richardhutnik said:
scat398 said:
richardhutnik said:
I have yet to see someone screaming on the evils of "equal outcomes" come out and admit that, in society, individuals who could afford certain things would not choose to live below a certain standard of life, like drinking toxic water that makes them sick. The glorification of "choice" above about everything else, ends up having immense rationalization for depravity people live in that it is their fault, or is chalk off along the lines of "you have to break few eggs". And, without resources, there is few liberties, only enslavement to circumstance.
I could also say there is a parasitic nature to Libertarianism. Individuals believe everything is in and of themselves, and they don't get any benefit from anywhere but themselves. And then they oppose taxes and whatnot. The will end up scheming and plotting for their own end, and presume that what they do only has an impact on themselves. In short, it is the mindset of a parasite, with delusions that everything here comes about because choice, in and of itself, produces magical results and abundance for everyone. And of course, the ONLY evil that comes about is from governments with their bullying.
Want to know what can cause the next Great War? Well, elites who fail to show any concern for the rest of humanity, and have pockets of depravity, and individuals who then go, "enough is enough". But, odds are it will end up being an escalation of a single incident and individuals not backing down.
|
Equal outcomes is a huge evil and is a false choice. Your example of someone affluent choosing to drink water that is toxic is a misrepresentation, under equalitarianism the affluent would be forced to drink the poorer water because only then are the outcomes of the poor and affluent equal, of course you can't have the affluent in equalitarianism because their outcome must be reduced to equal the less fortunate.
The danger of equalitarianism is not in its pursuit of civil rights its in its eventual impossibitly of success.
|
How low do you tolerate in a society as far as the consequences of failure? I don't see those who speak of "equality of outcome" even speaking to what a minimum outcome one can accept. There is silence into whether a society should be able to prevent those who are disadvantaged from getting toxic water, or anything else. It is silence, utter and complete silence. What I am saying is NO ONE, if they have a choice, would choose to drink toxic water. But, if given no choice, they do. The issue is the bottom end, not the top.
A number of people, like the individuals who did the "We are the 53%" thing which is "Suck it up losers, life is tough, and you are entitled to NOTHING!", end up saying there is no right or entitlement, as a human being to a minimum of anything:
http://not53.tumblr.com/
|
