• 1 Post
  • 35 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 15th, 2024

help-circle
  • Yes.

    Some people have to use pills their entire lives. I take some for my disability. They make me more patient and less excited/stressed. They also reduce episodes in which I might harm myself or do things I regret. I am not my disease. I am me, and the medicine is like using crutches for my mind.

    I can not solve my issues by talking to a therapist, so medicine is a requirement.

    I find it kinda idiotic not to accept medicine that will make things better for you. It’s irrational. I don’t blame you for feeling it this way, I am not sure if this is a gendered issue, but as a man I took it quite hard when I had to start taking meds, it was as if I had a weakness and was less than my peers. “Men are supposed to be stoic and tough” (I have since changed perspective)

    Take your meds, no-one will give you a medal or appriciate it if you don’t. You are also not weaker if you take them. It just makes life easier, like a good bed or a good home. Is having a good home a weakness? “What? You can’t survive on the street? You pussy!” /s

    See the irrational way of thinking? Any comfortable choice can be called some form of weakness. So then the queation becomes: Why choose to have difficulty when nobody gains from it?


















  • The advantage with democracy is that it is slow and most of the time end up with fairly sensible results. Decisions are often so complex that it is impossible for one person to actually understand it all. A consortium of advisors could fill that role, but they have to be benevolent and trustworthy too. Their decisions have to be based on something, so the advisors need researchers and people gathering intelligence and statistics. Those people also have to be trustworthy.

    All these layers have to be with as benevolent as possible. In a well functioning democracy, all layers would feel safe. It is really important to be safe from harm when giving bad news, or telling the dictator/advisors that their idea is really dumb, and would be a waste of resources or have a bad effect.

    You could argue that a benevolent dictator would welcome bad news, other arguments. However the difference in power would certainly make it scary anyways.

    Succession is another issue, and mental decline. Some people become quite mean in old age.

    The closest thing I could envision might work is some sort of semi-democratic technocracy. I still think improving democracy is better though