I don't care if it does not affect me...

Its a constant mantra I hear these days. People do not want to know, and even if they know, they do not care.

Be it taxes, universal healthcare, universal and free public education, killing people in other countries, holding innocent people in prison without charge, torture or simply going to vote, there is a lack of interest in contributing to society, community, country and standing up for what is right and just.

I've heard soldiers say people should pull up their bootstraps and be responsible for themselves. Soldiers!!!!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think perhaps that people are feeling inundated by the overwhelming amount of problems that they read or see in the media. To much input!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Maybe they should go to the places where the problems are happening then, rather than watching it on telly :bugeye:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

How exactly would that help them out? :shrug: If they are feeling "burned out" because of all of the problems that they know but can't really do anything to help out everyone, how will going somewhere really solve their dilemas?

 

I think seeing something on television is very different from seeing it happening in front of your eyes. I think not caring is a product of distance.

 

What do you expect when you give the vote to the rabble?

Of course they are right not to care about innocent people being put into jail. Because you know, none are.

 

What are you talking about?
Intellectuals are equally capable of rationalizing the deaths of thousands and millions.
And just who was it who 'gave the vote to the rabble'? Who is this you? Intellectuals. Well educated people, if anyone. If you want to look at history in those terms of 'who gave' when in fact it was taken to a large degree.

 

in australia you vote or get fined. so its forced upon us, though you still have the magical power of the donkey vote. and interpretative dance.

it seems dumb that your vote's worth the same as someone who's been brainwashed. but what can you do, at least equality sounds nice.

 

I think it has a lot to do with distance. If you don't see then as far as you are concerned it isn't really happening. For example when I hear about someone being murdered on the news I feel bad for them and their loved ones, but I had no connection to this person so that is as far as I ever go. Of course the story would be much different if I actually knew the person who was murdered, again it's about distance. In a lot of cases I think people might get caught up so much in what they want individually that they forget it is not what is best or is what everyone else wants. at least I know I do that a lot. I'm usually a live and let live kind of thinker, but I do like to help others out when I feel driven to do so. I don't mind paying taxes that are used for welfare or to fund schools I don't attend. But again I feel like I can relate to people on welfare and all of the children in underfunded schools so distance is a reason that I don't care as passionately as I really should about other events or people.

 

Who decides who is brainwashed?

I also think the word rabble is a very class charged word, hence my reaction. I doubt it is coincidental that he is calling himself a prince.

Further Reagan did rather well with the Intelligentsia and so did Hitler if you liked Reagan. Certainly communist dictators have done well with portions of the intellectual classes also.

Which country or culture where only the elite had the power to vote should we use as a model.

 

A LOT of times when I stick up for gay rights, I've been asked "are you gay?" As if I need to be black to care about civil rights.
I can't care about everything though. I donate close to home, but I feel bad when I don't donate to earthquake survivors in China. I just can't care about everything.

 

Simon, I have a question for you. You see, the way I read the OP, it concerns the question as to whether people should or should not care about an issue if it does not affect them. Alternatively, maybe it is asking why people don't care about issues that don't affect them.

In any event, I reviewed your two posts here, and I'm just curious, what is your position on the topic, assuming I got it right?

 

To me it sounded more like a lament than a question. Do I think that people should care about an issue that does not affect them? I actually find that a strange question. If it does not affect them, in the full sense of that word, they do not care. To be affected, to be moved by something means that one's feelings are aroused in relation to it. If you are not affected, certainly you had no feelings about it. Felt reactions are part of being affected. The question for me is why aren't people affected by certain things? Of course one tends to care for things that are closer to home, literally and figuratively. But still, if you see someone suffering, even on the telly, I find it odd it would have no effect at all. I can't understand how little people seem to care, even about themselves. How disconnected and isolated they seem, in general.

But if the point of your post was to imply that I should be more on topic, you could answer the question you see in the OP, yourself.

Do you think people should care about what they are not affected by?

Kind of role model for me the behavior you think I should be exhibiting, rather than, essentially, doing what I was doing: responding to what I wanted to respond to, even if it was tangential.

But perhaps I misread your intent.

Perhaps you just wanted to know what Simon Anders thought about that issue.

 

There really wasn't any malicious intent here, simon. I was primarily just curious, but I'm sure you will understand when I say there was a potential trap, depending on how you answered. I am not going to attack you here on this thread or anything.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

anyone capable of producing any kind of biased media? my point was someone capable of scrutinizing all information, with a passion for human rights, justice etc. has the same value vote as a person who believes the first thing they hear and only cares about themself.

 

I didn't think it was malicious intent. I thought you were trying to say I should be more on topic, but were going about it rather indirectly. Given what you say above I assume you were looking to catch me out on something you could bring back to the rape thread.

Which would be fair enough.

 

I meant who decides which people are really thinking and which people are brainwashed. I mean both the right and left think most of the other side is brainwashed. The rationalist/scientists think think the religious are brainwashed and the religious fear their kids being brainwashed in secular public schools.

I do think the media is biased and I sympathize with your feelings here. I am thrilled you have a passion for human rights and justice and so on.

I wish people who only cared about themselves really knew how to care about themselves.

And I do agree some people have a very shallow response to elections. I mean even people voting out of their own very limited idea of their interests are more sophisticated than people who won't vote for Obama cause he's black. Or someone because they are ugly or don't go to church or whatever.

I dunno. Mostly I was reacting to PJs air of classist downward glance. The rabble has often been the source of some of the good changes in society.

 

well i'd regard the rabble as those who act with little thought and much prejudice, rather than a distinction by class. they're someone's pawns. that they were the source of good changes might mean they were brainwashed by someone with the same values as you. i do get where you're coming from though.

 

So should we pass "caring laws" you liberal fascist you?

 

I think we need more compulsory community service.