Politics, rigid thought forms, hierargies, skill and democracy

I do not know so much of politics, but it seems that in the old times when Finladn was young, there were more thoughts and ideals leading and nowadays some tv shows with lied looks, not so much sincere facts. his seems to connect with foreigners wanting to learn about Finland arranging things peacefully, and so foreign errors made visible in the media, ruining Finnish ways. And it seems to connect with too rigid forms overruling the freedomof individuals of so the freedom of the people. Politics seeks to be accessible for an as wide audience of Finnish adults as possible, partly for kids too. That means that some normal, often repeated thought and values of the parties are simple and simple in form and try to apply to many things at once. Because they are simple, some good speakers for them are not at all intelligent, more like discussing social people taking opart in everyday life, seeing this and that point as they are told about them and repeating them later. This simplicity is needed in speaking for crowds and media. But it shoudl be also outspokenness in grounds for values, in the pictures of the world used, and not just empty words repeated. For the situations where there aren't so many lsiteners at the same time or when oneassociates with one group only like with some association and it's members, one can then use a more intelligent approach, discuss thing more at lenght, yet not making it a separate endeavour like a mindless idiot would do.
Poltics is also influenced by the need of running a demicracy in the middle of foreign influencies, which may be disguised as the influencues of big companies etc. Foreign countries lack Finnish ground for Finnish decisions, so one task of polityics is to go through the different ground for political decisions in the media and also in smaller circles, to teach them. So politics is a discussion also in thsi sense. Often foreigners are interested in economical benefit. To create economical benefit the wholes in the society which create that benefit ought to be well kept, i.e. whole, well arranged, well working, not exhausting the gorund for such benefit in the future, the society running smoothly at that place, getting support from the other parts of the society and from the workers, using a good understanding in these and so giving the workers and their families also a good life, a good society to live in. This kind of arrangements are a good cultural influence from Finland to abroad, but they should not be copied detailedly but instead their basci grounds understood and new arrangements made in each country by thinking these things through in their country, climate, culture, national character, values of people about what life shoudl be like, what they bother about in their society, what isgood for them, how is a good wuise future quaranteed for the soceity etc. This is not so difficult to think through as it might appear. Just think of one individual or type of individuals in time:why are they wuilling to go to work, what kind of benefits they want, what kind of job they like and how well would they take care of it, what is it's value in the society, how much wage ought they get to get a good life and what other arrangements and possibilities in the society they need, want, which things are good for them and which unwise and ought to be avoided. And so what a good society be like in that climate. What would it bother about, what would it follow, how skilled would it be, what is know about the long time endurancy of such cultural features and benefits, what should they avoid and how they keep way from ruining such things, which areas of life would they specialize into, besatisfied with and who would be eager,s killed and responsible enough to care for the rest and how would the society follow such arrangements, their needs and their need for distance.

Basics of a well working society

A well working society is build on what the people are like, not on the goverment etc. Kind of what the people in their laziness do, that they continue on their old tracks that they are comfortable with, that they learn new things in areas of interest to them and do not bother about everything. So an African does not get a well working African society by travelling to Europe to learn from the European societies well functioning ways and problem solving skills. Insteadan African village has a well working well kept water well, if that is a central value for all the people in that area, if they value a good well highly enough, and if they have the sufficient skills for that in that place and culture. If they do not have the motivation, the well is likely to get spoiled. If most have a high motivation but some want to spoil the well, thoise with a high motivation kill the sabotagers, and so they still have a well working well for drinking water. Also if they traditionally did not have a good well but with extra skill they nowadays could have it and they npwadays and in the future have a high motivation for the well, they are likely to invest in things and skills that make it possible for them to learn the skills for making and maintaining well the well.

Comparing the position sof different professions

In siciences there is a clear hierarchy of who has npticed how much. The technocal, engineering oriented notice the least. The natural sciences have objective thinking skills but largely memorized. Philosophy adds a wider view and more individual skills in objective thinking. Arts and religion seem to rise aboeve them but their position isn'ty as onefold but more likely a different position for each individual, since some individuals have basic skills lacking.

Of women's and men's clishee like position and their clishee like rights

Especially in school age many have misunderstandings and misestimates about women's and men's rights and obligations. Women and men are usually different but not all women alike each other. So women and men have typical rights and obligations which many take as given, but which in fact have grounds on how they behave and what they wish for. So each right is conditional, even if it is a typical right of that gender. Women's rights often are like using well cultivated things in the society, meant for good life, but they are on the condition that you yourself cultivate such thinsg faurly. Men's rights are often of the type that the less able ought to be helped, i.e. adviced by the older ones, professionals etc and given help. They are on teh condition that he does not misuse such differencies in power, skill,position etc, and that he fairly does his share of the obligations. Men and boys often have rights based on being soldier like or in doing healthy good quality, but such rights demand that they use soldier like characteristics in defence of the good of the society, and not against it, and that they really do things in healthy spirit. Women have often rights to influence the lives of others, but those presuppose that one ought to influence with wisdom, wosdom of life, morally and with good will.

Pacifism, civilized ways and the need for an army

It is very common that countries have a well organized civil society plus military service for men. Boys do not always understand how these connect. And especially they do not understand what to think of pacifism, women, moral and evil in these matters from the point of view of c´military service.
Countries have armies. Armies protect the countries and support their interests. That is different from evil running free. Evil means things harmful to the society, so that it is a thing to oppose. Evil does not mean soldiers' virtues, strenght, military power, convincing imago etc which are soldiers' characteristics to aim at. Things are called good because they are useful, good for some purpose. That is why these matters connect to good versus evil.
The rules and practises of the civil society build something for the society, a good society to live in, with a good promising future in the world as we know it. Moral rules seek to prevent from breaking these build things. That is why they sound pacifist. But all the world does not belong to the same group, so that one needs to defend them also from outsiders ruining them, which is what an army is needed for. So at the same time as one tries to avoid breaking things valued in the civil society, at the same time one build strenghts and skills for being able in soldier like things, for being able to defend good life and a good future. Joining together to large grouos greates strenght, and so this defendng goes best in big allegiancies, like the country and it's army, it's allies too.

One can help the more able

Some cultivate the view that one cannot help more intelligent, more skilled and more moral ones than what one oneself is. But that is not at all so. Whenever in human contacts or in groups, it matters a lot what the others are like and how they behave. Like if you are on a trip, it matters that also the children can walk some distancies by themselves. Or hat all carry their part of the things taken along.. And that they offer information. And that they do not attack against moral. That they participate in discussions with the intention to understand, and learn, and take those things morally into account in practise. Also if it a question of protection,one can well protect the more able, since two is usually a bigger opponent than just one, and three is even bigger. And taking part even though not fighting is better than betraying. Behaving in civilized ways it is not so big difference between people of different caliber. Interfering with the lives or responsibilities of others is a different things than helping and doing one's part. I wonder how one can be so mistaken to think that one should interfere even if one does not understand differencies like these?

Moral hierargies

Some more stupid or less moral people think that they are low in a hierargy of the society and so do not need to carry responsibility over their actions. But that is not so. Living in a society their deeds do affect, regardless of whether it was planned to have such effects or not, regardless if it was a social deed or something connected to some fact or value. Deeds tend to have side effects, even major effects on other people with different needs than the person doing the deed. So all need to carry responsibility. One way to carry responsibility is to talk to those who cause disasters to others and teach them or guide them socially. It is not a hierargy, it is just a question of skills and of caring for good life in the society, now and in the future, also for different types of persons than oneself. The arrangements and rules in a society are made on a general levl, so that they make life possibilities godd for all types of people by following the same rule. Regardless of whether one is stupid or not wanting to support some area of life or some style, one is oblidged to carry responsibility of how one affects the society and so also to follow it's wise rules. One common way to carry such responsibility is to avoid affecting major matters of the society and of other persons' lives, and to cooperate socially, and to leave the matters of the society to be decided by civilized wisdom, wisely of course.

Advices for white colour

I have a white dog and a brown one (apricot). It appears that the white colour is much more difficult to bear than brown.
White can mean diligency, cleanness and moral. Even though moral means often that things are diligently done, such diligency is tiring, and so in practise white is somethiung that you achieve, a characteristic of things done, and not the whole picture, which shuld be livelier: healthy happy colours mixed in, and not the ground that you start from, which should be more like everyday ife, for example the practical brown and some healthy happy colours mixed in. So you have more energy and the job is less tirying,s ince it is juts some points every now and then and not something to be done all the time.
For moral you need common sense, for which is ok my thinking course at http://quickerlearning.blogspot.fi which quickly explained is looking at a landscaope while observing the structures in it. Together with that and healthy psirit, the easiest forms of moral might be rationally grounded moral: we build somehow useful things in the society, see http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2013/04/rationally-grounded-moral.html , and therule "Live and let others life", see http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2012/10/live-and-let-others-live.html . For animals the picture of a horse running free in an arch in the latter, is nicest, easiest and most well working: kind of like trees growing in a forest patch: each individual, each living a fullf illing life and in harmony with the rest, not messing with their lives.

Another common type of moral is to think of the world at large, as one huge landscape like picture with the future of the world too, and care for the future generations, wish well for them and care the worldto a better state because of that every time that one meets an important questioon in one's life.

Safety in government jobs with position

"Dear Sirs,
Something which can delay supreme court nomination is lack of safety
and conflicts about what course the court should take. So what brings
safety to government officials?
Rationally grounded moral makes arrangements understandable also to
the selfish individuals and groups, see
http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2013/04/rationally-grounded-moral.html
Basic view of bureaucrats is that bureaucracy serves to meet people's
needs fairly and according to common sense witha picture of the whole
and civilized wisdom.
Different professions gain safety if they are according to people's
wishes what they with wisdom wish the officials etc to be like. Like
singers should have wisdom of life, police behave according to common
sense and people's views on what kind of moral is ´good to have in a
society, etc.
The Finnish behaviour rule
http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2012/10/live-and-let-others-live.html
solves conflicts between individuals, groups and countries. It also
makes government agreed about and law too, if it is placed above them
according to common sense, wisdom and wisdom of life, with a healthy
spirit.
Maybe also
http://healthilymoral.blogspot.fi/2011/08/world-is-of-love.html . ,
http://healthilymoral.blogspot.fi/2016/07/a-sense-of-different-areas-of-life-as.html
and http://healthilymoral.blogspot.fi/2016/09/why-emperors-maybe-stayed-in-power.html
"

Maybe also http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2015/11/healthy-ways-of-living.html


9. July 2018   See also http://talesfromforest.blogspot.com/2017/08/about-kalevala.html

15. March 2019   About placing the rule "Live and let others live" (i.e. it is ok to be selfish in ways positive for happy life but not to disturb the lives of others except fairly is ok - Think of the trees in a park: each one has it's branches sovereignly but does not disturb the braches of others.) above law. Sin ce the rule is ok but kind of thinking centered and does not allow all possible choices, it might be good to start in a quite (but not overly, I guess) orderly, rationally inclined way, and then let the situation open to this kidn of aloowing view that is positive for happy life.
I do not know about punishments, but could one in one's mind think of different choices, maybe far apart to make it easy in the beginning, and check what the end results affect compared to this rule: what would be the best working society, easy to agree about, giving good life & freedom to all? 

28th of March 2020  The rule "Live and let other live" could help also polices' work if used above law but explained with common sense and with the laws too.

Position in hierargy is not the same as benefit

Often actors and some criminally inclined think that it would be benefical for them to replace high officials and people in high position by actors and/or exercise pressure on the real persons in positions. But position is just a jib. It exists solely to get the job done. It's reputation comes from the high quality of the work done by the people usually in such a job or by famous such people. If a position would include lots of rights or priviledges without checking well that they are not used to wrong purposes, such positions would deteriorate to crime and would be only harmful to the country. So a high position ought to have just a job, done with good professional skill and civilized wisdom, and no extra rights or priviledges.
Even for a criminal, a high position does not necessarily mean benefit, since high positions are windy places: there are very many people who would want such benefits for themselves or such positions in decisions. Also, since jobs exist to get things done, giving those jobs to skilled persons motivated fro taking well care of the job at hand, would give all the benefit from that job done to the society, and doing so with all jobs would giuve an enermous benefit compared to jobs at wrong hands. So as an ordinary citizen you can so gain more than as a criminal tsealing power and benefit.

Pressure and moral

Selfishness-based moral means that one can behave morally even under pressure, if the group pressuring is selfish and listens to real rationality. About this type of moral see http://paratiisiteoria.blogspot.fi/2013/09/paratiisissa-on-kaarme.html under the Finnish text an English quotation from my book, and my book there at the first text of the blog by the link.

Big things and safety

If one would not know how to handle things, very many jobs would appear impossible. For example shops handling money, or a bank, or positions of fame or politics, etc. But as they are largely professions, they take things piece by piece small enough that they can handle them well. And the civilized wisdom of the rest of the society helps them in that.
I do not know how these professions handle things, but based on my experience of writing to the internet, I would say that it isn't just writing, and it isn't just knowing, but it is something which has influence if it is good quality and otherwise it drops away in competition. Like if you have a good bank or a lousy one, so which one gets the money fromordinary customers. So you get position according to your skills, or you drown in a mess if you try to take somebody else's position. When you have enough skill for the task at hand, things look quite ordinary in your eyes and often there isn't such a great variety of options but just some things to taker care of with your good quality skills. As we age, if we all the time try to learn about life, we learn more sides of each things we are interested in, learning across the years to solve things we first failed in. So a more skilled one often can solve problems that others fail in. So it matters a lot to hire just the workers who have lots of skills and a sincere interest in the area.
If some things are too large to handle, cut them to many small parts and give those parts maybe to a large group of people. Some things also are too big for some of those who would like to benefit from them criminally: if you stéal a thousand euros, that is just extra money for you, but if you steal a million euros, you are likely to get murdered because of the money. So with large sums, maybe one could divert the attention of some part of the criminals to much smaller sums maybe available. And the biggest money would then be for the biggest players, which are groups with work ethics, rationality, civilized ways etc, so that rational grounds matter and there can be agreement of what is good even if the parties appear competitors and separate. Like for examle building the groundwork for a hig level of economical success in a nation or a larger area: kind of basuic thriuths that the oparticipants agree about and base their lives on.

Interests and skills instead of power

"120. People's skill levels affect how many things they can well do at the same time and how quickly they get those things done and how well they succeed in them. The slow witted typically do something else at the same time, so they need lots of concentration and many attempts to succeed in even ordinary tasks, for example they think of food in the stomach or keep their body very rigidly.
For one to learn skills, one needs to pay attention to what was the idea in that skills, what it consists of and which ways of doing are best suited for it. The most slow learning try to copy via sexuality or acting or by keepin g company, very détailedly the social atmosphere of the more skilled one, but that just disturbs skills. Instead one should keep a longer distance and watck detailedly what the skilled one does, and do those things oneself, without being overly close. About problems that the wise do not usually fall into, teh less skilled have no right to demand the skilled to be models of how to fall into them and then rise again, but instead the less skilled should heed advices about the subject, usually ordinary basic advices about the subject and about those kind of things in the world and about life generally, since biggest problems have to be avoided in advance, always.
Typically people do only a few thinsg at a time. For example if someone sing, they think of the song's atmosphere, of music, of not disturbing neighbours, of music hobbies and of wisdom of songs. So they are kind of concentrated to music subject. So if one is interested in who should have power over what, one can via the rule "Live and let others live", i.e. It is ok to be selfish in ways positive for happy life but not to disturb the lives of others, one can with the help of this rule say that the person singing usually, almost always, ought to be allowed to sing. But on the other hand not to interfere in affairs that he/she is not just now taking care of. Similarly with other subjects. It is ok to care for them, in ways piositive for happy life in the society and in the world, but not to disturb such possibilities, which must be estimated wisely. For example someone may build possibilities for music hobbies, that is often a job or a hobby in music. Likewise in other subjects: the skilled one who value it take care of it. On the other hand the stupid usually should be allowed to do things by themselves to learn about life and skill but not to mess with the lives of others or the affairs of the society. So it often seems that there is no question of power unless there is someone with too little skill or not valuing the things in question enough, messing along. So the question of power seems to connect to family emebers influencing things because they are close to a person who values such things in life. Otherwise, and maybe even in family relations, things are quite clear with the rule "Live and let others live"."
http://feelingcomputers.blogspot.fi

About armies' looks

The leadership of Finnish army has often or traditionally been Swedish. That is absurd, since Finns have negotiation skills well suited for Finns, so a more peaceful result would have been to have an all-Finnish leadership of Finnish army. Finnish men also copy army like ways. It is absurd for them to copy Swedish style since their own skills are Finnish and well suited for just Finnish life and Finnish ways of handliung things. It is generally important to look roughly with the same kind of understanding and the same level of intelligence as one really honesty has, because so all others all the time talk in ways that you can well understand and they talk to your own motivation, so you learn all the time and benefit greatly. If you are skilled, it is nice to get respect and position that you fairly deserve. If you are not at all skilled but don't lie to be any more skilled than you really are, you learn all the time, and you do not look like a betrayal but like a good honest attempt in things that others too value. More stupid ones are often with more basic questions of life, so others kind of find them symphatetical. There are different levels of understanding in each: one is to understand well by oneself and to do on one's own, another is to have read and roughly followed through but not able to think such on one's own even afterwards, and a third is to not to understand but to follow authorities, for example priests. But between nations there are also other differencies: travellers find a different climate, different ways, different ways of being social and running the society, different rythm etc, so they kind of appear more stupid than what they in fact are when they are in their own country.Russians in Siberia copy froma cademical while Asians copy from highly respected masters of different skills, so it may be that Siberians are less intelligent that Asians while they on the other hand have more freedom than the Asians, like more average people typically have compared to highly educated. who do not get likewise followed in their own thughts. People in more eastern countries live the evening while western live the morning or day, so they have more evening like characteristics and appear more thoughtless, more leisurely, more freetime like. Trust is often felt toward the one who is more skilled and responsible, while instictual irrational trust is felt to the opposite direction: toward those who do not take care of things going well at all and so rely on others to take care of things. People in more southern and warmer areas typically confuse northern people to be like people in cooled indoors or like their own countrymen who have travelled to the cooler  or colder countries but who are not adapted to the northern climate.If you do a service to other countries in a way typical to your own country's culture, then others learn or otherwise benefit from it and so they are more in tune with your own culture, with it's ways, and so your culture has gained more influence in the world, in a way that it fairly deserves.

African lack of moral

African weather brings short-sightedness if one is not skilled in living with the heat. One things which affects a lot is what kind of food one eats and when. As far as I know, a good type of meal fitted for living wisely with the weathers, helps already even once a month but much more if eaten daily. At least in Finnish climate a meal of fish, rise and cooked vegetables brings a better touch of living wisely with the weathers. The Finnish climate is very different, almost arctic, but summer time daytime temperatures on hot days may rise to as high as roughly 30C, so just in case that it helps abroad, Finnish advices about living wisely the summer: http://healthynaturalwaysofliving.blogspot.fi/2017/02/living-wisely-summer.html

Often people are short-sigheted when their professional and other forefigures are much less intelligent than they are. So finding widely more skilled forefigures would help a lot. For example small wild birds may be more intelligent tahn apes and some apes more intelligent and farseeing than other apes.
In addition one needs civilized wisdom about what is a good way to live in a society, see http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2012/10/live-and-let-others-live.html and http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2013/04/rationally-grounded-moral.html and about healthy ways of living and wisdom of life http://finnishskills.blogspot.fi/2015/11/healthy-ways-of-living.html .
Intelligece one can learn from my blogs http://quickerlearning.blogspot.fi and http://pikakoulu.blogspot.fi plus from video playlists at http://www.youtube.com/khtervola .

* * *
(I was left wondering about African meals. Could one try different dishes and find out what makes one feel well and how often it is good to eat so in the local climate and with some type of activity & strain during the day? Would an evening snack of some fresh vegetables sallad, (maybe  a wineberry(??)) and a piece of a Carelian pie make one sleep well?)

About trying to guide people toward moral

It often happens for beginners who know only one approach to some questions in life, that they try to force others into accepting thier own views. But there are many areas of life. As people get more experience in life, they learn skills and talents in new areas of life from those who have such skills as their hobby or job. So they often have many approaches available fro each type of question. And so, if one tries to force them to one answer, they often resist, thinking that their own answer is better suited for them. So what is moral and what is not is a question that needs skills, open-mindedness toward other kinds of answers and a view of how the society works and what is needed in the society for things to turen out well. So an idea of who is how skilled in which areas of life, could settle disputes about whom to aloow freedoms and whom to allow decides for the group. Often varied answers by different people offer a well working choise for the group.

When someone errs to oppose moral quite strongly, it often is a questions of what is nonsese and what is not or of what was forcing, what was ordinary talk and what was mildly refusing to have an opinion. For suc too a better idea about who is how skilled in what, wouldgive better working communication. (http://pikakoulu.blogspot.fi ). About how much one can command and what is too far going, to that works well the rule "Live and let others live!" i.e. it is ok for all to be selfish in ways positive for happy life but not to mess with the lives of others, except fairly. One must demand this rule also toward and between others and not just with you with the person you conversate with. See http://Finnishskills.blogspot.fi . In the same blog also about healthy ways of living: If your suggestions is not good in some respect, it likely gets opposed, but if it works well for all, it is much more likely to be accepted and supported.

People who are considered to be with a lack of understanding, often confuse adices from different sources, kind of one talking one way of talking and another with another way of talking and other subjects too but they confuse them to be the same things and so produce nonsense from which they are blaimed. Relying more in common sense would help. One shoudl also pay somewhat more attention to who said the thing in question, not to memorize it as words only but as something said by someone specialized in certain area of life and with certain ways of thinking and level of skill in such and certain level of skill in other things. So the things said have only so much understanding and only about certain areas of life. What someone else said was with a certain leel of success in that area of life and certain amount of certainty in things at large. So please keep these things in your mind too as a landcspe, and your own understanding, the things at hand etc, and not just the words said.

People adapt to the culture and climate they were raised in, so that even abroad they tend to suggest that things should be guided like they were guided in their original homeland and culture. So if some Arab or whoever seems dangerously out of control and criminal, should one check if she/he is from another continent than you thought her/him to be from?Like Arab maybe African, some work oriented from Asia, etc.

Often especially young people confuse their environment talking about their own interests and values and about the importance of their place in the world, into believing that they themselves should invest in just those skills and areas of life even at the cost of their own profession and values. But it is not so. People just need to express their iews about things they like and value. It is not an obligation fro others, it is not even advice since it supposes that you are similarly inclined person. The rule "Live and let others live!" gives you room to follow your own likings even if others do not agree about their value.

Sexuality

In Finland sexuality is a love affair: people choose freely whom they love and with whom they want to get married and start a family. They also choose freely is they do not want to associate with someone or be sexual with someone. That is good life and makes things work out well. The rule "Live and let others live!" (which means that it is ok to be selfish but not to mess with the lives of others, except fairly interfering with others is ok) makes things work out well and gives freedom.

But in some other countruies people either aren't so free, so skilled, they have a different view on love in their enviroment, or they do not have enough contacts. So they end up with less good arrangements which though are said to have the good sides of love affairs.

http://yksinaisille.blogspot.fi/2012/03/advice-for-dating-and-finding-new.html
http://yksinaisille.blogspot.fi/2012/03/advice-on-creating-charm.html
http://yksinaisille.blogspot.fi/2012/03/build-perfect-relationship.html

Dark or light?

As one via age  learns new skills, one first as a kid becomes a member of the adult's world, then later  truly a part of it, then somewhat too skilled for some tasks, then too skilled for many to communicate with, then not understood. Likewise one learns to solve problems in life and of the world, and so later on one has more answers and more skilled style, but less understood anymore. So at first one maybe were for tough realism as a kid, kind of dark, then later average, then light, then out of sight, then dark or light or whatever when one part of the time succeeds in communicating answers found and part of the time is too different to be understood right. So from communication one changes to out of tune but full of answers - finds religion, art, upbringing of the next generation, etc.

On the other hand some try to start from the difficult end and so they lack quality, kind of full of lies. Or someone skilled loses touch with daily chores and so loses basic skills which bring quality. And both gorups some tend to encourage to tasks which require great skill. So it goes ashtray.

All people may have the same building parts, kind of rational, kind of caring for things they consider impirtant. But all do not stick to the level they know well and care about, but mess with the wider world, and so things go ashtray. Or they are social unobjectively in questions that should be parts of the society, of civilized ways and not of social life and personal choises.