Bill Maher's latest New Rule

[mRx 16]

Do you think all opinions are equally valid then Matt? What about referendum politics, does that have a good working record?

No. Opinions are reflections of values and there is no equality in value.

You may value the environment highly, and consider yourself a humane steward for Mother Nature.

I, on the other hand, may not value the enrivonment at all, and may be that D-Bag who throws his aluminum can out the window on the expressway.

And referendum politics--I have no idea what that it. Bear in mind, I'm a high-school dropout.

[Peikko 1,575]

That being said, isn't an educated elite in a better position to create policy than an uneducated mass? There are after all checks and balances in place to ensure that politicians don't have access to totalitarian control.

As for referendum politics, it's a situation where every major policy decision is balloted on by 'the people'. It sounds good in theory, but in practice it just doesn't work.

[My Name Is Nobody 3]

That being said, isn't an educated elite in a better position to create policy than an uneducated mass? There are after all checks and balances in place to ensure that politicians don't have access to totalitarian control.

As for referendum politics, it's a situation where every major policy decision is balloted on by 'the people'. It sounds good in theory, but in practice it just doesn't work.

What do you consider educated? Like common sense? or book smarts?

[Peikko 1,575]

Doesn't matter so long as there is a demonstrable ability to form policy not by plucking numbers out the air but by employing research and analysis and understanding the complexity of issues. Emotional responses to problems simply doesn't add up to good policy.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That being said, isn't an educated elite in a better position to create policy than an uneducated mass? There are after all checks and balances in place to ensure that politicians don't have access to totalitarian control.

The whole elitism argument is strange - as an argument it always seems to be used as a way of disparaging liberal academics, rarely if ever is it used in relation to anyone from the Conservative side. Its one of those weird things in US politics - as there's no denying that the folks who run the GOP are elites too, and it seems as though they actively court the white middle class as if they were all working class

You don't have to look very far to see the double standards - William F. Buckley's stance on the black vote, for instance.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Private Pike

[mRx 16]

That being said, isn't an educated elite in a better position to create policy than an uneducated mass? There are after all checks and balances in place to ensure that politicians don't have access to totalitarian control.

As for referendum politics, it's a situation where every major policy decision is balloted on by 'the people'. It sounds good in theory, but in practice it just doesn't work.

An education may or may not change one's value scale--but either way--values are completely individualized and unique. No amount of higher education or elitism can bring in line everyone's values. It's the fundamental flaw in collectivism. You can't please everyone.

Personally, I think that the Non-Aggression Principle fosters a peaceful and just society better than any utilitarian or egalitarian theory.

[Peikko 1,575]

No one has ever suggested everyone will be pleased - it's common sense that some people will not be pleased. For example, if you believe that the earth is flat you will not be pleased if someone sells tickets for a 'round the world cruise' or plane flights. You most certainly will not be pleased with photographs of the earth taken from space. However, that the flat earthers aren't pleased with things that crash with their delusion is irrelevant to what should be 'allowed' to take place. They are welcome to their opinions, but their opinions have no relevance.

Most decidedly their opinions should have no place in policy on whether or not man should take photographs from space or schedule round the world cruises or plane rides.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Doesn't matter so long as there is a demonstrable ability to form policy not by plucking numbers out the air but by employing research and analysis and understanding the complexity of issues. Emotional responses to problems simply doesn't add up to good policy.

Such as making taxpayers pay for illegals hellthcare?

[Peikko 1,575]

You need to look at the 'BIG PICTURE'. Mind you, I don't expect you to see beyond the window dressing Marc

[mRx 16]

No one has ever suggested everyone will be pleased - it's common sense that some people will not be pleased. For example, if you believe that the earth is flat you will not be pleased if someone sells tickets for a 'round the world cruise' or plane flights. You most certainly will not be pleased with photographs of the earth taken from space. However, that the flat earthers aren't pleased with things that crash with their delusion is irrelevant to what should be 'allowed' to take place. They are welcome to their opinions, but their opinions have no relevance.

Most decidedly their opinions should have no place in policy on whether or not man should take photographs from space or schedule round the world cruises or plane rides.

There's nothing wrong with having beliefs; I believe that there is life on other planets. There is no objective truth available to support my belief, but I'm not wrong to hold it. Truths are independent of belief.

That being said, I don't believe in any policy forcing someone from following a belief or a value, regardless of whether it is objectively true. As long as it doesn't violate the person or property of another, people should be pleased to do whatever makes them happy. This includes allowing a man to take photographs from space, and also allowing a man to write books on his belief that the world is flat.

[Heracles 417]

That being said, isn't an educated elite in a better position to create policy than an uneducated mass? There are after all checks and balances in place to ensure that politicians don't have access to totalitarian control.

As for referendum politics, it's a situation where every major policy decision is balloted on by 'the people'. It sounds good in theory, but in practice it just doesn't work.

What do you consider educated? Like common sense? or book smarts?

You need both. Unfortunately the extremists on both sides seem to be calling the shots in the US. Most of the people I have me here who clearly have both are not interested in politics.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Agreed, you need both. Just having 'common sense' or just having 'book smarts' makes a very incomplete individual.

And yes, I know. I have work to do.

[Heracles 417]

Most decidedly their opinions should have no place in policy on whether or not man should take photographs from space or schedule round the world cruises or plane rides.

Don't you realize this is a fundamental difference between America to that of other civilized and developed nations. In AUS for example and probably the UK decisions are made by panels of experts. Decisions are not formulate by radio / talkshow hosts or people's personal opinions alone. Take the health care reform article from Aus that I posted yesterday. A panel of medical experts presented a range of options to the government that will then decide the best option based on the experts 'research'. Whereas, the United States is all about opinions. School boards? opinions. Immigration? opinions etc etc etc

While these opinions may have worked in the past, due to fortuitous inadvertent success, they are now failing the country. The United states is almost at the bottom in most OECD rankings; and that was before the crippling recession hit. Where will it end up after that?

Edited August 11, 2009 by haza

[Peikko 1,575]

There is nothing wrong with belief, but there is everything wrong with allowing belief to trump reason and create policy based merely on belief and worse yet allow belief that has no reason to dictate what everyone else is allowed to do.

[Heracles 417]

Same goes with opinion. A lot of the problems the US is facing are self-inflicted due to notion that from birth, everyone must have a say in everything; even things they know nothing about.

An example of allowing beliefs to interfere with reasoning is how many feel it's compassionate to allow endless numbers of unskilled illegal immigrants to enter the US when economically it is financial suicide for a country and its residents living standard. Whereas, other developed countries base their immigration policy on logic. Even the most compassionate and socialist countries of them all have extremely stringent immigration rules. It's not because they hate immigrants but because they understand that limitless low skilled labor without the demand is not the right thing to do, for either the immigrants or the country. They allow people to trickle in and give them a chance to succeed.

Throughout history, opinions have led to some disastrous results.

Edited August 11, 2009 by haza