Comments on: Is Ideology About Status?

By: What Exactly Was Being “Negotiated” in Copenhagen? | Brian Frank

Wed, 23 Dec 2009 11:32:29 +0000

[...] policy, that politics is our system for choosing policies to deal with common problems. But as Tyler Cowen suggests, real politics seems to be more about who will be our leaders, and what coalitions will rise or [...]

By: Overcoming Bias : Politics isn’t about Policy

Overcoming Bias : Politics isn’t about Policy — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:34:15 +0000

[...] about policy, that politics is our system for choosing policies to deal with common problems. But as Tyler Cowen suggests, real politics seems to be more about who will be our leaders, and what coalitions will rise or [...]

By: Hopefully Anonymous

Hopefully Anonymous — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:32:18 +0000

Silas, your last point is apparently not true (that 10% of the population can’t veto its own subordination). For a recent example, polling suggests 10% of the population supports reproductive human cloning, but there seems to be a global consensus among nations that human reproductive cloning should be banned.

By: Michael F. Martin

Michael F. Martin — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 22:57:21 +0000

I thought politics was the art of the possible.

By: Lara Foster

Lara Foster — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:08:51 +0000

Silas- this discussion was moved to the open forum, where I thought Nick had some good points too… I think you’re right about the 10% (though, some people count anyone whose ever had a homosexual encounter, which is just about 50% of all girls between the ages of 17 and 25 at this point… but, I will say that even 1 or 2% of the population should be enough to raise an eyebrow as to evolutionary fitness.

By: Silas

Silas — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:25:49 +0000

Lara: there are pretty easy answers to the dilemma’s you’ve posed:

1) Hatred of homosexuality exist because ethnic groups without the norms got massively outbred and then annihilated (sp).

2) Women don’t have the same desire to seize power because it doesn’t make as much a difference to them in terms of access to mates. (Sad, but true.)

Also, I think estimates of homosexuality at 10% are ridiculously high. If they were that high a percentage of the population, homosexuals would be a big enough voting block that we wouldn’t be having these debates about what rights homosexuals should have.

By: mjgeddes

mjgeddes — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 04:21:21 +0000

All arguments must first accept the objective existence of moral archetypes/terminal values.

By: Lara Foster

Lara Foster — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 22:22:14 +0000

OK- I’ll give my own status-classification system, which I’m sure is similar to other people’s as well and is probably more well laid out elsewhere, but since nobody has referenced anything similar yet…

I can loosely divide people into three categories:
1) The Leaders/Decision Makers- This is the smallest and most elite portion of my social heirarchy. These are the people who have decided to make the world and the history they follow. Very few women, for some reason, seem to choose to take this role in society, for taken this role must be– it cannot be given, no matter how many movies depict crowds of people promoting the unwilling but wise leader… The role is taken, stolen if necessary, and very little gratitude is shown until decades later if ever. Both Brahmins and Vaysias *can* fall into this class. I respect them both to a very high degree. To quote my current hero, neruosugeon Frank Vertosick, “If you want to accomplish anything important, you have to be totally right– and willing to take the consequences when you are not… Complicating the matter is that these [surgical] decisions often must be made quickly and with incomplete information.” Most people just can’t hack it.

2) The Proles/Pawns: Almost everyone, everywhere, at any time falls into this class. Sure, I can *like* these people. I can even love and respect them, but we’re just not living in the same world.

3)The Travellers/Watchers: The happiest, most enlightened people you will ever meet. Often artists, freelancers, nomads. They understand destiny and don’t give a fuck. They’re in it for a good time and, in the end, they really don’t care what happens or what the world thinks. So be it.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 18:42:01 +0000

Wow, this is incredibly dumb. You’ve rediscovered the “insight” that politics is about power. Because you know, it’s not like it’s the DEFINITION of politics, not at all..

By: Hopefully Anonymous

Hopefully Anonymous — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 18:11:52 +0000

Andy Wood, let’s go back a step to attribution of ideas to individuals. It seems experimentally testable to me the degree to which people want a particular idea enacted depending on whether or not it will be attributed to them as their idea, vs. someone elese’s (in particular a status rival’s) idea. I think useful experiments like this could be done in a microsociological laboratory.