|
|
|
|
|
|
by data_maan
1335 days ago
|
|
|
I on the other hand met in person someone from Hong Kong whose uncle, I believe, had been imprisoned during a much earlier demonstration for a different cause. He didn't exclaim any morally high-flying attitude and said that after the demonstration was over and he was in jail, no public really remembered him, the news didn't write great stories about his heroic deeds and he suffered tremendously as a small cog caught between the wheels of history. You're attitude also reminds me strongly of pre-world-war Germany where there was also a sentiment that a war with the unjust oppressors is much better than the current rotten piece; you can see where this has lead. Ending, I don't what to dismiss your positive attitude to oush against oppression, but I want show that there is more to the issue than "live free or don't live at all". So what you say sounds great - in theory. But letting Mike Tyson answer: "Everybody's got a plan until they get punched in the face". |
|
|
You've identified the prisoners dilemma that dictators use to attain power. Every person is faced with a dilemma. Do I defect (submit to the oppressive regime) or do I cooperate (fight the oppressive regime). Cooperation has very high cost when other people choose defect. The more people that defect, the more costly cooperation is.
Liberty requires that sacrifice, but no one wants it to be their sacrifice, and a despot uses that property to enslave everyone. Martyrs are a necessary, but not sufficient component of liberty.
> You're attitude also reminds me strongly of pre-world-war Germany where there was also a sentiment that a war with the unjust oppressors is much better than the current rotten piece; you can see where this has lead.
Russia has the same rhetoric against "Nazi oppressors" in Ukraine. China pushed rhetoric about America causing civil unrest in Hong Kong. The civil war, revolutionary war, ww2, etc. all seem to push the same sentiment.
It might not be the rhetoric itself, but the values behind the rhetoric and the consistency between rhetoric and actions.
> But letting Mike Tyson answer: "Everybody's got a plan until they get punched in the face".
And Mike Tyson better than anyone knows you can't be the greatest ever without getting punched in the face a few times. What sacrifices do you think he made to get where he got? I find irony in quoting someone that literally risked their life and limb to achieve what they achieved while defending the idea that choosing slavery over risking life and limb is rational.
It is clear that it is rational to make either decision. The prisoner's dilemma is a dilemma, it is not clear what the choice should be. Education can help inform what the best strategy is or at least what the outcomes of various strategies are.
Conscripts in Russia are literally being marched off to their death because they have been enslaved. Had they fought their mafioso kelptocratic oppressors (at great sacrafice), they could be enjoying the fruits of their labor and incredibly rich natural resources rather than being forced to ethnically cleanse themselves (at least the non muscovites) in the meat grinder.