Politically correct people stay out of my threads

Page 6 of 11 [ 162 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 11 Next

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 511

20 Feb 2007, 1:41 am

Personally, the greed of sweatshop owners disgusts me. It would take so little expenditure on the part of the companies who own sweatshops to dramatically improve the lives of the workers.

When we are so clearly and overtly exploitative, what are they to think? What message does this send regarding western culture in general, and America in specific?

snake321
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

20 Feb 2007, 1:44 am

AlexandertheSolitary wrote:

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

AlexandertheSolitary wrote:

People already do make decisions as to how they act; laws are needed because human nature includes a capacity for evil. The Liberal Party in Australia is paradoxically by and large the more conservative of the two main parties (it is of course more complicated than this) the other being Labor (spelt in American English fashion unlike British equivalent Labour). The term "small l liberal" is sometimes used for someone more or less left leaning on many issues regardless of party affiliation, possibly though not necessarily what you intend. Or are you speaking specifically civil libertarianism, the defence of the rights of the individual? Just provided I do not confuse what you speak of with libertinism (or is that in fact what you mean?)

I do not argue for the abolishment of laws. Few do. I only knew that the Liberal party is not left wing. I am not a left winger. I am more like a libertarian in the American sense, and one that is more liable to lean right. I do mean libertarian, I was referring more towards the right wing party the Liberal party, partially because I did not know how to phrase everything as I knew that libertarian is a stolen term, and that liberal is a stolen term.

Quote:

Would you put some limitations/regulations on a system of sweatshops as an economic stage?

What kind of restrictions or limitations? We are talking about the third world here. They can put their own limits at their own risk or benefit. Really, I do not think that it will be a permanent thing. Wages will rise as demands for labor change with the changing of the economic structure and as growth continues. The sweatshop will die out naturally. As for regulation, the question really ends up being when are we paternalistic and forcing our beliefs upon that of the worker and employer combo and when are we dealing with an actual issue. I will tend more towards an idea that less does more and would prefer to inform people than coerce.

Who said anything about coercion? Either you believe that people will honour principles if reasoned to, concede some sanctions are necessary, or do not care. Injustices in the world have been going on for some time, and are hardly going to be sorted out solely by market forces, the product of relations between actual human beings with free will and a capacity for good and evil, as well as for deceiving and being deceived. Your lassez faire capitalism is really fully as naively optimistic about human nature as orthodox Marxist socialism or Buddhism, the latter at least having a more insightful diagnosis of the human problem as opposed to its solution than either of the two alternatives.

Apologies, I am getting too aggressive; I do not intend to hurt anyone's feelings, particularly as I have shared aspects of some such views in the past; the imprint of past impressions is part of who I am today. (Now snake321 can accuse me with justice of political correctness, on the basis of this last paragraph at least!)

Why do you think I'm gonna bite your head off? You've said nothing to anger me.... I would question what marxism and buddhism have in common though? I'm not really buddhist but I share alot of common beliefs with buddhism (and to a degree the other religions including atheism). If anything western society needs discipline very badly, our nation is starving for and crying out for discipline (Mtv seems to be a factor here).

snake321
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

20 Feb 2007, 1:53 am

I think we could use tougher laws, I'm not saying chopping fingers off for stealing or anything but I do think some laws need to be enforced alittle tougher..... And some laws they should lighten up on, like marijuana or prostitution (the non-exploitative kind)
I think that old people should be made to take a quarter annually test on their eye-site, hearing, mental alertness, and driving ability in order to keep their liscense too. My grampa had gotten lost in his own neighborhood, and most of them don't seem to be able to keep up with the speed limits. I'd also say that if they get into an accident theyr liable to have their liscense indefinately suspended (until they can pass another driver's test). I dunno why that came to mind lol, I'm on the rings of saturn right now;) 420 has been good to me.
But I'll be around again I hafta get to bed because I have work tommarrow.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

20 Feb 2007, 8:41 am

Hazelwudi wrote:

I am not going to say that there is no greed, but greed is why they go in there, and typically the conditions do end up being better than these people would get otherwise. Really, I think that our paternalism, even in sweatshops can end up being bad as workers do end up being hurt if we do try to put in higher standards because of the fact that trade-offs still end up being made. The job of the company is to hire on labor to create stuff for us to buy, that is what sweatshops often do.

I did not consider a sweatshop an embassy, I still do not. I consider a step better than whatever hole they previously had to deal with as shown by their tendency to work there rather than work where they previously did. If you care about the workers then you can give them your money but not enslaving people is all I really need to see. I mean heck, all nations essentially built up from sweatshops anyway. I suppose it all falls down to personal beliefs and all though.

AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

20 Feb 2007, 10:13 pm

Quote:

We indeed need discipline very badly indeed. I only meant that I felt that Buddhism (which I have my self been influenced by in the past) and Marxism, (to some of the objectives of which I have at times been sympathetic) while sharing the fact of having a reasonably clear assessment of some of the problems (different views and emphases of course) of the human condition, also share an overly optimistic view of human nature in their prescriptions for two quite different solutions. Then again Christianity (my current faith) could be accused of optimism, or conversely of an unhealthy pessimism at times. I am happy to debate all three and more at length. The specific apology above was directed more at your nemesis Awesomelyglorious (obviously neither a Buddhist nor a Marxist) whose lassez-faire anarchocapitalist (unusual to associate anarchism with the right though it might be) libertarianism, with its assumption that such evils as sweatshops would be cured by market forces alone. My apology to you (snake321), if I actually made a proper one, was earlier after I had just accused you of being a fanatic and felt that perhaps this was a trifle harsh. And Awesomelyglorious, I am aware that Buddhism is not a system of economics. I was talking philosophies. And of course you are not going to bite my head off, snake321. You are too far away for starters (I am jesting of course).

_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."

Last edited by AlexandertheSolitary on 21 Feb 2007, 1:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

20 Feb 2007, 10:20 pm

snake321 wrote:

What is this about Saturn? It sounds intriguing. And is there a non-exploitative form of prostitution? I thought that the elderly generally did have to have tests to retain their licence, thoughn obviously laws can differ between nations and even states. Are not the young, upon the whole, a greater danger traffic accident wise?

_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."

snake321
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

20 Feb 2007, 10:53 pm

AlexandertheSolitary wrote:

snake321 wrote:

The saturn thing was a euphenism i use for smoking weed (I guess I have to be blunt) because in Roman mythology Saturn was the god of euphoria. Non-exploitative prostitution is willing prostitution, where the woman offers the service on her own will as opposed to being forcibly trafficked. Young people who drink and drive and speed alot are also a hazard but the law doesn't ignore them being a hazard either. I haven't heard of them ever tightening up on people driving too far UNDER the speed limit.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

20 Feb 2007, 10:54 pm

AlexandertheSolitary wrote:

Anarcho capitalism???? Dude, I actually said governments CAN be useful and SHOULD be used. I just did not trust them to always do the right thing. My statement does not even conform with what I would consider minarchism for goodness sakes but rather just generic market liberalism! I mean, I can see it possible as being construed as minarchist as most, however, I did give the state more leeway than most minarchists would normally call for. Capitalism tends to be viewed as an economic system, libertarianism/classical liberalism is the philosophical system that is seen as being behind capitalism and promoting it so you cannot blame me for being confused on the inclusion of buddhism.

I do though think that sweatshops for the most part can be cured with market forces alone though as growth will create more jobs and opportunities that will draw people away from less productive sweatshop labor, and if one just considers labor to be a market, as I believe most economists in general do, that argument makes perfect sense. Heck, I even remember reading on Yahoo news that in certain areas of China that tighter labor markets are forcing companies to improve wages whereas imposed labor market restrictions tend to fail because the laborers and the factory owners find them harmful. Now of course, I am perhaps holding the rule of law to both be good and to be constant, however, seriously, economic growth will lead to a greater demand for workers which will bid up prices somewhat and thus cause higher wages. Considering that about 47% of American Economic Association members surveyed in 2005 believed that federal minimum wages should be abolished which is an acceptance of the idea that wages will naturally improve on the labor market, I really would not consider my ideas that radical.

AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

21 Feb 2007, 12:36 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

AlexandertheSolitary wrote:

Sorry! I shall just call you Awesomelyglorious from here on in without trying to define your exact political, philosophical or economic position. And I did not blame you; I was trying to clarify what I had said. I never meant to imply any overall similarity between your position, Buddhism and Marxism, (they are about as different a set of philosophies as you can get) merely a naively optimistic view of human nature, and I regret saying that much; it is probably ill-considered and more to the point wrong. Is liberalism or liertarianism your preferred term?

_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."

AlexandertheSolitary
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 945
Location: Melbourne

21 Feb 2007, 12:46 am

snake321 wrote:

AlexandertheSolitary wrote:

snake321 wrote:

Are you sure you do not mean Liber Pater or Bacchus? (admittedly the latter is merely a Latinisation of Bacchos one of the many titles of the Greek equivalent Dionysos, though Liber Pater was indigenous to Italy). Though given the festival of Saturnalia was a time of general topsy-turvydom when slaves and masters could change places temporarily perhaps you are correct. I think he (Saturn) may originally have been a harvest god later identified on dubious grounds with the Greek Titan Kronos, father of Hestia (known as Vesta to the Romans) Demeter (Ceres) Hera (Juno) Poseidon (Neptunis) Hades (Pluto/Dis) and Zeus (Jupiter/Jovis). Kronos himself was frequently confused with Chronos (Time, tempus in Latin). I think a scythe or sickle was associated with Saturn Kronos and Chronos. I am willing to stand corrected.

_________________
You are like children playing in the market-place saying, "We piped for you and you would not dance, we wailed a dirge for you and you would not weep."

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

21 Feb 2007, 12:56 am

AlexandertheSolitary wrote:

No problem! I just don't like being misdiagnosed at least not on a grand scale, and I consider myself a thoughtful person so I would have to defend an idea that is attacked as untrue or absurd. I did not consider my view of mankind an extreme of optimism considering that I can be relatively cynical, I just think that governments can mess up in calculating the good of individuals while these individuals will be better at making their own decisions or at least should have the freedom to do so. I really don't go by those terms you give. Heck, I am more likely to call myself conservative given the type of political conditions in the US. This is no support of Republicans, who have acted in a manner against the conservation of American principles as many would recognize, but rather a recognition that American conservatism does serve my purposes to some extent, despite the many flaws going through it in all forms of policy(although, all political parties have flaws to be honest), and the term conservative falls more in mainstream thought than what I would otherwise be called. If you call me any true appellation for my political ideology then I would prefer libertarian though, the reason being that unless you clearly define liberalism as being classical, people confuse you with the other form of liberalism.

Scrapheap
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Nov 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,685
Location: Animal Farm

22 Feb 2007, 1:03 am

snake321 wrote:

Exactly what the heading said, if your concerned about political correctness stay the f**k out of my threads. I only want intelligent people to respond, people who care about truth, not lies designed to avoid offending oversensitive frail people.

The why don't you return to Intensitysquared??

_________________
All hail Comrade Napoleon!! !

OA_
Raven
Raven

Joined: 28 Jan 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 123
Location: Planet OA_

22 Feb 2007, 10:26 am

snake321 wrote:

Well what I'm hearing you say (please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you) is that one should use pc as a lie to fish stupid people in (like lets say for a campaign) and then once you've got their support, toss the pc crap aside and reveal to the idiots that you've lied to them. This may work, had it not been for the fact that if you come forward with lies, people will react, possibly violently.
Making people learn to get along and being able to call shots down the middle isn't political correctness, our culture thrives on ignorance, selfishness, greed, consumerism, and hostility, and above all, a lust for power and dominance. Making people evolve beyond that isn't totalitarian, it's merely standing up for what is right, and what is beneficial to our species. The absolute truth seems out of reach to most people, however, a large part of this is also due to propaganda fuelling the negative aspects of human geneticism. Nothing logically gives another human being the "god given right" to oppress or cause suffering to others whom are innocent. Right and wrong is absolute terms is that simple. People need to be guided, or possibly even put into think tanks, to aquire universal mentality. Once they've gained it they will be free for they will have answers that have eluded man for many eons. Then people can be able to live in peace, freedom (with responsible boundaries), equality, prosperity, and knowledge. Further people could work towards a better society, where people look out for eachother rather than looking out for themselves and oppressing one another. The answer to equality isn't political correctness, it's balance. It's finding that middle road. It's moving beyond social labels (except where one is actively discriminated for a biological, and hince, unavoidable difference, such as race, gender, or even nuero-diversity).

Your view, you're entitled, thanks for sharing.
My 'truth' of what determines freedom is slightly different to yours. I was not meaning 'abuse' people, as you so put it via pc, that was your interpretation, not my intention. I was asserting the view that those whom do use pc are not necessarily ignorant or sheep.
Cheers :-)

Davidufo
Deinonychus

Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 356
Location: London

22 Feb 2007, 11:20 am

I think that being 'PC' is not something to fear
(it is not a breach of your freedom of speech, ok)

What it is ... is showing other people on this planet (Earth) that you can show respect & tolerance

(two values held high by most religions)

Life is not a competition
:roll:

snake321
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

22 Feb 2007, 12:34 pm

Davidufo wrote:

Tolerance? Political Correctness is very intolerant of historically dominant groups such as whites, males, heterosexuals. Any scientifically or statistically prooven truth gets tossed right out the window so that they can tell a lie to avoid conflict. However, when denying the said truth infringes upon the livelyhood or rights of the white/male/heterosexual, it gets ignored.
Examples being that it's "politically incorrect" to acknowledge that females can be sexist or that blacks/browns can be racist. So if I'm beaten down or robbed for being white, I can't call it racism, it's just an assault. But in reality it IS racism.

snake321
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

22 Feb 2007, 12:39 pm

And your right, life shouldn't be a competition. So why are you trying to make it one? "Oh those evil conservatives" but you don't even realise (because you do not ***WANT*** to realise) that the liberal lable is just as intolerant of others. Your not a "free thinker" or "open minded" or "progressive" or "new age" or whatever you think you are by following political correctness, your just a sheep, furthermore the one thing you try to avoid being called, a biggot. I constantly hear the flame war between religious fanatics and pc-nutcases, both sides want to point the fingers at each other but neither side wants to acknowledge their own faults.

Page 6 of 11 [ 162 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 11 Next

Jump to:

Politically correct people stay out of my threads Post Reply New Topic

Politically correct people stay out of my threads