@amerika It has more than just religion - surveillance, trusting generally untrustworthy companies compromising it security, let alone the unhealthy "not explain but regulate" stance on porn.

I sincerely doubt that any of those are clearly described by any religion, since religions generally predate internet porn or it security.

It's him, not religion that does that.

@admitsWrongIfProven

The problem here is this: people are either realists or symbolists.

The Leftists are the biggest symbolists, but religion acts like an ideology too.

We need people focused on reality.

@amerika In politics? Good one... the only realism i see there is "how do i cling to power and get payed twice".

@admitsWrongIfProven

Sounds like pragmatism.

Realism concerns itself with results.

Tyranny turns out badly. So does anarchy.

@amerika Well anarchy (thought to the extreme, not as a partial flavour added to another system) is a utopic idea. Would need to add something currently unavailable to make it viable, namely "how to stop people from accumulating power without a power to begin with".

Pragmatism vs. Realism does not capture it completely, i think.

It is pragmatic to stay in power and wanting to get payed twice. It is also realistic, as recent history shows.
What is missing is who it is for, what the goals are.

To improve society, the goals need to be aligned with peoples needs, not the politicians needs.

@admitsWrongIfProven

I think we are looking at realists versus symbolists.

Pragmatism is useful in some situations but in politics means compromise.

I agree anarchy is Utopian.

I disagree on improving society. Goals need to be aligned with the culture, genetics, and what improves them.

Individuals are cells in a larger body.

@amerika Would you say that a notable number of politicians on federal levels (of any country deemed "first world") have goals designed to benefit the people they rule?

That's the thing i think is the core of this. If someone applies symbolism or talks rationally (what i think you mean by pragmatism, please correct if wrong) really doesn't change much. If they have any efficacy, the goals will determine the general direction of change.

Goals could be "Stay in office next election" (#1) or "Assure clean drinking water for everyone" (#2). My point being that i strongly suspect the type of goal in the first example to be the norm, not the type in the latter.

Important part here: A politician promising for example clean drinking water does not necessarily have the goal to actually do anything about that, might be motivated by example #1.

I've not seen any politician go #2, and i suppose i never will.

@admitsWrongIfProven

Pragmatism would be working within the system, realism means having goals that have actual benefit in reality.

I think our definitions overlap somewhat on those points.

Clean drinking water for everyone is impossible. Someone and some groups will always choose to fail.

But for those who want it, it should be achievable.

@amerika Ah, so you take "pragmatism" to a compound meaning which is not in the dictionary. Yeah, working within the system seems problematic, but i am always a bit drawn to it because our version of a constitution is pretty solid. Were it adhered to, we would have a lot less problems.

The impossibility of reaching a big goal is not a problem, in general. After all perfection is only a thing that gives direction, not a thing to actually reach. Improve as long as expected results are good, turn to the next thing then, something like that.

I actually meant "without excluding anyone", otherwise it would be pointless to say it - who can afford bottled water already has clean drinking water just about anywhere. Who is excluded are just poor people, go figure.

And yeah, i think we agree on rampant corruption (-> goals not aligned with most peoples needs). Only that stuff on genetics i have like no hint that it would mean anything :-)

@admitsWrongIfProven

"tried to strike a balance between principles and pragmatism"

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pragmatism

I think I am using the dictionary definition precisely.

@amerika I meant

> Pragmatism would be working within the system

The definition does not rely on working within a political system or outside, so i needed the context of your meaning. It's all fine, now i got what you meant to say.

@admitsWrongIfProven

We can look at Flint, MI here.

The local politicians stole all the money.

Therefore, the water is bad.

Same as in South Africa.

@f17f9f6ff8e3a5ef95bbd20958678b0218df25d253a3485f756d8755e6208ead "all" i would doubt, due to group size. But it seems there are hints for an above average amount.