Controversy with Neil. Human History

Human History

I tend to agree here. I too see history as being a running battle between a powerful oppressive elite and an exploited majority.

I blame kings, politicians and religion. Power-seeking and wealth-seeking seem to be inherent human traits. Those in power are paranoid, want to hold on to power and suppress opposition.

Whenever we have seen movement from the masses in the form of revolutions they have only succeeded in replacing one elite with another and ended up with an even more repressive tyranny.

When we took up agriculture we lost it. We lost our closeness with nature and we traded a life of ease for a life of toil. That’s when we invented kings and religions and found ourselves enslaved.

Neil – you view of Greece and the Renaissance is far too western-centric. The biggest developments in civilisation were happening in India, China, Persia, Egypt and South America. We were a backwater of barbarians.

The enlightenment hasn’t happened for most of the world. We still need to free ourselves of religion and tyranny.

13 thoughts on “Controversy with Neil. Human History

  1. Agreed, India, China, Persia, Egypt and South America were quickly evolving before colonisation occurred and they were quite developed in a lot of ways compared to western societies.

    1. There is a tendency to always adopt a stance that is in line with our own culture. I suppose that is a result of the bias of our education, culture and patriotism.

      1. Yes indeed, Opher and Pooja. As I put it in the essay that prompted Opher to respond here, “It isn’t who someone is that matters, only what they do.”

  2. We are in agreement that there are far too many greedy elitists (I call them “parasites.”) There are also far too many that want to shackle ordinary people, or worse (the “pests.”)

    But it isn’t just “populists” (whatever that means) or “right-wingers” (ditto) that fall into these categories. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot also did these things, in their different ways.

    Yes, the Tories are downers. They were formed way back when, to defend the interests of the old establishment against the new ideas of the Whigs. But Labour are downers, too. Labour were the ones that brought in IR35, which has destroyed my career. And Sadiq Khan is Labour (though, of course, the original inventor of ULEZ was one Boris Johnson). To me, they are all the same. They are just two wings of the same bird (three, if you add in the Slob Dims).

    And the media propaganda machine isn’t all Tory-owned. The BBC, for example, represents establishment interests of all shades, not just Tories.

    To come back to the word “populist.” You say that idealistic Labourites “want to make life better for the average person.” That, to me, is the definition of a populist – someone who cares about ordinary people. What is your definition? I suspect that this word has been morphed in its meaning by those that want to sow confusion, just as in American-speak the word “liberal” has been corrupted so that it now means almost exactly the opposite of liberal.

    1. I guess my definition of a populist is someone who panders to the baser elements of human nature in order to gain benefit. They are not true to themselves or any vision of how to make anything better they use racism, division and xenophobia to generate fear, hate and division that they can then exploit. That’s what Johnson, Trump, Oban, Bolsonaro, Modi and Erdogan all did (and do).

    2. My main bones of contention with your stance are:
      a. I don’t think all politicians are equally bad. I believe some go into it for altuistic, idealistic reasons.
      b. I believe there are big big differences on people with different olitical parties.
      c. I believe the Tories and GOP are a greedy bunch of blood suckers who represent the wealthy and dump on the rest of us
      d. I believe a group (probably not a cabal) of wealthy people pull the strings with money, propaganda, threats and bribes and control the world.
      e. I believe this cabal buy politicians, control the media, brainwash the public, start wars and change regimes.
      f. I believe this callous bunch are psychologically maladjusted. They are selfish, greedy, callous psychopaths and sociopaths. They are controlling things. All they care about is their own wealth and power.
      g. I do not believe it is possible to simply retire into an autonomous group saying we do no wrong. That leaves these callous bastards to operate throughout the world with impunity. They exploit workers on starvation wages, enslave, pollute and plunder on a global scale. The only thing that can curtail the wars, violence, corruption, pollution and environmental destruction are global measures from a force more powerful than them. Not to do so is a path to global destruction.
      h. The problem then becomes how to control a force more powerful than this present cabal of wealthy psychopaths.

      1. (a) I would agree as far as that some politicians have reasonably sound ideas about certain things. David Davis MP, for example, genuinely cares about civil liberties, as his actions in 2008 showed. But for the great majority among them, their first loyalty is to their own careers, their second loyalty is to their party, and the people they are supposed to “represent” and serve come, at best, a very poor third.

        (b) The only differences between the parties are about who their “in-crowds” are. The Tories are the party of the establishment and the “money men.” Labour are the party of the public sector trade unions. The Greens are the party of activist idiots. The “Lib Dems” have come to attract a cadre that are both illiberal and anti-democratic. If you are not represented in any way by any of them – if you are “politically homeless,” as it is coming to be said – then all of them are just as bad as the others.

        (c) Don’t know about today’s edition of Gahd’s Own Party, but what you say about the Tories is spot on. BTW, when I lived in the US, I called their main parties the Repressives and the Depressives. Now, I call them the Reptilians and the Doomrats.

        (d) There are certainly those that do that – George Soros is one. Bill Gates is a wannabe, if not already one of them.

        (e) You are very probably right, but I think we need more evidence before we can generalize. In my view, most wars worldwide are started, directly or indirectly, by the US deep state.

        (f) Absolutely spot on. I could almost have written your words myself!

        (g) The only “force more powerful than them” that I can think of, is the entire human race. If we need “global measures,” the one we need is to have large numbers of people reject the political elites as the enemies of humanity they are. That requires a mental and moral revolution, before any political action can even start. That’s what I’m working towards.

        (h) You correctly recognize the “quis custodet custodes?” problem. Who will protect us against “the protectors?” This problem, I think, is insoluble within the current system of states and politics. That is why we have to ditch it, in favour of a system that can work for ordinary people instead of against.

      2. Lol – well David Davis doesn’t altogether come to mind with me Neil.
        Hmm – what you call in-crowds I call social groups. Tories represent wealthy, greedy exploiters . Labour provides excellent public service for ordinary people. Liberals – well nobody is quite sure. The Greens want to look after the environment. I believe in justice, equality and the environment. Labour and the Greens are my bedfellows.
        America is a strange place. The GOP has been taken over by extreme religious/psychotic MAGA lunatics and flat-earthers. They believe in guns, god (when it suits them) and making money by exploiting anything and anyone at any cost. They are nutcases. They run on racism, fear, division and violence.
        The cabal rules.
        Wars are about power and profit. The world-wide cabal oversee that.
        That callous bunch in my viiew are the wealthy cabal pulling the strings and the corrupt politicians allowing themselves to be used and making a mint in the process.
        The majority of people are either blissfully unaware, too knackered and exploited to do anything, simply don’t care or are so brainwashed they support these psychopaths and their gross abuse and inequality.
        I do not know how we control those with the power, but I am sure a system is possible – absolute scrutiny and absolute accountability. CCTV to watch them every minute!!

Leave a Reply