Political & socio-economic nerd-rage thread. page 44

[Grok]

Word games.

No, egalitarianism as in equality of rights, that is natural rights[1].

You probably need to study up some more on the political philosophy of John Locke[2].

Socialism, on the other hand, is a fallacy[3] which tries to achieve equality of wealth through the means of violent force, using guns, spears, slavery, whatever. Socialism does nothing more than create an elitist upper 1% class which rules over the starving masses. The ruling 1% political class gets the starving masses fighting over each other to tax the people who can afford three bowls of gruel each day to redistribute the wealth to the people who can only afford one bowl of gruel each day. Go visit N. Korea and tell Kim Jong-Un that you are a socialist man and he will throw you in a prison camp where you can contemplate how awesome socialism/statism is.

[1] Natural and legal rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[2] John Locke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[3] Fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[kenn]

No, egalitarianism as in equality of rights, that is natural rights[1].

You probably need to study up some more on the political philosophy of John Locke[2].

Socialism, on the other hand, is a fallacy[3] which tries to achieve equality of wealth through the means of violent force, using guns, spears, slavery, whatever. Socialism does nothing more than create an elitist upper 1% class which rules over the starving masses. The ruling 1% political class gets the starving masses fighting over each other to tax the people who can afford three bowls of gruel each day to redistribute the wealth to the people who can only afford one bowl of gruel each day. Go visit N. Korea and tell Kim Jong-Un that you are a socialist man and he will throw you in a prison camp where you can contemplate how awesome socialism/statism is.

[1] Natural and legal rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[2] John Locke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[3] Fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He believes in positive rights, not negative rights

[magicmerl]

Go visit N. Korea and tell Kim Jong-Un that you are a socialist man and he will throw you in a prison camp where you can contemplate how awesome socialism/statism is.

North Korea is a dictatorship.

Are you equating communism with socialism? The two are not the same.

I would point to Sweden as an example of a socialist country that should be aspired to.

[kenn]

North Korea is a dictatorship.

Are you equating communism with socialism? The two are not the same.

I would point to Sweden as an example of a socialist country that should be aspired to.

A homogeneous society that relies on another country to ensure it's neutrality?

[j3nn]

A) Not everyone contributed equally -- children, the elderly, the infirm.

But were they allowed to leave and not be part of the tribe? Could they opt out? Makes a huge difference.

B) While we're on the guessing game about what they did. They'd probably ostracize someone who tried to grab too much. And that Grok cried "class warfare".

Grab too much from within the tribe, from someone's dwelling, from their grass hut, from someone else's labor, OR grabbed "too much" from nature outside of the parameters of the tribe?

Again, there's a big difference.

[Rojo]

A homogeneous society that relies on another country to ensure it's neutrality?

Ah, there we go again. Socialism won't work if there's lazy blacks about.

[Rojo]

But were they allowed to leave and not be part of the tribe? Could they opt out? Makes a huge difference.

Yes. But I'm sure nobody did. It would mean certain death. Humans are social creatures.

Grab too much from within the tribe, from someone's dwelling, from their grass hut, from someone else's labor, OR grabbed "too much" from nature outside of the parameters of the tribe?

Again, there's a big difference.

At this point we should probably all stop playing anthropologist -- they're the ones who've studied this. Trying to make ancient human cultures "fit" looking backwards can make for some big assumptive mistakes.

[magicmerl]

Grab too much from within the tribe, from someone's dwelling, from their grass hut, from someone else's labor, OR grabbed "too much" from nature outside of the parameters of the tribe?

Again, there's a big difference.

I read that as being social structures that apply primarily within the tribe.

I think that there's lots of evidence that ancestral peoples did a moderately terrible job of ecological preservation, and were largely from taking 'too much' from the environment because of a lack of ability, not ancient wisdom and ethics. Witness the extinction of the megafauna in both australia and the americas when people first entered those lands.

[Rojo]

You probably need to study up some more on the political philosophy of John Locke[2].

Have you even read the books I've read! Hilarious.

Socialism, on the other hand, is a fallacy[3] which tries to achieve equality of wealth through the means of violent force, using guns, spears, slavery, whatever.

Like when the socialists extinquished Native Americans and enslaved Africa?

Man, you're are spun so hard, your kids are going to be born dizzy.

[kenn]

Ah, there we go again. Socialism won't work if there's lazy blacks about.

Quick to claim racism I see