[ExI] Regarding Wickedness

[Harvey Newstrom]

On Tuesday, November 27, 2007 1:47 AM, Lee Corbin wrote:
> 
> Evidently propaganda isn't as bad as I thought. Consulting 
> wikipedia one finds [....]
> 
> Thus *all* the pronouncements of candidates running for political
> office today can be deemed propaganda!

Why would you think this diminishes my argument?  This merely strengthens my
resolve that propaganda is evil.  The fact that politicians use it to get
elected makes it more so!

> But who knows?  To the speaker, those particular facts may 
> really seem to be the most relevant ones, which sometimes, 
> indeed, may mystify the rest of us that he could really be 
> looking at things that way.  But here, tolerance is probably 
> a good idea.

This is another way of saying that propagandists start to believe their own
lie.

> But I'm at a loss, personally. Suppose---to take a hopefully 
> entertaining but extreme example---that a number of us 
> Extropians are at a conference when civilization ends,
> we band together for survival, and a neighboring group
> commits atrocities against us, killing several of our
> beloved members. So several prominent Extropians
> get up and start telling lies about exactly how evil and
> how insidious the neighboring tribe is, which puts me
> in a quandry. On the one hand, I wish to give our
> community my full and entire support, and I definitely
> back even the most extreme measures that it seems to
> me we have to take (short of killing every last man,
> woman, and child of the neighboring tribe). So when
> this happens, I usually just shut up, and hope that I can 
> perhaps exert a moderating influence later. What would others 
> do in my position?

I would denounce the lies and tell the truth about the murderers.  I would
want to take correct action based on all the facts.  I would resist the
dictators that want to fool the community into their action without allowing
us all to choose for ourselves.  I would resent that the leaders don't trust
the rest of us to make a decision.  I also would have to wonder what else
they were lying about.  I could never trust such people again, and would
work to remove them from the community.  I would see them as a secondary
source of attack, not as a defense to the first attacks.

> > I don't think so.  The sheer brute strength that anger brings only 
> > really
> > helps in physical combat.  Where brains, planning, 
> strategy, and logical 
> > thinking are required (as in modern warfare), such emotions 
> only cloud the 
> > process rather than enhance it.
> 
> Yeah, maybe so. I succumb to a sort of elitism when I worry 
> that *other people* won't see as clearly as I do that an 
> enemy must be neutralized or destroyed, and so I rarely demur 
> at the hate-speech coming from my side (think again about a 
> neighboring tribe having ambushed and killed Spike, Samantha, 
> Eugen, Natasha, and Max, and whether you'd get up and say 
> "Uh, actually the neighboring tribe is not necessarily evil, 
> nor are they "bastards" in any real way.")

Nobody would say that.  Killing Extropians is evil.  Why not state that?  I
would have to assume that the people making up the lies about the opposing
tribe must not really believe that this is evil enough, such that they have
to invent further lies to add to the evil.  It is almost like they are
forgiving or forgetting the murders, and are moving onto some other topic of
evil instead.

> I feel like I'm living in 1984.  As a part of the modern 
> West, I no longer even have a vocabulary to vilify those I 
> would hate. To say they're "diabolical", "evil", "wicked", 
> "scurrilous", etc., is to sound faintly comical.  Some people 
> on this list try to solve the problem by profanity ("the 
> prick", "the fuckers", etc.).

All of these words are content-free.  They tell me how the speaker is
reacting, but do not explain or denounce anything about the target.  If we
describe murderers or terrorists, I could understand the evil that was done.
But calling someone names (like "Axis of Evil") does not convey any
information to me, except that the speaker considers the targets to be evil,
but refuses to elaborate why.  They are literally telling me, "Trust me,
they're evil, but I won't tell you why."

> Yes, but I'm sure you agree that it's more than that. We
> do *not* want to build on a foundation of lies, no matter
> how practicable it might seem at the time.

Agreed.  But if the truth is sufficient, then truth-mode should be
sufficient.  Why would emotionalism or partisans be required to further the
position?

> > Or are you saying we shouldn't be *only* analytical at the 
> expense of 
> > other responses?
> 
> Yes.  A good example is how we punish them. Unfortunately, it 
> is done only in truth-mode:  "The defendant has been found 
> guilty, and the penalty for breaking the law in this 
> particular case I deem to be
> ten years of confinement at a state prison (etc.)."   The problem with
> this is that it is entirely bloodless.   Here is how it 
> should be done:

I believe it should be done only in truth-mode.  I don't believe in
punishment or "justice".  It serves no purpose.  I don't believe in
deterrents (because they don't work).  We should catch criminals to stop
them, not punish them.  Short sentences for criminals fail because they
recommit crimes when they get out, not because they are not cruel enough to
the prisoner.

> The defendent, who has been found guilty, is brought once 
> more to the courtroom. A video *truthfully* re-enacts his 
> crime, using the best and  most modern techniques, hopefully 
> bringing the 
> audience to a fever pitch of anger and hatred towards the 
> defendent. We get to see in full detail the horror of how he 
> laid in wait for the prostitute and then brutally strangled 
> her ignoring her pitiful cries and pleas, and we get to see 
> the expression on her mother's face when she learns of her 
> daughter's death. If done properly, we the viewers are 
> rightfully and justly brought to hate the defendent. Only 
> then is the sentence read, and only then can justice truly be served.

This is a better recipe for a lynching rather than a court of law.

--
Harvey Newstrom 
CISSP CISA CISM CIFI NSA-IAM GSEC ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP