Charlie Stross writes
> Lee Corbin wrote
> > I couldn't take this test! I had to give up after only four questions!
> > Here they are: (for each, your only choices are strongly agree, agree,
> > disagree, and strongly disagree)
> >
> > 1. If globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity
> > rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.
> >
> > The assumption is that the interests of the trans-national
> > corporations are antithetical to those of humanity! [I meant
> > do not have any overlap.]
>
> Corporations are legal entities with many of the rights of human
> beings. They have their own interests and agendas which are distinct
> from those of the human beings who are members of them. (Corporate
> officers are charged with a duty of pursuing the interests of the
> corporation and can be fired or even sued if they let their own
> preferences get in the way.)
The implication being that corporations shouldn't have "their own"
interests, or that those officers shouldn't be so charged?
>> Was the WSPQ (World's Shortest Political Quiz) this loaded, and I
>> simply couldn't recognize it because I'm a libertarian? This is scary!
>
> To my (non-American) eyes the answer is "yes, it was". Be scared!
Why didn't you point out that it was loaded at the time? No one
said anything of the kind. Weren't we left thinking that the
test was non-biased?
Yes, what is scary is that objectivity has eluded us once more.
But what is infinitely more scary is a second possiblity: that
indeed the World's Shortest Political Quiz is mainly objective,
that this one on the contrary is to a great degree *more* loaded,
and that many people who agree with the objectives of this later
quiz don't mind it being so.
In other words, what is really scary is when even slight injustices
aren't confessed as such when they are in the service of ideology.
It's another case of the good ends justifying the not-so-good means.
Lee Corbin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:21 MDT