Talk:InstaGov/introduction

From Issuepedia
< Talk:InstaGov
Revision as of 19:05, 11 June 2008 by Woozle (talk | contribs) (New page: ==Leftover Bits which may be just rambling== I wanted to say something about the importance of ''establishing beliefs''. Advocacy groups take the beliefs for granted, and organize their ac...)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Leftover Bits which may be just rambling

I wanted to say something about the importance of establishing beliefs. Advocacy groups take the beliefs for granted, and organize their actions around those beliefs. For example: can we get together and agree, once and for all, that there's nothing wrong or immoral about homosexuality? Or, at least, that the only arguments against it are based in irrationality? It seems to me that a group of people coming together without a specific agenda and deciding on a few basic truths they can all agree on would have far more sway than the same statements being issued from advocacy groups dedicated to those specific causes -- even if the advocacy groups have more members. The obvious retort to an advocacy group: "Of course you believe that; that's where your support comes from."

Furthermore, there has been a history of such groups becoming corrupt and extremist; I assert that this is in large part because their value documentation (typically a "mission statement") has not been maintained -- updated and clarified as inaccuracies and vagaries become apparent, and as people's ideas about what is appropriate evolve over time.

If a group's mission is, say, to prevent cruelty to animals, this can morph through "preventing needlessly cruel scientific experimentation" into "preventing all animal experimentation of any kind", "releasing all test animals from captivity", and even "vandalizing animal research facilities and sending threatening messages to the researchers". It seems to me that using InstaGov (or something like it) to manage such a group would have allowed moderation (the original goal of preventing cruelty) to keep the fanaticism in check (e.g. by pointing out that freeing animals raised in captivity is no kindness, or that the increased security necessitated by "animal rights" incursions has led to less pleasant living conditions for many animals not to mention wastage of animal lives as butt-covering regulations prevent experimenters from re-using animals in multiple experiments.)

--Woozle 15:05, 11 June 2008 (EDT)