Standardized experiences

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

think about the world and how its built…
vacations for example, we have standardized experiences for
vacations… Disneyland for example, (the first time I went to
Disneyland I was 40, although I have lived in California since I
was 15) I have been to Yosemite several times, mostly in
my twenties, that too is a standardized experience, with
everyone doing the exact same thing…and this idea of
standardized experiences includes, in no particular order,
schooling, work, sporting events, politics/voting, even going
to the local fair, my own favorite is the Minnesota state fair,
but they are still standardized experiences… one size
fits all in these standardized experiences…

so, how does one escape this, standardized experiences for human beings?
I am not sure you can…let us look at being outside the standardized
experiences, crime for one, to commit a crime is to exists outside
of the standardized experiences… it could be considered to be
an act of rebellion against our standardized experiences…
and yet, the only result of crime is to hurt someone in some fashion…
the modern idea of rebellion is to hurt someone… to destroy an
airplane, killing hundreds, to bomb a facility, possibly costing
someone a life, certainly costing someone some money…
to stand outside of the standardized experiences is to stand
outside of the state/society… and as human beings, that is
problematic at best… we are social beings, we cannot exist without
other human beings, that is a fact of evolution… the natural
habitat of human beings is in a group or a social setting,
or in tribes of some sort… that is the human condition…
but to stand outside of standardized experiences is to harm in some
fashion, the tribe or the group… our very lifeblood…

think about the MAGA party basic philosophy… that everything
is fake… the media is fake, politics is fake, the state is an
oppressor against the common man, the institutions that allow
our state/society to function must be disassembled, the FBI,
the IRS, the Department of Education, and to what end?
the continued dissolution of the American state…
to removed standardized experiences of the state requires the
dissolution of the American state… and that path is the path
to failure… or do you want America to look like other failed states
like Somalia?

to reject our standardized experiences is to reject living in
a state/or society… to return to Hobbes ‘‘State of Nature’’
where without the government ‘‘life would be solitary, poor,
nasty, brutish and short’’…

One must wonder, is there some middle ground? is the MAGA goal
of turning America into Hobbes ‘‘State of Nature’’ really a goal
we want? I for one, don’t want that… and I am pretty sure
most of you don’t want that… perhaps, this living in our
world standardized experiences, might be our only choice
for the moment… Perhaps…

Kropotkin

2

https://forum.philosophynow.org/viewtopic.php?p=727189#p727189

3

The problem we face in our world is that system change is virtually only possible top-down. The changes that seem to be taking place at present are towards more autocratic governments, which the social and political unrest in the United States during the 1960s and 1970s were already addressing.

The difficulty of achieving systemic change is that it requires altering entrenched power structures with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. While top-down changes can lead to reforms, they are often limited and slow, particularly if the ruling elite resists change. Conversely, bottom-up movements can be powerful catalysts for change but usually face significant repression and co-optation.

The Civil Rights Movement, which advocated in the 1960s and 1970s for the end of racial segregation and discrimination, still recognises serious grievances today, which may have caused the Woke Movement, which essentially radicalised the issue.

The Anti-Vietnam War Movement, which protested U.S. involvement in Vietnam, could have just as easily criticised the CIA’s widespread intervention in the world, which prevented normal political development in many Arab countries. The “threat” of Arabian Unity under Socialism, which was the tendency of Arab countries, was essentially a threat to US dominance in the area, particularly over the oil fields.

The Women’s Liberation Movement was fighting for gender equality and rights and still has issues today, and the hatred towards Kamal Harris’s femininity is a prime example of that. Whereas women in leading political positions are not unusual in Europe, America seems to have a big problem with it.

Mainstream American values, particularly evident among younger generations in the 1960s, include a combination of individual rights, democratic principles, economic freedom, and a belief in progress and opportunity. These values sound very healthy. However, a very divided nation seems to have resulted from realising these values.

Ultimately, while mainstream American values are widely embraced, the challenge lies in bridging the gap between ideals and reality, fostering a more inclusive and equitable society where these values are genuinely realised for everyone.

4

And one of the problems in making fundmental change now, as compared to the 60s, at least bottom up, is that technology and capitalism have changed significantly since then. Technology offers the state and corporations almost complete survellience, a Stasi wet dream. The changes in capitalism have been in a few areas: 1) corporations have been merging and are now back to the behemoth sizes are reach of things like the East India Company. The founders of the US were aware the potential threats not just from tyrants but also from enormous private organization. Corporate charters could be revoked. It was seen as a priviledge. While this did not happen in the 60s, the corporations were not at the sizes they are not and antitrust and monopoly violations were taken seriously. There was also less absorption of government oversight by the industries they were to look over. Their power of influence and control governments is much stronger now.
2) Many more people, mainly rich people, are making money for not doing work. All those fancy ass financial derivatives where computers are guessing at changes in the market and making money out of nanosecond shifts, make rich people money and do nothing for production. 3) There has been a shift in the sense of responsibility of corporations. They were never, in general, complete allies with workers, but the mission has shift to the investors even more so, away from thinking much at all about long term relations with workers. Corporate values have shifted and since there is nothing to block them (anymore) they simply do it. 4) this is a change that is a subset of number 1 but it is so important and has such specific effects, I give it its own number: consolidation of media in a few companies. When Chomsky wrote about the Manufacture of Consent, he was critical of the domination of not many media companies for news. The situation is much, much worse than it was in the early 80s and then also the 60s and 70s. Further most of the media has lost the ability to engage in investigative reporting. The fourth pillar of democracy is entertainment and goverment and corporate PR - with occasional exceptions.