Toward a rational View of Society

A few things converged for me recently. I saw @Cassie_Jaye film The Red Pill balancing Men’s & Women’s Lib. I received as a patron Greg Palast’s video The best Democracy Money can buy pictured above. I edit the Newsletter & help Outreach at my local Quaker community, and face this week some difficult choices around social media. And I participate at a local Re-evaluation Counseling group on Logical Thinking about a Future Society.

This channel attempts to view the world in a rational sense, to counteract the well-publicised crazy-making that’s today’s norm.

International Men’s Day on Sunday went either with a whimper or with a howl depending on your favorite outlets. But it’s only part of the picture: that we need a serious rethink of our status quo ; in Revolution Is Racist, Populism is Sexist and Economic Justice is Homophobic, my patron friend Caitlin Johnstone

“[speaks] about a total transformation in humanity’s relationship with thought.”

Logical thinking is what we need today. I was taught in French lycée (high school) that logic started in ancient Greece, as philosophers wrestled with each other to sharpen their wits. And they did so against a backdrop of city-states fighting each other in what would lay the foundations of democracy.

Why Logic, you may ask? Is it taught in schools any more? Are there debating societies left in academia or the wide world? I retort that we must go back to first principles, and learn to think again!

Here is for example a very common error in logic that peppers political discourse especially, where confusion is sought & not clarity (see Footnote for example):

"If we’re the oppressors, then we don’t see the oppression"

is equivalent to:

"if we see the oppression, then we are the oppressed" [1]

& NOT what many say:

"if we’re the oppressed, then we see the oppression" [2]

In logical symbology:

(A => B) <=> (nonB => nonA) [1]

but not: (nonA => nonB) [2]

This is the confusion that pits Men’s against Women’s Lib, or Democrats against Neo-Cons, etc., who use [1] and [2] respectively!

In the best if all possible worlds, would just a little clear thinking not solve so many issues? That would imply, however, that we put our own emotional houses in order. And that is where the confusion starts: not only in our education, or lack thereof, but also in our emotional well-being.

What concerns me the most today, is that this also aids if not abets the current populism that’s sweeping the world — and it didn’t just appear from thin air — the Kennedy era, when Civil Service at home and Peace Corps abroad were cool, preceded a flagging Civil Rights movement (old website, look for Noam near the centre). The Reagan / Thatcher / Gorbachev era on the other hand ushered in the capitalist and me-generation way of doing things. And the current era sees the Occupy Wall Street and White Supremacist up-welling of the disenfranchised stoked by populist politics preying on Capitalism that grapples with its self-contradictions.

Amidst all this confusion it is hard to keep one’s head clear, isn’t it? Let’s return to my premise to turn a bit of logic to the task:

• First we must remove all forms of oppression — return to a human ethic if you will — where no group will subjugate any other. Men / women, parents / children, whites / nonwhites, rich / poor, government / private sector, Christianity or Islam / religions that don’t dominate a region
• That’ll free up our collective minds to be more inclusive & tolerant of people unlike us, leaving no room for socio-religious extremists
• That in turn will help us think what industries are good for us — such as more sustainable legumes & gramines not on-the-hoof meat, renewable energy & conservation not burning hydrocarbons — and what policies help our environment — public transit, smart cities and co-housing
• That will direct infrastructure projects that are also more sustainable and tabled by local politicians more in tune with their local & diverse people — constituents.as well as those-in-need for example
• This will cascade towards elections & representatives that cut thru the FUD (fear, uncertainty & doubt) and fosters friendly neighbourhoods
• That will stabilise politics away from strongman &/or wimpy politicians, that eventually votes in both Legislatives & Executives for a healthier state system that is truly representative

Indeed to respect varieties of priorities and opinions, we’ll have to ensure public debate and transparent politics. And there we must formulate our ideas and articulate proposals that are clear and logical.

A more rational view will start to emerge — logic prevails over sentiment, not crushing it but rather channeling it with empathy and clarity — and we the people will accept that more easily, as it makes sense to as many as possible, given constraints in our resources and opportunities in our diversity.

Footnote

I learned in Re-evaluation Counseling that men suffer these particular oppressions:

• Isolation — we’re taught to “tough it out alone” while women congregate more easily
• Cut-off emotions — feelings makes us vulnerable and works against our role of primary providers, as opposed to women as care-givers
• Overwork — our value is tied to our output, and we’re made to feel we never do (well) enough
• Kill-or-be-killed — militarism turns us into cannon-fodder, or we’re taught to be aggressive but alone & thus vulnerable & exposed

Does that not encapsulate all the stats and news items Men’s Lib will bring to the table? The mnemonic ICOK sounds like “I see OK” & helps me stay clear.