Thread: The world I would love to live in.

...............

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sONfxPCTU0

I didn't even have to watch. I know this by heart. My favorite line that nobody ever gets.

Originally Posted by gugi

One of them would be the right to property when that property happens to be other human beings. Abuse and exploitation of others has long historical precedent, but our modern society has largely moved away from it.

An example would be nice. Otherwise your statement here could mean anything. Who's claiming a right to property? And what property? What other human beings are you referring to? Abuse and exploitation does have a long historical precedent, but what evidence can you provide that modern society has moved away from it. How are you defining "Abuse"? "Exploitation"? "Modern society"? What do you mean by "Moved away from it"?

Originally Posted by gugi

When you put words in my mouth and proceed to reject them, I'm done. Obviously you can have a very spirited discussion between you and yourself alone, so I'd just leave you to it even if you chose to use me as a prop.

Putting words in your mouth? Or calling you out for making a false argument? And then you make another false argument, appeal to pity. Yes, maybe we are done, since you seem unwilling to have an honest discussion.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

...............

Know where you're going with that, I'm also thinking more along these lines as well....

Originally Posted by honedright

An example would be nice. Otherwise your statement here could mean anything. Who's claiming a right to property? And what property? What other human beings are you referring to?

Really? I thought I pointed it - it's written in the original US Constitution, and it was discussed at length at the adoption, as I do not doubt you are well aware. Here it is verbatim with emphasis:

which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons

And the lengths to which for example a big-name founding fathers went to defend his right to use his slaves even in the states where it was illegal with the argument that he's there only for the job - those are also well documented.

Originally Posted by honedright

Abuse and exploitation does have a long historical precedent, but what evidence can you provide that modern society has moved away from it. How are you defining "Abuse"? "Exploitation"? "Modern society"? What do you mean by "Moved away from it"?

Well the above mentioned text was repealed after a bloody war in which the side that won happened to be on the progressive (read it as advancing, i.e. moving forward, hate to say it but it seems I have to) side of history. It's still illegal to own people, it is also illegal to rape them (it wasn't if they were your property, slaves or wife), it is illegal to kill them. Reading of the laws pertaining to slaves is very illuminating about 'abuse' and 'exploitation'.

Originally Posted by honedright

Putting words in your mouth? Or calling you out for making a false argument? And then you make another false argument, appeal to pity. Yes, maybe we are done, since you seem unwilling to have an honest discussion.

Nope just I didn't think I have to chew your food either, and you don't strike me as a person who would defend slavery, or say pedophilia (another well established ancient practice, which is fallen out of fashion), so I don't understand what is the argument you are making here?
Instead of looking up at the paragraph I explicitly pointed you to you stated that I am rejecting "ideas merely because of age, and regardless of merit" which I didn't do at all. That is indeed putting words in my mouth.

..........

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lfk-JTdQ_0I

Originally Posted by gugi

Really? I thought I pointed it - it's written in the original US Constitution, and it was discussed at length at the adoption, as I do not doubt you are well aware. Here it is verbatim with emphasis:

And the lengths to which for example a big-name founding fathers went to defend his right to use his slaves even in the states where it was illegal with the argument that he's there only for the job - those are also well documented.


Well the above mentioned text was repealed after a bloody war in which the side that won happened to be on the progressive (read it as advancing, i.e. moving forward, hate to say it but it seems I have to) side of history. It's still illegal to own people, it is also illegal to rape them (it wasn't if they were your property, slaves or wife), it is illegal to kill them. Reading of the laws pertaining to slaves is very illuminating about 'abuse' and 'exploitation'.



Nope just I didn't think I have to chew your food either, and you don't strike me as a person who would defend slavery, or say pedophilia (another well established ancient practice, which is fallen out of fashion), so I don't understand what is the argument you are making here?
Instead of looking up at the paragraph I explicitly pointed you to you stated that I am rejecting "ideas merely because of age, and regardless of merit" which I didn't do at all. That is indeed putting words in my mouth.

Why the false assumptions and misleading statements? Chew my food for me? Defend slavery and pedophilia? Must you be so petty? And you did make an argument suggesting arrogance should those of the 18th century expect future generations to adopt 18th century rules. You did not specify what rules. Just because you also mentioned a paragraph from the Constitution as part of your post, it doesn't follow that said paragraph had anything to do with the mentioned rules. Just another example of the false logic you seem fond of using in your arguments.

And I thought the slavery issue in America was resolved over 150 years ago. Why are you letting it bother you today? If that is the only part of the Constitution that bothers you, you have nothing to worry about.

Gugi, I don't expect to change your mind, and you know you won't change mine. I was hoping to have a civil conversation with you where we could at least defend our positions, and agree to disagree. But you seem to me to be more interested in winning arguments rather than debating ideas.

Originally Posted by honedright

And I thought the slavery issue in America was resolved over 150 years ago. Why are you letting it bother you today? If that is the only part of the Constitution that bothers you, you have nothing to worry about.

It was an example of a pretty big part that it was dead wrong about. In response to your implication that whatever isn't in the constitution is "small details".
The slavery issue doesn't bother me, what bothers me is rewriting of history without regards to facts. I am also bothered by repeated accusations of false logic and false assumptions, without explaining what is false. But at this point I believe it is the result of you misunderstanding my posts - as evidence to it I would point the 'putting words in my mouth' I noted above.
With this level of communication breakdown I don't see a debate as feasible.

One thing I have always found ironic is the fantsy world of star trek. A world created by the west depicting a utopian society, which shows communism in all its idilic glory.

Funny isn't it that quite often even ideas with the best intentions at heart can be twisted by the minority, and the majority suffer because of it.

Unfortunately we all currently reside within an unsustainable existence. As a global civilization we're not taking any steps toward solving issues (overpopulation, pollution, nourishment etc.) that may keep us from extinction. This knowledge leads to fear which leads to strengthening our tribal nature along belief system lines (freedoms, etc.) ensuring our mutual demise. Without a fundamental change to the framework under which this world's population organizes itself none of the ideals stated above will ever become a true reality. Of course if the scope of your personal goals are narrowly focused to you and your surrounding area within your lifespan then you may be able survive quite comfortably. If you're hoping for a long term sustainable existence for all of the world's generations to come then major change needs to happen. Including the very definition of freedom and how we apply it's ideals.