Aristotle on Politics (Kebir Blue)

With the elections over in the US and the political turmoil that has existed in France and other countries, I thought i might be interesting to look at the purpose of politics. Aristotle had some interesting things to say about the polis and how we live together.
"For Aristotle, politics is about something higher (than what we've recently experienced). It's about learning how to live a good life. The purpose of politics is nothing less than to enable people to develop their distinctive capabilities and virtues--to deliberate about the common good, to acquire practical judgment, to share in self-government, to care for the fate of the community as a whole."
"Any polis which is truly so called, must devote itself to the end of encouraging goodness. Otherwise, a political association sinks into a mere alliance..otherwise, too, law becomes mere covenant...a grantor of men's (women's) rights against one another--instead of being, as it should be, a rule of life such as will make the members of a polis good and just."

so, what do you think of Aristotle's idea and what do you think politics should be about?

This would be assuming that politics in our day are real. I'm in a different perspective, it's just different colored puppets with 2 arms of the same man up each of their backsides.

SG--it certainly seems that way, doesn't it? so, how can we change that? young people in particular don't seem to vote for exactly the reason you mention. do we just let the big money on K street (us) take over or can we bring a certain amount of civility to the conversation?

We need to dispense with this nonsense about "common" good, "public" good. There only exists individual good.

"The purpose of politics is nothing less than to enable people to develop their distinctive capabilities and virtues . . ." Ignore the rest.

It use to be in American politics that the new world order creeps would move in and corrupt the leaders, the movers & shakers and 'help' them get elected, give them a fortune and bring them into the order. Now for the first time (as far as I know) we have a president created from scratch, literally from childhood. I'd bet that man has better programming than my quad-core.

How do you change something like that back when they have the media, the guns, the prisons and the minds of most of the people here?

We don't.

Psst...

That's why they don't care if I tell you, that was only a problem while they were setting this up.

We're beyond that.

New World Order is a load of bull. The problem is that the Ds are statist socialists and the Rs are statist socialists.

I hope you're right Scarlet.

I don't hope. I know he is wrong. If he wants to ignore it, let him. It doesn't matter.

Okay, I may have been unfair. Most Rs are statist corporatists which is just as bad.

In any case, the whole business of NWO politics stinks of an evasive unwillingness to admit that statism is fundamentally wrong.

for you Brits or other informed/opinionated lol. how do you think your system is working? it seems that having a short election cycle would be better than what we've got.

Scarlet--i would admit that we are all motivated by self-interest, but in a complex, non frontier world where neighbors don't live a long distance away, how do we live together. we're not an island unto ourselves. society doesn't work that way. we can't live "every man/woman for themselves". do we all drill our own well, burn our own garbage, plant our own food, all protect our own abode? and who decides when we go to war and who will defend us and what are we defending.

Scarlet,

I agree with you if you are talking about Democrats or the Progressive wing of the Rep's.

I like to leave a little breathing space for the folks still suffering from symptoms of denial.

I mean when I found it, it took about six weeks asking myself questions like: "Okay if my country isn't real, when was it real? Tyrants don't make up things like God given rights- life, liberty, freedom of speech... so when was it real and at what point was it lost."

...and yes there was a bit of mild depression nothing serious but evil is depressing.

So, it is extremely negative and sometimes downright frightening so I believe that I am probably already shoving it into people's ears more than I should.

So some initial denial is cool... just please do take steps in the areas that will protect your children.

Here, check this out, It really is important.

Wait Danny, the GOP has a "Progressive Wing"?

Fooled me because on every single "Progressive" measure put up for debate or vote, we barely had more than 1 Republican support the measure in each instance. Unless you count that Lieberman fellow, I count him as a "Party Of One" and definitely NOT a Progressive by any means.

Let me know who the Progressives are in the GOP so I can email them a line or two. We've got some work to do.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Scarlet--i would admit that we are all motivated by self-interest, but in a complex, non frontier world where neighbors don't live a long distance away, how do we live together. we're not an island unto ourselves. society doesn't work that way. we can't live "every man/woman for themselves". do we all drill our own well, burn our own garbage, plant our own food, all protect our own abode? and who decides when we go to war and who will defend us and what are we defending.<!-/Quote-!>

We aren't an island. We need the government to provide police, military, and courts. There can only be one justice system and one diplomatic system. We need only grant government the ability to act as keeper of the peace internally and abroad. What more is there? Everything else is robbery at the point of a gun. Public education is robbery. Public healthcare is extortion. Public transportation is thievery. All economic regulation is crime. Who was it that said that government's role was ever to rob some for the sake of others? All entitlements are wrong. A man should receive exactly what he has earned... no more and no less. If a man starves, it is his fault and the fault of no other. If I starve, it is my fault and the fault of no other. Everyone is capable of taking care of their own damn selves.

I believe laissez faire capitalism is the ONLY way. We can buy and sell for everything we need; there is no need for government in resource distribution and wealth redistribution. If we need oil, we buy it. If we need food, we buy it. If we need our garbage taken out, we pay for it to be. If we need electricity and running water, we buy it. If we can't buy it, we build it and sell it and profit. Government's role is only to ensure law & order at home and protection from enemies abroad.

If you argue that the good of society is more important than the good of the individual, you must realize that society is nothing more than a collection of individuals.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Wait Danny, the GOP has a "Progressive Wing"?

Fooled me because on every single "Progressive" measure put up for debate or vote, we barely had more than 1 Republican support the measure in each instance. Unless you count that Lieberman fellow, I count him as a "Party Of One" and definitely NOT a Progressive by any means.

Let me know who the Progressives are in the GOP so I can email them a line or two. We've got some work to do. <!-/Quote-!>

In the past, these people have supported progressive policies. Admittedly, they have been less likely to do so in the past two years. Here are a few that come to mind:
John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Olympia Snow, Collins, C Powell, Chuck Hagel, Murkowski, Specter until he switched, Castle, Arnold S, Bush family, etc

Well said Scarlet!

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

We need only grant government the ability to act as keeper of the peace internally and abroad.<!-/Quote-!>

This is not consistant with the US Constitution which prohibits American troops from internal law enforcement.

So no, it is not NEEDED or wanted.

That's a local thing and they need to keep their hands off. If I'm policed it should be by someone of my choosing and someone local. Thanks anyway though

Scarlet--so you'll build your own roads, outhouse, garbage dump, school,med school, etc. When in history has libertarianism worked? and if you put your money (who makes that?) in the bank and the bank goes under, that was your fault for not putting it under your matress, right? So, we're reduced to barter since hard assets are the only thing that can be trusted. and as for oil, we would need to eliminate the subsidies for fast depreciation, and eliminate farm subsidies and gov't flood insurance, just to name a few. And if you're a student, what about your Pell grant or student loan? Are you going to eliminate those? It all sounds third world to me.

SG-- today big money controls politics (maybe it always has). In the past in other countries only revolutions tended to rebalance the equation (Russia, China, Cuba, Venuzuela). But that didn't work too well, took away personal incentives and ended up just putting the power in a different group of oligarhs. In the US those with the money power more and more control all aspects of life. Even with our form of socialism, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class gets screwed. everyone now is talking about creating jobs. Think about this--when a corp like HP merges or buys out another company, the first thing the new entity does is eliminate jobs (for efficiency purposes) and we talk about creating jobs. Who's going to do that? And if you're the little guy, how will you deal with that? Recently it's been the gov't--local, state, and feds. but that's even changing.

the Tea Party is/was a response to these inequities. but they have no real focus and no real plan for "cutting taxes" and "spending". Would you be willing to take your chances on not having any retirement or health care? it's easy to say each person needs to be responsible and we should be responsible, but what about people who of no fault of their own are laid off from their job, are unemployed for 12 months, have their profession disappear, have to take bankruptcy, find a new job, get laid off again, run up credit cards, take bankruptcy, and at 50 are unemployable? it's easy to say that you're the captain of your own ship, but it's another to have to deal with the realities of a complex society. and maybe you've experienced some of these things, and if you have, then i can understand why you would be angry and why you would look for a scapegoat.

none of us really wants to deal with sacrifice for the greater good. i want mine and i want it now, is the current theme. real responsibility is about getting into the nitty gritty of life, organize for power that benefits society, and not buy into the American dream myth. the only time in modern American history where that theme existed was from 1946-about 1970. since then, it's been down hill.

"Big Money" is not a person and controls nothing. I think it's high time we start holding PEOPLE responsible and stop refuring to 'corporation control' because people control corporations. People are responsible, corporations are tools.

I do not believe it was ever the intention of the founding fathers for it to be the responsibility of the government to provide people jobs. Only after the government decided to get involved did jobs ever become a problem. Left alone we prosper.

Not so sure, Solomon at your very last 2 sentences.

If we subtracted the amount of jobs that the Govt artificially created from the jobs available. What would the unemployment picture have looked like months ago? Likewise if we empowered Obama to move forward with all the public infrastructure and transportation Jobs, how many people would not be added to the current unemployment rolls?

The Government has been largely absent from the Jobs situation, the Private Sector is shipping Jobs overseas on a 50-50 chance of saving a dime or two.

At this point, The way Obama is being Slammed on Jobs, you'd think they want him to take taxpayer dollars and create National corporations to employ the unemployed. How else is he supposed to "create" jobs?

Left Alone we have the biggest Real Estate bubble and ensuing employment gaps in modern history.

What leg do the Anti - Government folks have left to stand on. You cannot persecute a man for Jobs , yet tie his hand on creating them.

You have one half of the GOP yelling Obama isn't doing anything for jobs, while the other half of the GOP(Tea Party - YES they ARE the GOP)screams Government is doing too much.

Which is it?

The current economic situation is %100 attributable to an absence of Government, in regulation, oversight, and job creation. I have a hard time dealing with the Goverment not doing something LITERAL to create jobs.

I Outlined a REAL problem with Jobs in America on my blog, and why the Government has to step in before there are none left.

Follow if you dare.

Where all the jobs went!

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

This is not consistant with the US Constitution which prohibits American troops from internal law enforcement.

So no, it is not NEEDED or wanted.

That's a local thing and they need to keep their hands off. If I'm policed it should be by someone of my choosing and someone local. Thanks anyway though <!-/Quote-!>

I think you missed his point, police are part of the government.

Wendy,

I don't think we need a bunch of government run corporations to solve the employment problem. Government can encourage employment with sound policies that restore confidence in the direction of the country.

Politics does not exist to serve the common person but to maintain the power of the few.
My view as a non economic educated brit..is the banks cause the problems the country pays for it, whilst the bankers continue to make more money.
I think the entire economic system needs to be recreated. How I dont know... but surely the current system that promotes the greed of the few over the good of the many is morally wrong.
We need a system that promotes the individual to try hard to improve their lot whilst retaining a responsibility to society as a whole.
As a brit I am glad that if I were to fall on hard times I have a government that will support me. We should as a society care for one another. There are of course people who abuse the system and live off the backs of others.
I get the impression the American system is quite heartless and leaves you to your own devices.
Idealy I see government as a safety net to catch you when you stumble and help you back onto your feet. Not a distint impersonnel beast or an over interfering nanny.
In a perfect world you would not even notice there was a government or even a need for one. In our imperfect world however I think we can find a good government somewhere in between our British nanny state and your heartless American system

SG- i agree that corps. are not people even though the supremes have said they are. You're right they are controlled by people. But who is to blame for bad decisions and what control do we have over them. My 50 shares of Goldman Sachs doesn't have any weight over the actions of management or anyone else at GS. But my self interest dictates that i want my few dollars of profit even though GS may not be working for the greater good and may not add value to the American economy, only to those who receive exorbinate bonuses, etc. And who is to judge them? Not me, i want my stock to go up. Screw everyone else, right?

As to the founding fathers, I don't think they ever envisioned what America would become. Many of them only had their personal self interest in mind. It was people like Jefferson, Washington and Adams and a few others that looked to the greater good of all that created the greatest experiment in freedom and justice the human race has ever seen.

But I believe that we all can be a part of what those founding fathers invisioned; that we have the greater good in mind and that the world we live in is not the world they lived in but that in order to maintain those freedoms we all have to be involved in the process of working together for the common good. In creating the Constitution they created it with the future in mind and not just something for their own immediate financial and power benefit. It's about building community where people care about their neighbor and his/her welfare. We may disagree about how that will look but those founding fathers gave us a template for freedom but also called us to personal responsibility for the "other".

Danny. Regardless of what policies come out... even if the most job creation friendly legislation were passed tonight, million of jobs are not going to fall out of the Private Sectors hindquarters. That is just a fact.

It is against logic to say that we don't need the government to create jobs when we have not dropped below 9% national unemployment in Goawds know how long.

I don't see how employing people and ending the tsunami of of unemployed and social service benefits weighing on the budget becomes a bad thing. That is the Equivalent of the Tea Party saying we need to end SS while it has a 2.5Trillion USD surplus.

If there are this many people unemployed there is a real problem that isn't going to fix itself overnight. 600B in stimulus put towards creating Jobs for Americans at least until the Private sector gets it together is not a bad idea at all. These could be temp jobs, although I see no reason we should not keep them permanently. We are witnessing how unreliable the private sector can be.

So, what makes everyone so afraid of against TAXPAYER's money going towards employing WOULD BE TAXPAYERS?

Greed. No 'One' person at the top of the pyramid gets a red cent of any proceeds from said enterprise. Who benefits? In the scenario I presented, Taxpayers, The Budget Deficit, and Our under-stimulated economy. Look at how that would trickle down to Consumer Spending, Curbing Foreclosures(Or providing a pool of employed folks to stimulate a dying housing market with Rock bottom once a Century Prices), eases the liability of Federal, State and Local Governments that pass out Unemployment and Cash and Food Stamp Benefits, all while having a 2 fold injection back into the Social Security Fund.

Who loses, Wall Street. Big Business, and the Greedy little bastids that shipped our American Jobs overseas in the first place.

If that idea sounds crazy, you must be doing too well in life. I beg you to think of your brother.