# Civility in a Democracy



## Phinn (Apr 18, 2006)

There's an interesting article that appeared in the January 2005 issue of _Humanities_ magazine (published by the National Endowment for the Humanities) -- .



> Throughout history there has been the question: How should man live? How should we behave? How should we treat one another? The minute you have a community, you have to have some form of etiquette, of hierarchy, of recognition, just to keep people from killing one another.
> 
> Etiquette is older than law and even now divides the realm of regulating behavior with the legal system. There are a lot of problems with that these days because people keep trying to turn over matters of etiquette to the legal system, which doesn't handle them very well.
> 
> ...


The paragraph about Erasmus is particularly interesting. It coincides with one of the points made by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (e.g., in his book _Democracy, The God that Failed_), that when governmental control over a society increases, socially conservative behaviors and customs decrease. In other words, when people depend more on voluntary associations for their livelihood, people tend to become more socially conservative in their demeanor, habits and dress.

She also takes a jab at casual Fridays:



> Casual Friday was a disaster on many levels. First of all, anybody with any brains realized that there was still a symbolic system, so therefore you didn't really wear the grungy old clothes you wore on the weekend. You had to have a whole other wardrobe where you were pretending to be casual, but still look important. A lot of industries are cutting back on Casual Friday now. With it comes an attitude of, I'm my own person. You see it all the time. You go into a store and the employees will be having a personal conversation on the phone or listening to music and they feel they don't have to help you. They're at leisure. In professional behavior, you assume a persona. It's emphasized by the clothes, as we know from uniforms and the formal and informal uniform of how people dress.


Also, for Sator's benefit: appearing it the same issue is on fashion in the 16th century's Age of Exploration, due to the increase in international travel and the interactions between formerly isolated cultures.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

It would be nice if some of the civility and manners were restored to our society.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Civility begins with mercy toward even the smallest creature (becoming a vegetarian), and providing support for the poor and oppressed (ie, supporting universal healthcare and sensible welfare programmes).


----------



## agnash (Jul 24, 2006)

Civility begins with understanding that someone else might hold a different opinion; that said person might have a legitimate reason for holding that opinion; and, being able to discuss the difference without resorting to personal attacks and name calling.


----------



## fenway (May 2, 2006)

agnash said:


> Civility begins with understanding that someone else might hold a different opinion; that said person might have a legitimate reason for holding that opinion; and, being able to discuss the difference without resorting to personal attacks and name calling.


To quote a terrible movie, "Point, LaRusso!"


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Fogey said:


> Civility begins with mercy toward even the smallest creature (becoming a vegetarian), and providing support for the poor and oppressed (ie, supporting universal healthcare and sensible welfare programmes).


I think civility begins with a certain innate humbleness involving the knowledge that the universe does not revolve around you, that one must not constantly hold one's self "holier-than-thou", and civility in no way has anything to do with a constant need to instruct others on how to live their lives based upon how you live yours.

Cheers


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Fogey said:


> Civility begins with mercy toward even the smallest creature (becoming a vegetarian), and providing support for the poor and oppressed (ie, supporting universal healthcare and sensible welfare programmes).


Just like a monarchy right?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> Just like a monarchy right?


Careful! You will end up being on his ignore list so he can safely insult you.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Careful! You will end up being on his ignore list so he can safely insult you.


*shudders at the thought*


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> I think civility begins with a certain innate humbleness involving the knowledge that the universe does not revolve around you (...).


I perfectly agree. Shame that this innate humbleness is punished by society in many ways (which is, in my view, a result of our cultural development).


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

That's a good place to start.

Who is "Fogey"? I see he has a lot of posts. Did one of our members change his/her screen name? I have an idea who it might be, but I'm not sure.


----------



## Murrah (Mar 28, 2005)

I believe it's JLPetc


----------



## Murrah (Mar 28, 2005)

Phinn:

Very interesting articles. Keep them coming.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Case in point on this forum. Karl 89 and I held opposite opinions on an issue. Karl posted something to the effect I 'hated' him. This took me aback. I had a strong opinion, but hardly hated karl. I answered with humour I did not, and if I did would sneak into his home and rehem his trousers to short. On this forum, that is expression of hate most foul. Karl and I have become online friends. No doubt I have made inartfull posts in the past and probably will do so in the future. Hopefully I have enough humility and accumulated goodwill to survive.


----------



## Étienne (Sep 3, 2005)

Murrah said:


> I believe it's JLPetc


Yes, it appears to be the case.


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> I think civility begins with a certain innate humbleness involving the knowledge that the universe does not revolve around you, that one must not constantly hold one's self "holier-than-thou", and civility in no way has anything to do with a constant need to instruct others on how to live their lives based upon how you live yours.


+1
H_S


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Fogey said:


> Civility begins with mercy toward even the smallest creature (becoming a vegetarian), and providing support for the poor and oppressed (ie, supporting universal healthcare and sensible welfare programmes).


I think you got it all wrong- Them plants you eat don't agree with you, and would much rather you ate something else.

Supporting universal healthcare - Like Canada? They have less doctors, less medical outlets, and a huge list of people on the waiting list. Some Canadians have to travel, what? 200 miles to the nearest medical outlet that will help them, whereas, before, they had so much more. Canadians government has broken many promises. When it comes to my health I don't want the broken government to rule.


----------



## petro (Apr 5, 2005)

Fogey said:


> Civility begins with mercy toward even the smallest creature (becoming a vegetarian), and providing support for the poor and oppressed (ie, supporting universal healthcare and sensible welfare programmes).


No it doesn't.


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

WA said:


> Supporting universal healthcare - Like Canada? They have less doctors, less medical outlets, and a huge list of people on the waiting list. Some Canadians have to travel, what? 200 miles to the nearest medical outlet that will help them, whereas, before, they had so much more. Canadians government has broken many promises. When it comes to my health I don't want the broken government to rule.


Just remember, outcomes are not important. Intent is all that matters.

Yeah, right.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

hopkins_student said:


> Just remember, outcomes are not important. Intent is all that matters.
> 
> Yeah, right.


I'm not against governments helping people, but governments can become unruly with all of there power.

Many Canadians come across the border for medical reasons, because they don't want to wait- what is it 3 years? I believe some Canadians drive 500 miles, whereas, before, they didn't need to (the northern parts). So, how is this helping Canadians?


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

WA said:


> I'm not against governments helping people, but governments can become unruly with all of there power.
> 
> Many Canadians come across the border for medical reasons, because they don't want to wait- what is it 3 years? I believe some Canadians drive 500 miles, whereas, before, they didn't need to (the northern parts). So, how is this helping Canadians?


It clearly isn't helping Canadians. I was being facetious.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

WA said:


> Some Canadians have to travel, what? 200 miles to the nearest medical outlet


Yes, and the very same Canadians probably have to travel 200 miles to buy a suit. Big country, sparsely populated the farther north you go. And I have to travel 1,000 miles to see a caribou.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

hopkins_student said:


> It clearly isn't helping Canadians. I was being facetious.


I guess I'm a bit slow on your humor.

Instead of going to war in Iraq the US could have better spent the money on health for the poor, and better highways and etc. But, not a bridge for 50 people to drive across once in awhile. Interstate highways can be made 3 times bigger. The creation of more public transportation by rail or some other means in the big cities. It is hard to believe what the Republicans did with my future tax money. Democrats are not in the clear either. The Republicans said they were for a balance budget- where is it?


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

crs said:


> Yes, and the very same Canadians probably have to travel 200 miles to buy a suit. Big country, sparsely populated the farther north you go. And I have to travel 1,000 miles to see a caribou.


Yes, you need to only see a caribou. Dall Sheep are more interesting. You can even feed the Grizzlies up there and have a bear skin coat, too. But, to get the bear skin coat you have to feed the grizzly first- that way it will be happilie full and you will have a bear skin coat.

I don't think a suit will help those in the sparsely populated areas. But, I'm sure some have a couple. I wouldn't mind haveing one of those diamond mines up there. The long sunsets are nice to watch.


----------

