It’s not minor, it’s a habit of thinking that’s pernicious, to talk as though the only people who have agency are people with privilege. What you meant was obvious enough, but it was also sloppy thinking.
monstro speaks of the real world. People suffer and people want and people die, while other people live quite well. Talking about how many slavers can dance on the head of a slave doesn’t change that.
We can’t give people from the past a pass just because ‘things were different’. ‘Do to others as you would have them do to you’ is not exactly a new concept.
However, I really don’t think ‘we the people’ have to take the hit on this.
We buy clothing made in thirdworld sweatshops not because we don’t care; we do it because we can’t sew. If we can sew, the material we can buy was grown or harvested in horrible conditions for workers, animals, and/or the environment.
We buy tasteless food from factory farms because we can’t grow our own because our older houses have lead paint in the soil.
We buy fuel from countries with repressive political systems because solar power is too expensive and people with money are afraid a wind turbine will spoil their view.
We do this because of decisions made about our economy by others; we may have voted for these others, but we based our votes on schooling for our children, not international trade agreements.
Firstly, certain phrases are obvious enough in their manner that certain questions about them are fundamentally stupid and outlandish.
For example if someone is pointing out errors in behavior of an Islamic society and specifically mentions the abuse of women, it doesn’t need to be pointed out that the women are also Muslims. That goes without saying for one, and it basically is irrelevant to the point at hand.
My whole point about the Third World is you’re dealing with crushing levels of tribalism, illiteracy, backwards thinking, and billions of people socialized under those conditions. The point is those people cannot become enlightened on their own. The people of 16th century Europe did not become the enlightened people of the 17th and 18th centuries. No, their descendants did. By and large those people from the 16th century died mostly as ignorant and backwards as they were born, a small number of them helped advance human society and in subsequent generations those advancements spread to a slightly larger sliver of human society.
The point is people are not capable of vast changes of their entire being, or their entire beliefs. Those things are generational changes.
Tao’s Revenge is certainly correct, that if everyone changed like I change a light bulb things would turn great instantly. That isn’t how human beings work. It is incredibly rare for someone to be raised with a whole set of values that they just throw away entirely. The simple fact is they are not going to necessarily believe that all the concepts of “universal good behavior” are in fact, universal. They are going to think their behavior is right and proper, and that’s that.
I agree with all of this. These are the justifications that I was referring to. When I buy a $9.99 t-shirt from Target, I’m aware of the enormous mark-up on that item, and I also know that the majority of the profit made on that purchase does not go to the laborer or even his/her boss, but to some faceless, amoral, mega-corporation that might as well be on the planet Krypton, for all intents and purposes. I know this but it does not stop me from going to Target or Walmart, or any other store that sells $9.99 t-shirts made on the other side of the globe.
I’m an environmental scientist, but I live only as “green” as I find convenient. For instance, I will walk to and from work to save on gas, and reuse things as much as I can so as to cut down on waste. But I don’t have a compost heap on my back porch. I’m not a vegetarian and I still go to McDonald’s every now and then. Being truly environmentally conscious does not align with my work ethic. I know what I have to do to be a good steward of the Earth. I actively choose not to because I’m lazy and selfish.
So there is a moderate amount of “evil” that I tolerate within myself. Part of that toleration comes from knowing that I’m just one person; even if I did live a 100% pure life, it wouldn’t change the evil around me so why not conform? Being righteous for the sake of it would assuage my guilt but not change the world. And then part of my toleration comes from plain selfishness and laziness. Still, these justifications don’t detract from the fact that I’m still an active member of an evil (or pick another word, if “evil” is too ooky) society. All I can do is try to work harder at being kinder and smarter so that one day I’ll won’t want to buy a $9.99 t-shirt or eat that 99 cent double cheeseburger. And maybe I’ll rub off on someone else, and then we can all eventually spring forward, just a little.
We may not reach the ideal, but we can strive towards it. The first step is realizing that the ideal is not something in the far-off spiritual realm, but that it is attainable right now, in the material world. Throwing up your hands in futiliy is taking a step backwards, IMHO.
This is the most important point in the thread. Really, we should be attempting to judge ourselves by the more enlightened standards of the future. *
*No, I’m not just saying this so that historians of the future can be impressed by how forward looking and modern Tao and I are.
Except that’s not what you said. You didn’t point out errors in behavior in Islamic society. You said, “most practitioners of Islam are monsters.” Do those two phrases really mean the same thing to you?
why?
Because, against all odds, and in spite of absolute despair, the human spirit evolves. That which was acceptable is now seen as odious. The long dead perpetrators are beyond any consequence for their evil other than the scorn of living generations. Let us give them that, at least. And perhaps we should bow our heads in shame over the things which we do, because those acts we know to be foul, and reprehensible are not the only evils we that we do. Perhaps we do ourselves, and each other more harm by the things we claim to believe are our rights, duties, and destinies. We have simply not grown in our own spirits enough to realize it.
The Founding Fathers were racists. And the founding mothers didn’t even know what sexists were!
Tris
Supposedly, Jefferson himself felt that slavery was wrong, and yet he still resisted making an effort to end it. Yes, he was in debt, I realize that, and perhaps would not have been able to free his slaves – as much as he may have wanted to.
Perhaps, if anything, that makes him that much worse. He may not have been able to free his own slaves – and yet he never addressed the issue in law, as far as I can tell. That’s practically the definition of hypocrisy.
And let’s say it WAS impossible to free his slaves – the way they were treated makes it that much worse. Same with Washington. (Since they weren’t his to free).
Actually I believe he introduced a gradual abolition bill in the Virginia legislature when a slave revolt in 1801 made considering that impossible.
No. He privately advocated for gradual abolition and forced deportation of slaves back to Africa, but publicly he supported expansion of slavery. There is no evidence that he ever authored or introduced any abolition bills.
You must understand how limited our options are. Factory farming and health concerns remove natural animal fertilization from vegetable production, so both create run-off, nitrogenization, and eutropiphication …
And I can’t keep a few chicken as pesticides and fertilizers for my little vegetable garden.
And everytime God kills a kitten it’s your fault. If it truly is the fault of you, me, and every single person on the planet for choosing to allow these things to happen, wouldn’t you or I or any other person on the planet be justified to go on a homicidal rampage killing anyone they see? After all, everyone they kill is personally guilty of murdering thousands in the third world.
That’s a very different way of considering guilt. I do think that we all do things we shouldn’t do: you, me, every third-world farmer, even Saint Obama. I do think we all could do better. But going on a killing rampage wouldn’t make things better, of course: it’d make things worse.
Well, duh.
Our options are as limited as our society makes it.
Because I am an environmental scientist, I know how we can do things the right way, and how possible it is to make positive change with just a little effort. But because I work for the government, I know how the right way is almost always circumvented by the most expedient or most self-serving way. There it is again. Evil society. Blocking progress.
I live in a state where the secretary of natural resources has pretty much gone on record saying to hell with the environment, we need JOBS. The guy in charge of the state’s environment said this. Society selected him through their choice in governor, and sadly many individuals agree with his ideas. Still, future generations will judge him and us harshly. As they should, because we aren’t ignorant about what it takes to fix things. Even the dumbass in charge knows what the problem is and how to solve it. It’s just that we are all too, in a word, chicken-shit to do anything about it. I include myself, because I need a job and I know what will happen if I “speak truth to power”. I’m weak.
The governor stepped into my office about two months ago, to shake hands with people and show off his wonderful helmet hair. There was my chance to tell him exactly what was wrong with him, his stupid attorney general, and his even dumber secretary of natural resources. But what did I do? I smiled and shook his hand and afterwards gushed to people about how he had called me by my name. What a dumbass I was! But like I said, I’m a part of the system too. Which means I’m a part of the problem. If I were a true revolutionary, I wouldn’t be working for the government. I’d be doing grassrootsy activism, going to all the public meetings and being the loud passionate voice that agency people like me hate. But I like having a stable salary. I like having health benefits. I like being able to talk shit about the governor without actually having to do anything about him except voting for the other guy. I am the chicken-shit that is fouling the Chesapeake Bay. Just like everyone else I know. We know better, and yet we continue to flow downhill because flowing uphill is scary and seems impossible.
Thomas Jefferson is a perfect example of what we’ve been talking about. Here’s a guy who was pretty smart. He owned a lot of slaves and recognized that they were not animals but human (although inferior ones in moral and intellect, though conveniently superior in physicality and endurance). And yet he had personally met famous, educated, talented negros like Phyllis Wheatley and Benjamin Bannaker. I wonder how he reconciled those people with those he kept in bondage? It is documented that he didn’t think Ms. Wheatly or Mr. Bannaker were “all that”, but surely he had to feel that they were halfway dignified, somewhat adequate. Surely not suited to be treated as chattel, like most of their brethern and sistern. I truly do not understand how one could handle this without facing some cognitive dissonance. It would be like eating a plate of pork chops right after you played bridge with Porky Pig.
There was no law in place that forbade TJ from paying his slaves, even if he could not free them. He could have also educated them (no Black Codes back then, IIRC). He could have also emancipated them upon his death…particularly those related to him (his suspected children). That he did none of these things suggest that he did not “struggle” as much as people would like to believe.
I don’t know where judging Mr. Jefferson gets us exactly. But I do know we can’t say he was a man ahead of his time and then pretend the other stuff didn’t exist. They seem interrelated to me; they cancel each other out somehow. If he were just a plantation owner or even just another run-of-the-mill POTUS, it would be one thing. But the man is honored for establishing the concepts of freedom and liberty in this country. Why shouldn’t people who know the truth NOT roll their eyes when they hear about how great TJ was? Isn’t that how we usually treat blatant hypocrites?
Abigail Adams says hi.
And then I gave an example of why I think that, the example was specific to only male practitioners, obviously. I didn’t necessarily need to give a “for example” at all, I chose to do so. Obviously I think there are a list of reasons I think the majority of Muslims would be classified as a “monster” under the criteria of these forums; however that does not mean that the specific example I gave was the reason I felt that way about a larger set of Muslims. (Not also, I never said “all” Muslims, nor are you saying I did, but I wanted to make that specifically clear.)
I think my wording was very clear, and honestly you’re not going to get anything else out of me on this. I’m not going to say “mea culpa” and admit you taught me a lesson with your comments, I said what I meant to say and find no fault in it, and I won’t be convinced otherwise. I find this whole line to be a detraction from the main point of the thread. I think in the context of my previous posts and the general progression of the conversation it was obvious the entire thing about Islam was just a single bullet point that was only being used to make a larger point. If you have further things to say to me about the larger point, fine, but I didn’t make that comment because I was interested in debating it or discussing it, it was a “for example.”
The larger point in that post was me saying I’m not a moral relativist. To emphasize that I pointed out that I’m perfectly fine passing certain judgments on people regardless of their culture or upbringing (for example my judgments of certain Muslims.) However, I do think there is value in looking at and coming to understand the reasons people around the world engage in immoral behavior. I think it’s a good thing to understand where stuff like stonings, female genital mutilation and et cetera come from. People don’t just naturally start doing stuff like that, that’s a product of socialization and culture. I do think that people in the West often have a hard time separating moral relativism (which essentially forgives immoral actions because of the culture itself) and an acceptance of what is fairly well researched social science–namely that behavior is heavily influenced by your culture and socialization. That does not forgive or condone, and properly it doesn’t attempt to do either, it’s just a means of explaining.
I also don’t generally feel I need to parse out what I’ve already said in this manner, but since you’ve obviously gotten in such a tizzy over it I’m doing this as a courtesy since you apparently have difficulty following.
So making the world a better place is all about destroying capitalism and buying stuff only from local, craft laborers? That’s bullshit. That’s just the bullshit Utopian propaganda that Communists used back before everyone realized how impossible their ideas were, I didn’t realize people had basically forgotten the entirety of the 20th century.
That $.99 cent cheeseburger is fucking wonderful. Mass quantities is fucking great, genetically modified crops are great, cheap meat is great, pesticides are great. These have made the world better, not worse.
And this is the disagreement right here boiled down. You acknowledge that we are physically capable of solving most of our problems, but dispute people would be willing to due to social conditions.
However since these are based on choices (people choosing to keep up the same crap) then they, you and me share moral responsibility for our collective choices in any system that accepts a generally understood concept of human free will.
I’m the kitty Hitler 
Well since you’re one of those people seems like it’d end in suicide.
Maybe instead of homicidal rampages/suicides it’d be more productive to concentrate on fixing our behavior and fighting the ignorance of others as well as our own.
I actually grow weary of the focus on the small number of unfortunate souls that worked Jefferson’s fields. Their plight is about as relevant to them now as the price of a milkshake in New York City. They are long since dust and are past caring about such things.
Their plight was not any worse than that of many other blacks kept in servitude, or many millions of other people of all ethnicities who have been enslaved since time immemorial. The plight of blacks in America is about as unique as a three-leaf clover.
When I look at what failures of Thomas Jefferson’s we as a society can learn from, his owning of slaves doesn’t even register. So fucking what? It’s honestly just too small and mundane to care about. There is nothing to learn from it, other than “people who are raised wealthy in a society in which wealthy people own slaves and profit from human slavery will probably grow up to profit from human slavery.” Guess we’ll have to be real careful we don’t reconstruct such a society again, or we’re likely to end up with a future President being a slave owner.
No, if we want to learn from the mistakes of Jefferson I’d say there are far more important ones than his personal moral failings vis-a-vis some enslaved blacks who have been dead for ~130 or so years at minimum. Jefferson’s most important failings were:
-Saying that most of North America should be divided up into small republics
-Creating philosophical support and foundation for venomous shit like nullification, one of the philosophical underpinnings of secession and ultimately the Civil War.
-Spouting off about how patriots should periodically rise up and overthrow their government.
Jefferson’s politics in that manner actually extended slavery and brought about far more misery and death than his personal ownership of a few hundred slaves. That shit is small compared to Jefferson’s greater crimes.
I’ve actually never thought much of Jefferson at all. Of the Founding Fathers he ranks probably the lowest of any of the famous ones. I’ve always been much more partial to Hamilton and Adams.