S
Sniffles
Guest
There's reform to accomplish liberal goals and there's also reform to accomplish conservative goals; the act of reform itself is neutral.
And what exactly are liberal goals, if I may ask?
There's reform to accomplish liberal goals and there's also reform to accomplish conservative goals; the act of reform itself is neutral.
And what exactly are liberal goals, if I may ask?
Intelligence is not the only thing that governs whether a person can gets 4 year degree. Being able to pay for it makes a big difference.Stick this in your pipe and smoke it.
I said it once, I'll say it again: gotta love manichean-style politics.
Ah, so you're a believer in absolute determinism. Alright, so if a person is biologically predetermined to a set of features and qualities that are likely to result in his success, why is it fair to reward them to the detriment of someone who committed no crime but to lose the genetic lottery?
For the record, the verdict is still out on the determinism vs. free will debate, with various fields of science coming to different conclusions, so it wouldn't make sense to structure a society on an unverifiable idea but rather the pragmatic approach would be to perfect the systems that we already use.
One needn't rely on science to come to the conclusion that free will is ultimately impossible. I do not necessarily believe that everything is predetermined, but I do believe that humans are not really in control of their own actions; whether it is a result of the structure of our brains, or some metaphysical concept about which I am currently unfamiliar, there must be something that governs our actions. You must realize that thoughts and desires come to you by no fault of your own, no? The only thing I do know is that people are substantively different than one another, and I cannot fairly judge another because I have not walked in his shoes.
I am not calling for a rejection of any particular system, but simply referencing the fact that judging a system based upon its unfairness is probably not the best way to go about it, since every system is inherently unfair.
One needn't rely on science to come to the conclusion that free will is ultimately impossible. I do not necessarily believe that everything is predetermined, but I do believe that humans are not really in control of their own actions; whether it is a result of the structure of our brains, or some metaphysical concept about which I am currently unfamiliar, there must be something that governs our actions. You must realize that thoughts and desires come to you by no fault of your own, no? The only thing I do know is that people are substantively different than one another, and I cannot fairly judge another because I have not walked in his shoes.
I am not calling for a rejection of any particular system, but simply referencing the fact that judging a system based upon its unfairness is probably not the best way to go about it, since every system is inherently unfair.
In Germany we have liberals, conservatives and socialists and while the first ones dropped beyond 5 % votes, the latter ones form the two biggest parties. How about the psychological mindset of people if you increase the spectrum ? Aint mindsets not bond after all to the very deterministic availiability of options ?
I thought that there was no life beyond the USA!
if you recall, Fascists were for societal reformation, and no one would call them liberal.
They vaguely seek to create a greater degree of egalitarianism, while also maintaining personal liberty.
Well, I think the point is that an high IQ make you more prone to questions traditionals view of life, and also more to think about society in a "progressive" way, and to be more innovative to challenge weakness of societies and to encourage reform built with reflection. At the same time, I observed that liberals are not the only group who have higher IQ than the average, it is even higher in libertarian circles where the average IQ is around 135. Globally, it seem that people with high IQ are mostly liberals and that conservatives and libertarians are minority. That does'nt mean that liberal are smarter, the meaning is: an high IQ make you easily prone to ask question, but less easily to answer with accuracy. That's all.
Fascists are not conservatives.
Contradiction. If you force people to be equal, you supress their personal liberty. And economic liberties are indiviual liberties, if you want to promote individual liberties, you must promote the economics ones.
there are several liberal fascists factions. Che Guevara being a perfect exampleHow are they not? They are radical, revolutionary conservatives.
No, capitalism denies economic liberty to the largest segment of the population. If someone is starving or impoverished, they are a slave to their poverty.
there are several liberal fascists factions. Che Guevara being a perfect example
no it doesn't. they have the opportunity in a capitalist society to move from any social class to another. liberty =/= entitlement to a good lifestyle
yes it does. a communist society has a dictator who controls and distributes resources.Communism =/= Fascism
it doesn't happen very often because most people are not ambitious. most people just want to fit in, be accepted and follow a path already beaten out for them.As Marm and others have said, the myth of upward mobility is untrue, especially in American society. It happens, but not very often.
How are they not? They are radical, revolutionary conservatives.
No, capitalism denies economic liberty to the largest segment of the population. If someone is starving or impoverished, they are a slave to their poverty.
yes it does. a communist society has a dictator who controls and distributes resources.
"revolutionary" and "conservative". Contradiction. Fascists are actually very progessive and want to reform society deeply, it's even more true for Nazis. And the both movements are of a socialist origin.