Tweet
This is going to be a LOOOOOOOOOOOONG monologue so be warned.
This country I'm looking for would be.. some vague descriptions, however my professional ambitions are targeted to few countries already so that's not the point (North America, East Asia).
So. What pisses me off in today's systems? The lack of respect to its citizens. I don't believe in 'cradle to grave', that is the North European model. It has its benefits, and I wouldnt' abolish it because it fits the needs of many people. I'm not saying it's bad, I'm saying it's not for me.
To me, the whole idea sounds like a sosialist dystopia, Orwellian even. I don't like it when people are kind of attached to the government, as in dependent on it. This kind of model will strengthen the current governments and they can't be truly challenged, because the political discourse is very limited to that ideology. People would choose safety over freedom, this is for sure.
People need government to take care of themselves. So gov takes the role of telling what is best for you, and making rules and restrictions to behaviour that would be seen against your benefit. This I have a HUGE problem with and this is what I mean when I talk about the disrespect of the government. How about letting everyone decide themselves what they want to do, think and feel? This is essential to freedom.
Any kind of power structure that wants to .. push its values to you and restrict other ways is not about individual choice but mass control. They are always defining the paradigm and we are merely let in it to debate in that box of issues.
For example I could go to most countries and see what the hot topics of the decade are. To me it seems like the most important issues aren't even debated, so it is obvious to me that the way public discussion is directed is not healthy, roaming freely, but rather limited to few issues.
In a way this isn't bad because people are particiating in it, so it clearly is an issue to them and majority should rule the paradigm. However, I claim that anyone with power is actually choosing the issues and then we debate them. So outside debates are left outside of the 'real issues'.
I was talking about sosialist dystopia, so there are other kind of dystopias, any model has its own dystopia just like they have their utopia. But I do have a problem with government getting any kind of stand on the political paradigm, I think that should be decided by open debates.
This means, if a political party sets its list of values, sets some talking points, then media will follow those and debate happens. So the way these issues come, it comes from the top, when I think it should be bottom up.
But the bigger issues are dependency on the government. Because the government acts and establishes that it is a force of good, thus if you are against that govnermnet, you are inherently bad, or at least against that good. So the government can rule and strike anyone going against the ideas in that said government, and therefore it is next to impossible to truly challenge any ruling entity. You can challenge it, but you have to stay in the paradigm they have already set. So you are handicapped from the start. THis is kind of what Orwell says, with the patriots striking people who are against the government as traitors etc. If you aren't withi us, you are against us.
I don't like that black and white setting, because it is undemocratic and definitely against freedom. I think the government should only have few jobs, and the most important is to make sure that these freedoms are maintained. What they can do is find old restrictive rules that we can get rid of... they should be there to uphold and polish that freedom of the individual citizen and thus the freedom of everyone, disregarding their sex, race, economic status, political beliefs, religion, etc..
So I have very much problems with any government that controls issues or tries to do that, sets rules that directs the lifestyles of people. I just see that as a gross violation of freedom AND privacy.
Governments have become our managers instead of our servants. They aren't supposed to be my boss, they are supposed to serve the citizens. So if your mindset is 'what is wrong in today's society and what kind of new rules and restrictions can we impose to correct that situation', I'm immidiately having problems with that. Respect the citizens and let them make their own decisions.
I have a problem with governments that sets itself above the citizen. I have huge problems with the setting we have, when a crime is commited against another individual, say a violent crime. The criminal then pays fines to the state and then possibly pays some 'pain money' to the victim. Often times the fines for the state are higher. As if the state was the victim? Exactly why is this a good thing? I know, the state needs money to redistribute it, however, **** the state when it comes to individual vs individual crime. The victim gets shafted... since the victim got the beating and the pain, that victim should get all the money from the criminal.
It's a fine and punishment against breaking the rules of that state. The concept is simple, however, in this case, the state sets itself above the individual citizen, the very person it should be serving.
This I think is not justice.
I don't like bureocracy, I think we should work to lower and strip ourselves from that as much as possible, I don't think it si healthy or beneficiary to have worship of the system. The system becomes very complicated and there are many people, professionals, who just become experts on the system to be able to work in it, because normal people have no ways of understanding it anymore.
It then becomes less transparent, it becomes expensive to uphold, and if we hold freedom as a high priority, well that just doesn't serve the purpose anymore. The system becomes fat, ugly and smelly, and it starts serving itself.
I'm also a big advocate of privacy. I think it is an essential component of freedom. I don't think the goverment should have any business to my business, unless there is considerable reason to see I might be engaging in illegal activities, in which case there should be some evidence. But if there is no such scenario, the government should stay the hell out of me and my business.
The government does not own me, we only have a deal via citizenship. This membership should not assume submitting to its power. The only thing it should assume is to the member accepting the rules and laws and if he should break them, he will be submitted to the consequences. So doesn't this mean you DO submit to the power of the government? In a way it does. But aside from criminal law, I don't think a citizen should submit to anything.
So here are some random thoughts, I don' tthink a country that is built in these ideals exists. I don't think a goverment such as this is possible in any European country either. Maybe Estonia, I don't know.
What I'm saying is, individual freedom, privacy and respect of its citizens. Extmreley low bureocracy, no set political paradigms. No system that starts feeding itself.
This country I'm looking for would be.. some vague descriptions, however my professional ambitions are targeted to few countries already so that's not the point (North America, East Asia).
So. What pisses me off in today's systems? The lack of respect to its citizens. I don't believe in 'cradle to grave', that is the North European model. It has its benefits, and I wouldnt' abolish it because it fits the needs of many people. I'm not saying it's bad, I'm saying it's not for me.
To me, the whole idea sounds like a sosialist dystopia, Orwellian even. I don't like it when people are kind of attached to the government, as in dependent on it. This kind of model will strengthen the current governments and they can't be truly challenged, because the political discourse is very limited to that ideology. People would choose safety over freedom, this is for sure.
People need government to take care of themselves. So gov takes the role of telling what is best for you, and making rules and restrictions to behaviour that would be seen against your benefit. This I have a HUGE problem with and this is what I mean when I talk about the disrespect of the government. How about letting everyone decide themselves what they want to do, think and feel? This is essential to freedom.
Any kind of power structure that wants to .. push its values to you and restrict other ways is not about individual choice but mass control. They are always defining the paradigm and we are merely let in it to debate in that box of issues.
For example I could go to most countries and see what the hot topics of the decade are. To me it seems like the most important issues aren't even debated, so it is obvious to me that the way public discussion is directed is not healthy, roaming freely, but rather limited to few issues.
In a way this isn't bad because people are particiating in it, so it clearly is an issue to them and majority should rule the paradigm. However, I claim that anyone with power is actually choosing the issues and then we debate them. So outside debates are left outside of the 'real issues'.
I was talking about sosialist dystopia, so there are other kind of dystopias, any model has its own dystopia just like they have their utopia. But I do have a problem with government getting any kind of stand on the political paradigm, I think that should be decided by open debates.
This means, if a political party sets its list of values, sets some talking points, then media will follow those and debate happens. So the way these issues come, it comes from the top, when I think it should be bottom up.
But the bigger issues are dependency on the government. Because the government acts and establishes that it is a force of good, thus if you are against that govnermnet, you are inherently bad, or at least against that good. So the government can rule and strike anyone going against the ideas in that said government, and therefore it is next to impossible to truly challenge any ruling entity. You can challenge it, but you have to stay in the paradigm they have already set. So you are handicapped from the start. THis is kind of what Orwell says, with the patriots striking people who are against the government as traitors etc. If you aren't withi us, you are against us.
I don't like that black and white setting, because it is undemocratic and definitely against freedom. I think the government should only have few jobs, and the most important is to make sure that these freedoms are maintained. What they can do is find old restrictive rules that we can get rid of... they should be there to uphold and polish that freedom of the individual citizen and thus the freedom of everyone, disregarding their sex, race, economic status, political beliefs, religion, etc..
So I have very much problems with any government that controls issues or tries to do that, sets rules that directs the lifestyles of people. I just see that as a gross violation of freedom AND privacy.
Governments have become our managers instead of our servants. They aren't supposed to be my boss, they are supposed to serve the citizens. So if your mindset is 'what is wrong in today's society and what kind of new rules and restrictions can we impose to correct that situation', I'm immidiately having problems with that. Respect the citizens and let them make their own decisions.
I have a problem with governments that sets itself above the citizen. I have huge problems with the setting we have, when a crime is commited against another individual, say a violent crime. The criminal then pays fines to the state and then possibly pays some 'pain money' to the victim. Often times the fines for the state are higher. As if the state was the victim? Exactly why is this a good thing? I know, the state needs money to redistribute it, however, **** the state when it comes to individual vs individual crime. The victim gets shafted... since the victim got the beating and the pain, that victim should get all the money from the criminal.
It's a fine and punishment against breaking the rules of that state. The concept is simple, however, in this case, the state sets itself above the individual citizen, the very person it should be serving.
This I think is not justice.
I don't like bureocracy, I think we should work to lower and strip ourselves from that as much as possible, I don't think it si healthy or beneficiary to have worship of the system. The system becomes very complicated and there are many people, professionals, who just become experts on the system to be able to work in it, because normal people have no ways of understanding it anymore.
It then becomes less transparent, it becomes expensive to uphold, and if we hold freedom as a high priority, well that just doesn't serve the purpose anymore. The system becomes fat, ugly and smelly, and it starts serving itself.
I'm also a big advocate of privacy. I think it is an essential component of freedom. I don't think the goverment should have any business to my business, unless there is considerable reason to see I might be engaging in illegal activities, in which case there should be some evidence. But if there is no such scenario, the government should stay the hell out of me and my business.
The government does not own me, we only have a deal via citizenship. This membership should not assume submitting to its power. The only thing it should assume is to the member accepting the rules and laws and if he should break them, he will be submitted to the consequences. So doesn't this mean you DO submit to the power of the government? In a way it does. But aside from criminal law, I don't think a citizen should submit to anything.
So here are some random thoughts, I don' tthink a country that is built in these ideals exists. I don't think a goverment such as this is possible in any European country either. Maybe Estonia, I don't know.
What I'm saying is, individual freedom, privacy and respect of its citizens. Extmreley low bureocracy, no set political paradigms. No system that starts feeding itself.
Comment