Guys, do you really have no idea how shopworn your ideas sound? We’ve heard it all before; your rhetoric could be taken almost unchanged from the ranting of 1960’s radicals, except for the exact slogans (Power to the People! Fight the Power! Up Against the Wall!). And worst of all is when you denounce the “sheep” for not instantly agreeing with you- we must either have no political conciousness or we’re collaborators with the opressors!
Life is a little more complicated than a morality play, and maybe, just MAYBE it isn’t as simple as you paint it.
I think it is completely reasonable to plan for a future that involves high prices for oil.
Sure, using the word “moral” to justify a course action might be inappropriate - especially when the term can mean different things to different people. Even so, it is a conversation worth having. If your only retort to a concern for the future is “yeah well people have been saying that for a while” you aren’t listening. There are some serious problems ahead of us, and idiots who dismiss them offhand are going to plow us right into them.
What I believe is Good, Morale, and absolutely Correct.
People who don’t believe what I believe are Evil, Immoral, Stupid, Corrupt and WRONG WRONG WRONG. They should all either be killed or be forced to believe what I believe.
Even when I don’t have the slightest clue what the fuck I’m talking about.
By buying up all the oil and storing it under ground? Get serious.
And idiots who try to exaggerate them while also not understanding the first thing about about the subject, about how markets work, and to be honest are out of touch with reality as we know it are properly derided for spewing their silly beliefs in GD. There have been (and probably will be in the future) real, serious discussions on the subject of dwindling oil reserves and alternative technologies and how both things (and a bunch more) will effect the various markets, but adhay’s screed was really worth nothing more than a couple of brief chuckles.
Dunno, man. What if the system is evil? What if maybe, just maybe, a system where people steer half ton vehicles powered by dead dinosaurs so they can go to work making advertisements isn’t the best possible system we can come up with?
Fair enough, but what’s the alternative? A centrally directed command economy? Sumptuary laws? If you think that the hoi polloi are blind and ignorant, they’re positively geniuses compared to your average bureaucracy. The track record of would-be philosopher kings telling the peasants what’s good for them is dismal.
Fair enough. I just don’t like it when an issue is dismissed because there are some crazies on one side. adhay certainly couches his argument in a lot of moral muck - but he isn’t really wrong. Conservation of the planet’s resources is a reasonable idea for the long-term prosperity of humanity.
I disagree with the OP. I think a system by itself can be evil if it is inherently evil, or if by the actions of the bureaucrats and magistrates in it it becomes evil.
As for inherent evil, let’s take Papa Doc Duvallier’s Haiti. It is a kelptocracy and kept power by terrorizing the population with violence.
The more troubling situation is what we face as a threat here at home: bureaucrats and magistrates making an indifferent system subject to oppression. When policies and facts are daily twisted to hurt and deny some group of people their just due under equal protection and reward others on a hurt the poor/help the rich basis, that can be evil.
I specifically point to the Federalist Society, a political faction of ideological lawyers and judges who systematically rule in favor of the rich and against the poor. A system that allows these conspirators to be members of the bar and bench without question of their political motivations is questionable as evil.
Nihilism isn’t making a proposal you don’t think will work or don’t like.
lurking guest’s idea seem to qualify though; “I propose not replacing government with anything at all…except folks who have something more than their own personal gain at heart.”
There was a country founded on slavery and indigenous displacement. Those colonists turned pioneers looked at a broad continent blessed with natural resources beyond imagination. Plenty for everyone!
But how to develop it? Jefferson had it right in his first draft, “life, Liberty and the pursuit of Property”. Happiness defined as owning worked while there was plenty to steal and the idea of free-markets backed by corporate trade wars waged under state colors had appeal to the {i]hoi polloi*. Collateral damage is anything that limits profit.
Yes, unrestrained consumerism is the basis for the shit we look upon today. It’s about time we moved into 22nd century thinking. Namely, that energy-wise, we simply cannot afford the rich … namely, anyone having more than they could conceivably use. Hoarders, against the wall.
