|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on May 19, 2013 4:32:55 GMT 1
I kind of agree with you about Picasso! Good God could it be that art is the thing we see eye to eye on?! Our disagreements stem from our political differences for the most part. I'm very wary of governments (although I currently work for my government) and have noticed a pattern throughout history that the more power a government gains, the more oppressive they become. It's not a government's place to "help the little guy". It's on the little guy to make his bones one way or the other. Otherwise, he doesn't develop the strength needed to deal with life. I'm not saying one shouldn't offer a hand here and there, but the government shouldn't be making a business of it and THAT is what I take exception to (among other things).
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on May 19, 2013 4:42:38 GMT 1
We were doing quite well there.
I notice that a large amount of people who claim to have succeeded at life through hard, honest work rather than being helped are the ones who were born rich, or born into corrupt systems who can make them rich. Or, on a smaller scale, just born into circumstances where life was in some way easier. Better parents, better neighbourhood, better breaks, whathaveyou. And so when some drug-addict or unemployed or other brand of life's losers comes asking for a handout, our man says, "This guy is lazy. I started from nothing and look what I became. It's a fair race and I won it through effort. Go back to the starting line." Very comfortable, very guiltless view of life.
The hell it's a fair race. I'm not going to go full Socialist and say it's not a race, but it is not fair and I promise you picking a runner up off the floor will not make either you or him weaker. A government should make helping the people it represents not just its business but it's chief business. And while it's at it, it could let go of its curious habit of helping people who pay for it. In secret, through channels.
Going to bed now, and going to regret responding to this argument in the morning. Sorry Linders, please move these posts. Iron one day either you or I will learn to stop baiting, or to stop biting. God I hope it's me. Either way it'll be a really nice day.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on May 19, 2013 4:57:24 GMT 1
First off, "fuck fair". Life isn't fair. Deal with it. Not that I got my non-PC answer out of the way... there are charities and such already in place for people who need a hand. Churches, local organizations, etc. I should know since as a former rep of a large utility company I worked with them quite often. The help is out there, but people continually take the easy way out. The old saying of "God helps those who help themselves" rings true. Being successful does NOT mean being rich. It means you can support your family and live what you consider to have a good life.
History shows that when everyone is equal, the truly brilliant never rise. How would have Carl Sagan been had he known that despite his brilliance and ability he'd be treated as well as a common factory worker, for example? After all, all are equal, and get equal consideration.
I take exception to that premise. For exampele, Clarence Thomas was born in one of the biggest shit-holes in the US. Yet, he ascended through his own hard work to become a Supreme Court Justice. The opportunity is there and that is fairness. But achievement should remain individual for when everyone is made to be equal by the government, no one is equal. Please see the feudalism of Europe as a good indicator or perhaps China or the USSR for examples.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on May 19, 2013 5:26:00 GMT 1
See I know life's not fair. I never said it was, or anything like it. I'm not an idiot and I've had my share of completely unjust misfortune just like everybody. Life is absolutely not fair. What I'm saying is that maybe instead of exploiting this fact so that you and the 'truly brilliant' can win the unfair contest, we should make it more fair. In order to save and improve other people's lives, instead of triumphing in spite of them.
Community is mankind's greatest invention. I'm not advocating Communism by the way as you seem to suggest with the Sagan thing - Communism ignores individuality and is easy for dictators to exploit. Sagan should be free to follow his passions and be rewarded for his accomplishment, absolutely. But neither should he ever step on other people to do that. Science is a collaborative enterprise. Humanity is a collaborative enterprise.
Clarence Thomas worked hard, but he got lucky. The circumstances of his birth put him in a position, gave him a goal and motivation. If you think success is due more to effort than to luck, then ask everybody else who lived in that shit hole what they think. Strangely, they didn't become Supreme Court Justice. People born with money and connections and comfort did. And one other.
As for people being equal, I'm not sure what you mean. I don't mean to say that everybody is born with equal potential. Not at all. Some people are born smart, some are born with fathers who work a good trade or for a successful company, some are born in an environment or in a social circle that makes them smart or hard-working or confident or happy. Some of us are born in a town with almost no water and a school that jut got blown up. Others get none of those breaks. We are certainly not born equal and we should not make ourselves equal. Innovation, skill and passion must be rewarded! But human beings must not be cast aside like animal runts. We can foster competitive spirit without fostering war.
I don't think life is fair or that we are all born with the same chances. But what I think is - it isn't going to make the starving man any weaker if you feed him. I'm not saying feed him forever, make him dependent. Feed him a bit, listen to him, show him how to find food. But don't you walk past him and say there was a perfectly good stick he could have used as a fishing rod that you dropped for him and it's his own fault for not learning to fish by himself. That translates from bullshit to English as 'I don't care about him'.
I boil the difference between conservatism and liberalism to a very simple thing - selfishness or altruism. Well we've evolved and grown strong as a species because we work together. And we've decided that it's morally wrong to be a King or a Supreme Ruler and that it's wrong to kill people who hinder you or to enslave people to allow you to do better, or to exploit them, or to be rude to them if they weren't rude first. And the parameters for what kind of selfishness is acceptable just get smaller every century. It's not making us weaker.
And yes, calling one ideology selfishness and the other altruism makes mine sound morally superior, so I'm always dubious about my own conclusion! Too simplistic? It makes me sound like the good guy and you the bad guy. But I like it a lot better than 'The means are there, but they're too lazy'. Yeah, but why are they too lazy? And why do you stop caring for them because of that? They're human beings who aren't moving forward. You can walk past and make up some excuse that allows you to blame them, or you can stop for an hour and help.
EDIT: And I think I'll 'rest my case' with that and give you the last word! What a puffed-up idiot I must look and will no-doubt feel in the morning. I wish I were a good enough writer to express my politics without making it into the rousing speech from the end of a movie. I mean everything I said - but I feel daft for how show-offy and melodramatic I / we sound.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on May 19, 2013 5:52:30 GMT 1
See I know life's not fair. I never said it was, or anything like it. I'm not an idiot and I've had my share of completely unjust misfortune just like everybody. Life is absolutely not fair. What I'm saying is that maybe instead of exploiting this fact so that you and the 'truly brilliant' can win the unfair contest, we should make it more fair. In order to save and improve other people's lives, instead of triumphing in spite of them. Community is mankind's greatest invention. I'm not advocating Commun ism by the way as you seem to suggest with the Sagan thing - Communism ignores individuality and is easy for dictators to exploit. Sagan should be free to follow his passions and be rewarded for his accomplishment, absolutely. But neither should he ever step on other people to do that. Science is a collaborative enterprise. Humanity is a collaborative enterprise. Clarence Thomas worked hard, but he got lucky. The circumstances of his birth put him in a position, gave him a goal and motivation. If you think success is due more to effort than to luck, then ask everybody else who lived in that shit hole what they think. Strangely, they didn't become Supreme Court Justice. People born with money and connections and comfort did. And one other. As for people being equal, I'm not sure what you mean. I don't mean to say that everybody is born with equal potential. Not at all. Some people are born smart, some are born with fathers who work a good trade or for a successful company, some are born in an environment or in a social circle that makes them smart or hard-working or confident or happy. Some of us are born in a town with almost no water and a school that jut got blown up. Others get none of those breaks. We are certainly not born equal and we should not make ourselves equal. Innovation, skill and passion must be rewarded! But human beings must not be cast aside like animal runts. We can foster competitive spirit without fostering war. I don't think life is fair or that we are all born with the same chances. But what I think is - it isn't going to make the starving man any weaker if you feed him. I'm not saying feed him forever, make him dependent. Feed him a bit, listen to him, show him how to find food. But don't you walk past him and say there was a perfectly good stick he could have used as a fishing rod that you dropped for him and it's his own fault for not learning to fish by himself. That translates from bullshit to English as 'I don't care about him'. I boil the difference between conservatism and liberalism to a very simple thing - selfishness or altruism. Well we've evolved and grown strong as a species because we work together. And we've decided that it's morally wrong to be a King or a Supreme Ruler and that it's wrong to kill people who hinder you or to enslave people to allow you to do better, or to exploit them, or to be rude to them if they weren't rude first. And the parameters for what kind of selfishness is acceptable just get smaller every century. It's not making us weaker. And yes, calling one ideology selfishness and the other altruism makes mine sound morally superior, so I'm always dubious about my own conclusion! Too simplistic? It makes me sound like the good guy and you the bad guy. But I like it a lot better than 'The means are there, but they're too lazy'. Yeah, but why are they too lazy? And why do you stop caring for them because of that? They're human beings who aren't moving forward. You can walk past and make up some excuse that allows you to blame them, or you can stop for an hour and help. EDIT: And I think I'll 'rest my case' with that and give you the last word! What a puffed-up idiot I must look and will no-doubt feel in the morning. I wish I were a good enough writer to express my politics without making it into the rousing speech from the end of a movie. I mean everything I said - but I feel daft for how show-offy and melodramatic I / we sound.Buch, I truly am glad you posted this. This actually proves my prior assertions that we're alike in more ways than either of us would care to admit. I would feed a hungry man and then teach him to fish... provided he was willing to learn. Sadly many people do not want that. They just want their meal by the easiest means possible at nearly any cost provided they don't directly pay it. I've lived in many cities ranging form prison towns to my hometown to San Fransisco and San Antonio. I've met people from all over the world, from Pakistan to Russia. I know human nature. People rarely, if ever, exert effort unless it's forced upon them. My philosophy is simple: allow people to have access to the tools they need to be successful. If they choose not to use them, that's on them. If they fail because of someone else beating them, they can either quit or learn from their failure until they or their children make it. When they succeed, the should enjoy the fruits of their labor. Should their children become wastrels, then it becomes an issue for the children and eventually the family will fall and be replaced by another that learned from that family's mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on May 19, 2013 6:01:06 GMT 1
I think we're a lot less alike than you say - but I'm glad you're not misunderstanding me.
I'll say that you know as much about human nature as me or anyone else with a few years and a few brains. We don't need to sell ourselves here by listing achievements and travel stickers. We both know what we're talking about well enough - but we look at it from different angles. Your man doesn't want to learn to fish - so what, you let him (and his family, you mentioned) starve? I ask him why he doesn't, and if he says nothing I find out, and then we see about fixing it.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on May 19, 2013 6:06:18 GMT 1
"I am going to bed now." "I will rest my case an let you have the last word."
If nothing else, you have to credit my talent for shameless lies.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on May 19, 2013 6:08:07 GMT 1
The way I see it, if the man chooses to not to learn how to fish, then he accepts the responsibility of his actions. If it affects his family, then that truly is sad, but it's not my place to intervene on that kind of thing. The offer for me to provide him with the skills to survive and even thrive is always open, but if he doesn't want me to help him, I bloody well can't force him.
That's why I take exception to many government programs: they don't offer the choice. You either comply or find yourself ruined.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on May 19, 2013 12:18:40 GMT 1
Alright alright, you've had your go at each other
Opening this as a place air out or discuss differences in opinion on the role of government in society. I'd say that even more than the gun thread I'm gonna ask that everyone keep it civil here.
|
|
|
Post by Warhammer Gorvar on May 19, 2013 12:43:15 GMT 1
Every time I see Lidners break up a argument using his modding skills I keep thinking this.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on May 19, 2013 12:45:20 GMT 1
Dare I ask what that suggests of your opinion of me?
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on May 19, 2013 12:50:13 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on May 19, 2013 12:54:28 GMT 1
Didn't really break this one up - we'd already stopped by ourselves a few hours earlier.
|
|
|
Post by Lily Ariel Linders on May 19, 2013 13:10:15 GMT 1
Every time I see Lidners break up a argument using his modding skills I keep thinking this. Oh my... lol How about "I am the Law and the Law is not mocked"? Good ol' Javert... ;D (Sorry, Linders-my-Love, not having a go at you, I swear - I just had to say that... still love me? *fluttering my eyelashes cutely*)
|
|
|
Post by A Normal Pathfinder on May 19, 2013 16:00:30 GMT 1
Linders you lucky man
|
|