The struggle the USA faces in accepting kindness for all

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 828
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

The struggle the USA faces in accepting kindness for all

Post by -1- » Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:22 pm

“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

“Society will develop a new kind of servitude which covers the surface of society with a network of complicated rules, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate. It does not tyrannise but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
There is a problem. Americans see socialism only as it had been viewed during the times of communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. This is evil to the Americans. Say "socialism" and they will invariably think of poverty, slavery, shut up or you will be sent to the Gulag, people disappearing, political tortures, individualism abolished, we all march to the same beat, May Day parades, carrying larger-than-life pacards of Stalin, Lenin, Marx and Engels, drab clothing that don't fit well, poor nutrition, poverty, socialized medicare, laziness, total loss of individual enterprise, total loss of reward for striving to do well, atheism, Darwinism, etc. etc. etc.

I think Americans have a hard, very hard time of getting rid of this image, and seeing socialism form from a different angle: "We produce a lot, we have a lot to give, so why not give to those who don't deserve it, by work or by purchasing power, but need it; they are humans too." This is the spirit developing in advanced industrial countries, and advanced democracies. They are examples that show that democracy, capitalism and socialism can be blended, without causing harm or destruction or failure to the system.

In Canada, UK, Germany, and all other European countries, save for the Balkans, wealth is immense; they don't mind welferizing their nations when there are no jobs, for they recognize that joblessness is not an individual's fault, but a force of the economic reality creates it. Why punish those who can't get a job by subjecting them to extreme poverty? In America, that's an immediate and well-accepted way of dealing with people. Nobody even questions the process. This is natural to Americans, to detest and despise those with no jobs, and to allow them to drift their lives into disarray, desperation and defeat. In Europe, in Canada, governments and the population do see and accept that socialized medicare does lead to a healthy nation with no worries about their health and footing the bill, instead of what Americans believe, that socialized medicare destroys the medical system and undermines the American way of life, which is a dog-eat-dog world, you survive or perish.

Then they have the audacity to deny the force of Darwinist evolution.

Anywhoooo... enough said. I wanted to point out only one thing: that Americans apply a certain equivocation, by equating socialism of old to socialism of new. And this is a mistake they make.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6295
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The struggle the USA faces in accepting kindness for all

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:33 pm

Should we give a fuck what Americans 'think'? Where does this collective narcissism come from?

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 2857
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: right here

Post by henry quirk » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 pm

"why not give to those who don't deserve it...they are humans too"

Indeed, if you or him or her want to give your own resources to folks you deem as 'undeserving' but in need, then: you should do exactly that.

My standards being somewhat different, I'll assist folks who I deem 'deserving'.

That is: you discharge yourself as you see fit and I'll do the same.

If we work it this way, we -- you and me -- ought not have any problems between us, right?

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 828
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re:

Post by -1- » Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:47 pm

henry quirk wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 pm
"why not give to those who don't deserve it...they are humans too"

Indeed, if you or him or her want to give your own resources to folks you deem as 'undeserving' but in need, then: you should do exactly that.

My standards being somewhat different, I'll assist folks who I deem 'deserving'.

That is: you discharge yourself as you see fit and I'll do the same.

If we work it this way, we -- you and me -- ought not have any problems between us, right?
Between us, no. Because the way you posed the post, we are both in the "have". So neither of us will depend on the other to give to survive.

But if there are many who give to those whom they deem deserving, and there are few, too few who want to give to those who are not deserving but in need, then many people potentially perish.

This is where socialism kicks in: tax everyone of too much excess income, and help the weak and incapable and undeserving survive.

Americans are dead set against that. Maybe Europeans are, too, but their governments think that helping the undeserving needy is a good idea.

There may be considerations of vote harvesting in this policy, I admit. But if one waits just one generation under the American system, then per definition the vote generation by accepting socialism won't work. Because, obviously, if the weak, undeserving and needy can't eat, they die, without producing offspring.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 828
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: The struggle the USA faces in accepting kindness for all

Post by -1- » Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:52 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:33 pm
Should we give a fuck what Americans 'think'? Where does this collective narcissism come from?
The first question I can't answer.

Your second question is answered by the immense success America has enjoyed in its capitalist make up. There were never mass starvations, mass exodus of people due to any reason, never have there been a war against invaders, and WWII ensured that America would be the industrial powerhouse for the globe for a long time to come.

Americans, in my opinion, attribute all their success not to the fact that they had had great natural resources, including arable land, and minerals, a physical distance from great wars. Instead, they attribute their success to their fiercely capitalist system. It is true, I won't deny it, that fierce capitalism creates wealth and power. But they somehow dismiss what other leading industrialist countries realize, that is, that the welfare system does not damage their economy.

This is not to say that Americans don't appreciate their natural resources and their land. Please, they do. They love their country.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6295
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Re:

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:55 pm

-1- wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:47 pm
henry quirk wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:20 pm
"why not give to those who don't deserve it...they are humans too"

Indeed, if you or him or her want to give your own resources to folks you deem as 'undeserving' but in need, then: you should do exactly that.

My standards being somewhat different, I'll assist folks who I deem 'deserving'.

That is: you discharge yourself as you see fit and I'll do the same.

If we work it this way, we -- you and me -- ought not have any problems between us, right?
Between us, no. Because the way you posed the post, we are both in the "have". So neither of us will depend on the other to give to survive.

But if there are many who give to those whom they deem deserving, and there are few, too few who want to give to those who are not deserving but in need, then many people potentially perish.

This is where socialism kicks in: tax everyone of too much excess income, and help the weak and incapable and undeserving survive.

Americans are dead set against that. Maybe Europeans are, too, but their governments think that helping the undeserving needy is a good idea.

There may be considerations of vote harvesting in this policy, I admit. But if one waits just one generation under the American system, then per definition the vote generation by accepting socialism won't work. Because, obviously, if the weak, undeserving and needy can't eat, they die, without producing offspring.
So who gets to decide who is 'deserving'? Yanks would rather have bajillions spent on ever more sophisticated ways to murder non Yanks than to help their own population, mainly because they hate each other almost as much as they hate 'foreign assholes'.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 828
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: Re:

Post by -1- » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:18 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:55 pm
So who gets to decide who is 'deserving'? Yanks would rather have bajillions spent on ever more sophisticated ways to murder non Yanks than to help their own population, mainly because they hate each other almost as much as they hate 'foreign assholes'.
If I read Henry's post correctly, then it's a personal matter of deciding who is deserving and who is not. In socialized capitalist countries they give to the needy, regardless of who deserves it and who does not -- effectively removing the question to be answered and removing the concept of "deserving" or "not deserving".

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 2857
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: right here

Post by henry quirk » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:40 pm

"it's a personal matter of deciding who is deserving and who is not"

Yep. My resources, my assessments; your resources, your assessments.

Seems fair to me.

#

"if the weak, undeserving and needy can't eat, they die, without producing offspring"

And this is a 'bad' thing, yes?

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6295
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Re:

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:48 pm

-1- wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:18 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:55 pm
So who gets to decide who is 'deserving'? Yanks would rather have bajillions spent on ever more sophisticated ways to murder non Yanks than to help their own population, mainly because they hate each other almost as much as they hate 'foreign assholes'.
If I read Henry's post correctly, then it's a personal matter of deciding who is deserving and who is not. In socialized capitalist countries they give to the needy, regardless of who deserves it and who does not -- effectively removing the question to be answered and removing the concept of "deserving" or "not deserving".
Henry's a fascist fuck. He doesn't seem to understand that humans have always lived in societies, or 'communities' (Henry's most hated word). If he prefers to go it alone in the jungle then he's welcome to do that. The trouble with yanks is that EVERYTHING is about money. I think you will find that money had little or nothing to do with any of the greatest achievements and breakthroughs (those events that happen now and then that drag the grey masses kicking and screaming into a pleasanter existence) of a select few human beings. No individual OWNS any of those things. Humans have the ability to end poverty and starvation, but the short-sighted and selfish morons out there can't stand the thought of THEIR MONEY going towards what they consider to be 'lesser' human beings (those with little money) being able to live with some dignity. Actually it's the very rich who are generally the most worthless and obnoxious of humans. They might give their token money to 'charity' (which is invariably stolen by other rich scamming scumbags) but on the whole they tend to be cunts of the highest order, with no taste and a compulsion to flaunt it and rub everyone else's noses in their crassness.
Last edited by vegetariantaxidermy on Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 2857
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: right here

"Henry's a fascist fuck"

Post by henry quirk » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:50 pm

I love you too, Veg.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6295
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The struggle the USA faces in accepting kindness for all

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:12 pm

It's not even really a matter of altruism. Intelligent people understand that ANY one of us can fall on hard times. Even rich bastards can lose all their money. Normal, decent people don't like to see beggars and starving children on the streets, so they don't begrudge their taxes going towards ensuring that they don't have to be assaulted with this sight every time they leave their house. Of course there are those who enjoy that sight because it confirms in their tiny minds that they are a superior kind of human, 'winners' rather than 'losers' like those pathetic creatures they might allow to rummage through their rubbish now and then.

Impenitent
Posts: 1702
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: The struggle the USA faces in accepting kindness for all

Post by Impenitent » Fri Jan 19, 2018 11:40 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:33 pm
Should we give a fuck what Americans 'think'? Where does this collective narcissism come from?
where did it come from? 1945

-Imp

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6295
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The struggle the USA faces in accepting kindness for all

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:19 am

I don't even need to say anything :roll:

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 2857
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: right here

Post by henry quirk » Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:29 am

For me: it's not about 'money', Veg...it's about what 'money' represents, which is 'me working'.

I work to keep me and mine sheltered and fed and defended; I don't work to feed, shelter, and defend folks who can do it for themselves but won't, or those who do need a hand but expect to live lavishly on my efforts.

You and folks like you wallow in envy over the rich man's wealth, while folks like me don't give a flip about the rich man...his wealth neither aids or impedes me so 'why' should I give a flip?

I'm sorry there are all these deficients around needin' to be takien care of, but I didn't sire 'em, I don't love 'em, and they can't have the benefits of my time and energy (those belong to my family).

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6295
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The struggle the USA faces in accepting kindness for all

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Sat Jan 20, 2018 2:12 am

Totally wrong on every count. Nothing I write seems to register with you. And of course it could only be about 'envy' of rich people. I couldn't give a flying fuck if someone has a lot of money. They just happen to often be cunts, which is often how they got rich in the first place. And you can't have rich people without poorer people. What a mean-spirited, shallow and selfish attitude you have. Too stupid to see that your taxes raise the standard of living and general well-being of the entire country. Your 'system' is unworkable. Go back to the law of the jungle that you crave, and you will find there is a lot MORE interference in YOUR life and nothing to stop anyone who's a bit stronger than you from taking everything you own.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests