The Power Principle of redirecting real grievances of the people toward irrelevant enemies

Absolutely, the concept comes to us from the Romans ("dīvide et īmpera") and has been used throughout history, as you quite correctly point out, in various tactics for the few to maintain control over the many. Note the knee-jerk reactions from core authoritarians here. They can't stand to see the power structure critiqued in even the slightest degree.

They actively participate in division for the sake of it. Division is power and maintains the hierarchy that they worship.

Marx's theories are massive, complex, and difficult to understand. However, generally, as I'm sure you're aware, they are also idealistic abstractions. He recognized and uniquely voiced long-established truths FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF HIS POINT IN HISTORY, however, when those truths are used to create and enforce any power structure rather than allowing socialism to arise naturally, automatically, the old revolutionaries become the new dictators.

Or as popular culture has it ... "New boss same as the old boss."

We've got a lot more cultural evolution to experience before we're anywhere close to being ready for socialism, much less, communism.

IMO.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I am curious. What do you think would need to come first: resolving our divisions as citizens excluding our current political system or correcting our current political power structure?

Do you think that ordinary citizens will ever see issues the same way or would you entertain a system that allows people their different views while maintaining a honest government structure? Would the former even be possible?

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: Gryphon66

I am curious. What do you think would need to come first: resolving our divisions as citizens excluding our current political system or correcting our current political power structure?

Do you think that ordinary citizens will ever see issues the same way or would you entertain a system that allows people their different views while maintaining a honest government structure? Would the former even be possible?

Excellent questions that would take a long time and many pages to answer adequately. So, short answer.

There will never be resolution of our "differences" as long as we concentrate on the difference. Cooperative efforts demand that we focus on what can be agreed upon not what is disputed. What motivates the average member of society? Is it truly something like Maslow's Hierarchy? Are we fundamentally xenophobic thieves?

In my life, I've had success in finding the win-win. The current power structure will not go without a fight; they never do. The best we can hope for is that it will die under its own weight. If we are careful about what we build it its place, we might be, in terms of the normal curve, "happier."

We've been deceived to think that we have to get everything we want right now. Life just doesn't work that way except in the very, very short term. I get more of what I want, more of the time, by cooperating with others and helping them do the same thing.

That's a very shallow response.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I hear you 100%. I agree that part of the problem is instant gratification and maybe even that we tell young impressionable minds that they can be anything they desire, without limits. But that is probably another discussion all together.

I would love to start transitioning to a honest and corruption free government before the collapse. I have a bad feeling that if the collapse happens first, what emerges out of the fire will not be a better structure and will probably be worse in many ways.

I just don't think those differences will ever be resolved to the point where the 2 sides start working on the main problem, our politicians who don't really represent either side.

If we can't resolve our differences (which I don't think we ever will) would you be supportive of a system that each side recognizes the differences and starts working together to tackle the real problem? In that way, the powers that be wouldn't be able to use those differences against us.

a reply to: ClovenSky

If the past century is any indication, the push toward divisiveness will be set aside as some point for a general disaster (natural, economic, etc.) that will result in the mean willing to do anything to get back to "normal."

That is usually followed by some large scale conflict, followed by authoritarian prosperity, followed by revolutionary frustrations, rinse and repeat.

Again of course, IMO.

a reply to: Gryphon66

So basically we will just follow history? We are human and this is what the outcome will always entail? Even though we know history and what has happened to every empire that has ever existed, we are doomed to the same fate?

I wonder, there has to be a structure out there that allows for differences. That will allow the divisions to exist and maybe even be out in the open. That we could recognize human nature in all of its glory and respect that.

Would it be such a horrible thing to acknowledge racism exists and accept it? That sexism exists and accept it? I just see the populace becoming more and more divided and convinced that all that needs to be done is squash the opposition. To remove the bigotry, the racism, the sexism and many more isms is the only way towards peace. But has that accomplished anything positive lately? Or has that PC movement allowed the puppet masters greater control over the population?

If a system could be created where these pockets of anit-PCism could be created for people of like minds to migrate to, as long as they didn't infringe on a persons free will (maybe some type of adherence to the bill of rights) would you support it?

a reply to: ClovenSky

Hmmm ... innovation and novelty are always possible. I'd love to see us, as a species or even a culture, break the cycles of history.

A structure that allows for differences? Live and let live, and treat others the way you want to be treated.

Anything that will help us ameliorate the urge to primate xenophobia.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Thank you for your responses. Maybe one day xenophobia will be irradiated but I have a sneaking suspicion reality was designed this way on purpose. I just get excited thinking that we could correct this corrupt system of governance with the differences being intact.

The golden rule. Treat others how you would like to be treated. Isn't that dangerous? What if the individual has ideals and morals completely different than your own? They treat you according to how they view reality, but for you, their reality is hell. They aren't being malicious or deceitful but because of their ideals they still treat you like $&#(@# based on your ideals. The golden rule and people's fascination with it kind of amazes me.

Peace

a reply to: ClovenSky

Perhaps I should have prefaced my simple rules with:

"First of all, don't be psychotic."



Peace to you as well, friend. Thanks for a refreshing conversation.

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: Gryphon66

I hear you 100%. I agree that part of the problem is instant gratification and maybe even that we tell young impressionable minds that they can be anything they desire, without limits. But that is probably another discussion all together.

The problem is NOT the people. The problem is the leadership. Stop blaming the people.

a reply to: Gryphon66

They are many studies talking about what it means to be a psychopath.