Wait,
Wait, maybe I do like this blog. I said it was about politics. Maybe it should be a sort of compendium of all my time wasted on political blogs. All the lessons learned from that. But if I am not writing it to an artificial intelligence living 1000 years in the future, (like my other blog) who am I writing it to? Who reads a blog? Could I actually write a blog that people read? Or could I write it for myself as this sort of point of reference? A recording place for myself for political ideas?
I guess I could give it a try. What have I learned from watching politics unfold on the Internet? Unlike science, politics is freaking retarded. I don't say that to demean it, but it really is. Much politics as it exists is based on manipulating mushy minds into backing a certain goal. Pseudo reasonable arguments are advanced to justify any goal, with great liquidity; the same seemingly consistent line of reasoning can be advanced as supporting diametrically opposed goals by manipulating it around various axises, various shift points in the human brain. Awareness of these shift points liberates the individual from this paradigm of control.
The first axis is the prescriptive vs. descriptive axis. To demonstrate it, consider the book The Prince by Machiavelli. In it, he describes various systems of political manipulation used by leaders in his time (1500 ish). It was fundamentally a descriptive work, simply detailing what he had seen used on subjects to maintain control of the powerful elite. He justifies this frank honest approach famously saying: "He who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation."
I guess I could give it a try. What have I learned from watching politics unfold on the Internet? Unlike science, politics is freaking retarded. I don't say that to demean it, but it really is. Much politics as it exists is based on manipulating mushy minds into backing a certain goal. Pseudo reasonable arguments are advanced to justify any goal, with great liquidity; the same seemingly consistent line of reasoning can be advanced as supporting diametrically opposed goals by manipulating it around various axises, various shift points in the human brain. Awareness of these shift points liberates the individual from this paradigm of control.
The first axis is the prescriptive vs. descriptive axis. To demonstrate it, consider the book The Prince by Machiavelli. In it, he describes various systems of political manipulation used by leaders in his time (1500 ish). It was fundamentally a descriptive work, simply detailing what he had seen used on subjects to maintain control of the powerful elite. He justifies this frank honest approach famously saying: "He who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation."
So the argument was that while the things therein ought not to be done, they are done and people should be aware of them. He was demonized by the elite who's secrets he revealed, and they did this by shifting the context of his work along the prescriptive vs descriptive axis in the public mind, so that Machiavelli was not describing these evil methods of control, he was prescribing them, saying they should be done. As a result, he was tortured and banished. "Old Nick" became an English term for the devil, and to this day we use the term "Machiavellian" to describe insidious and unethical actions of leaders. Because he tried to explain what was done, he became the supposed advocate for it and paid a terrible price
Hmm.
You know what, maybe writing a blog about the inner workings of politics isn't such a good idea.
...
Yeah, fuck this. I'm going to go write about robots. See ya!