|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 19, 2023 12:28:46 GMT
My belief is that poverty is relative. a guy with a car in Sudan is rich compared to a man without enough to eat who is poor. A man who have a ski lodge in Austria in UK is rich compared to a man who has never taken his children on a holiday. I take this as a glass case example of the hubris I'm describing. To garner moral support you start off with the notion that "a person needs help because they can't do x - surely sorting this out is a net win?" and then you mutate it into the powerplay "Society itself is the wrong shape and I want it forcibly changed" |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 19, 2023 16:04:50 GMT
Its all there in human history, Cholera in London, the French revolution, civil war, plagues. Whataboutery. Its ok to say you don't understand, nobody will mind. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 19, 2023 16:10:00 GMT
My belief is that poverty is relative. a guy with a car in Sudan is rich compared to a man without enough to eat who is poor. A man who have a ski lodge in Austria in UK is rich compared to a man who has never taken his children on a holiday. I take this as a glass case example of the hubris I'm describing. To garner moral support you start off with the notion that "a person needs help because they can't do x - surely sorting this out is a net win?" and then you mutate it into the powerplay "Society itself is the wrong shape and I want it forcibly changed" Its reality. What you desire is not. People who fall too far behind the average feel disenfranchised and behave accordingly. Kids getting involved in gangs/theft/drugs do not do so because they don't have enough to eat, they do so because they see what others have in comparison and see no way of getting it themselves. That's reality, not your theory of government control. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 19, 2023 16:26:49 GMT
Its all there in human history, Cholera in London, the French revolution, civil war, plagues. Whataboutery. Its ok to say you don't understand, nobody will mind. Just look up whataboutery, you might learn something Einstein.Which might be fun for everyone else. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 19, 2023 16:40:20 GMT
Its reality. What you desire is not. You are just proving me correct - you start with the modest notion of relieving unnecessary suffering and then the scope creep starts and you insist that the whole of society needs to be placed under your control If only we could find some kind of reliable treatment for your affliction, but human nature is human nature. People like yourself are part and parcel of the aversity of my story arc and I should be thankful you can be relied to cause a never ending stream of horrific disasters so I never get bored and become alienated - I will always have a meaningful job trying to untangle the mess and debrief the survivors. People who fall too far behind the average feel disenfranchised and behave accordingly. Kids getting involved in gangs/theft/drugs do not do so because they don't have enough to eat, they do so because they see what others have in comparison and see no way of getting it themselves. That's reality, not your theory of government control. For a start you are wrong about this - healthy people derive meaning from dealing with something real (a challenge they can fail at) rather than an environment constructed out of government Wendy houses and safety nets. The alienation comes from the feeling that nothing you do makes any odds to your path (a prisoner environment). You have it almost perfectly upside down. Secondly, even if what you are saying is true for some people, society has more than one problem to solve at once. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 19, 2023 16:57:35 GMT
Its ok to say you don't understand, nobody will mind. Just look up whataboutery, you might learn something Einstein.Which might be fun for everyone else. History is not whataboutery. Now if you have nothing interesting to say why not shut up. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 19, 2023 16:59:34 GMT
Just look up whataboutery, you might learn something Einstein.Which might be fun for everyone else. History is not whataboutery. Now if you have nothing interesting to say why not shut up. It is if using it as an escape from being able to answer, now you are in corner, no good blaming me. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 19, 2023 17:02:59 GMT
Its reality. What you desire is not. You are just proving me correct - you start with the modest notion of relieving unnecessary suffering and then the scope creep starts and you insist that the whole of society needs to be placed under your control If only we could find some kind of reliable treatment for your affliction, but human nature is human nature. People like yourself are part and parcel of the aversity of my story arc and I should be thankful you can be relied to cause a never ending stream of horrific disasters so I never get bored and become alienated - I will always have a meaningful job trying to untangle the mess and debrief the survivors. People who fall too far behind the average feel disenfranchised and behave accordingly. Kids getting involved in gangs/theft/drugs do not do so because they don't have enough to eat, they do so because they see what others have in comparison and see no way of getting it themselves. That's reality, not your theory of government control. For a start you are wrong about this - healthy people derive meaning from dealing with something real (a challenge they can fail at) rather than an environment constructed out of government Wendy houses and safety nets. The alienation comes from the feeling that nothing you do makes any odds to your path (a prisoner environment). You have it almost perfectly upside down. Secondly, even if what you are saying is true for some people, society has more than one problem to solve at once. What in your opinion caused the French revolution then? Only I thought it was the rich in France leading extravagant lives and wasting money while the poor scraped a living. The rich funding the war in America to become even richer and failing leaving the poor even poorer. Those poor looked to the rich to help when they had a poor crop. They had a poor crop and the rich refused to help. History. But perhaps not, Perhaps the revolution was because the poor lack a challenge they could fail at. Lol. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 19, 2023 17:03:44 GMT
History is not whataboutery. Now if you have nothing interesting to say why not shut up. It is if using it as an escape from being able to answer, now you are in corner, no good blaming me. I'm going to ignore you as you have nothing to add troll. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 19, 2023 17:11:58 GMT
It is if using it as an escape from being able to answer, now you are in corner, no good blaming me. I'm going to ignore you as you have nothing to add troll. Only because I find your political ramblings in the vein of Blairite politics amusing. You are just like him, he also believes he can con anyone. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 19, 2023 18:14:25 GMT
You are just proving me correct - you start with the modest notion of relieving unnecessary suffering and then the scope creep starts and you insist that the whole of society needs to be placed under your control If only we could find some kind of reliable treatment for your affliction, but human nature is human nature. People like yourself are part and parcel of the aversity of my story arc and I should be thankful you can be relied to cause a never ending stream of horrific disasters so I never get bored and become alienated - I will always have a meaningful job trying to untangle the mess and debrief the survivors. For a start you are wrong about this - healthy people derive meaning from dealing with something real (a challenge they can fail at) rather than an environment constructed out of government Wendy houses and safety nets. The alienation comes from the feeling that nothing you do makes any odds to your path (a prisoner environment). You have it almost perfectly upside down. Secondly, even if what you are saying is true for some people, society has more than one problem to solve at once. What in your opinion caused the French revolution then? Only I thought it was the rich in France leading extravagant lives and wasting money while the poor scraped a living. The rich funding the war in America to become even richer and failing leaving the poor even poorer. Those poor looked to the rich to help when they had a poor crop. They had a poor crop and the rich refused to help. History. But perhaps not, Perhaps the revolution was because the poor lack a challenge they could fail at. Lol. I think the revolution had far more to do with incompetence , high-handedness, unfairness and repression than 'the wealth gap'. The elites in France became useless, dismissive and disinterested in anything but themselves. I didn't suggest that obstacles be constructed to keep the poor happy, but that meaning comes significantly from the challenge of overcoming obstacles that are real. Your subconscious knows when you have a fake trophy. Alienation comes from feeling you are living an unreal life, even if it is strewn with unreal obstacles. Typically, the elites hold their positions until they become incompetent so that the advantages they confer from their rule become obviously smaller than their cost. To summarise - be more like Trump and less like Trudeau  |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 19, 2023 18:19:51 GMT
You are just proving me correct - you start with the modest notion of relieving unnecessary suffering and then the scope creep starts and you insist that the whole of society needs to be placed under your control If only we could find some kind of reliable treatment for your affliction, but human nature is human nature. People like yourself are part and parcel of the aversity of my story arc and I should be thankful you can be relied to cause a never ending stream of horrific disasters so I never get bored and become alienated - I will always have a meaningful job trying to untangle the mess and debrief the survivors. For a start you are wrong about this - healthy people derive meaning from dealing with something real (a challenge they can fail at) rather than an environment constructed out of government Wendy houses and safety nets. The alienation comes from the feeling that nothing you do makes any odds to your path (a prisoner environment). You have it almost perfectly upside down. Secondly, even if what you are saying is true for some people, society has more than one problem to solve at once. Only I thought it was the rich in France leading extravagant lives and wasting money while the poor scraped a living. The rich funding the war in America to become even richer and failing leaving the poor even poorer. Those poor looked to the rich to help when they had a poor crop. They had a poor crop and the rich refused to help. History. But perhaps not, Perhaps the revolution was because the poor lack a challenge they could fail at. Lol. Well you were on solid ground and then you blew it. Using living conditions in the 18th Century to make a point about life today in one of the richest countries in the world with one of the most generous welfare systems in the world is a stretch even for you.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2023 18:35:07 GMT
I take this as a glass case example of the hubris I'm describing. To garner moral support you start off with the notion that "a person needs help because they can't do x - surely sorting this out is a net win?" and then you mutate it into the powerplay "Society itself is the wrong shape and I want it forcibly changed" Its reality. What you desire is not. People who fall too far behind the average feel disenfranchised and behave accordingly. Kids getting involved in gangs/theft/drugs do not do so because they don't have enough to eat, they do so because they see what others have in comparison and see no way of getting it themselves. That's reality, not your theory of government control. They get involved because it's just part of growing up in bad areas. For some it's like an adventure, where poor parenting and outside influence hasn't completely defined right from wrong. Most grow out of it. Do you just think this nonsense up without actually thinking about it? Everyone carries some level of envy in them, but they don't become criminals over it. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 19, 2023 20:02:21 GMT
What in your opinion caused the French revolution then? Only I thought it was the rich in France leading extravagant lives and wasting money while the poor scraped a living. The rich funding the war in America to become even richer and failing leaving the poor even poorer. Those poor looked to the rich to help when they had a poor crop. They had a poor crop and the rich refused to help. History. But perhaps not, Perhaps the revolution was because the poor lack a challenge they could fail at. Lol. I think the revolution had far more to do with incompetence , high-handedness, unfairness and repression than 'the wealth gap'. The elites in France became useless, dismissive and disinterested in anything but themselves. I didn't suggest that obstacles be constructed to keep the poor happy, but that meaning comes significantly from the challenge of overcoming obstacles that are real. Your subconscious knows when you have a fake trophy. Alienation comes from feeling you are living an unreal life, even if it is strewn with unreal obstacles. Typically, the elites hold their positions until they become incompetent so that the advantages they confer from their rule become obviously smaller than their cost. To summarise - be more like Trump and less like Trudeau It was traditional of the times that the lords and barons taking tithes from the peasants were also bound to keep aside reserves in case of shortages, in the lead up to the revolution there had been protests that the royalty had not fulfilled this role. The answer to the protests was violence, suppression and the locking up of thousands without any provision in the Bastille. I'm sure you are familiar with the storming of the Bastille. In a way you are right, the poor of France were never happier than when they shared a common purpose of guillotining those who had mocked and suppressed them. You should read the rising of Napoleon and why he was such a popular leader ruling almost all of Europe except Portugal. He was only beaten by the British who had a dedicated army (rather than mercenaries) highly trained and war hardened from Indian conquests. It would be interesting to see how your theory fits in with the history. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 19, 2023 20:07:33 GMT
Its reality. What you desire is not. People who fall too far behind the average feel disenfranchised and behave accordingly. Kids getting involved in gangs/theft/drugs do not do so because they don't have enough to eat, they do so because they see what others have in comparison and see no way of getting it themselves. That's reality, not your theory of government control. They get involved because it's just part of growing up in bad areas. For some it's like an adventure, where poor parenting and outside influence hasn't completely defined right from wrong. Most grow out of it. Do you just think this nonsense up without actually thinking about it? Everyone carries some level of envy in them, but they don't become criminals over it. That is part of the picture, but its no coincidence that more people like the "adventure" in hopeless areas than they do in hopeful ones. |
|
