badgenome said:
Kasz216 said:
badgenome said:
Kasz216 said:
It's essentially Probable happieness vs almost uniform but equal unhappiness. Though in general that's basically the route of all Capitalism vs Commuism type things.
|
Yeah. I always think of it as getting an equal slice of pie as everyone else vs. a piece which is larger in real terms but other people will have an even larger slice than you. I know which one I'd prefer, but it's quite distressing how many people have so much ressentiment towards anyone who does better than themselves that they would destroy their own standard of living to rectify that perceived evil.
|
I blame it on "My idea/team is the best on everything" syndrome.
You see it all the time in politcally based studies, for example if you believe every thing said about the democrats they make more money on average, have the support of most of the poor, all the rich 1% are republicans and are smarter on average.
Half that can't be true if the other half is true.
Somewhere along the lines honest discourse disapeared to the point of where i think most people actually believe it. Both sides think their economic plans are the best for growing the economy for everyone and shrinking income distrubtion.
When really it's one or the other... and 70% of what either party wants to do doesn't do either, but only pretends to in the short term.
Anything with a time period attached to it of less then 5 years is more or less worthless.
|
Specifically pertaining to Marxists/communists, though I suppose this applies to extreme partisans as well, there's a real True Believer aspect. For example, every time the manifold failures of communist nations are brought up, the standard line is that, yeah, well, the USSR, China, Cuba, etc. aren't/weren't really communist. The fact that every single communist country turns out to be the exact same sort of authoritarian shithole doesn't seem to cause them a single second of honest introspection to ponder that, hey, maybe communism could never, ever turn out any other way.
|
I can see that. I remember the one forum member on here... Sci-Fi Boy, who was essentially championing the government and society of Star Trek. When pressed on how it would work he talked about vague future technologies and didn't see the stupidity of passing legislation today that requires future technology that will take god knows how long to create to be workable.
I mean, anyone can invent something that works by using future available resources. Like Leonardo Divinchi's flying machine.
