First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply Monarchy, should we have a king?
3489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Dreamscape
Offline
Posted 1/30/13


This is wrong.

How so?

Humans are not inherently evil. That is a big lie.



I disagree with you. However I never stated that humans are inherently evil. I simply said that due to jealousy, envy, irrational hatred, self-centeredness, rational hatred and in-the-moment impulses would doom certain areas of a peaceful anarchy. You give this possibility to certain people in this new era of ungoverned lawlessness and they will take advantage of their power influence and resources to get what they want and screw everyone else.

I wouldn't let that happen. If something evil is occurring in front of me I would stop it. Allowing evil to happen is more evil than causing evil because you chose to let evil happen therefore the peaceful and good people will do something about the evil from occurring.







What if you can't stop it?
Banned
31571 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / The Void.
Offline
Posted 1/30/13 , edited 1/30/13

ZenZaku wrote:



This is wrong.

How so?

Humans are not inherently evil. That is a big lie.



I disagree with you. However I never stated that humans are inherently evil. I simply said that due to jealousy, envy, irrational hatred, self-centeredness, rational hatred and in-the-moment impulses would doom certain areas of a peaceful anarchy. You give this possibility to certain people in this new era of ungoverned lawlessness and they will take advantage of their power influence and resources to get what they want and screw everyone else.

I wouldn't let that happen. If something evil is occurring in front of me I would stop it. Allowing evil to happen is more evil than causing evil because you chose to let evil happen therefore the peaceful and good people will do something about the evil from occurring.







What if you can't stop it?

I can. Beings of Love are much stronger than beings of Hate. Beings of Love will always conquer Beings of Hate.

3489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Dreamscape
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

-Vega- wrote:


ZenZaku wrote:



This is wrong.

How so?

Humans are not inherently evil. That is a big lie.



I disagree with you. However I never stated that humans are inherently evil. I simply said that due to jealousy, envy, irrational hatred, self-centeredness, rational hatred and in-the-moment impulses would doom certain areas of a peaceful anarchy. You give this possibility to certain people in this new era of ungoverned lawlessness and they will take advantage of their power influence and resources to get what they want and screw everyone else.

I wouldn't let that happen. If something evil is occurring in front of me I would stop it. Allowing evil to happen is more evil than causing evil because you chose to let evil happen therefore the peaceful and good people will do something about the evil from occurring.







What if you can't stop it?

I can. Beings of Love are much stronger than beings of Hate. Beings of Love will always conquer Beings of Hate.



Okay so you've just been shot and killed by this person who wants to commit evil. What have you accomplished?
31425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

ZenZaku wrote:


lordseth23 wrote:


Humans are not self-centered beings. Our species would have died out in the Paleolithic period if this were true.


I said mainly. Do you not look at helping someone or doing something and asking yourself, what is my benefit going to be?


No, because I already know the benefit of helping someone, and I don't particularly care about my well-being in any action that I take.
3489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Dreamscape
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

lordseth23 wrote:


ZenZaku wrote:

Okay so you've just been shot and killed by this person who wants to commit evil. What have you accomplished?


The accomplishment is that you did not stoop to his level of misunderstanding.


But if the goal was to stop the evil act, as Vega intended. Getting shot and killed doesn't really solve anything.
49288 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / US
Offline
Posted 1/30/13
There is no form of government better than a benevolent monarchy. Unfortunately it is pretty much impossible to ensure that a monarch STAYS benevolent.
31425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

dark_paradox_21 wrote:

There is no form of government better than a benevolent monarchy. Unfortunately it is pretty much impossible to ensure that a monarch STAYS benevolent.


How is it better than a benevolent democracy?
3489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Dreamscape
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

-Vega- wrote:


ZenZaku wrote:



This is wrong.

How so?

Humans are not inherently evil. That is a big lie.



I disagree with you. However I never stated that humans are inherently evil. I simply said that due to jealousy, envy, irrational hatred, self-centeredness, rational hatred and in-the-moment impulses would doom certain areas of a peaceful anarchy. You give this possibility to certain people in this new era of ungoverned lawlessness and they will take advantage of their power influence and resources to get what they want and screw everyone else.

I wouldn't let that happen. If something evil is occurring in front of me I would stop it. Allowing evil to happen is more evil than causing evil because you chose to let evil happen therefore the peaceful and good people will do something about the evil from occurring.







What if you can't stop it?

Death is an illusion. I have died on June 4th 2009 and resurrected on June 4th 2009. I am immortal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u5BPna6OJE&list=HL1359574404 Break free from your delusion.



I could easily say the same to you

I am not lying.



I am not delusional.


I am not delusional as well.


Well this discussion has gone off track. Wanna go back to the whole anarchy thing?

Okay. :)





Okay so you disagree that jealousy, envy, and the irrational violence would occur in an anarchy. What's your reasoning?

There will always be peace in an anarchy because people are inherently good.



Okay, inherently good doesn't stop people from acting out of jealousy or committing violence. Let's steer away from whether people are good or bad at the core and instead look at the emotions and feelings that I'm talking about.
21071 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Washington, DC
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

longfenglim wrote:

First, you speak of the monarchies as 'a waste of taxpaters' money', I think this objection is unfounded, in that monarchies would be cheaper to uphold than our current form of government. As our government is composed of several statesman of varying degrees of importance, it follows that we must pay more to uphold a democracy, and the salary of many statesman, than a monarchy, with less. In a monarchy, there is the King and his family, who, I assume, can live in Royal luxury on the salary of a single statesman. Thus, it can be said that we are, in fact, paying for several kings in our current system, and, by reducing the amount of employees, a monarchy would be less expensive.

Secondly, you say that they are 'unaccountable', which is true, and which is actually a good thing, in that we now have fully separated the hoi polloi from the government. The wisdom of the king and his ministers would no longer be hindered by the ignorance of the mass, which are, usually, more prone to bigotry than an educated elite. It was, after all, a mob of workers who lynched black people during the Civil War draft protest, and not of elites, and it is the redneck southerner, the 'salt of the earth', who are part of the Klan. Thus, putting the power into the hands of the people effectively endorse mass prejudice, what is called, I believe, by Mill as 'Tyranny of the Majority'.

No, America is a Democratic Republic, we elect our representatives, who goes to Washington with our mandate to represent the interest of his community. They get together to try and impose upon the nation what the many would like. But, here's the rub- why should this man claim to have my mandate, if I disagree with him? Why, shouldn't we just devolve the power from this fellow, who is almost as removed from me as a king, pretend to work with my mandate to pass whatever laws he pass. Thus, we have a senate that, ideally, would only work to promote a set of policies which a plurality of the community agrees to be better than the rest of the policies put forward by other, equally distant statesman, thus, we have the majoritarian interest working to impose common folly upon everyone. On the otherhand, it is clear our government's only a gathering of private individuals working together to promote shared private interests. A Monarch, on the other hand, is just as separated from the mob, where the majority opinion needs not affect him or his ministers, and where each ministers, rather than be chosen for slick tongues, would be chosen for suitability, as the king is groomed for the throne. Thus, we have a gathering of capable rulers to make decision unaffected by any interests, where the wealth of the nation is the king's wealth, and thus, making him above bribery, and where prosperity is assured.



longfenglim, the "waste of taxpayers' money" comes from the fact that, the money would be better spent somewhere else, besides in the hands of a monarch. When people spend their money, they have a better understanding of what their actual needs are in life, than a monarch, who has little to no connection to them and the understandings of their needs. There are so many different people and different needs in a country, having one person trying to balance all those needs just can't be done. Unless the monarch has some super power where he can understand everyone's needs and also has the ability to efficiently allocate resources to meet those needs, one person, or even a group of people, can't run an economy. Communist examples like the Soviet Union and China are perfect examples. Stalin and Mao had ideas of how they could run a great society, but they had no idea how to micromanage the needs of the different people, so those economies suffered. And also, the monarch can decide how much money he will get, so he can easily charge more than all the statesmen in democracy combined if he wanted to. I am assuming you're talking about a monarch with absolute power. Correct me if I'm wrong.

And the "unaccountability" means that the monarch has no checks and balances when it comes to spending, so the monarch can waste money, spending it all on himself if he wanted. The only accountability he has is the threat of revolution if he does a horrible job. At least with politicians, if they really are bad with their spending, the media can see it and criticize the politician, lessening his chances of getting reelected. In the private sector, if you waste money as a business, you're weakening your business and increasing your chances of bankruptcy. You talk about wisdom from the king and ministers, but what makes the king and his ministers so "great"? You seem to think a monarchs are somehow exempt from the faults and ignorance of humans, but monarchs are humans also. If a monarch somehow had super powers where they could understand all the knowledge about the economy and its people, than the monarch would probably be a great idea for the people. But no, no one person has knowledge of the whole economy or the whole nation of people. That knowledge is scattered between different people. Which is why I like it when people have more freedom to choose their choices in life, good or bad, than have one monarch, who has less knowledge and incentive to improve that person's life, make the choice for them.
3489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Dreamscape
Offline
Posted 1/30/13


So they regret killing someone over having a larger house. That won't necessarily stop them from doing it more. Or perhaps they have a mental instability where they truly don't care. Or maybe they kill because it gets them off. There are too many possible reasons either way for this issue. And even if we could list them all chances are something else entirely different may happen. I'd love a peaceful coexisting society where everyone works for the betterment of each other and humanity in general. The problem is that people have all these varied things going on through their heads. Why does the schoolyard bully pick on his peers? Is it because he can and knows he'll get away with it? Is it simply because he doesn't like the other children? Maybe they called him names and he's just retaliating now? Is he being mistreated at home and is inflicting his pain on others? Or is he simply sad and depressed and doesn't know how else to express these feelings? Apply that analogy to any other event and the possibilities are endless. No one truly knows why anyone else does anything.
Banned
31571 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / The Void.
Offline
Posted 1/30/13
I'm tired of arguing.
31425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

ZenZaku wrote:



So they regret killing someone over having a larger house. That won't necessarily stop them from doing it more. Or perhaps they have a mental instability where they truly don't care. Or maybe they kill because it gets them off. There are too many possible reasons either way for this issue. And even if we could list them all chances are something else entirely different may happen. I'd love a peaceful coexisting society where everyone works for the betterment of each other and humanity in general. The problem is that people have all these varied things going on through their heads. Why does the schoolyard bully pick on his peers? Is it because he can and knows he'll get away with it? Is it simply because he doesn't like the other children? Maybe they called him names and he's just retaliating now? Is he being mistreated at home and is inflicting his pain on others? Or is he simply sad and depressed and doesn't know how else to express these feelings? Apply that analogy to any other event and the possibilities are endless. No one truly knows why anyone else does anything.


This is why we need to continue studying psychology, so we can eventually eliminate the need to bully from the human condition and be able to live in a world like you mentioned. That being said, it can become fairly obvious why people act the way they do if you know enough background information, and you may be able to show them why their behavior is not in their best interest.
49152 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Oslo, Norway
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

lorddisick wrote:

Monarchy leads to anarchy.


Works pretty well in Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
31425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 1/30/13 , edited 1/30/13

ZenZaku wrote:


Interesting. I do agree with your reasoning. However I don't agree on the only emotional vibrations being fear and love. Is every other emotion we feel based out of these two? So you're crying because you're happy, is that from the love vibration or is it its own vibration? Since there are seven deadly sins wouldn't each one have a vibration?


Yes, every emotion is derived from these two entities. The seven deadly sins can all be traced back to a person's innate fear. People aren't evil, any of their evil actions are just a result of their inability to suppress their fear.

Banned
31571 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / The Void.
Offline
Posted 1/30/13
Also, you can be varying degrees of fear and love in the same time throughout the emotional spectrum.
3489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Dreamscape
Offline
Posted 1/30/13

lordseth23 wrote:


ZenZaku wrote:



So they regret killing someone over having a larger house. That won't necessarily stop them from doing it more. Or perhaps they have a mental instability where they truly don't care. Or maybe they kill because it gets them off. There are too many possible reasons either way for this issue. And even if we could list them all chances are something else entirely different may happen. I'd love a peaceful coexisting society where everyone works for the betterment of each other and humanity in general. The problem is that people have all these varied things going on through their heads. Why does the schoolyard bully pick on his peers? Is it because he can and knows he'll get away with it? Is it simply because he doesn't like the other children? Maybe they called him names and he's just retaliating now? Is he being mistreated at home and is inflicting his pain on others? Or is he simply sad and depressed and doesn't know how else to express these feelings? Apply that analogy to any other event and the possibilities are endless. No one truly knows why anyone else does anything.


This is why we need to continue studying psychology, so we can eventually eliminate the need to bully from the human condition and be able to live in a world like you mentioned. That being said, it can become fairly obvious why people act the way they do if you know enough background information, and you may be able to show them why their behavior is not in their best interest.


A lot can be reviled if we know their history and we can draw close guesses as to why they act how they act. A problem I see and have found is will people accept the advice and stop whatever harmful act they're doing in order to preserve their best interest. A lot of times they may not see a harmful act for what it is and ignore your advice until they know better.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.