Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
13. what is the validity of the social contract where rupert murdoch rules?
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 07:16 AM
Jan 2013

and how are the sheriff's actions the result of his own will, when his job and livelihood depend on him acting in accordance with rupert murdoch's will (indirectly and admittedly mostly unconsciously)?

and why is the sheriff only responsible for his job function as mindless 'muscle' & only the judge is responsible for his job function as 'mind,' when without the sheriff, the judge's decision would be meaningless? surely both the judge & sheriff are not only disembodied muscle or mind, but moral actors and human beings as well?

following your line of thinking means prohibiting resistance in the places where we are most likely to meet 'power' face to face, since every level up the hierarchy is protected by more & more insulation from the people affected. it also seems to prohibit any physical resistance & limits resistance to parading around the offices of power with signs -- as we generally aren't allowed to get much closer than that.

going a bit further, when the rupert murdochs of the world effectively structure the shape of most human interactions, but don't follow the golden rule in their own, that has ramifications all down the chain of command too -- a kind of corruption that permeates every level -- and people's behavior will change in recognition of *reality,* despite residual desires to be 'better people' or moral exhortations to follow the golden rule. it seems to me.

Wiccans Have It Too AnnieBW Jan 2013 #1
It's universal enough to warrant only minimal replies coti Jan 2013 #2
I'd be happy to follow the golden rule if the ruling class would. as things stand, such notions HiPointDem Jan 2013 #3
Which brings up an important point. coti Jan 2013 #4
i'd agree; but in that case the oppressors aren't being treated as they would wish to be treated. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #5
The Golden Rule is surprisingly more resilient than one would think. coti Jan 2013 #6
The powerful have huge expectations of being treated well, & they enforce their expectations. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #7
That may be true, but one of the important words in my above post was "realistic," in line with coti Jan 2013 #8
here's the rub, though. few of us will ever deal with rupert murdoch. we may, however, have HiPointDem Jan 2013 #9
This is great moral discussion, where you're going with this, in all seriousness. coti Jan 2013 #10
i'm not really looking for anything, just exploring the notion. my thought was more focused on HiPointDem Jan 2013 #11
They absolutely comingle, and, 90% of the time, your actions will fall on the side of the person coti Jan 2013 #12
what is the validity of the social contract where rupert murdoch rules? HiPointDem Jan 2013 #13
How about I just leave that answer to you, as you better understand the specific context coti Jan 2013 #14
the sheriff has no responsibility other than to act as a cog? see, there i disagree. no need to HiPointDem Jan 2013 #15
My last reply, though it's been a great conversation- No, the sheriff has no POWER to act coti Jan 2013 #16
he has power over his own actions, and he has power to judge whether the law he's asked to HiPointDem Jan 2013 #17
As far as the very last paragraph of your reply #13 coti Jan 2013 #18
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A Very Brief Return- for ...»Reply #13