FrL: I’ll happily “lay off” buttonjockey308. But I’m incredibly curious how you would feel having a patrol officer working the beat where you live, shop, or work and that officer thinks that “you have it coming” for any bad things that happen to you because “you choose to live” or work or shop in that area.
I have no intention of defending him, but did he say that? I must have missed it.
Why, I wouldn’t be very happy about it all.
Relevance?
-FrL-
AFAIC, there’s exactly zero difference between his stated viewpoint and that attitude.
Oh, yeah. I forgot to name the attitude in question: Blaming the Victim.
Right, that was his attitude in his first several posts. My point is that later on he tried to concede to you he might be wrong after all, but you kept fighting him even then.
-FrL-
Unfortunately, you are wrong. Many societies view rights at the group level, not the individual. A member of the group may sacrifice themselves (their wishes, desires, or even their life) for the betterment of the group. What is important is that the group survives, not the individual. It is a mistake many people make who grow up in predominantly western societies that are mainly individualist in nature vs. collectivist as is the majority of the world.
The collectivist nature is what makes change so difficult. There is immense pressure to keep the status quo. People who wish to change take the chance of being alienated from the group. This is a very bad thing for someone in this type of culture. People in individualist societies don’t understand the pressure that can be brought to bear upon people who don’t conform to the groups wishes. It is only when you are the leader or have great influence within the group can you attempt to make changes. But by doing so you could jeapardize your standing.
Look again. Where has he said that a rape victim, or a burglary victim, or a victim of any crime does not deserve police protection and support? He has at least twice made a distinction between indivduals and societies. He likes our society. Why would he be a bad cop?
No, they don’t: societies have no brain cells, no neurons, and no ability to view anything. There are individuals who live within societies who view rights at the group level, not the individual level. This is an unethical way to approach the world.
Yes, I know, this is so terribly ethnocentric of me. I don’t care. I’m not a fan of moral relativism; and if I’m wrong, then I’m wrong everywhere, not just for some society that believes (for example) in executing the infant children of a traitor, because crimes are committed by families and not by individuals.
Actually, I think the mistake many people who grow up in predominantly western societies make these days is to believe that all approaches to ethics are equally useful or valid,a nd I think that’s the mistake you’re making.
I understand all that. I’m not arguing that there’s no such thing as peer pressure, or a social pressure to conform.
I’m arguing that no rights exist, objectively, at the group level. Individuals who comprise a group have rights, but groups themselves do not. Nor do groups have obligations.
Daniel
LOD, I’m not arguing that it is right, I’m only telling you the way it is.
It explains why a dictator doesn’t exist in isolation. He has his group which supports him and they try to exclude other groups from gaining power. Why don’t they want the other group to have power? Because it dilutes their own power. It is why once the other group does gain power they usually are no better than the guy they just replaced. The only difference is which group is being persecuted at any particular moment. Only when the underlying culture changes can things improve.