Why do we allow other imperfect human beings to dictate how we are supposed to live our lives?
>>1282278
Some imperfect beings are less imperfect than others.
>>1282278
Chomsky is an establishment fart. Worthless pseudo-contrarian.
>>1282278
What are we supposed to do then?
>>1282278
Same reason we allow genocide deniers to remain influential public "intellectuals" outside of their field of study Noam "Khmer Rouge Don't Bruise" Chomsky
>>1282278
a brilliant question op, where is this from?
>>1282278
dude like why do we have leaders? why can't we just like do whatever we want?
Why is it that leftists recognize hierarchies such as student-teacher, doctor-patient, barber-customer, etc, yet refuse to recognize the hierarchy of political leader and follower?
Why do we allow leftists to keep their social acceptability even when they are wrong about everything?
Chomsky should be deported to Venezuela.
>>1282849
By deluding themselves into thinking that the political leader and follower are on the same level, just doing different jobs. That or claiming the necessity of a vanguard.
>>1282278
Chomsky: which genocide do you think I should deny today?
>>1282278
We shouldn't allow it.
>>1282783
>Khmer Rouge don't bruise
My sides were not ready.
Does anyone else hate how Chomsky looks like these days?
Nigga with his crazy ass bird nest hair. Looks fucking ridiculous, get a haircut.
Why do we allow imperfect human beings to roam around freely without a power structure putting them in their place?
Anarcho-syndicalists are fucking jokers. They saw the horrors that state communism lead to so instead they move the goalposts to muh ebin anarcho utopia where we all live in peace and people will voluntarily work because we also moved the goal-posts to communism now requiring "post-scarcity" and we totally don't need a power structure to spread goods in society according to need, but i'm sure it will all work out if we tried it for the 5000th time
Also we don't need a national defense because borders are a spook so we can let all the nignogs and theocrat mudslimes in and they will magically convert to our materialist non-culture because they are so agreeable *tips tabula rasa*
>>1282394
So it's better to be an outsider and and absolute contrarian who has no voice?
>>1282864
>endorsed by
Tell Rupert Murdoch I said hi.
>>1282297
Depends on your standards of measurement.
>>1282849
Certain things are easier to measure and harder to argue about.
I dont know why it turned out like this but its the nature of our existence.
It is harder to see the cause and effect of an intellectual speaking his mind and the end result of his followers interpreting it and becoming influenced by it as they act.
Social critics talk about the future and past a lot. They try to organize the past a certain way and make predictions based on generalizations.
Through their efforts they themselves change the outcome to an extent.
Its all very hard to judge but when we listen to one of them and he is interesting to listen to(this is a broad term but it involves producing ideas that fit the intellectual prowess of the audience and doing it in an attractive way) we are effected by his ideas whether we want to or not.
>>1282849
Those things you listed are voluntary associations. A teacher doesn't have physical authority over his or her students (except for children obviously, who are an exception to everything in ethics and politics, always).
When we talk about 'political leaders' we are talking about people with disproportionate power over others. This violates the idea that the human will and the value it seeks are equal to one another.
>>1282849
I dont think this is true. The OP's statement is the same one a citizen can make about his doctor or teacher.
Also different settings result in different reactions.
It is about expectations. A doctor's goal is to repair your body. A teachers goal is to give you information.
An intellectual's goal is to present his point of view and persuade you of it.
The teacher and doctor work off certain standards, their personal input is lower than of an intellectual that writes about about whatever he wants.
Maybe the OP's statement comes from a misunderstanding. Maybe he feels that when he listens to an intellectual he must either agree with him or disagree with him as oppose to just contain another point if view within his mind.
Maybe what OP is essentially saying is, we shouldn't get exposed to more information that is not based on our own life's experiences. Or maybe its a cry against information about things we cannot have experience of. Meaning social systems which are above and beyond one's experience.
Perhaps its cry against meddling in political affairs at all. Just worry about your own private issues and lead your life that way.
Maybe OP's question is simply a disguised anti political argument.
>>1282278
they rule through deception and exploitation
the whole idea is that they find leverage and don't lose grip of it. mozart knew how play the piano, a salesman knows how to read your interest level and will say anything you want to hear, michael jordan knew how to git buckets, and some men....they know how to climb invisible ladders and find leverage on other men. they get their rocks off on gaining power. it's allllll vanity, everything is vanity..
>>1285621
>it's allllll vanity
for you
>Someone has to be perfect to tell me what to do.
>>1282849
The Soviet Union, arguably the most successful leftist state in history, recognized the need for a Vanguard to steer the soviet people in the correct direction.
>>1282278
Because perfection doesn't exist and imperfect humans are the best we got.
That and they are probably more skilled in societal management than you are.
Anyway I'd say. Interesting sorts of threads. Save the common spiritual house. Discuss one's way to a better world.
>>1282278
Because police will come to your home.
>>1282849
Because they can be justified on a voluntary basis.
>Why is this person allowed to give me medical assistance/teach my kids/cut my hair.
>Because I want them to do that and their expertise seems to qualify them.
>Why should we have a state of professional rulers
>. . . ?
>>1287301
The implication of OP's question was that there simply should be no state. No having to compromise with imperfect humans in charge, thus no need for any kind of "societal management".
