Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Maaaaan, fuck statists.
Well, just when I thought that I haven't seen enough bullshit on the internet, there comes a piece of tripe from a political faction that, unfortunately, doesn't get all the criticism they deserve on the internet, unlike right-wing libertarians. Statists. Fuck statists.
So, this gentleman claims that the government needs to force people to do what a government-appointed board of psychologists declares is in their best interest and would make them happy in the long term, and punish them by fines if they don't comply. I cannot find words to describe what is wrong with this. First of all, there is the insane amount of arrogance that lies behind that argument. Humans aren't a bunch of faceless drones that all think the same, so nobody can claim to know what everybody wants and what is in everybody's best interest. There is a thing called subjectivity, y'know? They think like existentialism didn't show up 150 years ago and say that a view like that is bullshit, y'know? Secondly, the problems that could show up by assigning a board of psychologists to judge what is best for society based on their studies is very dangerous, for a load of reasons. Empirical study of sociological phenomenons can be fairly unreliable, and there is a whole intellectual movement built around the idea that such studies are essentially fruitless - antipositivism. Thirdly, it's blatantly totalitarian. Need I say more?
Comments
"Statists"?
That's one of the most meaningless names I've ever heard for a political faction.
I was actually kinda expecting this to be about statistics >.>
From what I've gathered, it's a PC term for "totalitarian" that some American politicians love labeling themselves with.
The EU is often accused of this kind of thinking, too, so I'd say it's not uniquely American.
I always got the impression that statism originated from a similar form of narcissism that fuels right-libertarianism: namely "The world would be so much better if everyone listened to me!"
^^ I'm talking about the term itself. But yes, that kind of thinking is very widespread in the modern world, and it worries me.
I wonder which political option isn't driven by that idea Worm mentioned. Perhaps some now-extinct currents of conservatism once were, but I'd wager I might be wrong on this too.
The fallacy, from my point of view, lies within the arguement. The gentleman in the video admits that people know themselves better than others do, but argues that we as humans are fallable and thus need outside help to behave ourselves. But governments are made of people, and thus just as fallable. Therefore all systems are flawed, not just those that rely on indvidualism.
Back in the early 1800's Tocqueville warned that the United States would one day face "Tyranny of the Majority".
Tocqueville, by the way, was a bit of a racist according to my knowledge. The dude just couldn't wrap his mind around the idea that the locals aren't overjoyed with the fact that civilised France invaded their native Algeria.
I thought no one liked statists but it's just that they're not even popular at all hence no one talks about them. On the other hand, libertarianism is an attractive political philosophy so there's more people who like it, and thus more visible opposition to it.