I like Weber's conceptualization of the Absolute vs. the Responsible, and especially his recognition that to be an effective human being requires a constant blend of both. But that ambiguity leaves tons of room for human folly.
In my direct personal experience, much of today's progressive institutional leadership endorse an Absolute Ethic…
I like Weber's conceptualization of the Absolute vs. the Responsible, and especially his recognition that to be an effective human being requires a constant blend of both. But that ambiguity leaves tons of room for human folly.
In my direct personal experience, much of today's progressive institutional leadership endorse an Absolute Ethic that "the worse, the better" in terms of amassing funding and power and instilling a permanent crisis mentality so their enlightened vanguard can break whatever eggs necessary to achieve the grand global omelet others are too blind to envision. It doesn't remotely reflect the will of their voters, but the kind of people with the drive and will to power to claw their way to the top of exclusive institutions tend toward Absolute Ethic tunnel vision that their ends justify their means.
It brings to mind the old quote about democracy being a lamb and two wolves deciding what to eat for lunch. The thoughtful, civic-minded citizen is stuck between wolves who might have perfectly good intentions from their vantage points but are willing to do unlimited damage on the way to Utopia.
I agree with your critique of the institutional leadership of some of the far left welcoming, exaggerating, or inventing crises as fundraising opportunities.
That said, civic-minded citizens are still faced with a choice. And in my opinion re-electing Trump is by far the worst choice. So much so that all other considerations ought to be put aside.
We agree. An election where the rules are not followed would be worse than a Trump victory.
You remind me that i was upset when Democratic political bodies gave money to unelectable MAGA candidates*** in Republican primaries. That was legal, but it struck me as unethical, cynical, and ultimately damaging. .
*** Initially autocorrected to "abdicates," which I thought was funny.
I think you caught me in a misuse of labeling something an Absolute Ethic! An Absolute Ethic of stopping Trump implies extralegal means. Anything goes. I don't believe that and I shouldn't have applied that term to Trump. Thank you.
As to fear or emotional manipulation, if a voter was on the fence, and I had the opportunity, i'd tell them why I feared trump's election and why. If I was effective at communicating my honest opinion, I might make them afraid also. Not sure if that would qualify as a manipulation of their emotions.
I like Weber's conceptualization of the Absolute vs. the Responsible, and especially his recognition that to be an effective human being requires a constant blend of both. But that ambiguity leaves tons of room for human folly.
In my direct personal experience, much of today's progressive institutional leadership endorse an Absolute Ethic that "the worse, the better" in terms of amassing funding and power and instilling a permanent crisis mentality so their enlightened vanguard can break whatever eggs necessary to achieve the grand global omelet others are too blind to envision. It doesn't remotely reflect the will of their voters, but the kind of people with the drive and will to power to claw their way to the top of exclusive institutions tend toward Absolute Ethic tunnel vision that their ends justify their means.
It brings to mind the old quote about democracy being a lamb and two wolves deciding what to eat for lunch. The thoughtful, civic-minded citizen is stuck between wolves who might have perfectly good intentions from their vantage points but are willing to do unlimited damage on the way to Utopia.
I agree with your critique of the institutional leadership of some of the far left welcoming, exaggerating, or inventing crises as fundraising opportunities.
That said, civic-minded citizens are still faced with a choice. And in my opinion re-electing Trump is by far the worst choice. So much so that all other considerations ought to be put aside.
We agree. An election where the rules are not followed would be worse than a Trump victory.
You remind me that i was upset when Democratic political bodies gave money to unelectable MAGA candidates*** in Republican primaries. That was legal, but it struck me as unethical, cynical, and ultimately damaging. .
*** Initially autocorrected to "abdicates," which I thought was funny.
I think you caught me in a misuse of labeling something an Absolute Ethic! An Absolute Ethic of stopping Trump implies extralegal means. Anything goes. I don't believe that and I shouldn't have applied that term to Trump. Thank you.
No to lying or stretching the truth.
As to fear or emotional manipulation, if a voter was on the fence, and I had the opportunity, i'd tell them why I feared trump's election and why. If I was effective at communicating my honest opinion, I might make them afraid also. Not sure if that would qualify as a manipulation of their emotions.