Equality? No such damned thing!

[Oleg Bach]

The whole myth that all men and woman are created equal - and stay equal for the duration of a life time brings poverty to nations. With this great forced equality that is being propogated by our institutions comes a crippling of exceptionalizm. Those who are weak - mentally - spiritually - finacially and physically are now considered equal to the strong. This is a crime against nature which leads to the debasement of all.

We all hear about the proverbial trickle down effect that is supposed to take place in a capitalist system..where inovation and great creative power is supposed generate wealth and security for all...the problem is that confidence that is cruxial in generating success is failing.

Sure we in our liberalism we attempt to generate self esteem and confidence in our young people...and that is very nice I suppose...but we do not generate approval in our superiour individuals - and we thwart them at every turn unless they become compliant to the agenda of mediorcrity through equality. So how can we have the magical trickle down effect that creates weatlh when in this liberal democracy we promote those who lack ability in to postions of authority - and we systemically oppress our best..

Human beings are NOT equal - all like trees in a forest are of different height and compostion...the concept of EQUALITY...has not worked in the long run for our neighbour to the south - we should replace the concept of equality with the idea and principle of fair play and justice..that would work better in building a better society.

In days of old LORD meant keeper of the bread..a person entrusted in making sure that all were feed and all survived...a noble was a person of generous and talented dispostion - there job was to ensure that the weaker - the stupider were kept safe and sound...Now we are not allowed to identify the weak - nor the strong - we are at a stand still.

[kimmy]

The whole myth that all men and woman are created equal - and stay equal for the duration of a life time brings poverty to nations.

You've got the whole premise wrong, silly old man.

People are supposed to start with the same opportunities. The rest is up to them. There's nothing about forcing people to stay equal.

-k

[Shwa]

You've got the whole premise wrong, silly old man.

People are supposed to start with the same opportunities. The rest is up to them. There's nothing about forcing people to stay equal. -k

Simply brilliant reply!!

Mr. Oleg, sir? You've just been pwned.

[Michael Hardner]

Most of us are happy with the changes in the social order, that have happened over the past 50 years or so - men included.

I have met some men who aren't, but they usually have some personal sob story, or bitter memoir that blames some woman for their own faults.

[Oleg Bach]

You've got the whole premise wrong, silly old man.

People are supposed to start with the same opportunities. The rest is up to them. There's nothing about forcing people to stay equal.

-k

Don't call me silly old man....I can be silly when I please...in fact Ms. K...I am more of a man than any young man that you know or will ever know..so there!

[Oleg Bach]

Simply brilliant reply!!

Mr. Oleg, sir? You've just been pwned.

NOW I am going to sound like the racist creep..It's all about genetics...some people are simply of a higher order than some others...Keep breeding a bunch of dummies and you end up with dummies...a dummie in the cradle..and dummie to the grave...BUT with the myth of equality running rampant in the western sense since 1776...who ever is the biggest money grubber comes out on top..and THAT is not a sign of superiourity but a sign of mindless fixation on the material based in a sense of inferiority and a strong urge to prove themselves....personally - I don't give a damn - I know who I am and who I am not...and I don't compete..might get irritated and intolerant which seems competative but it is more a sense of righteours indignation ...

Take a look at the eyes of the consumers..the shoppers that went crazy on Black Friday...don't tell me these are creatures of superiour intelligence and spirit...as I grow old and become even more of a "silly old man"....I have come to the conclution that 89% of the population are slightly smarter than the family dog.

[Oleg Bach]

The other issue is the damage to the gene pool caused by industrial style abortion...seems that some how a lot of smart people are not here...maybe like the six shooter abortion is the great equalizer..?

[dre]

The whole myth that all men and woman are created equal - and stay equal for the duration of a life time brings poverty to nations. With this great forced equality that is being propogated by our institutions comes a crippling of exceptionalizm. Those who are weak - mentally - spiritually - finacially and physically are now considered equal to the strong. This is a crime against nature which leads to the debasement of all.

That myth doesnt even exist as far as I know. And there IS no equality, forced or otherwise.

With this great forced equality that is being propogated by our institutions

Our institutions dont give a rats ass about equality. They want more privilege, wealth, and political power to concentrate at the top of the food chain.

[Shwa]

NOW I am going to sound like the racist creep..It's all about genetics...some people are simply of a higher order than some others...Keep breeding a bunch of dummies and you end up with dummies...a dummie in the cradle..and dummie to the grave...BUT with the myth of equality running rampant in the western sense since 1776...who ever is the biggest money grubber comes out on top..and THAT is not a sign of superiourity but a sign of mindless fixation on the material based in a sense of inferiority and a strong urge to prove themselves....personally - I don't give a damn - I know who I am and who I am not...and I don't compete..might get irritated and intolerant which seems competative but it is more a sense of righteours indignation ...

Take a look at the eyes of the consumers..the shoppers that went crazy on Black Friday...don't tell me these are creatures of superiour intelligence and spirit...as I grow old and become even more of a "silly old man"....I have come to the conclution that 89% of the population are slightly smarter than the family dog.

Your righteous indignation don't mean a damn thing. You were easily bested by a smart young woman and it had nothing to do with liberalism, Black Friday shoppers or 1776.

Now, make like a good boy, sit up and shake a paw...

[Jack Weber]

I wonder if this is a homework assignment in method acting?

[Michael Hardner]

I wonder if this is a homework assignment in method acting?

Yes, Oleg has been cast in the role of Lassie in the upcoming revival at the Royal Alex.

[maple_leafs182]

Oleg, it seems like you see us all as being separate when in reality we are all one living, breathing organism.

Liberal democracy is a failure, we look to politicians to solve our problems, the problems that face us aren't political, they are technical. Technology is the answer to almost all of our problems, technology should be at the forefront of society, not politicians.

We can create abundance of food and houses, we could clean the oceans, lakes, rivers and air, we could end our dependence on fossil fuels for transportation, we could use technology to benefit all of mankind.

I see the biggest problem of society is the monetary based economy, it creates inequality, it divides us by creating classes, it encourages scarcity for scarcity is profitable. Equality is a myth in our current monetary based economy.

[Shwa]

Liberal democracy is a failure, we look to politicians to solve our problems, the problems that face us aren't political, they are technical. Technology is the answer to almost all of our problems, technology should be at the forefront of society, not politicians.

Technocracy, eh? For more on this technology-first, politicians-second idea please see '1984' by George Orwell.

PS - luckily since you live in a liberal democracy you are able to access and read 1984. Please take note of this irony.

Thank you.

[Michael Hardner]

Technocracy, eh? For more on this technology-first, politicians-second idea please see '1984' by George Orwell.

Hmmm. If my memory serves me correctly, technology served the government of Oceania quite well in 1984.

[maple_leafs182]

Technocracy, eh? For more on this technology-first, politicians-second idea please see '1984' by George Orwell.

PS - luckily since you live in a liberal democracy you are able to access and read 1984. Please take note of this irony.

Thank you.

I've read 1984.

We don't need politicians, they don't solve problems. We should be using the scientific method while using the latest and greatest technologies to arrive at possible solutions to our problems.

We don't need the technology to monitor humans, just for production, transportation, along those lines.

[Shwa]

I've read 1984.

Read it again. This time with a bit of understanding.

We don't need politicians, they don't solve problems. We should be using the scientific method while using the latest and greatest technologies to arrive at possible solutions to our problems.

So as long as it is scientific totalitarianism, it is OK, or are you referring to something like Vulcan from Star Trek? You little Spock you.

When the scientific method can be used to solve moral problems, let me know.

We don't need the technology to monitor humans, just for production, transportation, along those lines.

Are you talking robots and stuff? Read 'I, Robot' Asimov, 1950 or, even better, watch 'Blade Runner' Scott, 1982.

Because if you are saying that we don't need to monitor the humans, but just "production, transportation" which are inherently human activities, I think your sort of logic not only gives robots headaches, but has been successfully used by Captain Kirk to form moral dilemmas in machines that freak the machines right out. See Star Trek's 'The Changling' Roddenberry, 1967, esp. the machine 'Nomad.'

Enjoy.

[maple_leafs182]

So as long as it is scientific totalitarianism, it is OK, or are you referring to something like Vulcan from Star Trek? You little Spock you.

Never watched Star Trek before.

When the scientific method can be used to solve moral problems, let me know.

Give me an example of what you consider to be a moral problem.

Are you talking robots and stuff? Read 'I, Robot' Asimov, 1950 or, even better, watch 'Blade Runner' Scott, 1982.

I've never read I Robot, I've seen the movie I robot, I'll assume the movie is based on the book. I don't mean walking talking robots, but machines. Look at an automobile plant, it is almost completely automated, there is no reasons why we can't have farms that are completely automated to produce an abundance of food for all of us.

Look what our system produces, war, poverty, pollution, recessions/depression, degradation of land and depletion of resources, this current social or economic system is insane, it isn't sustainable.

The problem is, I think there needs to be a total collapse of the current system before people start to question its validity.

[Shwa]

Never watched Star Trek before.

Then maybe you ought to since many of the futurist ideas you come up with have already been worked over.

Give me an example of what you consider to be a moral problem.

You're kidding me right?

I've never read I Robot, I've seen the movie I robot, I'll assume the movie is based on the book. I don't mean walking talking robots, but machines. Look at an automobile plant, it is almost completely automated, there is no reasons why we can't have farms that are completely automated to produce an abundance of food for all of us.

Ah, so you are saying automation is the answer to our dreams? Everything in an automobile plant is completely monitored including the staff that run the machines.

Look what our system produces, war, poverty, pollution, recessions/depression, degradation of land and depletion of resources, this current social or economic system is insane, it isn't sustainable.

And yet on and on it goes. You are not the first to decry the present state of things. For more information read, 'Revelations' The Bible, God, 4000 BC.

However, the chief flaw you have here is that the "system" you decry has science as one of it's chief components. The atom bomb, for example, didn't just appear out of thin air.

The problem is, I think there needs to be a total collapse of the current system before people start to question its validity.

Perhaps there needs to be a total collapse of your current thinking before you start questioning the validity of your ideas. Have you ever thought of that?

You're a radical, I can respect that, but a radical that makes assertions about science ought to subject his own ideas to the "scientific method" and it doesn't appear you have done this. I, on the other hand, am not compelled by this ethic, thus I can have some fun with your ideas.

Thanks, much appreciated.

[Michael Hardner]

Technology has its own qualities. Dictators can use it to suppress society, as with 1984, or the people can use it to upset the established order. (eg. Martin Luther's printing press, video cameras behind the Iron Curtain in the late 1980s.)

Technology's usefulness is not in doubt, nor is it avoidable.

I concur with mapleLeaf that government is under-utilizing it now, and appears to be uneasy with it.

[Shwa]

Technology has its own qualities. Dictators can use it to suppress society, as with 1984, or the people can use it to upset the established order. (eg. Martin Luther's printing press, video cameras behind the Iron Curtain in the late 1980s.)

But in any example you use, technology has only resulted in more politicians and bureacrats. Their form might have changed a little bit here and there, but the content has been the same for millennia. In fact, some might argue that politics (and politicians) are an inherent part of human nature.

Now if technology and science can administer social policy, please, do tell.

[Michael Hardner]

But in any example you use, technology has only resulted in more politicians and bureacrats.

Not true. Computers eliminated thousands of manual office jobs, for example.

Their form might have changed a little bit here and there, but the content has been the same for millennia. In fact, some might argue that politics (and politicians) are an inherent part of human nature.

Politics and politicians won't go away, but government changes with every new technological change, even if it's in a small way.

Now if technology and science can administer social policy, please, do tell.

Technology frames communications, which is a key part of government. The printing press brought down the Catholic church. Telegraph, Radio, Television, and the web have changed how we all communicate, including how government communicates with the people.

[maple_leafs182]

You're kidding me right?

Nope, I think what people consider morally wrong and morally right is relative. I think allowing mass starvation and blind air strikes to occur is morally wrong but currently this society allows it, heck it is profitable to do so.

Ah, so you are saying automation is the answer to our dreams? Everything in an automobile plant is completely monitored including the staff that run the machines.

Yes, and you point?

However, the chief flaw you have here is that the "system" you decry has science as one of it's chief components. The atom bomb, for example, didn't just appear out of thin air.

Yes, I know we use science but we don't utilize it very well, we use the latest and greatest sciences and technologies to build weapons of war and destruction instead of using it to build systems that can benefit all of humanity.

Perhaps there needs to be a total collapse of your current thinking before you start questioning the validity of your ideas. Have you ever thought of that?

I am open to different ideas or systems, I see what this current system produces and I see a lot of fundamental flaws, this is why I do not support it.

[Shwa]

Not true. Computers eliminated thousands of manual office jobs, for example.

Which has resulted in a dramtic downsizing of the Canadian and provincial bureaucracies. Wait, no it didn't.

Politics and politicians won't go away, but government changes with every new technological change, even if it's in a small way.

ML182 is offering a radical solution, by definition, not something "in a small way."

Technology frames communications, which is a key part of government. The printing press brought down the Catholic church. Telegraph, Radio, Television, and the web have changed how we all communicate, including how government communicates with the people.

The printing press brought down the Catholic Church? When? Where?

I am not saying technology doesn't have it's utility, but a technocracy serves no one.

[Shwa]

Nope, I think what people consider morally wrong and morally right is relative. I think allowing mass starvation and blind air strikes to occur is morally wrong but currently this society allows it, heck it is profitable to do so.

If it is profitable, then there is a scientific method that is used to predict said profits. Economics, for one, uses a lot of math.

Yes, and you point?

Your advocating for Big Brother. No thanks.

Yes, I know we use science but we don't utilize it very well, we use the latest and greatest sciences and technologies to build weapons of war and destruction instead of using it to build systems that can benefit all of humanity.

So you are saying there is some moral imperative to science then? Show me your work on this, you know, the calculations and data you have used to arrive at this moral conclusion. Oh wait, it's relative...

I am open to different ideas or systems, I see what this current system produces and I see a lot of fundamental flaws, this is why I do not support it.

Well damn good thing it supports you eh? What with the internet, grocery stores - a job...

[Michael Hardner]

Which has resulted in a dramtic downsizing of the Canadian and provincial bureaucracies. Wait, no it didn't.

In the private sector, it did reduce the number of clerks and so on.

The printing press brought down the Catholic Church? When? Where?

Printing was previously controlled by the church. The relatively cheap and portable printing press allowed individuals with divergent views to make themselves known. These debates eventually resulted in a great schism (and wars) which fractured the church into protestant sect.

I am not saying technology doesn't have it's utility, but a technocracy serves no one.

I would say that technology serves itself, like any virus.