|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Unjust Deserts - Gar Alperovitz & Lew Daly | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
well...I did just now look up your role model, Dr.Norman Bethune. Seems he was an ardent communist/socialist---married his wife and spent most of her inheritance on a grand tour of Europe...then they divorced. I bet she was convinced he was nuts. He did champion the cause for the poor and often gave them free medical care, however.
Seems he wrote a poem for the Spanish Civil War in 1937:
quote: Seems he saw equality as the only true freedom. I doubt that I would have the guts to follow Norman Bethune...much less Jesus. Besides...obedience is better than sacrifice...im just waiting for God to make me obedient enough to live a life of sacrifice. When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
I'll quote it again:
...obedience is better than sacrifice...quote:Obedience and sacrifice are the same thing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
We would never get governments to follow Jesus mandates,however. Why not? Governments already facilitates the creation of massive amounts of wealth. And they facilitate the accumulation of that wealth into the hands of a few people. Certainly a single man, such as Bill Gates, could not defend his wealth against all the millions of people who might contest him for it in a world without government and the protection of property rights it creates through its monopoly on force. So, your position that governments have no role to play in determining who gets what is dead: the primary function of governments (past and present) is to determine who gets what and to protect that determination through use of force.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Its all well and good to quote Matthew and yes, I do believe that Jesus said it...but do you realistically expect someone--anyone--to sell everything they have and walk around helping people? Without government welfare? Health care? a car to drive? Without getting paid anything? Lets be practical here...
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
We would never get governments to follow Jesus mandates,however.
[qs=Jon]Why not?When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
We would never get governments to follow Jesus mandates,however.
Jon writes:
First of all, elected officials are never elected due to the will of an overwhelming majority of the people. Second, money and power are responsible for many of the elected officials...not simple people power---and we all know the frequent deadlocks in Congress and the Senate. My point is, any change encounters some resistance and a change of the order of magnitude suggested in this book would quite likely encounter resistance to the point of violence. Special interests would seek to protect the stuff they have---(look at the occupy wall street movements as a small tip of the ice burg. ) The moral argument is basically sound, yet will require a voluntary cooperation of the people. Aint nobody gonna start redistributing stuff on a massive scale that wont likely get shot in so doing. Why not?When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Aint nobody gonna start redistributing stuff on a massive scale that wont likely get shot in so doing.
Except world governments, who, as I've said, have a monopoly on things like shooting folk.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Jon writes: This gets back to guns. Americans own far and away more guns than any other nation on earth. They won't let them be taken away---not all of them, at any rate---and even if our military did try and enforce law on its own citizens, these folks would not obey peacefully. In addition, much of our military is made up of working class citizens who likely wouldnt go against their own people. Of all of the "Arab Springs" and uprisings globally---none would hold a candle to the raw outrage and energy of the home bred folk of rural America. To sum it up: No government would ever tame the wild, rebellious, and eternally free and feisty spirit of the Americans. Except world governments, who, as I've said, have a monopoly on things like shooting folk.When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
This gets back to guns. Americans own far and away more guns than any other nation on earth. They won't let them be taken away---not all of them, at any rate---and even if our military did try and enforce law on its own citizens, these folks would not obey peacefully. In addition, much of our military is made up of working class citizens who likely wouldnt go against their own people. Of all of the "Arab Springs" and uprisings globally---none would hold a candle to the raw outrage and energy of the home bred folk of rural America. To sum it up: No government would ever tame the wild, rebellious, and eternally free and feisty spirit of the Americans. Where did you pull this from, Phat? Do you have any evidence for this nonsense?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
The question is: Does Jesus expect it?
Its all well and good to quote Matthew and yes, I do believe that Jesus said it...but do you realistically expect someone--anyone--to sell everything they have and walk around helping people?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
I obviously have no evidence for how the American people would behave. I do know the mindset of many people, however and I do know that they would resist a world government. In addition, it is a fact that Americans own far more guns than any other urban or rural population.
Do you see any reason why we would obey such a government? (Like the comical notion that it would actually give us what we want?) When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
That's a myth. ... the wild, rebellious, and eternally free and feisty spirit of the Americans. People don't fight for privilege. They buy it - and they pay others to protect it for them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
ringo writes: Thus, in any future scenario involving a world government bent on redistribution of "stuff", there would be an army bought and paid for by the wealthy (who own the most stuff) and there would be an uprising of the masses who---in America at least---own much less stuff than do the wealthy yet far more stuff than the average global citizen. A paid army versus citizens holding on to what they have. People don't fight for privilege. They buy it - and they pay others to protect it for them. When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, it means just what I choose it to meannothing more nor less.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
Yes.
... there would be an army bought and paid for by the wealthy... Phat writes:
No. They'd clamour for more police protection but very few of them would actually do anything. Your average "feisty" American gun-owner might shoot at somebody taking his stuff - and kill his own children in the process - but you'll never see an "uprising of the masses".
... and there would be an uprising of the masses who---in America at least---own much less stuff than do the wealthy yet far more stuff than the average global citizen. Phat writes:
Who said anything about a world government?
... in any future scenario involving a world government ...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3991 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 6.9
|
Phat writes: Thus, in any future scenario involving a world government bent on redistribution of "stuff", there would be an army bought and paid for by the wealthy (who own the most stuff) and there would be an uprising of the masses who---in America at least---own much less stuff than do the wealthy yet far more stuff than the average global citizen. A paid army versus citizens holding on to what they have. During the past few decades, the wealthy have accomplished one of the greatest redistributions of stuff ever. The feisty Americans who lost the most cheered them on."If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024