you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]jet199 13 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

The trick is to have your own personal code and stick to it.

And to develop that code you need to think about what you would do in a morally difficult situation before you get there.

So you need to think about things like "what would you do it your demographic became widely discriminated against?" even if it seems completely unlikely to happen.

Another one which has come up recently is "what would you do if there was a food shortage or a run on the shops?" We had just a hint of lockdown last year and a minority of people went crazy and emptied the supermarkets. A sensible person would already have considered that scenario and added it to their moral code.

There are many such things we should all consider.

It's easy to be good in good times, that's never when personal morality is really important.

[–]PencilPusher55[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But the issue with this is that, while you're entirely correct - I am speaking of the larger application. In my eyes there is no use in "being an island" as they say in a world that is collapsing. What I am speaking of is an entire redirection of the way we function as people but it seems impossible. You could never reverse any of the things that are now only allowed but ENCOURAGED now because you'd be called a dictator or a fascist.

[–]jet199 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

They've locked down the whole world. They get called fascist but they don't care. A lot of these things only effect good people who decide to care.

Society does often become morally stricter, it didn't just move one way. Look at MeToo, other than the actually criminal stuff most of that was acceptable behaviour 20 years ago, now it's not. Peadophile, again was seen as far less of a big deal than it is now. Hurting people's feelings is becoming close to being against the law in many countries.

I think mostly the movement we have seen is away from condemning things which are damaging for society and towards condemning things which are damaging for individuals. If you can make an argument there are victims being harmed then you can roll back almost any freedom. For instance the right for women to talk about their health and bodies is disappearing purely because a small group find it triggering and threaten suicide. Even when it's nonsense it works.