The problem of Capitalism

Humans are just animals, also. Clearly, nothing you've said in this statement is logically consistent.

On the other hand, if you concede that you can own animals, you most also concede that you can own humans (just another type of animal). I have yet to hear a single person disputing this fact.

 

I’ve shown how and why land is not comparable to a human. You know that I have done this.

 

Let's see....

(1). Crank: "All are free to make rational choices" (if they are living in the 1st world....)
(2). Me: "All people are NOT equally free to make rational choices (no matter where they live).

You say my proposition (2) equates to "only some people can make rational choices"; whereas (2) equates more accurately to "only some people are free to make rational* choices",

See the difference? Those words, namely, "are free", are significant in that sentence.

 

Nope. Unlike yourself, I'm not an advocate of slavery. Of course, slavery can certainly exist, as can murder and rape. I simply don't agree that either of the three are just.

 

So only some people are free to make rational choices?

 

Comment: def. (verb): to explain or interpret something

You say "commenting on" is "a subtle form of" promoting a specific ideology. Nonsense.

See how your ideology is altering the meaning of words... to suit your ideology. You want the public to remain divided by ideology and prejudice. You don't want the illumination of "explaining and interpreting" to be practiced in schools.

You are in effect saying an education institution is unable to "comment on" these things, in an unbiased fashion.

Refuted above.

Refuted above.

Refuted above.

...resulting in enduring prejudice, and the blind leading the blind...

Of course you have no idea....

You don't understand Wells at all; and indeed neoliberal capitalism - with it's lack of planned sustainable resource management (aka "invisible hand....") - must almost by definition result in global catastrophe, owing to unmanaged resource depletion and profit-driven ecological poisoning, apart from the prospect of ideological warfare.

 

1) maybe, maybe not. either way, that's DEMOCRACY. besides, what kind of outrageously capitalist ivory tower dweller wastes precious resources on first world social engineering while the world starves?

2) I've been on the other side of the fight over religion in public schools, so cannot speak for the religious.

3) What in hell does that have to do with the power of education? Are you conceding? To a socialist?

 

In so far as any of us - given the human condition, ie, the anxiety-causing conflict between the conscious, searching-for-knowledge ego, and unconscious instinct - are "free" to make "rational choices", then indeed it will appear that only some people are free to make rational choices, in any given point of time.

But that is not the same as saying some people will never be free to make rational choices, eg, education itself can change the degree of freedom to make rational choices (hence my debate re ideology and education with crank).

See the problems arising from the human condition (which no other creatures face?)

 

I'm not seeing what you're describing. How does this support the violation of the person and/or property of your fellow man?

 

Oh puh-leeze. Just get off your lazy, spoiled and coddled First World arse and get over your 'issues'. If war torn, starved, beaten, and thoroughly PTSD'd refugees can turn their fortunes around in a single generation, anyone can.

 

….the blind leading the blind, with prejudice precluding sensible debate; haven't you noticed the state of our democracies lately?

The solution to that requires a WTO instituted to facilitate prosperous development in all nations, obviously.
("America First" is the last policy that will enable elimination of 3rd world starvation).

In any case, there is only one "god"/reality. The education task is to increase our understanding of what this means. (Article 18 of the UNUDHR hasn't quite grasped this point).
[Even Richard Dawkins is "in awe" of the universe ie, he's a 'believer', he just doesn't express it in those terms].

The power of education - to eliminate ignorance, prejudice AND to create the new macroeconomics required to engender universal sustainable prosperity, at a time when the planet's ecological limits demand alternative systems of production and distribution.

 

Do you know what fascism is?

 

1) the poor state of our democracies is a direct result of far too much coddling. The very thing you're advocating for more of. What we need is a good dose of starvation - to remind us that demanding anything more than the tools of survival and the liberty to use them, is outrageously greedy.

2) no, the solution is for people like you and I to stop hogging all the resources.

3) education's purpose is academics - period. the learning of facts and figures in order to equip the adult for practical function. ie, to learn the skills needed to provide for him/herself.

4) this 'universal sustainable prosperity' you speak of .. do you understand what that will actually mean? If you think it means the rest of the world will come up and meet you at the top, you're delusional - with respect. the only way such a thing could ever happen is if First Worlders reduce their consumption to that of the Third Worlder. GO! Hurry up, things aren't getting any better for the starving masses! What's that? You don't want to give up your luxuries? Your exclusive use home, your aircon, your car, your smartphones? your yearly vacations?

 

It's very possible you're talking to a fascist.

 

If you are not seeing what I am describing, in the sense that you don't understand what I am saying, then obviously we cannot proceed.

Can you zero in on any particular point in my post?

Note: Prof. Jeremy Griffith warns that an examination of issues such as the anxiety-causing (inner psychic) conflict between the searching-for-knowledge conscious ego and unconscious instinct will be too confronting for many at first...in fact the whole human race is confronted.

...and perhaps crank's reaction above...."get off your lazy ass" illustrates this point.

Btw crank, why did Trump's brother fail to manage it? Failed to make the "rational choice", despite the fact that the very first most powerful impulse is to stay alive?

"What a Chimera is man! What a novelty, a monster, a chaos, a contradiction, a prodigy! Judge of all things, an imbecile worm; depository of truth, and sewer of error and doubt; the glory and refuse of the universe.” B. Pascal.

 

Who knows. All I know is that the arguments are wafer thin. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

I haven't the first clue what you're talking about. I'm not American (and not male, so you can stop calling me 'he').

 

Meet who at the top? The guy with 10 dodge vipers in his garage, and gold-plated taps in the bathroom?

In any case, a global economy powered by the sun, wind, pumped-hydro and (if required) nuclear, will be infinitely richer than today's economy.

 

I like your attempt to push First World 'guilt' onto just that guy. That was funny and cute!

Sadly, no banana. We're ALL living way too rich. Even the very poorest First Worlder hogs about 10 times the resources used by a Third Worlder. More probably, given how fat some of them are.

PS: I have no issues with people living as well as they they see fit to do .. but I'm not demanding someone else fix things so that I can carry on with my First World life.

 

You are the one can't read

 

You are being silly now. You don't like what i wrote, i do understand that. However, being silly is different. Do franchise owners live on minimum wage?

 

"Just that guy" was presented by me an example of the incredible waste and privilege of many in the 1st world. I assumed you would be capable of understanding that.

You rubbish the idea of universal sustainable prosperity, claiming we 1st world-ers will have to drastically alter our life styles - which implies we in the 1st world are all placing equal claims on resources, which is nonsense.

Universal sustainable prosperity is achievable, with free green energy (soon technically possible, provided invisible hand 'free'-market, neoliberalism is vastly curtailed toward public sector intervention), with necessary provision of public housing and public transport.

Addressesd above: the homeless in the 1st world certainly do not; your figures need a fact check.
But yes, we (who are 'well-off') do - and in fact are required by our stupid neoliberal system - to over-consume, much of it junk, while junk advertising execs grow rich. The Australian government is cutting taxes in an effort to "avoid a recession" - it wants people to spend ….on any kind of junk, just so long as they spend.

It's called the consumer society.

Translation: you don't mind people growing obscenely rich (eg owning 10 Dodge Vipers) while other are homeless.

Combined with the fact you don't want prejudice-eradicating education in schools, your stance (world view) is either fraudulent (designed to maintain privilege) or ignorant of the human condition (as described in an earlier post).

Btw, Fred Trump jr. became an alcoholic (and suffered a heart-attack) at age 48.

So much for your simplistic assertion that all are free to make "rational choices".

 

Says the guy who avoids debate, by simply claiming "I'm not seeing what you are describing".
[Though I acknowledge your qualifier "possible"]

Which part of this can you "not see as describing"?:

"But that is not the same as saying some people will never be free to make rational choices, eg, education itself can change the degree of freedom to make rational choices (hence my debate re ideology and education with crank)"



.

 

Yes you do. You favor legalized stealing of people's rights to liberty by rich, greedy, privileged parasites.

What if it is your right to liberty that they own?

Some people here on this board, like me, don't believe that people's rights to life and liberty can rightly be other people's private property. Other people on this board -- like you -- believe that forcibly recovering one's right to life or liberty from someone who claims to own it -- may even legally own it -- is "stealing."

 

The community rightly chooses those who will be responsible for carrying out its mandates.