Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

Socrates · 2004-09-02 19:20:13

Actually no, Socialism is not really what I had in mind (although a certain amount of welfare statism would be nice). What I'm looking for is a direct democracy similar to Athens with more people allowed to vote. I'm also curious about where you've "seen" socialism. If you mean the Soviet Union's "socialism" that isn't socialism @$$hole it's COMMUNISM, get a history book.

Cobra Commander · 2004-09-02 19:28:28

Actually no, Socialism is not really what I had in mind (although a certain amount of welfare statism would be nice). What I'm looking for is a direct democracy similar to Athens with more people allowed to vote.

Fair enough.

I totally disagree with the entire premise, but arguing about such things is what we do here.

Still, that's hardly imaginative, if novelty or "progressivism" is the goal.

Socrates · 2004-09-02 19:32:48

I never said novel was the goal. Of course you win on the progressive one but still I think that if people are more involed in government a more humanitarian world (or solar) view would develop

Cobra Commander · 2004-09-03 05:22:55

I'm also curious about where you've "seen" socialism. If you mean the Soviet Union's "socialism" that isn't socialism @$$hole it's COMMUNISM, get a history book.

Getting a little rattled are we?

I'm quite aware of the distinction. Socialism exists to varying degrees in Europe, Canada and even the good old US of A. The entire premise of what you refer to as "welfare statism" is flawed, in essence stealing from one for the benefit of another. We hardly need government for that sort of thing. ??? Socialism tends to lead to a demeaning of personal responsibility, in addition to the obvious high taxation and bloated social spending. Such states quickly find themselves in decline.

I think that if people are more involed in government a more humanitarian world (or solar) view would develop

Based on what, out of curiosity. If a system of government was going to change basic human nature wouldn't Communism have made a better showing than it did? By and large people seem to be selfish pricks and the responsible citizen who will put in a days work for the betterment of his fellow man... well, I've never met him. Isn't it reasonable to believe that under direct democracy (which has a host of other problems besides this) that everyone would try to secure the greatest benefit for themselves? Class conflict on a grand scale. Five wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

It sounds great, everyone has an equal voice, direct participation, fairness and brotherhood of all mankind. But when you put into practice, well, it's progressive all right. Like cancer.

Socrates · 2004-09-03 13:58:59

Has history escaped you Cobra Commander, welfare statism brought America out of the Great Depression. Besides you're assuming that most of the poor are people who would waste the money on frivoulous things (and some would) but it is my belief that the poor are generally good people and that if the state just gave them a leg up by creating new jobs so the unemployment will go down (my suggestion would be keeping our current jobs here by heavily taxing corporations that move overseas and use Fair Trade policies instead of "Free" Trade), giving them all the basic necessities of life by funding organizations that create them, (funded by the heavily taxed rich) and by regulating corporations to make sure that no more poor are created by repeats of Enron. So in other words if we just took a little bit of affluence out of the lives of millionaires then anyone can have food, clothing, a house, public transportation, and health care. So which would you rather have, billionaires who loses a hundred grand a year or people dying because nobody cared to help them when they needed it. Ironically taxes can increase without welfare statism (observe George H.W. Bush) and not a penny goes to the poor. It screams of selfishness when millionares won't use a tenth of a percent of their yearly savings to help those less fortunate than them.

Oh and as for direct democracy I think you are being pessimistic. If there was nobody who ever cared about anyone other than themselves then Jesus Christ wouldn't have had cured lepers or taught people to obey the Golden Rule, there would have been no abolition movement, Meip would have turned in the Frank family to the Gestapo, and the Quakers would have disbanded from the horrible persecution they faced because they believed that God was a kind and loving diety instead of a Hobbsian bigot and that people of different colors and creeds deserved to be treated like humans. The reason America has such a low voter turnout is because most people feel that thier vote won't make a difference (I'm sure Nader supporters in 2000 feel/felt that way and to a greater extent the Democrats (especially several black democrats in Florida whose votes weren't counted)). If the citizens of a nation replaced a collection of drones called Congress then there would be a larger feeling of power amongst the people and therefore more initiative to vote and therefore more concern about the issues (instead of just how much money they are taxed). Let's not forget America was founded upon Five wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner (and it not ending up as the sheep). If you read the Bill of Rights it is obviously about majority rule with MINORITY RIGHTS. In other words the wolves can't eat the sheep but they must find some other agreement. Maybe the sheep will have to learn to eat mice (which is what wolves will eat) but at least the sheep is not eaten. Of course this sounds impossible, but hey a high level mutual cooperation is what seperates humanity from the animals (that and corporate fraud :laugh: )

Cobra Commander · 2004-09-03 14:46:22

Has history escaped you Cobra Commander, welfare statism brought America out of the Great Depression.

World War II brought America out of the Great Depression. I know that's not what they're teaching in the public schools these days, but 'them's the facts' as they say.

So which would you rather have, billionaires who loses a hundred grand a year or people dying because nobody cared to help them when they needed it. Ironically taxes can increase without welfare statism (observe George H.W. Bush) and not a penny goes to the poor. It screams of selfishness when millionares won't use a tenth of a percent of their yearly savings to help those less fortunate than them.

Government spends far more than you imply and for all their handouts and subsidies they make no progress in solving the real problem. Instead they create dependents, a bloc of citizens beholden to them, brainwashed into believing and accepting that they can't do anything on their own. Meanwhile the nation is weakened economically and culturally. If a few billionaires want to help, wonderful. But trying to alleviate your own conscience with other peoples' money is the wrong answer.

As for direct democracy, if we were all good and noble it would work, as would communism, fascism or any number of other systems that sound wonderful to truly well-meaning people. Unfortunately, for every Jesus you find I can find a million Judas'.

Socrates · 2004-09-03 17:50:35

First of all Cobra Commander, I want to know what "the real problem is"

Of course you may be right about my statistics (after all 47.25% of all statistics are made up on the spot) but dern it it's the only solution I can think of to end poverty, which has plagued mankind since the end of the Stone Age.

And has it ever occured to you that the poor might not be made lazy by the government providing universal shelters, public transportation, and health care but that it might help greatly reduce the amount of poverty in the US and the world and help people aspire to get a job (again created by the government). Of course there will be some freeloaders but it will be worth it if there are a thousand decent people who get help for every freeloader that is able to engourd him or herself.

Oh and the socialist countries you name all have some of the highest GDP's in the world, hardly what I would call "declining". And Yes, unlike our "president" I know that Europe is not a country but the European Union, if it ever became an actual country, would have a higher GDP then the United States.

Besides if you really are afraid of the poor freeloading do what I call "the direct approach". Here's an example, my uncle (a libertarian) lives in New York City which has streets full of poor people all asking for some cash. So, how does he know which poor will actually spend money on food and which will spend it on crack, he takes the direct approach and offers to take them to a resturant and buys them food, if he's not in a hurry (and no I'm not making this up). So instead of giving them cash the government should give people what they need like job training programs, homeless shelters, home construction projects, universal health care (you know like the rest of the developed world has), and public transportation so people can get to thier jobs if they can't afford transportation. This will attract people who just need a little help and will turn-off freeloaders

I don't think that charity makes people more discouraged if there is anything that can be shown with the New Deal is that the knowledge that someone actually gives a $#!* will make people reach for the stars.

Oh and these governments that you think would work if everyone cooperated have nothing to do with cooperation. Fascism and Communism are all about a few people maintaining thier power.

Unfourtunatly for every Jesus you find I can find a million Judas'

You're forgeting two things

1) It only took one Jesus to change the world
2) Some people (including myself) believe that Judas might have been merely anti-Jewish propoganda.

Cobra Commander · 2004-09-03 18:19:05

Of course you may be right about my statistics (after all 47.25% of all statistics are made up on the spot) but dern it it's the only solution I can think of to end poverty, which has plagued mankind since the end of the Stone Age.

Hey, I can sympathize with you, it's frustrating. But if handing out money was the answer we'd have had this solved decades ago.

And has it ever occured to you that the poor might not be made lazy by the government providing universal shelters, public transportation, and health care but that it might help greatly reduce the amount of poverty in the US and the world and help people aspire to get a job (again created by the government).

It occurred to me years ago, but observation didn't bear it out.

So let me get this straight, government should give people housing, transportation, healthcare and some sort of government created "job?" Forgive my bluntness but that is absolutely absurd. See, in order for government to provide all these things it has to bring in revenue, which since government produces nothing means taxes. In order to pay taxes, someone has to be producing something which brings a profit. SO we end up with government punishing the producers by taking the fruits of their labor and using it to reward non-producers. That is recipe for economic disaster and eventually a whole lot of hungry people.

Oh and the socialist countries you name all have some of the highest GDP's in the world, hardly what I would call "declining".

As well as high and climbing unemployment rates and taxation, while their economic growth is miserly if not negative in some cases. Decline.

Besides if you really are afraid of the poor freeloading do what I call "the direct approach". Here's an example, my uncle (a libertarian) lives in New York City which has streets full of poor people all asking for some cash. So, how does he know which poor will actually spend money on food and which will spend it on crack, he takes the direct approach and offers to take them to a resturant and buys them food, if he's not in a hurry (and no I'm not making this up).

Commendable! I applaud his efforts.

So instead of giving them cash the government should give people what they need like job training programs, homeless shelters, home construction projects, universal health care (you know like the rest of the developed world has), and public transportation so people can get to thier jobs if they can't afford transportation. This will attract people who just need a little help and will turn-off freeloaders

Great, who's gonna pay for it? Oh, right. The rest of us.

I don't think that charity makes people more discouraged if there is anything that can be shown with the New Deal is that the knowledge that someone actually gives a $#!* will make people reach for the stars.

The New Deal did this? Hmm, and all this time I thought it was an environment that let people make the most of their potential with hard work and perserverence while keeping the fruits of their own labor. Damn, if I'd only known a government program was behind it all. And with a war to boot!

A moment to wipe the sarcasm off.

Oh and these governments that you think would work if everyone cooperated have nothing to do with cooperation. Fascism and Communism are all about a few people maintaining thier power.

On an ideologic level both are are fundamentally about cooperation. They just never work out quite as advertised.

You're forgeting two things
1) It only took one Jesus to change the world

Okay, but that hardly helps your case for direct democracy. Dictatorship, maybe...

2) Some people (including myself) believe that Judas might have been merely anti-Jewish propoganda.

Irrelevant, the comparison stands.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2004-09-02 19:20:13

Re: Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

#27 2004-09-02 19:28:28

Re: Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

#28 2004-09-02 19:32:48

Re: Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

#29 2004-09-03 05:22:55

Re: Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

#30 2004-09-03 13:58:59

Re: Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

#31 2004-09-03 14:46:22

Re: Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

#32 2004-09-03 17:50:35

Re: Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

#33 2004-09-03 18:19:05

Re: Yet another Martian Constitution - An alternative to Euthenia

Board footer