And the Election Results are In! …

• Australia is daft
• I wonder whether there is a problem with having political discussion being largely a problem solving discussion. That is, negative discussion reigns (i.e. what we haven’t done yet) and positive discussion (i.e. what we have done, what we have achieved) is overlooked or thoroughly misunderstood
• Media is expose orientated: they like to focus on ‘scoops’ and perceived political weaknesses. This is a habit of downward social comparison (i.e. becoming aware, conscious of superiority), which the petty bourgeoisie all too often indulge in
• Political apathy leads to the non-exercise of reason. The centre-right rely on reason minimum people
• The centre-left have the complicated situation of trying to build; the much more difficult alternative option than destroying. This is manifest requiring reason vs non-reason (often emotions), hope vs fear, large heartedness vs minimal concern for others, higher intelligence (the fact is, to face up to problems and come up with sorts of policies to target them requires effort which the policy-lite centre-right doesn’t need) vs lesser intelligence. Its an angel versing a devil in perpetual combat…
• I fear that democracy is breaking down. The apathy here (i.e. 6% informal votes, i.e. votes which cannot be used and are 99% intentionally done improperly, I mean, how hard is it to scribble on a piece of paper?) and in the US, even the UK, is very troublesome. People don’t want to dare to know. This is somewhat understandable which the limited ability for achievement with the political parties which come into existence but the fact is two principles reign democracy. One, democracy is founded upon disappointment. There is work to do, problems to solve so we need governance. Further, leadership needs changing and refreshing, and negotiations and consensuses are often required to please all. Two, the perfect is the enemy of the good. Expectations, particularly the high sort, need to be checked at the door regarding politics and we only need to consider what options exist.
• People seem to be disappointed in that our political parties don’t have perfect solutions. Democracy was founded on the idea that people are mature, and like Freud’s ego have to work for an extended period so as to achieve an answer whereby only then can pleasure be had. People expect too much at once, perhaps its the technologies and the cool gadgets’ fault. Nonetheless the result is the infantilization of citizens

Politics, religion

This 9/11 era is going to be seen as the McCarthyism of our time. Hysteria, pure and simple, over the Other. Moreover communally supported hysteria which institutions (media, politicians, education system, etc…) simply don’t touch. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing” is really a statement of liberal democracy, and there are times when institutions must confront society, popular opinion and better it. The Islamic Center two blocks away from Ground Zero is a clear case in point.

“There are dozens and dozens of mosques in New York City. I think this is what people have called a teachable moment. It is a moment for better communication. And I would urge the people behind the Cordoba Initiative to go ahead and accept some of the offers that have come forward to find a better, more appropriate place that isn’t polarizing, that isn’t controversial.”

(link 1)

This is the pathetic opinion of cultural relativism. It’s actually cultural imperialism as it is the endorsement of non-Islamic, ‘Western’ people over Muslims, yet I believe it fits neater in cultural relativism and I don’t wish to go into the discourse of latter day imperialism. The relativism I see is in the “don’t shake the boat” philosophy: let people be with their beliefs and avoid any possibility of friction. This is a mockery of society. Society essentially entails the possibility of people getting their feelings, their opinions hurt, especially regarding things like the usage of private space or speech on privately owned websites. In the New York instance it is terribly ironic that the ‘Western values’ Al Qaeda targeted, which I take to include Liberal Democracy and it’s freedoms, may be curtailed, or that people at all think they should be curtailed for an Islamic Center with a Mosque. These opinions are wrong. Also if they are merely feelings which are associating Al Qaeda terrorists with Islam at large then the feelings are wrong, and political decisions should NEVER NEVER NEVER be governed by feelings! Feelings will always have a residue home in politics, but when they start getting a significant say or the last say then the system is faltering.

The fact is everything went wrong with the West after 9/11. Instead of building a better future with dialogue and understanding between the West (United States, Europe, Australia, pretty much) and Islam we have stereotyped, misunderstood and tried to push away, at least into the corners, Islam and Muslims (which is all this New York incident is, denial, temporary answers, shirking responsibility). The Minarets in Switzerland, the Burka in France, the Mosque in New York City and widespread, deep ignorance between those non-Muslims in the West and Muslims. Nearing our first decade of the event we shall have completed a history of thorough failure. It is not only the failures of that period but the boding of the future that is worrisome.

Are we responsible enough to have religion in society or should we side with Zola? This must be thought about now.

I would like to dovetail two points into this. (1) People seem to think nowadays that they can and should dictate their culture or beliefs onto everyone, and sometimes mistake democracy as encouraging this hegemony. It doesn’t and people shouldn’t. Case in point are the minarets in Switzerland. A completely non-harmful activity in private space is absolutely none of society’s concern. FOR FUCK SAKE, NONE! People must be granted this autonomy as to be able to be themselves. This does tie in slightly to democracy in the fact that citizens must not be coerced in their activities and must lead their lives freely, otherwise they might feel political obligations and/or political ideologies might be endorsed or advocated. The problem with this gain, this value of the West and it’s golden liberal democracy was this was a gain that isn’t sufficiently acknowledged, and it is normalised. It must continually be renewed and acknowledged: people can do things different from the majority as long as they harm no one. This is fundamentally about minority rights. If the nation-state can’t respect it’s minorities, be they religious, political or literary (e.g. fans of violent crime literature) then only bad things may spring forth. (2) Politicians should be largely pedagogical not populist. Some populism is tolerable but the needless vile opinion poll chasing in a fucking period without any fucking upheaval whatsoever of this election with it’s incredible breadth is astonishing and unsupportable. There is no economic substance in the debates about surplus worthwhileness, there is no reason to violate UN obligations and turn away refugees. If politicians normalise ignoring the facts and reality to satisfy capricious voters then society is starting to rot.