[2012-Aug-21] Something ideology something politics

[Oldrac the Chitinous]

You'd think that, with this many panels, Zach would have put something funny in, at least by accident. I am kind of impressed by how little this comic entertained me.

[wolfva]

Sometimes the truth hurts; perhaps you have a self consistent world view? I found it very funny, but only because I keep running into peole just like those in the panels.

[DonRetrasado]

what in god's name

[Maze1125]

View points such as "Everything should be free" are not the only self-consistent ideologies.

It's quite possible to have an ideology that believes x, y and z should be free, while a,b and c should be restricted, and for that to be self-consistent. Provided the freedom of x, y or z does not necessarily imply the freedom of a, b or c (or the restriction of a, b or c necessarily imply the restriction of x, y or z.)

[tophernator]

Not sure if criticising tea party... or occupy wall street.

[nobody]

Also the politician at the end? He's criticising that? Or we should be like him?

We must remember of course that even though Zach is an educated man he isn't a socialist. It's a shame when that happens.

[Guest123]

And if you look to your right as we pass, children, you'll see a failed webcomic artist who, in his desperation to draw something "funny" and "topical," endorsed Social Darwinism and accidentally started World War III. His kind was culled first due to their lack of a humor gland.

[nobody]

We must always remember of course that, just as the rotted, dried out flower used to be a beautiful rose, so too did the web cartoonist Zach Weiner used to be a beautiful rose.

[anus mcgee]

THIS IS HORSE SHIT

[Anonymouse]

I find the argument that this is the kind of organization that thrives in human society to be both fairly compelling and immensely depressing.

But then I realize that this comic, like others, is exaggerating a facet of how things work for humor. Yes, shallow rhetoric and tribalism have a lot of power over what groups succeed, but there certainly are specific goals and values espoused by these groups. Even if it comes down to simply dichotomies like "Governments cannot be trusted" versus "Corporations cannot be trusted".

[acilius]

I like it. It reminds me of one of my favorite recent books, James P. Carse's Religious Case Against Belief. Professor Carse argues that religion is beneficial when it holds people together and enables them to engage in multigenerational projects, but that religions that come with belief systems attached (e.g., Christianity) are limited in their ability to achieve these objectives, because beliefs are never stable from generation to generation (a point Zach captures with "whatever they would have stood for if they were born when I was") and never unproblematic if examined thoroughly (as the first three panels illustrate.) Professor Carse wants to value religions the way we value biological species, not as media that transmit truth claims ("thinking that a cow stands for something,") but as ends in themselves.

What Professor Carse says about religion can be extended to political life. Political groups make efforts to promote the interests of their supporters and embrace ideologies that allow their members to see those interests as the definition of justice. If you think that politics should be a disinterested quest for pure truth and absolute justice, that fact may seem distasteful. But I would say that it is in fact less distasteful than the alternative. People are more valuable than ideologies, bonds among people are more valuable than anything pure and abstract. So a healthy politics will be more about keeping people together and striking deals to promote as many people's interests as possible than about being right and virtuous. Of course, when political decisions are too much in the hands of an unrepresentative group, outgroups are justified in trying to break their grip on power. I'd say we're very much in that situation in the USA now. But even so, their efforts are better directed at building and maintaining new and bigger ingroups and looking out for their interests than in commitment to abstract ideals.

[from here]

What I often almost don't get - especially in such good stories: Webcomics goal isn't to provide truth, wisdom or something - their goal is firstly to be red, and maybe secondly to feed their author.

[nobody]

What I often almost don't get - especially in such good stories: Webcomics goal isn't to provide truth, wisdom or something - their goal is firstly to be red, and maybe secondly to feed their author.

I made you a comic and it fulfils the first of your goals the maximum I think.

[Montero]

Come on, this kind of comic is awesome.

When people believe in something, it's not necessarely because the do think it's true. Rather, they like how that belief mould their life.
And it's not just convenient: it's necessary. Beliefs are to people what working hypotesis are to scientists. They may or may not be correct, yet they make you work.

To acilius: I like that professor.

[nobody]

Montero, I didn't like it therefore it is of no value to anyone