Jump to content

This Aint Packers Talk v69


CWood21

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Uffdaswede said:

Are you being funny or have you really been trained to think that an elite class must rule over a class they, by fiat, adjudicate to be stupid?

And then, of course, it follows than anyone who disagrees with you is stupid. 

This one is acting up, fellas. Time to execute procedure 214. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

This one is acting up, fellas. Time to execute procedure 214. 

Yeah that was mean on my part. 

People are young so they can learn.

Liberty is given up so easily and with the best of good intentions. 

Edited by Uffdaswede
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Uffdaswede said:

Are you being funny or have you really been trained to think that an elite class must rule over a class they, by fiat, adjudicate to be stupid?

And then, of course, it follows than anyone who disagrees with you is stupid. 

Let’s take all other human characteristics out of it ( greed, looking out for their own best interests, etc) You don’t believe an ‘elite class’ ( I don’t like the term, so when I say it I mean our smarter individuals) would do a better job in creating laws/guidelines/ boundaries than the general public?

Human beings aren’t very bright, and people do need to be guided

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said:

Let’s take all other human characteristics out of it ( greed, looking out for their own best interests, etc) You don’t believe an ‘elite class’ ( I don’t like the term, so when I say it I mean our smarter individuals) would do a better job in creating laws/guidelines/ boundaries than the general public?

Human beings aren’t very bright, and people do need to be guided

Ask North Korea how that goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said:

Let’s take all other human characteristics out of it ( greed, looking out for their own best interests, etc) You don’t believe an ‘elite class’ ( I don’t like the term, so when I say it I mean our smarter individuals) would do a better job in creating laws/guidelines/ boundaries than the general public?

Human beings aren’t very bright, and people do need to be guided

What if we told you that you're definitely not in the decision-making group? Same enthusiasm?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

What if we told you that you're definitely not in the decision-making group? Same enthusiasm?

Oh, I def am not in the elite class, nor am I in the most intelligent group.

But generally speaking , people need to be watched over because they’re not bright.

There are millions of people who believe one race is better than others . Those people are stupid. And I can go on and on but no , idt the general public is smart enough to run a functioning society

 

People have extremely self-destructive and other primitive behaviors that are negatives on society. ( smoking for instance) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cakeshoppe said:

The justification for paternalism for me is this: humans are simply not as rational as we'd like to think. The human brain has flaws in the way it processes things that have been very persistent over time, and people have developed ways of exploiting those deficiencies quite well. Judging risk is one of those things that humans are near universally very bad at, as is judging probability. In areas like these I definitely think there's a justified interest for the state to step in and limit the free free choice of its citizens with regard to behaviors harmful to themselves. Gambling, drug use, seat belts, etc. are all ares that fall under that umbrella. Propaganda is a more controversial area but one that I think is worth at least having a conversation about. Now, I think the state can do a lot better than just sanctioning end users on these matters but I do think it's justified in acting to prevent people from harming themselves by these means.

This is a very difficult subject for me. On one hand I’m like let people do as they please if they’re not affecting others but on the other hand if I’m looking to make society better, sometimes it’s important to protect people from themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said:

Oh, I def am not in the elite class, nor am I in the most intelligent group.

But generally speaking , people need to be watched over because they’re not bright.

There are millions of people who believe one race is better than others . Those people are stupid. And I can go on and on but no , idt the general public is smart enough to run a functioning society

 

People have extremely self-destructive and other primitive behaviors that are negatives on society. ( smoking for instance) 

The general public is running a functioning society. At least that's the premise of a democratic republic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

The general public is running a functioning society. At least that's the premise of a democratic republic.

Do you really believe that? I’m not attacking you , I’m just curious . Idt the public runs much of anything . And as much as we tout that we’re a Democratic Republic,  we’re highly influenced by the ‘ elite class ‘  There’s millions of people who vote against their own interest each cycle because they’ve been lied to and manipulated for so long.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rainmaker90 said:

Do you really believe that? I’m not attacking you , I’m just curious . Idt the public runs much of anything . And as much as we tout that we’re a Democratic Republic,  we’re highly influenced by the ‘ elite class ‘  There’s millions of people who vote against their own interest each cycle because they’ve been lied to and manipulated for so long.

Thats why I added the caveat. Money in politics is obviously a massive problem that's not easily dealt with. It's better than a monarchy or a communist government for the people living under it. Giving said "elite class" even more power and influence? No thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

Thats why I added the caveat. Money in politics is obviously a massive problem that's not easily dealt with. It's better than a monarchy or a communist government for the people living under it. Giving said "elite class" even more power and influence? No thanks.

I understand. You can’t get rid of greed and such which is why the public needs ‘ power ‘.

 

My basic point is that most people need to be saved from themselves and if there were no greed (lol) a specific group of people making the laws/norms/ guidelines would be better for society 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Uffdaswede said:

Are you being funny or have you really been trained to think that an elite class must rule over a class they, by fiat, adjudicate to be stupid?

And then, of course, it follows than anyone who disagrees with you is stupid. 

It's not about an "elite class". Those in charge of creating laws aren't any less susceptible to these issues than any other subjects of the laws. I support a society formed in a way to minimize hierarchical structures where any class has power over another, and I don't identify the state with any class in particular, though it is certainly in the present case.It's the very nature of a state that it's role should be to protect its subjects. That's just what a state is. An agreement between people to forgo what might be individually advantageous for the sake of collective security. If that's not what a state is, then I see no reason to respect a state's authority. With that in mind, it seems natural that some policies should be paternalistic in nature. Bu like I said, I think simply outlawing something because it is bad for the user is the crudest form of paternalism and should be avoided when there are other ways of achieving the goal of harm prevention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When societies work well, the power the decision makers have should be coupled with an equal responsibility to those for whom they make decisions. This applies whether it is government or business. Once you lose the responsibility part of the equation, things stop working well and your decision makers slide either to communism, fascism or worst of all, a sociopathic viewpoint that discards the rights of people as an unneccesary encumbrance. 

Society is just too complex to do without a big group of decision makers,  they are an essential cog in societies machine, so we need them to be, well, somewhat ethical.

something approaching the old Quaker beliefs does the job (see below). I'm not talking religion here, just the guidelines for people and especially the decision makers. 

What are the Quaker values?

Quaker Testimonies
  • Peace – Creating peace in ourselves and our community.
  • Integrity – Being true to oneself and one's values and honest with others.
  • Community – Respecting and valuing every person's place in our lives.
  • Equality – Respecting every person's right to fairness and respect.
  • Stewardship – Valuing the gifts we have been given.
Edited by OneTwoSixFive
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Rainmaker90 said:

Do you really believe that? I’m not attacking you , I’m just curious . Idt the public runs much of anything . And as much as we tout that we’re a Democratic Republic,  we’re highly influenced by the ‘ elite class ‘  There’s millions of people who vote against their own interest each cycle because they’ve been lied to and manipulated for so long.

This is true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:
  • Peace – Creating peace in ourselves and our community.
  • Integrity – Being true to oneself and one's values and honest with others.
  • Community – Respecting and valuing every person's place in our lives.
  • Equality – Respecting every person's right to fairness and respect.
  • Stewardship – Valuing the gifts we have been given.

We could use more of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...