NationStates Jolt Archive

Politics.

As a university student, I find that many of my peers simply refuse to care. They find who lost on American Idol or the latest occurance on House more important or interesting than the suspension of constitutional rights. (No disrespect meant to House. I watch the show, but It's not more important than the entire nation's future!) I mention the suspenion of habeus corpus, and I get a shrug, or even an apparent lack of understanding of the concept!

Honestly, I get more frustrated with those who don't care one way or another than I get with those who politically oppose me. I can handle disagreement; after all, I do know that, at least, those who don't agree with me politically are trying to do what they think is best for this country, and I respect that. Those who don't care, well, they don't try to do what's best for the country, becuase they don't care what's best for our country.

Just as bad, or worse, as those who don't care/vote are those who care enough to vote, but don't care enough to be informed.
They truly damage our republic's system of democracy. Ill informed voters. They gave us President Bush. Twice. (Well, once, I suppose. After all, we must give the Supreme Court their due credit for 2000.) Those who vote purely on party lines--either way. The hard core democrats and republicans who will oppose a candidate/law simply because of affiliation. Such blindness and ignorance astoudns me. Why stop at learning a candidates party? A party is simply an attached label; it's the policies that really matter.

The most frustrating part of it is what influence my peers and I could have! What a difference we could make in this world of ours, if only more of us cared! If my friends would debate the merits of universal health care with the same passion as they do the probable outcome of the next big game, what could they accomplish? I know they have the intelligence for it. I'm at a top university, and I've seen time and time again as they apply their intelligence to anywhere BUT politics. My university even offers FREE newspapers, The New York Times, the AJC, and more, yet at the end of the day, I never see enough people reading them.

It's time for my generation to wake up.

Sorry. I just had to rant.:headbang:

Me!

That's why we have this beautiful forum.

Soon you'll be one of us, retorting "so fucking what?" to any real question directed to you. Apathy is contagious. :) This will sound odd from me, given my posts here in favour of my ideology. More often than not, however, I won't waste time wondering why no one else cares though, nor will I spend myself that way. So I'll just be yet another member of the fucked up postmodern youth of "late capitalism". Proudly too. :D

http://www.uvtv.info/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/zeromancer.jpg

Well, to tell you the truth, a political conversation tends to be boring with your friends. And depends on what politics you're talking about. I, for one, really couldn't give a rat's ass about abortion. I just dislike the holier-than-thou attitudes displayed by some pro-choicers and pro-lifers. Free speech on the other hand...is pretty important to me.

Well, to tell you the truth, a political conversation tends to be boring with your friends. And depends on what politics you're talking about. I, for one, really couldn't give a rat's ass about abortion. I just dislike the holier-than-thou attitudes displayed by some pro-choicers and pro-lifers. Free speech on the other hand...is pretty important to me.
Yeah, some issues just bore the hell out of me - like the war in Iraq, which I could not care less about. For stuff like abortion, I have my positions on them, but they interest me little.

To tell you the truth, I'd much rather talk about sports, video games, random shit than politics. I mean having someone completely politically incompetent is annoying...like some people who think we attacked saddam because he was communist...so I have no problem with someone who really doesn't care/know much about politics but has enough knowledge to at least follow along when I do decide to make some type of statement.

Then they all be What the Fuck? when they all get drafted. I can imagine it now.

" OMG IM DRFATED WTF!"
" Um... yea dude... while you were not caring and doing coke, the whole world went to hell."
" OMG RUN TO CANADA"
" Mate, Canada is under China rule."
" YAY! THEY WILL NOT CARE IF I SMOKE WEED!"

he gets there, and is shot.

Then they all be What the Fuck? when they all get drafted. I can imagine it now.

" OMG IM DRFATED WTF!"
" Um... yea dude... while you were not caring and doing coke, the whole world went to hell."
" OMG RUN TO CANADA"
" Mate, Canada is under China rule."
" YAY! THEY WILL NOT CARE IF I SMOKE WEED!"

he gets there, and is shot.

You miss that we live in a post-political world, where "country" is meaningless. All is "Business," and "Business" is all.

You miss that we live in a post-political world, where "country" is meaningless. All is "Business," and "Business" is all.
Cool. :)

" OMG IM DRFATED WTF!"
" Um... yea dude... while you were not caring and doing coke, the whole world went to hell."
" OMG RUN TO CANADA"
" Mate, Canada is under China rule."
" YAY! THEY WILL NOT CARE IF I SMOKE WEED!"
he gets there, and is shot.
I'd say he would chose another place to run, like the Truly Democratic country of Iraq, but somehow I don't care.


You miss that we live in a post-political world, where "country" is meaningless. All is "Business," and "Business" is all.
I'm afraid that, unfortunately, not yet.

BTW, business is good because it doesn't care. About what you're doing in your bedroom and where your bedroom is.


However, let's remember that capitalism has proven to be an artificial condition. It exists only if strictly limited, as a result of interference between companies and rules. Only in a small space of balanced rules. Push too strict, and you get government-controlled "business". Let the corporations grow, and you'll get business-controlled government; and one huge corporation with central planned economy. Almost the same.

You miss that we live in a post-political world, where "country" is meaningless. All is "Business," and "Business" is all.

You make it sound like it's a bad thing. ;)

You make it sound like it's a bad thing. ;)

It is.

I'm not a fan of countries, but at least people give a damn about screwing over their countrypeople.

I'm not a fan of countries, but at least people give a damn about screwing over their countrypeople.
I can tell you that people have pretty good relations inside our corp. Much more than just in the same country or the same town or the same street. Just a tradition of this industry.

I can tell you that people have pretty good relations inside our corp.

So?

Since the whole point of the corporation (unlike the country) is to deal with others, and make profits off them, the relevant question is how those others are treated.

Politics.

As a university student, I find that many of my peers simply refuse to care. They find who lost on American Idol or the latest occurance on House more important or interesting than the suspension of constitutional rights. (No disrespect meant to House. I watch the show, but It's not more important than the entire nation's future!) I mention the suspenion of habeus corpus, and I get a shrug, or even an apparent lack of understanding of the concept!

Honestly, I get more frustrated with those who don't care one way or another than I get with those who politically oppose me. I can handle disagreement; after all, I do know that, at least, those who don't agree with me politically are trying to do what they think is best for this country, and I respect that. Those who don't care, well, they don't try to do what's best for the country, becuase they don't care what's best for our country.

Just as bad, or worse, as those who don't care/vote are those who care enough to vote, but don't care enough to be informed.
They truly damage our republic's system of democracy. Ill informed voters. They gave us President Bush. Twice. (Well, once, I suppose. After all, we must give the Supreme Court their due credit for 2000.) Those who vote purely on party lines--either way. The hard core democrats and republicans who will oppose a candidate/law simply because of affiliation. Such blindness and ignorance astoudns me. Why stop at learning a candidates party? A party is simply an attached label; it's the policies that really matter.

The most frustrating part of it is what influence my peers and I could have! What a difference we could make in this world of ours, if only more of us cared! If my friends would debate the merits of universal health care with the same passion as they do the probable outcome of the next big game, what could they accomplish? I know they have the intelligence for it. I'm at a top university, and I've seen time and time again as they apply their intelligence to anywhere BUT politics. My university even offers FREE newspapers, The New York Times, the AJC, and more, yet at the end of the day, I never see enough people reading them.

It's time for my generation to wake up.

Sorry. I just had to rant.:headbang:



I totally agree with you. And the fact that the American Public has lulled themselves into this way... I'm sure It wont be that hard before we al say goodbye to the bill of rights and hello to a nice police state. We have become a lazy, sad, and pothetic people. Perhaps we've squanderd these rights so much we don't deserve them anyway?

It's time for my generation to wake up.


Our generation is screwed over. There are going to be A LOT of wake up calls in the near future to some people.

Then they all be What the Fuck? when they all get drafted. I can imagine it now.

" OMG IM DRFATED WTF!"
" Um... yea dude... while you were not caring and doing coke, the whole world went to hell."
" OMG RUN TO CANADA"
" Mate, Canada is under China rule."
" YAY! THEY WILL NOT CARE IF I SMOKE WEED!"

he gets there, and is shot.

Personally I would love to see that happen. I would not mind being drafted if I get to see those people that mad classes impossible break down in boot camps.

Then they all be What the Fuck? when they all get drafted. I can imagine it now.

" OMG IM DRFATED WTF!"
" Um... yea dude... while you were not caring and doing coke, the whole world went to hell."
" OMG RUN TO CANADA"
" Mate, Canada is under China rule."
" YAY! THEY WILL NOT CARE IF I SMOKE WEED!"

he gets there, and is shot.

You must be a prophet!

Since the whole point of the corporation (unlike the country) is to deal with others, and make profits off them, the relevant question is how those others are treated.
Oh, come on. Do corporations aim to oppress, kill and enforce people from other corporations? No. Countries do. Vietnam, Korea, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan. A country doesn't want other countries to exist, it wants to be the one. A corporation does want others to exist, to make profits off them.

And, as long as you're within a really big corp, it's just like the country to you, but better because it at least didn't get you for free and won't, for instance, draft you. Yes, we know a corporation's real purpose is to make money. And it's nice we know at least that, because we don't know what's the government's real purpose. In this light, just making money isn't that bad, is it?

Yes, we know a corporation's real purpose is to make money. And it's nice we know at least that, because we don't know what's the government's real purpose.

I didn't say "government." I said "country."

We do know that identification with one's country leads to altruistic treatment of citizens of that country... while the conversion of human relations into market relations almost necessarily rests upon treating other human beings as cogs in the machine of profit, with moral depravity resulting.

I didn't say "government." I said "country." They don't exist separately...

We do know that identification with one's country leads to altruistic treatment of citizens of that country...
Same with company. In-corp relations even between multinational people are better than between people in the same country. People have much more and worse conflicts within countries. They don't share a single goal. People inside a corp do. Even though it's particularly strongly felt in my field, it isn't limited to shipbuilding.

And, also, I don't find the current supposedly altruistic treatment of people because they are same-country something remarkable. You usually only see people from your country around anyway. And, so, it simply mean that others are treated even worse, like "I don't care if they're slaughtered" (see wars). It borders on nationalism.
Fortunately, we aren't like that yet (see anti-war protests). Many people do treat others irrespectively of their country.

I'm not a fan of countries, but at least people give a damn about screwing over their countrypeople.

But when they don't, it hurts a lot more than anything a company can do on its own. After all, it has been the government that allows corporations to get away with crimes in the name of nationalism or economic dominance.

It's time for my generation to wake up. Wake up to what? The nightmare that is the American political landscape? There isn't all that much incentive for waking up.

Wake up to what? The nightmare that is the American political landscape? There isn't all that much incentive for waking up.

But why then die in your sleep? Why no wake up to at least go out guns blazing in a massive orgy of violence and explosions in the name of the liberty of the human race!

Apathy saddens me to no end. However, I can't help but ponder the possibility that many US citizens appear apathetic simply because they're afraid to say how they really feel. I know, it's quite an optimistic viewpoint when most of the time I just want to scream something along the lines of "where are we going & why are we in this handbasket?" but I just can't help it. If that is the case, however, will they decide at some point that the need to speak outweighs the danger, and if so, will it be too late by then?

Welcome to the last several thousand years of human existence. Give people stuff to buy, food, entertainment, all the while keeping the peace, and they won't care who's running the show.

They don't exist separately...

Only, while you might be able to destroy national identity with a global culture, any chance of destroying the State through global capitalism is a pipedream.

Same with company. In-corp relations even between multinational people are better than between people in the same country. People have much more and worse conflicts within countries. They don't share a single goal. People inside a corp do. Even though it's particularly strongly felt in my field, it isn't limited to shipbuilding.

Again, because the key element of the corporation is interaction with outsiders, this means little to me.

And, also, I don't find the current supposedly altruistic treatment of people because they are same-country something remarkable.

Indeed, it isn't. It's very natural.

You usually only see people from your country around anyway.

Right. And generally you treat others with a modicum of decency. That's human.

Only, while you might be able to destroy national identity with a global culture, any chance of destroying the State through global capitalism is a pipedream.
Why do you think I'm a supporter of one or another? Don't be quick with labels.
Unrestricted capitalism is impossible. If you let corps grow, they'll grow, merge until there are just two entities and rule, with their central economy. We've seen it with any developed market: only two conglomerates stay.


Again, because the key element of the corporation is interaction with outsiders, this means little to me.
Now, think of the other part. Country also interacts with outsiders. It sends them little gifts - bombs, missiles, bullets. Special on holidays.

Both interact with outsiders, but corporations at least do it in mutually beneficial way, unlike countries.


Yes, corps are about money. Anything wrong with that? At least it's better than nazional dominance or crap like that.

After all, it has been the government that allows corporations to get away with crimes in the name of nationalism or economic dominance.

The state created corporations and capitalist property rights in the first place; I don't believe I was defending it.

like some people who think we attacked saddam because he was communist...

No fuckin' way. You can't be serious.

People aren't going to care about politics if it doesn't affect them. There really isn't enough hours in the day to worry both about the stuff that affects you and the stuff that doesn't.

Elaborating a bit on the important point. About how actually good is what people tend to cite as the sign of corporate evil: the fact that they are machines for increasing profits.

Corporations just want money. The money are enough, and you get something for them. Countries want more - not just your money, but your obedience, your loyalty, your life. And, furthermore, countries believe that your money and life already belong to them, and you're just returning the debt. Your sacred debt to your country which you owe everything to.

So corporations trade with you. First they trade their money for your work, then they trade your money for their product. It's their modus operandi, the only way they can work. Countries don't bother trading with their human property. They take your money because they want to spend them, take your work and life because your country needs them, and take your freedom just because.
Well, you get something in return, but just a tiny fraction of what was taken, and even that is treated as country's generous help; don't forget to thank it.


Now to the part III - fighting each other.

The reasons for wars have always been split between two things: solid gain (territory, resources, people) and personal complexes, like honor, revenge, nazional pride, ideology, showcasing the military dick, or just feeling particularly jingo today.

Considering the latter, we can tell for sure that these wars would be forgotten if power was taken away from countries. Corporations are machines, depersonalized mechanisms full of mutual control; they don't have human personality disorders. Honor, dick length, nazional pride - purely animal instincts of alpha domination and herd unity; machines don't exhibit them, even if built of humans, they keep rational as a whole. They won't make wars for honor.

Now, let's take the first way: practical gains. Very certainly, both countries and corporations are equally interested in more resources.
But how do wars over resources usually end? They end at a table, discussing the peace terms, making tradeoffs. In trading. The blood spilled was for nothing particular, just to decide who has a longer dick and not to give up easily. They could do it without fighting, right away, and it would be cheaper for both.
Corporations do it this way. When a corporation wants to acquire another company, there's a takeover. Most of the times little changes for the purchased company, just that now they are a part of another entity. There happen some hostilities, when personal ambitions stand in the way, but that rarely goes above financial sabotage - nothing comparable to a war. So, without countries, wars for gain would also be either gone or limited to personal conflicts. As a whole, corporations belong at the trading table.


And the reasons for such difference in approaches don't really require long explanations to understand. They are in the very nature.
What's symbolic of a country? A crowd cheering in unity to the emotional words of their leader.
Of a corporation? A group of executives discussing their plans around the table.

It's time for my generation to wake up.

Sorry. I just had to rant.:headbang:

Quite right. I get so frsustrated when people refuse to take any kind of stand. I mean... for fuck's sake! Does it not bother you that we're fighting an unjust war? That the government is impossibly corrupt? That we're destroying the Earth that nurtures us? That we're about to spend £76b renewing a system designed to kill millions, when the same money could be used to vastly imporve our health services, eductaion services, or could even go to aid the third world... it could be put towards renewable power! How can you not care?

I think you are missing a few things there, Vault 10. Like, that corporations have high interest in there being a state that orders the market and the circumstances. And many an industry has intentions and interest for war, since they are interested in profit. If a war promises profit, then why should a 'machine' refuse from doing it, from using the power they have on the government to get it through?

Anyway, I think this Corp vs Country thing is a bit out of topic. The topic is, Why care and why not?

That's an ongoing debate in social sciences (which is the subject i am studying), whether its a good sign for democracies when their people stop being interested in voting and daily politics.

Theory 1 is that it is a good sign, since the people start not caring for what is decided 'up there' since they feel content with how things are and trust in the feeling that things will stay good for them, thus with content comes lack of interest. So its said to be a normal development in a working democracy.
Theory 2 is that people grow so frustrated and apathetic, that they think whatever they vote, whatever they do, they can't influence they way things are and will be in any way, and that the government won't listen to them even if they voted for them. Thus theory 2 states that a low voting rate is the failing of democracy.

I have seen both types of people, yet I don't know what causes lack of interest in politics. I can just say, that I can understand the people you grew frustrated and don't care anymore, since they tried at least, and cared once.

I also grow frustrated meeting people that haven't once in their lives even thought what could be best for the country and in their interest, which leaders one should elect and which not, and what rights and opportunities the individual has.
So, yeah, its time for our generation to wake up, though I doubt it ever happens. Still, its reassuring to know there are young people who actively participate and do care what is decided and what can be stopped in a country.

I think you are missing a few things there, Vault 10. Like, that corporations have high interest in there being a state that orders the market and the circumstances.
Corporations have some interest, but in the big picture state costs them way too much; it would be much cheaper for them to create their own.

That's why, while corporations alone would be better than state alone, the best system would include weak governments. Only in organizing and coordinating role, not in administrating. Just to keep the spot so corporations don't take it, because they wouldn't refuse a chance.


And many an industry has intentions and interest for war, since they are interested in profit. If a war promises profit, then why should a 'machine' refuse from doing it, from using the power they have on the government to get it through?
I expected this point, but waited for it to be voiced rather than build it up myself.

Yes. Corporations have their share of interest in wars. But, in a war, where does the profit come from?
It comes from the government. It's the country which pays the corporations for equipment and services. Of course, companies are interested in governments paying them.

However, on its own, war contains only loss. It is waste of huge sums of money by governments, and on their way from coffers to dumps some are picked by the corporations.
But without countries and governments there wouldn't be such flow.

Simple as it is: if you start throwing gold on a dirt road, most will sink into the dirt. But a passerby will be able to pick some of it, and, if he's cynical enough, he is interested in you throwing the gold around. Or in you hiring him to throw around the gold (for whatever reason), to make the analogy closer.
However, he won't throw his own gold around.

...piss me off to no end.

Things have always been like this from the beggining of times.

Most people are sheep. Very few people care about anything going on outside their field of view, and those are the ones that run things, for their profits or for the whole.

The others are happy if they have something to fuck, a nice car and a reasonable bank account.

I know the Corp vs Country thing isn't on topic, and I don't want to say I'm going for one side or the other, but I think we might be forgetting the late 1800s/early 1900s in America when the government was basically controlled by business. I'm not saying it was worse than a war or something, but it certainly wasn't hunky dory, what with the horrible industrial conditions and huge rich/poor divide and whatnot.

Don't forget the rest of the world was hardly any better. Some monarchies even had yet to be removed.

And it were labor unions, grassroots movements, which put the industrial conditions into a normal state (eventually benefiting the industry itself).

Today the US government is controlled by businesses as well. The problem is that it is (and was) controlled by specific businesses, to gain advantage among others, not by them collectively.