Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
First, he is wrong. Arguments against the letter of the law happen all the time. That is how a will be challenged for its constitutionality.Western society has chosen for itself the organization best suited to its purposes and one I might call legalistic. The limits of human rights and rightness are determined by a system of laws; such limits are very broad. People in the West have acquired considerable skill in using, interpreting, and manipulating law (though laws tend to be too complicated for an average person to understand without the help of an expert). Every conflict is solved according to the letter of the law and this is considered to be the ultimate solution.
If one is risen from a legal point of view, nothing more is required, nobody may mention that one could still not be right, and urge self-restraint or a renunciation of these rights, call for sacrifice and selfless risk: this would simply sound absurd. Voluntary self-restraint is almost unheard of: everybody strives toward further expansion to the extreme limit of the legal frames. (An oil company is legally blameless when it buys up an invention of a new type of energy in order to prevent its use. A food product manufacturer is legally blameless when he poisons his produce to make it last longer: after all, people are free not to purchase it.)
I have spent all my life under a Communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society based on the letter of the law and never reaching any higher fails to take full advantage of the full range of human possibilities. The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relationships, this creates an atmosphere of spiritual mediocrity that paralyzes man's noblest impulses.
There is no "left" in the US. If there were then your poor people would not be treated so badly. A broken leg would not bankrupt you and you would not need a gun to go out and buy a pint of milk.
You frothers have no idea what socialism is and cling to Cold War rhetoric in order to fill the gap in your knowledge. None of you have mentioned Venezuela yet either.
That is true. Capitalism is implicit in the "pursuit of happiness" from the founders, or the "property" from John Locke.Americans are culturally indoctrinated with the capitalism. I don't know how this can be denied. It's only common sense.
They're a collective of a few greedy a-hole billionaire brainwashers and a giant brainwashed collective of dupes, all to pander to the rich, dupe.Rush talked about this on his show today....he pointed out that the left has an agenda...they want to use the government to control other people, while conservatives just want to be left alone.....the drive to control other people has put the left in control of the media, the education system, hollywood....... and Conservatives act as individuals while they face collective action from the left....
Well put. That is the GOP's biggest problem! The rat bastards keep working as a bunch of individuals instead of one collective.
Socialism = Political Atheism, which allows people to walk away from Christian responsibility.
Socialism divides a nation into classes, based on the fact people throughout history blame their problems on "the rich". Even though Socialism has time and time again shown "the rich" are part of it, the Socialists still relentlessly tell everyone they fight "the rich". Most Socialist/Communist leaders are from wealthy families. The Socialists don't name "the rich" by name, unless they are found to contribute to patriotic causes. No matter what the facts are, their spokesmen say they fight "the rich"
The Socialist teaching of the Civil War and founding of America allows people to believe a fictional view of history, which is negative exaggerated. No one from history can defend themselves and set the record straight. This allows Socialist minions to walk away from patriotic duty and gives them a false sense of elevated intelligence. Americans don't have to realize the Socialist chapter is the worst time in our history, because they are given a fictional negative history. The only reason the Socialists talk about history is to control the voting of today.
Environmentalism = political control in the name of the planet.
People in Oklahoma said the Dust Bowl incident was caused by over-farming. People want to believe that the planet will punish humans for their sins. (when they are not making profits of the "damaging" business). Now, scientists say the Dust Bowl was caused by a natural cycle of El Nino.
Older people become more sensitive to weather, so older people swear it's hotter than before. "Global Warming"
Socialism is nothing more than a group of worthless goons trying to use psychology to win total control.
Pity you don't know the difference between an adjective and a noun.Conservatives do not want to be "left alone". They want to control every aspect of my life including who I can fuck and marry.You need to rethink this whine.
No...they don't.....it is the left that is doing this. The left wants to control what you eat, your healthcare, your retirement, how much water your toilet uses to flush...the left in Iceland is murdering people with down syndrome.........in order to get it out of their gene pool...
Have you seen the sexual commisars on college campuses lately....? It was the left wing under hitler that demanded more babies, it was the left in china that wanted less babies.....
if you think the left is going to leave you alone in how you have sex, after they control everything else...you really are delusional......
Why did Jefferson leave out property or change it to "happiness?"That is true. Capitalism is implicit in the "pursuit of happiness" from the founders, or the "property" from John Locke.Americans are culturally indoctrinated with the capitalism. I don't know how this can be denied. It's only common sense.
What ever that means. Maybe hitlers national socialist party?Socialism = Political Atheism, which allows people to walk away from Christian responsibility.
Socialism divides a nation into classes, based on the fact people throughout history blame their problems on "the rich". Even though Socialism has time and time again shown "the rich" are part of it, the Socialists still relentlessly tell everyone they fight "the rich". Most Socialist/Communist leaders are from wealthy families. The Socialists don't name "the rich" by name, unless they are found to contribute to patriotic causes. No matter what the facts are, their spokesmen say they fight "the rich"
The Socialist teaching of the Civil War and founding of America allows people to believe a fictional view of history, which is negative exaggerated. No one from history can defend themselves and set the record straight. This allows Socialist minions to walk away from patriotic duty and gives them a false sense of elevated intelligence. Americans don't have to realize the Socialist chapter is the worst time in our history, because they are given a fictional negative history. The only reason the Socialists talk about history is to control the voting of today.
Environmentalism = political control in the name of the planet.
People in Oklahoma said the Dust Bowl incident was caused by over-farming. People want to believe that the planet will punish humans for their sins. (when they are not making profits of the "damaging" business). Now, scientists say the Dust Bowl was caused by a natural cycle of El Nino.
Older people become more sensitive to weather, so older people swear it's hotter than before. "Global Warming"
Socialism is nothing more than a group of worthless goons trying to use psychology to win total control.
Just as with NATIONAL Socialism, humans grasp at false ideals when feeling helpless.
What ever that means. Maybe hitlers national socialist party?Socialism = Political Atheism, which allows people to walk away from Christian responsibility.
Socialism divides a nation into classes, based on the fact people throughout history blame their problems on "the rich". Even though Socialism has time and time again shown "the rich" are part of it, the Socialists still relentlessly tell everyone they fight "the rich". Most Socialist/Communist leaders are from wealthy families. The Socialists don't name "the rich" by name, unless they are found to contribute to patriotic causes. No matter what the facts are, their spokesmen say they fight "the rich"
The Socialist teaching of the Civil War and founding of America allows people to believe a fictional view of history, which is negative exaggerated. No one from history can defend themselves and set the record straight. This allows Socialist minions to walk away from patriotic duty and gives them a false sense of elevated intelligence. Americans don't have to realize the Socialist chapter is the worst time in our history, because they are given a fictional negative history. The only reason the Socialists talk about history is to control the voting of today.
Environmentalism = political control in the name of the planet.
People in Oklahoma said the Dust Bowl incident was caused by over-farming. People want to believe that the planet will punish humans for their sins. (when they are not making profits of the "damaging" business). Now, scientists say the Dust Bowl was caused by a natural cycle of El Nino.
Older people become more sensitive to weather, so older people swear it's hotter than before. "Global Warming"
Socialism is nothing more than a group of worthless goons trying to use psychology to win total control.
Just as with NATIONAL Socialism, humans grasp at false ideals when feeling helpless.
Thats a stretch.I doubt that the founders had Amazon and Walmart in mind when they framed the constitution.That is true. Capitalism is implicit in the "pursuit of happiness" from the founders, or the "property" from John Locke.Americans are culturally indoctrinated with the capitalism. I don't know how this can be denied. It's only common sense.
Do you understand the origins of the "pursuit of happiness"? I can assure you it has nothing in common with capitalism.Capitalism is implicit in the "pursuit of happiness" from the founders, or the "property" from John Locke.
There needs to be a balance doesnt there. The Walmarts will crush smaller traders using their buying power. They will sell things for less than cost until there is no competition.Very commendable but its a drop in the ocean set against the damage they cause.You have a very simplistic world view. I understand perfectly the point being made.Speaking of shallow thinking but you are really confused about this, aren't you?
Profit is the reward for taking risk and doing something. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with your convoluted shit about "dominance", whatever the hell that means in this context.
Profit is a good thing because it drives entrepreneurship, innovation, jobs and wealth.
Socialism is a bad thing because it creates perpetual poverty and rewards non productivity.
You don't create prosperity by taking money away from those that earn it and giving it to those that didn't earn a damn thing, do you? Well maybe in your convoluted uneducated greedy world but not in the real world.
Much of modern capitalism is about might is right. Buying up competitors and so on. It benefits nobody apart from the corporations. In fact it has a negative influence on the economy,society and the individual.
Never mind that Corporate charity grew in 2016 which helps our economy, society and individuals.
Seems you are believing the lies.
Charitable Giving Statistics | NPTrust
That's the same thing they said when our town got a Wal-Mart.
Our city has prospered because of them and they caused no damage.
In the uk the supermarkets are squeezing the dairy farmers because they sell milk as a loss leader and they want their suppliers to share their pain. The result is that more and more dairy farmers are giving it up. I have a friend whose family has farmed the same land for several generations. He will be the last of them as his kids dont fancy it.
When they are all gone they will have to import milk or,more likely, there will be megafarms where the cows are doped up by Monsanto to produce frankenstein milk in quantity. So for the sake of a penny on a pint of milk a whole industry,a way of life is gone.
Its nice to have cheap milk but there is still a cost.
First, he is wrong. Arguments against the letter of the law happen all the time. That is how a will be challenged for its constitutionality.Western society has chosen for itself the organization best suited to its purposes and one I might call legalistic. The limits of human rights and rightness are determined by a system of laws; such limits are very broad. People in the West have acquired considerable skill in using, interpreting, and manipulating law (though laws tend to be too complicated for an average person to understand without the help of an expert). Every conflict is solved according to the letter of the law and this is considered to be the ultimate solution.
If one is risen from a legal point of view, nothing more is required, nobody may mention that one could still not be right, and urge self-restraint or a renunciation of these rights, call for sacrifice and selfless risk: this would simply sound absurd. Voluntary self-restraint is almost unheard of: everybody strives toward further expansion to the extreme limit of the legal frames. (An oil company is legally blameless when it buys up an invention of a new type of energy in order to prevent its use. A food product manufacturer is legally blameless when he poisons his produce to make it last longer: after all, people are free not to purchase it.)
I have spent all my life under a Communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society based on the letter of the law and never reaching any higher fails to take full advantage of the full range of human possibilities. The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relationships, this creates an atmosphere of spiritual mediocrity that paralyzes man's noblest impulses.
Secondly, the "higher" state of human existence is impossible. That is exact opposite of equal protection under the law. The letter of the law does not guaranty equal outcome, nor should it.
He is not wrong. You simply don't understand what he is saying.First, he is wrong. Arguments against the letter of the law happen all the time. That is how a will be challenged for its constitutionality.
You seem to be ethically challenged.Secondly, the "higher" state of human existence is impossible. That is exact opposite of equal protection under the law. The letter of the law does not guaranty equal outcome, nor should it.
Do you understand the origins of the "pursuit of happiness"? I can assure you it has nothing in common with capitalism.Capitalism is implicit in the "pursuit of happiness" from the founders, or the "property" from John Locke.
Same difference, communism is just evolved socialismThat's communism, superdupe.Socialism is fucked up from the start because it forces people into its incestuous collective
Evolved through violent revolution every time. Less liable to happen to it than to savage capitalism is...socialism (FAIR CAPITALISM) is actually a cure for communist revolution.Same difference, communism is just evolved socialismThat's communism, superdupe.Socialism is fucked up from the start because it forces people into its incestuous collective
Fucking taint lolol.There is no "left" in the US. If there were then your poor people would not be treated so badly. A broken leg would not bankrupt you and you would not need a gun to go out and buy a pint of milk.
You frothers have no idea what socialism is and cling to Cold War rhetoric in order to fill the gap in your knowledge. None of you have mentioned Venezuela yet either.
Na, no socialist government has lived long termEvolved through violent revolution every time. Less liable to happen than savage capitalism is...socialism (FAIR CAPITALISM) is actually a cure for communist revolution.Same difference, communism is just evolved socialismThat's communism, superdupe.Socialism is fucked up from the start because it forces people into its incestuous collective
You are just lumping everything you dont like under the banner of socialism. Thats dishonest.Glad you brought that up Tammy, because Crony Capitalism is a form of socialism. Essentially it is socialism for the wealthy elites and serfdom for the rest of us. Agreed?Your assertions are simplistic and cliched.What is your definition? I will accept it.
Bill Shankly put it best.
Its how we build communities.
The idiots that talk about "sharing" are the welfare queens that don't want to pay their part of the bills and wants to get somebody else to pay for them. That is their idea of sharing. That is the reason why socialism never works.
Socialism is a greedy little scheme by the unproductive to use the force of government to get somebody else to pays their bills. It destroys economies because it is never viable in the long run. It always fails when the wealth that was created under capitalism runs out. .
The biggest "welfare queens" are the large corporations. What caused the last recession ? Corporate greed did, and it will cause the next one as well.
