Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
You have to accept the will of the majority even if you aren't enfranchised?
Forced to receive goods you are opposed to, have no say, obliged to follow their rules?
That's moral?
Does that person have a moral duty to make war on the state?
Oh maybe i get the anger, in the model you can at any time stop being a net tax taker (refuse welfare) and you vote.
So you choose either to participate in decision making or to be a warden of the state. The moral atrocious idea is that someone can and should be both
After you accept all the above, you want a society that AT LEAST allows talent to flourish as much as possible. That's a libertarian leaning one which maximizes the rewards of effort and ambition. Details can vary, from optimistic dreams of "anarchy" to significant degree of state force being used to avoid the losers of society become violent against the succesful ones, but the
I'm grunching; maybe you and others have already discussed this, but I'm pretty curious as to what happens to those without the necessary talent or luck to succeed. Presumably there is no serious welfare state in place to cover these people. What happens to them? Do you think private charity could cover those costs? Or is it just, "too bad, so sad, you should have had more skills"?
One of the things I hate most about libertarian-style ideology is that it seemingly has no answer for those without "merit" in the free, allegedly merit-based economy they pine for. Most of us have at least one family member or friend that is dumb as a rock. They can't compete with the median citizen of the nation, let alone the high achievers. Guess what? We still love these people and are very interested in having them NOT die penniless on the street.
Many of these aforementioned people don't have steady family situations where they can rely upon a family member to meet their basic needs. I find it rather hard to imagine that private charity could get anywhere close to meeting the needs of all of these people, and that's before even including the qualifiers the runners of a private charity may place on the applicants -- religious qualifiers, perhaps, or drug tests...
"They write black people Black with a capital B, but they keep the lowercase for whites" -- stuff like this. Apparently, "whites are the only people you can be racist towards" is full race-based compensation for ongoing decades of oppression of black Americans.
I mean, of course this is your reaction because you donÂ’t value national identity and persuasion in general.
Your vision is your leftist group acquires power and forces compliance on everyone else through state power and violence if necessary. Correct me if IÂ’m wrong.
In fact, you seem eager to use violence on your opponents.
I loathe national identity. Patriotism is a curse. True that. "Persuasion", I mean, I like arguing on the internet, but I dislike formal debates; I'm not really sure what you mean.
I honestly don't have much of a "vision" as everything seems irrevocably broken. Ideally, some genuinely left-wing party would replace the Democrats, then gain power through democratic means, and codify a number of laws to set up a highly robust welfare state and very high taxation on inheritance/wealth hoarding. (with a robust tax-collecting entity to close all the loopholes and other benefits the super-rich currently have)
Will any of this ever happen in the US? Of course not, which is why I'm just gonna keep sitting here and complaining on the internet.
If Putin said something like this, he was paraphrasing George Bernard Shaw's famous quote “If at age 20 you are not a Communist then you have no heart. If at age 30 you are not a capitalist then you have no brains".
I'm not sure about Victor's feelings towards George Bernard Shaw, but in any case, OF COURSE no socialist/communist/whatever would ever support Vladimir Putin. Russia today is one of the least socialist countries on the planet. It's much more akin to a fascist, hyper-capitalist, imperialist nation like... well, the good ol' US and A.
KoG, what you have to remember is this.
Inseparability requires exploration. Rebirth is a constant. Nothing is impossible. You must take a stand against yearning. Throughout history, humans have been interacting with the dreamscape via electrical impulses. Our conversations with other warriors have led to a summoning of supra-psychic consciousness. Who are we? Where on the great journey will we be aligned?
Humankind has nothing to lose. Reality has always been beaming with beings whose chakras are enveloped in health. We are in the midst of an ancient awakening of fulfillment that will be a gateway to the quantum soup itself. We are starseeds of the multiverse. The goal of electromagnetic resonance is to plant the seeds of presence rather than selfishness. We exist, we reflect, we are reborn.
You may be ruled by greed without realizing it. Do not let it eradicate the richness of your mission.
KoG, what you have to remember is this.Inseparability requires exploration. Rebirth is a constant. Nothing is impossible. You must take a stand against yearning. Throughout history, humans have been interacting with the dreamscape via electrical impulses. Our conversations with other warriors have led to a summoning of supra-psychic consciousness. Who are we? Where on the great
this is a little too coherent to be a good Craig impression
I like Craig, though. I enjoy cranks of all flavors (some maniacs may even argue that I am one myself!)
this is a little too coherent to be a good Craig impression
I like Craig, though. I enjoy cranks of all flavors (some maniacs may even argue that I am one myself!)
Well, the good news is that if you don't like that one, you can make a new one yourself:
. Just reionize those electrons, and you're off to the races.
Wayyyy back in the day in these threads, from before I had ever posted, there was this lovely guy called STEELEHOUSE. He was one of the most GOATed cranks 2p2 has ever seen. Bring him back!
As others have observed, one of the lame things about Trump is that he took all the oxygen away from all of the right-wing cranks that used to flourish in the US. Lyndon LaRouche is not walking through that door. It's all Trump, all day.
The tragic homogenization of right-wing lunacy. Sad!
Worse is that Trump and Trumpism have basically made the art of political caricature completely obsolete. Yesterday's Onion articles are today's news.
I'm grunching; maybe you and others have already discussed this, but I'm pretty curious as to what happens to those without the necessary talent or luck to succeed. Presumably there is no serious welfare state in place to cover these people. What happens to them? Do you think private charity could cover those costs? Or is it just, "too bad, so sad, you should have had more
There are families and private charities (who have a lot more resources at their disposal because far fewer resources are commandeered out of their hands by the state).
IF no one in your extended bloodline, nor any of your friends, nor anyone with excess resources in society and willing to be generous, deems you worthy of help, that's natural selection in action and goodbye.
Libertarianism would obviously increase family bonding (because you need it more), actual friendship (your life depends on it more than before) and the value of charity (making it more fulfilling for generous people, because of the increased effect of their intervention).
One of the biggest critiques of welfare statism is exactly that it deteriorates the importance of family and human relations because the state substitutes itself in roles that historically (*biologically*) are fulfilled by family, friends, and the rich people who want to build a patronage network.
Under a libertarian system it becomes more important to help your family members (because you want help when it's your turn to need it), to make stable and long duration friendships (same reason) , to attach yourself to rich people networks for whom you can be found as valuable. Basically, to live properly as a social mammal, without violence underpinning all social relationships, rather the expectation of favours being exchanged through time for mutual benefit, which is a much more solid form of bonding than the threat of police coming and taking you and your stuff if you don't pay taxes.
Libertarianism in this topic (removing the state as the nanny state, as the welfare provider) is much more in line with our biology and does generate massive positive externalities.
Moreover regarding the "person who is a lot less talented than the median", with no state violence underpinning all relationship, that person can very often STILL participate in production in some ways, and still procure a bit of stuff for himself or the family he lives with.
Ofc the way to do it is not creating poverty traps through welfare (which *always happens currently*), destroying every incentive for even that little amount of contribution that individual could provide.
Otoh if a bad family has bad apples, and you don't subsidize it, families get better in time which is another exceptionally important point for future well being. Subdizing failure is distopic.
If no one in society wants to help a violent drug addict, it should simply be gg the violent drug addict. Not actively, you don't go and remove it, but you have a system in place that deals brutally with violence on other people and property remember, so you have the state (or private citizens defending themselves) kill him the first time he attempts to steal or to assault someone and *you are done*.
And if you are done brutally and ruthlessly every time with them, quickly there are fewer of those people around (and they have less time to reproduce themselves) and life is better for anyone else, which is how it should be.
Keep in mind this is how urban europe dealt with urban poors for centuries, i am not inventing anything. Family, friends, charity network, those slipping out of them (usually because violent and so intractable) killed the first time they are caught stealing stuff or robbing someone and so on.
Oh how I miss those halcyon days of medieval Europe. A much simpler and better time for all.
Given the technology available at the time what they accomplished was quite a miracle yes. They built buildings that stand today, and developed legal and technical concepts we use today.
And btw i was referring to a later time.
The Waltham Black Act (UK) in 1723 established the system known as the Bloody Code which imposed the death penalty for over two hundred, often petty, offences
Oh maybe i get the anger, in the model you can at any time stop being a net tax taker (refuse welfare) and you vote.
So you choose either to participate in decision making or to be a warden of the state. The moral atrocious idea is that someone can and should be both
The state and society seizes your liberty and your property and it owes you for that. It's like eminent domain. It's still theft and unfair, but that's the social contact and why you are owed welfare. You're owed more than that really, but most people should settle for it as it's actually a decent exchange.
Ok. There have been several visions of the future laid out.
Now, let’s see who here succeeds in actualizing their vision into reality. After all, if you can’t actualize your vision, then it’s irrelevant.
(Karl has already resigned himself to failure.)
Anyone want to bet they can beat me?
Lol
Ok. There have been several visions of the future laid out.
Now, let’s see who here succeeds in actualizing their vision into reality. After all, if you can’t actualize your vision, then it’s irrelevant.
(Karl has already resigned himself to failure.)
Anyone want to bet they can beat me?
I'll bet you a million dollars that a human walks on Mars in my lifetime.
Ok. There have been several visions of the future laid out.
Now, let’s see who here succeeds in actualizing their vision into reality. After all, if you can’t actualize your vision, then it’s irrelevant.
(Karl has already resigned himself to failure.)
Anyone want to bet they can beat me?
If the wager is properly escrowed, I'm all over that!
