Debunking the 'self made man' myth

Post Reply New Topic

But then um.... wouldn't we like, um...... starve? How many of you guys have ever lived on a farm? Grown any food? Slaughtered an animal? Can you make your own rope? Building supplies? Can you protect yourselves?

If no one strove towards any level of oversight, any level of economic excellence, then who would keep people from killing each other? And feed everyone? What would happen if there was a drought, hurricane, earthquake, flood, volcanic explosion, or famine?

I did not suggest going back to having no modern technology or anything like that, more doing a better job at using and distributing resources.....so you don't have someone with more money they could spend in 10 life times as well as people who can barely afford to not starve at the same time. Problem is wasteful society, reap non-renewable resources and doing a good job of wasting anything that is available. If done right everyone would have access to food, water and necessities of life, but not with the current system...but I get it, its over peoples heads because who would even want to rationalize that maybe the psedo-survival of the fittest behavior is not necessary due to the abundance of resources on this planet if people weren't to stupid to use them right.

Also there would be some organization, just not a monetary system, so no need to strive for economic excellence there'd still be a society of sorts....just not one with class division, the attitude of having to make it to the stop even if it means screwing others over and all the BS that goes along with it. But then it might resemble how communism is supposed to look.

Either way I don't have all the answers that is as far as I have gotten as to coming up with a description of what I'd see as a better system....either way the system we do have is not sustainable so something has to change or its going to collapse and there will be much chaos and violence likely but that is probably more likely than smoothly moving to a more sustainable system/society.

I do not get what that picture is supposed to imply unless its a symbolic representation of what is going to happen to this system if it continues functioning as it does of course than it makes sense. Also do not get the 'but then um...wouldn't we like, um starve?' bit.....I got the question just not why you typed it in such a horrendous manner.

What you're thinking of is a better world. It's not just a better system. I believe that human nature is the cause of these problems.

And no not all people are like this but with so many people there are bound to be people who think in terms of "screw others". Those are the people who are actually going to try to accumulate vast and unnecessary wealth. Not all of them are going to succeed but they're the only ones who are going to try.

The world would be a better place if people were motivated simultaneously by self-interest and other people's interests.My life is important and so is yours. My needs and your needs are both of equal concern. That should be the attitude. It's ridiculous that even when it costs you next to nothing to help someone people still refuse. It makes perfect sense that someone isn't going to help someone if the cost to themselves is greater than the benefit to someone else. I wouldn't help someone if the cost to myself was greater than the benefit. It doesn't make sense that people won't help others at almost no cost to themselves with the attitude "it's not my problem". When there's a problem that can easily be solved at an extremely low cost I have no clue why people just ignore it.

A new system probably won't change things. There needs to be a global shift in attitudes.

That might not be possible without mass brainwashing as someone else has already said. The person meant it sarcastically. It's funny that sometimes I wonder if mass brainwashing would actually do more good than harm. It's totally unethical so I'm not advocating for it by any means I'm just wondering if it would actually be beneficial to this world.

Without a fundamental change in human nature there is no system that can create this ideal world. The people that make up the system need to change. A new system can't solve things without a global shift in peoples' attitudes and values.

Good points, I think it is very true a shift in attitude would be necessary you are right that a change of system alone would not really fix the issue....but then how do you cause a global shift in attitude? Maybe brainwashing wouldn't be the answer since as you say it is unethical and well it would be fake if people where just essentially programmed....but perhaps influence, but then people have been trying to influence positive change in the world for a very long time to no avail a lot of times it would seem.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khS-sQ1KHFE[/youtube]
I don't think humans are angels. But it is silly to say our behaviour is fixed regardless of circumstances. In fact its dangerous. This is exactly the attitude rulers want from a population.

The current system is sustained through brainwashing.

Last edited by RushKing on 30 Oct 2014, 3:44 pm, edited 4 times in total.

And not all of us are capable of attaining these skills. There has to be something for the less brainy people to do. Lack of intelligence doesn't mean lack of heart.



I was never very good at math and science. Always stuck to the humanities. I won the high school history award back in '88.

There is. But those job carry little to no inherent dignity, and often do not pay a living wage.

Then again, people are paid according to the rule of "Supply & Demand". If there is a large supply of "unbrainy" people and little demand for what they can do, then they will be paid less than the smaller number of "brainy" people whose skills are in much greater demand.

And people need living wage to sustain themselves...so if the less brainy people can only hope for jobs that don't pay a living wage, then there is definitely a need for programs to help assist those people with the costs of living. Otherwise they'd have to pay people with such jobs a living wage.

Also I think I like supply & demand even less now, since that implies it creates the prefect environment for a small amount of people to have the most to split among themselves and then the rest are left with less than this small group to try and split up. Though I suppose it is not so bad if there are programs/policies in place to off-set that some so that wealth distribution is not so disproportionate. The least amount of people should not have the most wealth/resources....its only going to lead to a collapse, or a police state when those few with the most decide they need more oppressive laws to keep people out of their 'stack' so to speak. Who would stop them the government they are buying out?

^^^
True; take the social welfare state away where the masses cannot find subsistence and anarchy will ensue, as people will do whatever it takes to feed their children, or feed themselves if the STUFF does hit the fan.

The problem is that many people do not have the kind of mind, that can do hands off stuff all day long, and others do, and in this TECHNOLOGY OF INFORMATION society that is moving this way increasingly as such, these folks, in large, are the ones that are needing help and will continue to as that is the way their mind works, and change is possible to some degree, but NOT without a great deal of work and just plain luck.

Additionally the social welfare state pours approximately 2 trillion dollars a year into our economy. Take that away, and the economy will come to a grinding train wreck.

So yes, politicians and news talking heads are just the front men. The folks who really make this country work, are in the background, including the policy makers that WILL CONTINUE to keep the social welfare state in check to feed and house the masses, as they sure do not want them coming to their door step will loaded fists without a bite to eat for them or their children.

And ironically children always do better and thrive better when mothers are home to take care of them.

The so-called welfare moms are doing it right as far as the love connections that make trust in the world possible FOR THE DEVELOPING HUMAN BEING and their children in metaphor will inherit the earth.

While the kids being raised by folks who really don't care about them, in the nursery schools, or in front of TV's and computers, when both parents are just too tired from the toils and troubles of work, are the one's who will never truly trust the world the same, as OPPOSED TO the mothers who stay home with their children and or the BLOOD CONNECTED extended poor folk family that work together to both make a full human being, and ends meet.

So, when the dude Jesus said, the meek will inherit the earth, he was basing that on science, wittingly or unwittingly, or whoever said it, if it wasn't the real dude Yeshua aka Jesus.

And for those ignorant folks who do not believe that poor people produce anything of value in this country; yes, those on welfare and such as that, and the so-called ignorant ways of church life that bind them together, those are the real fools, no, not the folks on welfare reproducing children, those who are too materialistically greedy about keeping up with the Jones, to even have kids, the greatest productivity known to any animal on this earth, out of the illusion of complex language and culture.

Yes, these are and will continue to be the inheritors of the earth. It's the simplest genetic math there is. One plus one makes two continuing as such. One plus zero makes none, after death.

And no I do not have any children, at least not anymore, but I am not so foolish to I think I have one-upmanship on my poor relative in-laws that have a whole tribe of extended family, while us so-called 'elite' folks on my side, have a 'handful', out of many potential parents.

Relatively rich or not in materialistic ways, it is the human connection and family that is truly rich, with or without money. And the social welfare state, in general, will continue to take care of those folks, as it is the only way to keep our now information technology way of life going, without anarchy, as a given now.

^well put.

Good lecture above and Anthropologists understand this fact about the cooperative nature of human beings above and beyond the competitive nature as long as they have been studying much smaller social group unit primitive societies.

IN these societies sharing is done instead of collecting, and cooperation of the tribe as one team, is done over any competition other than the competition of the social unit together against the environmental challenges of REAL LIFE TO OVERCOME FOR SUBSISTENCE.

This is the way foraging human beings existed for most of their existence on this earth, and the human being's closest primate cousin the Bonobo provides evidence of what makes humans special in this greater altruistic way of life, as they do share a similar empathy gene and empathy related brain structures with human beings, that no other animal primate or not, including chimpanzees possess.

In fact the Bonobo uses sex to resolve conflict, both hetero and homo, instead of aggression and violence, with willing partners.

Whereas, the rape and pillage metaphor applies to the Chimpanzee.

When human beings live close in relatively small groups of less that 150 to 200 sets of eyes and the empathy connections of brain thrive, cooperation and altruism, along with sharing, thrives as well.

Agrarian ways of much larger populations and more sets of eyes than humans are evolved for moreover can shut the empathy connections of the brain down, and regress us to our less loving cousins, with the process of negative epigenetics and neuroplasticity that CAN nullify our empathy gene and empathy brain structures basically making us in to chimpanzees instead of bonobo like human beings.

Interestingly, the free love movement of the 60's, to make peace not war, is the true unadulterated human nature, where free consensual sex and the extended family reins, and everyone is part of the much smaller relative social group unit.

Culture is NOW 'the virus', not human beings, overall, and again, Anthropologists have this figured out, well beyond, the politics of now or then, in Forager to Agrarian to Industrial to the now Information Technology Culture distancing from human being and Bonobo way of life to a life of machine cognition and robot way.

Yes this, instead of a free roving social cognition moving in art vs. concrete straight sidewalk moving 'zombie apocalypse' for a metaphor of it that continues now reflected in social memes as always.

Thanks Sweetleaf and I hope you are doing well. :)

These programs already exist.

They're called "High Schools", "Colleges" and "Universities". There are also vocational programs, and any number of "Academies" (usually beautician / esthetician training centers).

The trouble is that people have to actually go to them, enroll, take the classes, study, pass the tests, and graduate.

People have to put forth their own effort to achieve their dreams.

Of course, if you're just referring to monetary handouts, don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.

^^^

Well yeah.. there is that 2 trillion dollar social welfare state... that already does exist.. it's not always money in dollar form that's given out.. but the benefits.. go on and on and on.. and of course the way any healthy human large society lives.. proven as such in the healthiest LARGE societies that currently exist in Scandinavian homogenous leaning countries where the wealth is shared willingly and mandated as such...until migration comes.. and the human nature of discrimination kicks in...

Small groups are the thing.. they are homogenous.. and work...

But in large societies.. only the social welfare teat.. will work...

It's just math and human nature added together for the simple answer.. of what it takes to live.. in relative chaos.. for a great portion of the large human herd.. of heads... populated in a way they are simply not evolved to be.. for thousands and thousands of years of naked life in undomesticated wild...

In two trillion ways of dollars spent.. to make it work as is..is once again.. simply the way it is....

We are a free market economy and social welfare state.. that exists..and works as is.. as best as possible as is....

Oops! sorry about the ellipses i was just in poetry mode in a heart-felt part of the Internet Universe.. hope you don't mind.. if i veer off the concrete side walk a little for now.. but be back to my robot ways.. just by pressing a button in my mind from left to right.. and the other half a mind....a little later i promise...

as i will to communicate.. and not to confuse....

No worries.

I didn't mean to seem insensitive; but while it is true that most people can make their own destinies, there is a subset of the population for whom willingness far exceeds ability - they want to work, but are simply unable.

So, yes, for those people, there is the welfare state - a catch-all category for people living on government hand-outs without any hope of ever becoming productive and useful citizens.

They have my sympathy.

That's, I believe, why Max (Lionel Stander) said, at the top of Hart to Hart, "This is my boss: Jonathan Hart, a self-made millionaire. He's quite a guy."