Pecking order and intimidation
Observing what goes on the United States these days you could be forgiven for thinking that
While nobody seriously contemplates to make the pecking order the law of the land, in a way it has already become that, at least as far as the right to intimidate is concerned.
Because there is no doubt about the fact that one group considers its social norms so superior that it deems the social norms of the other group as little more than a pecking order, and hence it considers it justified to resort to intimidation as the appropriate language and thus to install a pecking order among the supporters of social norms.
It must be noted though that no person, who cherishes the idea that social norms are cultural institutions that have to be justified by their use to society, will ever be at ease with partaking in a pecking order, no matter of what kind.
To partake in a pecking order where an alternative is available is a sign of negligence of conscience and probably the terminal sign after all the private debauchery and public irresponsibility that preceded it, for you cannot behave towards decent people as towards animals and not force a redefinition of eligibility for trust on society.
I know of course that all this stinks. Someone pays convicted criminals who don't get other work to riot. It's amazing though how many people cry: Hip hip hooray! 200 years of democracy, 200 years of temptation, now this. It's all going according to plan, the people are learning the lesson, they understand that there's a price to be paid for freedom. So far, so good. But what has ever improved the state of society in the last 200 years?
Postscript from the following day. All of this applies to international relations as well, only that the levels of trust and agreement on what is best for society (which determines something's use to society) are quite different nationally and internationally.
Those who make the decisions are on cocaine,But really it's about social norms. The most basic social norm in existence is the pecking order and it isn't established through discussion, but through intimidation.
and those who carry them out on opiates.
While nobody seriously contemplates to make the pecking order the law of the land, in a way it has already become that, at least as far as the right to intimidate is concerned.
Because there is no doubt about the fact that one group considers its social norms so superior that it deems the social norms of the other group as little more than a pecking order, and hence it considers it justified to resort to intimidation as the appropriate language and thus to install a pecking order among the supporters of social norms.
It must be noted though that no person, who cherishes the idea that social norms are cultural institutions that have to be justified by their use to society, will ever be at ease with partaking in a pecking order, no matter of what kind.
To partake in a pecking order where an alternative is available is a sign of negligence of conscience and probably the terminal sign after all the private debauchery and public irresponsibility that preceded it, for you cannot behave towards decent people as towards animals and not force a redefinition of eligibility for trust on society.
I know of course that all this stinks. Someone pays convicted criminals who don't get other work to riot. It's amazing though how many people cry: Hip hip hooray! 200 years of democracy, 200 years of temptation, now this. It's all going according to plan, the people are learning the lesson, they understand that there's a price to be paid for freedom. So far, so good. But what has ever improved the state of society in the last 200 years?
Postscript from the following day. All of this applies to international relations as well, only that the levels of trust and agreement on what is best for society (which determines something's use to society) are quite different nationally and internationally.
Labels: 27, bons mots, formalisierung, geschichte, gesetze, institutionen, wahrnehmungen, zeitgeschichte, ἰδέα, φιλοσοφία
Eingetragen Am/um
20:15
