Responsibility

[Doktor Howl]

If you take part in evil, you are evil.

"I'm just doing my job." sounds a whole lot like "I was just following orders."

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

If you take part in evil, you are evil.

"I'm just doing my job." sounds a whole lot like "I was just following orders."

[Scribbly]

We're actually moving further and further away from the point of the rant to discuss the ins and outs of Steinbeck's example, which, well. It's been a good discuss, so I'm not exactly disappointed, but it isn't what I was driving at.

What I was trying to talk about was people manipulating systems to their own benefit, at the detriment of others, and then hiding behind the fact that they are operating within a bigger system to justify their actions.

The two big examples I used were MPs expenses in the UK (where rules were put  in place regarding what was alright to claim, and then roundly ignored, to little long term change and effect), and the banking crisis, which has resulted in an obscene amount of pain for a lot of people, whilst those directly responsible have not suffered at all, instead being free to continue in their cushy, highly paid jobs.

Now. Whether or not you should shoot the driver, that is actually tangential to my point. My point is that he needs to bear responsibility for being the one to drive the tractor through the house. The buck stops with him for enforcing the decisions of the collective groups. It has to be on his conscience, and he needs to be ready to face the consequences of his actions if it is later decided to be immoral and deserving of punishment.

However, too often I think that people are ready to allow others to get away with their despicable actions simply because it is their job. Steinbeck's bulldozer is just one example of this, but the most blatant of a man trying to pass the buck up to 'society, and you can't shoot society!'

And as I said earlier, I find the entire notion of ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor unsuitable for guiding our actions as individuals in the real world.

[Doktor Howl]

What I was trying to talk about was people manipulating systems to their own benefit, at the detriment of others, and then hiding behind the fact that they are operating within a bigger system to justify their actions.

Which was precisely the point of my above post.

Sorry if it wasn't verbose enough.

[Scribbly]

Which was precisely the point of my above post.

Sorry if it wasn't verbose enough.

No no, I got that and I agree... I just thought it might be worth restating what I was trying to say in the first place, because I think it might have got muddled up.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

We're actually moving further and further away from the point of the rant to discuss the ins and outs of Steinbeck's example, which, well. It's been a good discuss, so I'm not exactly disappointed, but it isn't what I was driving at.

What I was trying to talk about was people manipulating systems to their own benefit, at the detriment of others, and then hiding behind the fact that they are operating within a bigger system to justify their actions.

The two big examples I used were MPs expenses in the UK (where rules were put  in place regarding what was alright to claim, and then roundly ignored, to little long term change and effect), and the banking crisis, which has resulted in an obscene amount of pain for a lot of people, whilst those directly responsible have not suffered at all, instead being free to continue in their cushy, highly paid jobs.

Now. Whether or not you should shoot the driver, that is actually tangential to my point. My point is that he needs to bear responsibility for being the one to drive the tractor through the house. The buck stops with him for enforcing the decisions of the collective groups. It has to be on his conscience, and he needs to be ready to face the consequences of his actions if it is later decided to be immoral and deserving of punishment.

However, too often I think that people are ready to allow others to get away with their despicable actions simply because it is their job. Steinbeck's bulldozer is just one example of this, but the most blatant of a man trying to pass the buck up to 'society, and you can't shoot society!'

And as I said earlier, I find the entire notion of ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor unsuitable for guiding our actions as individuals in the real world.

I find it ironinc in the US that as the Bankers are slipping behind their limited liability shield, the US Supreme Court is ensuring that they have First Amendment rights...

"You're not responsible for what you do... but you have a right to say whatever the hell you like!!" that seems completely insane to me.

I also agree with your view of "ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor", memetics as a model can help us understand why humans behave as they do, maybe even predict some behaviors... but it doesn't negate the individuals culpability. Arguing that its they System's fault is just a dodge. The MP's knew that what they were doing was shady, the Banks knew that what they were doing was shady (in at least some of the instances)... System or not they should be responsible for what they knew. Even those banks that handed out stupid large sub-prime loans to people that couldn't afford it should be responsible for that decision to their investors and the individual borrower should bear responsibility for getting in over their head (The system let me borrow more money than I could handle!!). Instead, the borrower plays victim when they get kicked out, the bank plays dumb (its my job to give out loans and that person fit within the minimum constraints!) and surprised that the guy who worked at McDonalds couldn't handle a brand new $250,000 home and none of them want to say Mea Culpa.

[Cramulus]

However, too often I think that people are ready to allow others to get away with their despicable actions simply because it is their job. Steinbeck's bulldozer is just one example of this, but the most blatant of a man trying to pass the buck up to 'society, and you can't shoot society!'

And as I said earlier, I find the entire notion of ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor unsuitable for guiding our actions as individuals in the real world.

By participating in society, all of us are complicit in numerous evil things. Eating meat, using oil, trading stocks, paying taxes.. all of these contain a certain amount of societal detriment, a certain amount of evil. If we resolved to stop doing any kind of evil, we'd be paralyzed with inaction. (or I guess we could go become fruitarians and live on an off-grid  commune, but if that's the only way to not do evil, I'd rather do a little evil)  I find this idea of radical individual responsibility inadequate to guide actions in the real world too. Because it makes the cashier at stop and shop responsible for GMO contamination, and it puts the guy working at my local bank branch on the same level as Tim Geitner.

[Doktor Howl]

However, too often I think that people are ready to allow others to get away with their despicable actions simply because it is their job. Steinbeck's bulldozer is just one example of this, but the most blatant of a man trying to pass the buck up to 'society, and you can't shoot society!'

And as I said earlier, I find the entire notion of ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor unsuitable for guiding our actions as individuals in the real world.

By participating in society, all of us are complicit in numerous evil things. Eating meat, using oil, trading stocks, paying taxes.. all of these contain a certain amount of societal detriment, a certain amount of evil. If we resolved to stop doing any kind of evil, we'd be paralyzed with inaction. (or I guess we could go become fruitarians and live on an off-grid  commune, but if that's the only way to not do evil, I'd rather do a little evil)  I find this idea of radical individual responsibility inadequate to guide actions in the real world too. Because it makes the cashier at stop and shop responsible for GMO contamination, and it puts the guy working at my local bank branch on the same level as Tim Geitner.

Eating meat isn't evil.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

However, too often I think that people are ready to allow others to get away with their despicable actions simply because it is their job. Steinbeck's bulldozer is just one example of this, but the most blatant of a man trying to pass the buck up to 'society, and you can't shoot society!'

And as I said earlier, I find the entire notion of ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor unsuitable for guiding our actions as individuals in the real world.

By participating in society, all of us are complicit in numerous evil things. Eating meat, using oil, trading stocks, paying taxes.. all of these contain a certain amount of societal detriment, a certain amount of evil. If we resolved to stop doing any kind of evil, we'd be paralyzed with inaction. (or I guess we could go become fruitarians and live on an off-grid  commune, but if that's the only way to not do evil, I'd rather do a little evil)  I find this idea of radical individual responsibility inadequate to guide actions in the real world too. Because it makes the cashier at stop and shop responsible for GMO contamination, and it puts the guy working at my local bank branch on the same level as Tim Geitner.

I'm not sure I understand your usage of evil in the context here... eating meat is evil? Using oil is evil?

For me, treating animals cruelly is evil... and I would never do that. However, eating a dead animal is just eating a dead animal. If I know company X treats their animals like shit, I stop buying from them. Thats as far as I am complicit or culpable. Of course, if I choose to take it further, if I choose to act against the person committing evil, thats also an act of personal responsibility. If I get a whole group together to fight the wrongs that is also an act of personal responsibility. If 5 guys in the group go blow up the evil farmer's house, that was their own damned fault. If I had used incendiary speech to rile them up... then that is MY responsibility.

I think for me it boils down to this:

I am always responsible for my decisions and actions.
I may choose to act against a broader Evil, and I am responsible for any actions I take.
However, unless I participate in the evil I am not responsible for the evil act.

The OP isn't even talking about 'evil' as much as irresponsible behavior based on 'the system'. In those cases, I think its clearly individual responsibility at issue.

[Jasper]

However, too often I think that people are ready to allow others to get away with their despicable actions simply because it is their job. Steinbeck's bulldozer is just one example of this, but the most blatant of a man trying to pass the buck up to 'society, and you can't shoot society!'

And as I said earlier, I find the entire notion of ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor unsuitable for guiding our actions as individuals in the real world.

By participating in society, all of us are complicit in numerous evil things. Eating meat, using oil, trading stocks, paying taxes.. all of these contain a certain amount of societal detriment, a certain amount of evil. If we resolved to stop doing any kind of evil, we'd be paralyzed with inaction. (or I guess we could go become fruitarians and live on an off-grid  commune, but if that's the only way to not do evil, I'd rather do a little evil)  I find this idea of radical individual responsibility inadequate to guide actions in the real world too. Because it makes the cashier at stop and shop responsible for GMO contamination, and it puts the guy working at my local bank branch on the same level as Tim Geitner.

Eating meat isn't evil.

Not in itself, no.  But giving money to current meat industry giants is arguably fucked.

[Adios]

However, too often I think that people are ready to allow others to get away with their despicable actions simply because it is their job. Steinbeck's bulldozer is just one example of this, but the most blatant of a man trying to pass the buck up to 'society, and you can't shoot society!'

And as I said earlier, I find the entire notion of ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor unsuitable for guiding our actions as individuals in the real world.

By participating in society, all of us are complicit in numerous evil things. Eating meat, using oil, trading stocks, paying taxes.. all of these contain a certain amount of societal detriment, a certain amount of evil. If we resolved to stop doing any kind of evil, we'd be paralyzed with inaction. (or I guess we could go become fruitarians and live on an off-grid  commune, but if that's the only way to not do evil, I'd rather do a little evil)  I find this idea of radical individual responsibility inadequate to guide actions in the real world too. Because it makes the cashier at stop and shop responsible for GMO contamination, and it puts the guy working at my local bank branch on the same level as Tim Geitner.

Eating meat isn't evil.

Not in itself, no.  But giving money to current meat industry giants is arguably fucked.

Why?

[Jasper]

I've seen shit. 


Suggested content:  Fast Food Nation, Food Inc.


Oddly, even though the meat horrifies me, I still eat it.  I appear to be immune to cognitive dissonance.

[Adios]

Well I guess everybody who can't grow their own just has to go without. Let's put those damn ranchers right the fuck out of business. They deserve it, after all.

[Doktor Howl]

However, too often I think that people are ready to allow others to get away with their despicable actions simply because it is their job. Steinbeck's bulldozer is just one example of this, but the most blatant of a man trying to pass the buck up to 'society, and you can't shoot society!'

And as I said earlier, I find the entire notion of ceding responsibility up to some nebulous biological metaphor unsuitable for guiding our actions as individuals in the real world.

By participating in society, all of us are complicit in numerous evil things. Eating meat, using oil, trading stocks, paying taxes.. all of these contain a certain amount of societal detriment, a certain amount of evil. If we resolved to stop doing any kind of evil, we'd be paralyzed with inaction. (or I guess we could go become fruitarians and live on an off-grid  commune, but if that's the only way to not do evil, I'd rather do a little evil)  I find this idea of radical individual responsibility inadequate to guide actions in the real world too. Because it makes the cashier at stop and shop responsible for GMO contamination, and it puts the guy working at my local bank branch on the same level as Tim Geitner.

Eating meat isn't evil.

Not in itself, no.  But giving money to current meat industry giants is arguably fucked.

I don't see how.  That's the only way to produce enough meat.  Same goes with corporate/factory farms that produce wheat.

You don't feed cities with Farmer Brown's 100 acres.

[Cramulus]

ah "evil" probably isn't the right word. you guys know I don't really believe in evil anyway. I'm using it to represent the things that humans demonize.

I was watching this documentary last night about Genetically Modified Organisms, and how traditional farmers are getting the legal squeeze put on them by Monsanto. Monsanto released its patented organisms into the wild, where they reproduced like crazy.. apparently if you have any of this genetic material on your farm, even if you never planted it, Monsanto's gonna take your farm and demand you destroy your "contaminated seed store". From one angle, Monsanto is trying to establish a genetic monopoly by forcing farmers to rely on their products. From another angle, they're just protecting their intellectual property.          /tangent

Anyway, let's get back into that steinbeck bulldozer. If you live in America, odds are, you are eating GMOs. (see: corn syrup) Is it your responsibility that all those farmers are having their livelihoods destroyed? Should these farmers be mad at you, specifically, for powering Monsanto?

If you are paying taxes in the united states, about 36% of the taxes you paid in 2009 were spent on the military and its various endeavors. Am I responsible for those guys being tortured at Gitmo? I certainly paid for it.

Or on a more local level, I paid taxes to Westchester county last year, some of which doubtlessly funded the corrupt yonkers police station. The yonkers PD is responsible for numerous acts of brutality and injustice, am I responsible for that? I could have moved and not contributed to that system, so do I bear some of the blame?


Does this version of personal responsibility go the other way? I'm reminded of the Windows 7 commercials where some young socialite looks at the camera and says "I'm a PC and Windows 7 was MY idea." and what they're talking about is that windows 7 was based on the bad feedback they got from Windows Vista. If I participated in that feedback, can I claim to some ownership of Windows 7?

I voted Obama, am I responsible for his health care bill?

I have a low level job at a publishing company. We publish ESL books. Can I claim to have taught millions of immigrants how to speak English?



Responsibility is diffused through the network. That's how large systems survive, they don't rely on any individual agent. BP's CEO steps down, another one steps up. You shoot one bulldozer driver, they'll hire another. If you want to change the system, you're wasting your time fucking with its tiny human agents.