"Apolitical"

in politics •  6 years ago  (edited)

To me "apolitical" roughly translates to: I am in a privileged enough position to ignore other people's problems.

There are two types of groups, those built on strength and those built on weakness. Over time to differentiate themselves people in the group of strength must deem more as weakness and break off those bonds, while those who build bonds on shared weakness can never be broken. Eventually your privilege will run out, my "apolitical" friends, and you will find yourself with nowhere to turn to as all the politics you used your privilege to ignore catch up with you.

Fight for the rights of every friend you have with your heart, and then make new friends by fighting for their rights as well. Nothing else will do.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I really, really don't understand all that narrative about privilege.
We all (from the same country and time) go to school, have access to various sports clubs and we all have 8+4 years to stand on a line for the future life.

What is the difference if you are a kid and you are taken to school in Merc vs Public bus? No difference. What's the diff. if you have 100 toys vs 3? No diff.

Keep in mind that I'm writing you this from a country with GDP per capita of about 5.500 $. It's less than the top 17 African countries and a bit less than Nigeria.

Yet, that small poor country produces hundreds of sportsman, including No1 tennis player, great basketball, volleyball, water polo... players, hundreds of young researchers...

What do you think is the reason: we are working hard to do something with our lives, or we are privileged?

There are two types of groups, those built on strength and those built on weakness.

It's not a strength/weakness per se, it's a competence.
Competent people gain their strength from their competence.
I mean, look around, or ask anyone from Eastern Europe, for example, how is it possible that millions of them breached the gap and become equal to Westerners in only 10 years and often in less than 3 weeks?

The answer is simple, they were competent in: craftsmanship, sport, science, engineering, trade, IT...

You take your skills and your passport and - you go to Germany, Austria, Swiss. If you are a hard-working, competent and responsible, your very first salary will be higher than the salary of a lazy, incompetent German.

Simple as that

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

Good to see you still flagging people just because they expressed a different opinion in a civilized matter! How dare they?!?!

:D

It's less visible in Europe, but from where she is, it is more common.
What you say is true but there is another part of the problem I got to see with my own eyes while working with the extremely poor.

They usually start from so low a level that it is almost impossible for them to even make it to the levels common for us.
And couple that with the fact that willpower and strength is not the same in everyone, you get people who are more likely to not make it, than people who do.
And nobody can be objective about their starting point, their luck or the real hard work they did in order to escape it.
This is why I found Steem to give me oversight on what the people do and how the people are, so I get to see if they are "helpable" or not and what I could do in order to really help them.

This is a better view of the problem:
https://www.boredpanda.com/privilege-explanation-comic-strip-on-a-plate-toby-morris/

LOL

100%. "apolitical" people are always so full of themselves, too. They think that they 'figured it out' and act 'above it all' and it's maddening.

This goes for any organisation, platform, and especially the individual. Everything is inherently political.



This post has been rated by the user-run curation platform CI! In this platform users are able to manually curate content. This is done regardless of Steem Power, for both rewards and vote size calculation.

Join in at our site here!
https://collectiveintelligence.red/

Or join us on discord to interact with the community!
https://discord.gg/sx6dYxt



This post was submitted for curation by: @anarchyhasnogods
This post was given a rating of: 0.996204584278801
This post was voted: 100%

can you provide a definition of politics? On one hand I would consider myself very political, but at the same time I am completely apolitical.

The word politics is commonly defined via the power to govern, and the struggle for controll between political parties. Since I reject this is idea of governance I would say I am apolitical.

But I agree with your conclusion very much

Fight for the rights of every friend you have with your heart, and then make new friends by fighting for their rights as well. Nothing else will do.

politics is management of society itself

Agreed. Aristotle argued that politics is a "practical science" relevant to the human good and, insofar as man is a social animal, he is also a political animal.

Thus, the unconcerned citizens who profess to be apolitical effectively exile themselves from society and will likely garner little to no sympathy in the event that they themselves perceive to be oppressed.

sadly in a lot of ways they get the most sympathy, at least among the ruling class

It is indeed a cruel irony that the ruling class favors the apathetic and indolent. However, as you mentioned, such privileges will eventually run out.

cruel irony? They literally couldn't survive if they didn't. That's where all their power comes from

I see what you mean. It is certainly true that the ruling class favors the apolitical in the sense that they do nothing to change the status quo.

To clarify my thought process, if the ruling class (here I was thinking in terms of liberal democracies, although I now understand the term "ruling class" has a much broader meaning) is supposed to represent the engaged citizenship, then the cruel irony is that it nevertheless remains most sympathetic in many ways to the interests of the apolitical (the status quo) because the ruling class is not so much the elected officials as it is the centralized bureaucracy run by an unelected administrative class.

Sorry for the confusion, and hopefully this makes sense!

" is supposed to represent the engaged citizenship,"

it represents the capitalist class

  ·  6 years ago (edited)

"There are two types of groups, those built on strength and those built on weakness"

Sounds like you start with a false dichotomy right from the first sentence! Don't worry, it's a common logical fallacy!

*second sentence

  ·  6 years ago Reveal Comment
  ·  6 years ago Reveal Comment

What is this?
I mean, I know that she made a mistake and she left but this is just cheap retribution.

Come on, let's be productive.

Are you saying that I'm not productive? :)

This is the internet. We usually come here to avoid being productive

  ·  6 years ago Reveal Comment