I have a lot of quarrels that I shall quell here and now.
Quote:
It is obvious that you acknowledge the necessity of change, yet ironically you deny it. You suggest a reinforcement of current socio-economic situations by promoting you are actually multiplying the problem. A more cut-throat society would create more fierce competition which would actually lead to more violence, more crime. Crime is not only caused by a necessity to survive, so you are not really addressing the whole problem. Also, sure you got to where you are now, but does the method justify the means? For me, the means is much more important, for you must live with the ramifications of your actions.
I don't deny change, I implore the greater achievements of the extreme ideals of a Utopian society, which those who will not benefit, will consider it as Dystopian.
In great books such as Brave New World or 1984, their society works to the advantage of the individual. No questions asked, you know your role from day one. No confusions. Though, I believe I would like society to give people the oppurtunity, if they are strong enough of mind to take it, to advance up through the wrungs of the socio-economic ladder.
The ramifications of actions, such as this, where the end is, indeed, more important than the means, do not matter. It is the end goal that inspires the actions. If done illegally, then by all means, the perpetrator deserves to be punished. I'm not talking about killing to get to the top. I'm talking about doing what it takes. If you have to step on people and use people to do it, then so be it. Murder goes to far.
Quote:
One, I have the highest respect for all life. No matter, if you think it is flawed, it is still a gift from Nature. You may see it as a flaw, but I like to think that every life is precious, and who are we to be the arbritators of life? Can we actually be so impietous to actually try to reign power in realms beyond our own? The taint of murder is not something I desire on my hands. You ask about suffering too, but that is a part of life. No matter how hard you try to will eventually suffer. This is not a bad thing. From it we gain knowledge of ourselves, and learn to understand and appreciate what we do have. Even though they might suffer themselves, and cause trouble on the part of others, they are still humans. Also they can major impacts on the world. Terry Fox for one. Though he was not born physically disable, because of cancer I think it was, he became physically disabled, yet he raised much awareness about cancer research.
I have a high respect for life as well, because of that, I believe that some should simply not be forced to live through life because of their defections. You say every life is precious, and who are you to decide? Some people simply don't have lives. Some people simply are told what to do, where to go, how to behave. I don't encourage this. I encourage people to fight and think for themselves in order to better their situation. The poor of this world, the majority, simply take their situation, the one they are born into, and do not fight for it. This is where their character flaws, which are innate characteristics which are born to them, block them on true progression. Terry Fox was merely an advocate for Cancer Research. Without him, we still would have just as much research and cancer treatment. He was just a way to the means, had he never been born, we still would have investigated it, as it has become a major problem with health.
Quote:
Though I agree that social conditions do force them into these jobs, I do not believe in exploiting people. Again this returns to a moral issue. Exploiting someone for your own needs, is a selfish act, and I believe that the mere fact you use people shows a lack of morals on the manipulator's own part. In the end I think they are weak, for they cannot accomplish what they want without using people.
Exploitation is a natural human action. We exploit eachother for emotional security, humour, or other reasons. Dating is a co-exploitation both people share, using eachother to create joy for themselves. All actions are completely self-motivated. Philanthropists do what they do because it makes them feel good. If they didn't feel good about it, they wouldn't do it. It's a selfish reason in the end. Without clever manipulation, you can't reach the top of the ladder.
Quote:
Yet people who manipulate others are any better? You are kidding right. To exploit people is too leech off of them, to make them do your own work. Also before you mentioned that if someone arises higher out of their social situation then they are a good example, yet here you say it not possible. Also it not someone's fault to be born into a socio-economic situation. They were born into it. If you have a chance to gain more in life, why shouldn't anyone else? Just because people get a head start in the race of life does not mean they will win. Returning to another point, you have no right to say someone should not be born. Interesting fact is that even though the poor do generate more population, it is the wealthy, the minority that produces the majority of the pollution. You are trying to convince me their advantages?
People take advantage of the system all the time. They mooch because of people's weakness to give out what others have worked hard for. I, for one, am glad of the social welfare changes made in 1996, allowing only five years of federal aid to a family and after than, then it is decided that family is unfit to get anymore help because they are unable to help themselves. TANF is a great and new revolutionary idea to help people force themselves to take temporary help, knowing it will end. It forces them to attempt to get better jobs, to go and try to move up. Those who fail, they are simply unfit for advancement. They are not strong enough to adapt the way they need to for their success and survival.
You're right in saying that just because someone was given a headstart, that doesn't mean they will win. I agree, someone can surpass them from the bottom wrung, however, they have to work harder for it. It's not their fault they were born into their plight, but because they are, they must be forced to work out of it or remain in it and slowly let themselves spoil and rot.
Quote:
Personalities can change with the wind. People are able to overcome their situations and rise above it. You talk about strenght, but according to Darwin, not the strongest survives, it is the most adapted.
You see life as a hedonistic and materialistic view, which limits yourself to see the true potentials in humans. Also you completely ignore morality, and the fact of higher powers. You present an interesting ideas, yet ones that are just amplifications of our phallocentric Western culture. You put a value on the large, tall, and strong. You are stuck in a priapism. It would appear you are trying to advocate progression, yet it is still bound to our current power structures. Soceity is already, for the majority, like this. Not in the extreme case as you, but the apathy and hedonism of the current situation is causing the deterioration of humanity. The way I see it, is Social Darwinism will actually catalyze our end.
Personalities aren't easy to change. They don't change like the wind. Personality is as genetic as hair color, but it also relies on child welfare. The core elements are imprinted with genetic code, but they are skewed with upbringing. Someone with a bad temper can learn to control it through childhood or never learn how and have it always flaring up everytime something goes wrong. Also, i believe you used the word priapism completely wrong. Actually, I'm positive you did.
The way I see it, humans are adaptable creatures. We are the most adaptable creatures to walk this planet. Our adaptations are our strengths. However, some people aren't strong enough to adapt to their situation and they fail and falter all through their lives. I for one have no care for these people.
Quote:
Let me get this straight you are gay and you are a Nazi also? Thats a smurfing oximoron, thats like someone saying they support Marxism and Nazism. You know how many homosexuals that son of a killed? Men who were just like you, who's only mistake according to your ideology was being gay.
I would like to state that I am not a Nazi. I am not anti-semetic. I don't believe that gays, jews, blacks, mexicans, and people of different races should be killed, tortured, etc. I don't believe in torture.
You're confusing what I am talking about. I agreed with Hitler's intentions on making a Utopian society by ridding all of those who were deemed unfit. It just so happens that the people he deemed unfit were the exact people who had been in success of their country during that time. He merely had a skewed perception of reality when he viewed who and what he saw as fit. He was insane after-all.
Quote:
You think in a elitist society they would give you guys rights? Do you like being descriminated and humilated by homophobes? Do you enjoy being considered below a group of people because of your sexuality? I dought you do, so dont promote hate against other people hypocrite. Why dont you live in a elitist society like the one they have in Iran, where homosexuals are hanged and stoned to death and sometimes put to slavery. Would you of enjoyed that if you were ether born into a lower class or because of your sexuality?
An elitist society does not discriminate to the straight, white male majority. You simply don't understand the term elitism. An elitist society favors those who can work the system and climb the ladder, despite what position they were born into. Iran is not an elitist society. I'll leave that statement at that. They are a dystopia, a tyranny. It is completely different.
Quote:
GREAT you descriminate people for who they are . How nice especially since you have the rainbow in your sig which symbolizes diversity.
My sig is merely for humor purposes. As is part of this debate.
let me acknowledge that I am not against helping people. I will help the people I care about, because as a person, i am unable to simply not care about anyone else. It's strangers that I don't care for and why should I. Leviathan, you spoke of higher power, or something more divine, and I say that you can't incorporate your beliefs into society. You harp about morals, and I have morals. The very structure of society that I suggest is based on nothing but a strong foundation in the moralistic implications that the society presents. Work, or die. Achieve victory or fail. Black and white. These are our options.
Why should I pay taxes so the unfit can live five more years without having to work. I know some people work and get out of this, and I acknowledge those people as the people who make my society work. It is the people who abuse systems and remain lazy, but all the while complain about their place in society.
Out of desperation, vagrants turn to drugs for their problems. It is the socio-economic status that causes crime, and it is the fault of the system that pretends to favor the poor. Social Welfare should be non-existent. A Government is there to provide the rules and regulations that one must follow in order to attain success all the while protecting the rights of those that follow it. It is not here to fund those individuals who can't or simply refuse to help themselves. Those people are merely unfit individuals and deserve their fate.
Quote:
I don't understand. First you think it's "wrung", but then, greedily, you think it's "rung"?
You, my good friend, are nothing short of a genious.
