Results 1 to 40 of 108

Thread: Authoritarians and Politics

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by consentingadult View Post
    I agree to a certain extent, but I am saying something different, because even in what you are saying, there is an implicit moral bias, preconceived concepts about what is right and wrong, that even you seem to take for granted: from an evolutionary POV, even people who advocate a non-competitive mode of living, are in fact, applying a competitive agenda. Even people who advocate non-violent ways of living, even pacifists, are trying to get the upper hand in life, whatever their rationalizations. To say it figuratively: in a world organized according to the principles of EIIs, it is the SLEs that get the short end of the stick.
    Gosh you come off as condescending (maybe try looking at the log in your own eye more). It's not a hidden bias. It's that I believe the competitive model actually doesn't work, and yes, is morally wrong because it lifts up the few and screws over the many. So yes, I want my view to win over the dog-eat-dog model because that model is stupid. I don't care about couching it in evolutionary terms in this context because doing so is more of the "excuse" about why we must only create dystopia.

    In the larger scheme of things, there is no such thing as right or wrong. The fact alone that High RWA people exist, proves that these people serve some biological evolutionary purpose. If they didn't, they wouldn't be there. And why is a Low RWA world where there is no competition and everyone has food on their plates, by implicit definition a better world than a High RWA world where 50% of the worlds capital is owned by a mere 1% of the worlds population?

    People talk about being WOKE nowadays. GTFOOF, 99.999% of the world's population is vast asleep.
    I don't care about your need to say everything is relative so we should carry on being useless. And great equivocation on the word "woke," which certainly doesn't refer to being "enlightened."

    Anyway a world in which the most people suffer the least in my view is always the morally superior world, though I would factor animals in as well. It's because suffering is actually real. I have suffered enough to understand why I wish it on no one.

    PS: Obviously this isn't worded precisely enough, as if I asked a genie for this world we'd all be in comas or something - you can't suffer when you're not conscious, etc.
    Last edited by marooned; 08-05-2020 at 06:19 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •