[MD] S/O and Morality

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Arlo]
Fear, it's what's for dinner.

[Platt]
Agree in principle. Not only politicians but the media thrive on fear.

[Arlo]
Yes, and make sure you recognize that its not only the so-called 
"mainstream media" that resorts to fear, but also other media outlets 
like talk-radio and Net Media.

Oddly, this was a central point in "Bowling for Columbine", where 
Moore considers the violence in America to be rooted in part in a 
media that bends over backwards to scare people about this threat or another.

[Platt]
There are times, however, when fear is justified but the very common 
psychology of denial occurs.

[Arlo]
And here is where the danger of degeneration in the dialogue begins, 
namely in overlaying "justifiable" with "my party". That is the mess 
that got us where we are. Both sides pander to their own proclaimed 
"justifiable" things we should be afraid of, while ridiculing that 
which the other party professes should scare us.

Are there things we should be concerned about? Absolutely. But I 
don't think we need to rely on fear, a kind of Armageddon-rhetoric, 
to get this information out there. Or maybe we do, maybe we as a 
culture are so conditioned to only pay attention when someone yells 
"Fire!!!" that simple, straightforward dialogue is impossible.

I think the key is pointing out specific, workable, areas of concern. 
Take illegal immigration. Are there things about it that should 
concern us? Absolutely. Is the end of America eminent? Of course not. 
Same with global pollution. Are there things that should concern us? 
Yes. Are we only days away from "The Day After Tomorrow"? No.

[Platt]
I'm thinking particularly of the lead up to WW II when Churchill's 
warnings were a cry in the wilderness.

[Arlo]
There will always be real dangers in the world. But what saddens me 
is that our own shortsightedness following WWI, and our overall 
sympathies with the Master Race dialogue of the Nazis, led to a 
situation that only after many, many years became one where war was 
the solution. Do not forget that Henry Ford, among others, was a 
staunch backer of Hitler, even receiving the top Nazi award given to 
foreigners.

[Platt]
I wonder if the MOQ has any clues as to how to assess potential 
dangers. What immediately comes to mind is any threat to free speech 
and other intellectual level rights that oppose to social conformity. 
I'd be interested if you have suggestions for any other MOQ clues of 
legitimate threats.

[Arlo]
As started this thread, there is always reason for concern when 
social powers subvert intellectual patterns. And that's also part of 
the solution, as I believe "fear" is social-level rhetoric. If you 
believe caution is in order, lay out a intellectual, reasonable 
argument for the dangers and offer potential solutions. That's about 
the best we can do.