure. Your suggestion sounds much like Aldous Huxley's dystopian nightmare of Brave New World.

Also, I studied economics at A-level and my economic status became a variation of the UK mixed economy. Conclusion: Economics A-level has fuck all effect on the world.


A level econ blows, the actual material is so piss easy they have to make the questions as bitchy and pedantic as humanly possible

A level econ blows, the actual material is so piss easy they have to make the questions as bitchy and pedantic as humanly possible

true

A level econ blows, the actual material is so piss easy they have to make the questions as bitchy and pedantic as humanly possible
amen. the multiple choice part of the AS level was a joke :p

A level econ blows, the actual material is so piss easy they have to make the questions as bitchy and pedantic as humanly possible
Meh. I didn't take it any further, I'm doing a real science degree instead of a social science.

OOH, CONTRAVERSIAL!

Well, if it makes you feel any better, I will try to give you an honorable death in the Great Class War. Of course, I can demolish hedonism and utilitarianism if you'd like.

amen. the multiple choice part of the AS level was a joke :p
Multiple choice?? I did OCR Economics, we didn't get no steenking multiple choice!! MotherFUCK!

Meh. I didn't take it any further, I'm doing a real science degree instead of a social science.

OOH, CONTRAVERSIAL!
Perhaps you should be taking a spelling course as well. :D

I have few morals, but one of those few remaining morals is to demand Self-Honesty both for myself and others.

I am a Buddhist, but I am also a Hedonist.
I am a walking contradiction.
I want to rule the world so I can destroy it.
I only care about myself and the people I love, everyone else can go fuck themselves.
I fake empathy in order to get people to like me.

But I am at least honest about being a horrible person.

Hell I'm not even a Buddhist

I think we're diverting somewhat, not that discussing the exam system isn't fun

Multiple choice?? I did OCR Economics, we didn't get no steenking multiple choice!! MotherFUCK!
mwuhhaahaha it was hilarious! everybody finished in about 20 minutes lol (and its probably a reason why i got 100% in the exams that year :D ;) )

i did either OCR or AQA, but i think it was the former. but then again it was like 4 years ago now (and it was just one of of the 3 AS papers we sat for it, for the record)
[/hijack]


i'm not posting this, honest

Perhaps you should be taking a spelling course as well. :D
Damnit, my inner grammar nazi wasn't watching the spelling division. He has been shot and replaced. controversial

mwuhhaahaha it was hilarious! everybody finished in about 20 minutes lol (and its probably a reason why i got 100% in the exams that year :D ;) )

i did either OCR or AQA, but i think it was the former. but then again it was like 4 years ago now (and it was just one of of the 3 AS papers we sat for it, for the record)
Last exam one.

I did OCR for definite, none of the past papers were multiple choice. AQA probably did multiple choice, as my friend said his exams were piss easy first year.

For the first year, I had 3 1 hour exams, with questions ranging from 2 - 12 marks. Second year, two of the exams were similar but an hour and a half long with a 25 mark question tacked on the end. The third exam, synoptic on europe, was four or five exam questions over 1h45m.

Damn you and your multiple choice, I only got that in physics and chemistry :D

I know you're not being serious.. but on the off-chance you are, you should know that neoconservatism doesn't really involve an adherence to any single moral philosophy.. that is, if you're talking about the much-demonized American variety of neoconservatism.. maybe you've got another type over there.


Indeed the version over here is different. The NeoCons over here are the Project for the New American Century kind.

from their official website at http://www.newamericancentury.org/
The Project for the New American Century is a non-profit educational organization dedicated to a few fundamental propositions: that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle.

The Project for the New American Century intends, through issue briefs, research papers, advocacy journalism, conferences, and seminars, to explain what American world leadership entails. It will also strive to rally support for a vigorous and principled policy of American international involvement and to stimulate useful public debate on foreign and defense policy and America's role in the world.

William Kristol, Chairman PNAC

from an article at http://home.earthlink.net/~platter/neo-conservatism/pnac.html
Project for the New American Century is a neo-conservative think-tank that promotes an ideology of total U.S. world domination through the use of force. The group embraces and disseminates an ideology of faith in force, U.S. supremacy, and rejection of the rule of law in international affairs.

The group's core ideas are expressed in a September 2000 report produced for Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush, and Lewis Libby entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century. The Sunday Herald referred to the report as a "blueprint for U.S. world domination."


and the core ideas mentioned above from the cited report:
The U.S. must take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein is in power: "While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."
The U.S. must "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars" as a "core mission"
The U.S. forces are "the cavalry on the new American frontier"
The report builds upon the 1992 draft document " Defense Planning Guidance," which claimed that the U.S. must "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role"
Permanent U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, whether or not Saddam Hussein is in power
Increasing military pressure on China: "it is time to increase the presence of American forces in southeast Asia" which will lead to "American and allied power providing the spur to the process of democratisation in China"
"the creation of 'US Space Forces', to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent 'enemies' using the internet against the US"
The report contains ambivalent language toward bioterrorism and genetic warfare: "New methods of attack -- electronic, 'non-lethal', biological -- will be more widely available ... combat likely will take place in new dimensions, in space, cyberspace, and perhaps the world of microbes ... advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool"
Development of "world-wide command-and-control system" to contain dangerous regimes of North Korea, Libya, Syria, and Iran.



Sorry for the lengthy post, but i feel it is critical to understanding what the implications are in the term NeoCon.