Crallask Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 Wouldn't we be so productive and free to negotiate whatever by that point that it wouldn't matter? They want to farm some area for food or hunt animals. Wouldn't we be building space colonies and deep sea fortresses by then? I don't get it. I may as well be more focused on how we can terraform planets to serve our my in the future. I mean, this is how far off these questions are from being relevant. Tropical island paradise? Fuck that, why not a tropical planet or space platform?
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 Great. And if that "jerk" comes here, out negotiates me, and I end up shirtless, more power to him. And if your definition of idiot doesn't include people with IQ's between 50 and 70 running around in their underwear and poking rocks through their genitals, congratulations. Mine does. Right so the underlying principle here is that if it pleases you it's right? Fair enough. There''ll be people like me to protect vulnerable people from snakes like you. More power to me, right? Species, as a word, has a definition. Don't know where you're going with that. But since you wandered into whatever this is, there are dozens of articles chronicling the dwindling populations of these tribes due to renunciation of membership and joining(what apparently doesn't exist) civilization and more advanced societies. So, I don't know. Whatever. I don't see the point you're trying to make, but that's the best I can do to answer your question. Individuals coming together create a civilization. It has a definition but there's no such thing as a species. It's a classification humans give groups to who can interbreed. It's a collectivist concept like "society" or "the people". Why would I give a fuck about a collectivist concept? It's like saying "the future of the country". I care about individuals and some individuals may chose this "idiot" life. I'm not a relativist and I prefer modern civilization but insufferably smug and hubris-tic people like you sour the whole thing. What's ironic is that you fail to grasp that civilization has a moral component and part of that is the universal application of ethics; NOT ""well these people are idiots so let's fuck-em over". 2 1
MagnumPI Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 Right so the underlying principle here is that if it pleases you it's right? Fair enough. There''ll be people like me to protect vulnerable people from snakes like you. More power to me, right? It has a definition but there's no such thing as a species. It's a classification humans give groups to who can interbreed. It's a collectivist concept like "society" or "the people". Why would I give a fuck about a collectivist concept? It's like saying "the future of the country". I care about individuals and some individuals may chose this "idiot" life. I'm not a relativist and I prefer modern civilization but insufferably smug and hubris-tic people like you sour the whole thing. What's ironic is that you fail to grasp that civilization has a moral component and part of that is the universal application of ethics; NOT ""well these people are idiots so let's fuck-em over". Meh, insults and no argument. Another one for the list. 2
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 Meh, insults and no argument. Another one for the list. You think "Who cares? they're idiots" is a valid argument but my responses are not? Prove it. Another one for the list. Oh, you've got a list, have you? 1 1
MagnumPI Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 "In an anarchistic world, how would black people seek justice through arbitration or private law so that they might remain on the lands they've existed on for decades or more?" "In an anarchistic world, how would hispanic people seek justice through arbitration or private law so that they might remain on the lands they've existed on for decades or more?" "In an anarchistic world, how would Asian people seek justice through arbitration or private law so that they might remain on the lands they've existed on for decades or more?" Just more racism disguised as concern. 1
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 "In an anarchistic world, how would black people seek justice through arbitration or private law so that they might remain on the lands they've existed on for decades or more?" "In an anarchistic world, how would hispanic people seek justice through arbitration or private law so that they might remain on the lands they've existed on for decades or more?" "In an anarchistic world, how would Asian people seek justice through arbitration or private law so that they might remain on the lands they've existed on for decades or more?" Just more racism disguised as concern. You never go full social justice. 1 1
Ray H. Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 So, to be clear, the fact that the people being discussed might have lived their entire lives in an area under dispute makes no difference? What does make a difference is that they don't meet an IQ requirement to exercise property rights?
MagnumPI Posted October 24, 2015 Posted October 24, 2015 So, nobody's even reading what I write, and it's just turning into an ignore-fest. Baling out of the thread. 1
Very Ape Posted October 25, 2015 Posted October 25, 2015 MagnumPI rand Sage... Do you think libertarianism and anarchy include the right to exploit those you deem to be of "lesser intelligence"? One might wish to consider the knowledge of first peoples regarding medicine in particular as most of our modern medicine was derived from their vast knowledge of medicinal plants. Contrast with the knowledge of most white people in North America regarding their own health and you'll see the vast majority are fat, lazy, uninformed, barely literate and believe that poking buttons on a shiny screen and making sophomoric statements on Facebook makes them more "intelligent". And now instead of giving natives smallpox laced blankets we give the white natives toxin laced vaccines even for ordinary colds and nearly indigestible GMO foods but hey they are not intelligent enough to figure it out so shame on them. So if that is your definition of an "advanced civilization" then I believe you are both in need of some native brewed huayasca. That and a smaller empathy gap. 1
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 25, 2015 Posted October 25, 2015 Wouldn't we be so productive and free to negotiate whatever by that point that it wouldn't matter? They want to farm some area for food or hunt animals. Wouldn't we be building space colonies and deep sea fortresses by then? I don't get it. I may as well be more focused on how we can terraform planets to serve our my in the future. I mean, this is how far off these questions are from being relevant. Tropical island paradise? Fuck that, why not a tropical planet or space platform? #1. Tearing Up the Antarctica Anti-Development Treaty We should terraform the Earth. Nature is not designed to fit what we want and need, so we should re-design it. Draining the oceans would be easier than starting from scratch on Mars. So, to be clear, the fact that the people being discussed might have lived their entire lives in an area under dispute makes no difference? What does make a difference is that they don't meet an IQ requirement to exercise property rights? The Stone Agers Need to Break Rocks "Entire lives" refer to seniority rights, which are way below intellectual-potential rights. The unevolved natives selfishly hoard land that the rest of us could get better production out of, which would benefit all, even the backward natives. The law of Nature should be "Use It or Lose It." MagnumPI rand Sage... Do you think libertarianism and anarchy include the right to exploit those you deem to be of "lesser intelligence"? One might wish to consider the knowledge of first peoples regarding medicine in particular as most of our modern medicine was derived from their vast knowledge of medicinal plants. Contrast with the knowledge of most white people in North America regarding their own health and you'll see the vast majority are fat, lazy, uninformed, barely literate and believe that poking buttons on a shiny screen and making sophomoric statements on Facebook makes them more "intelligent". And now instead of giving natives smallpox laced blankets we give the white natives toxin laced vaccines even for ordinary colds and nearly indigestible GMO foods but hey they are not intelligent enough to figure it out so shame on them. So if that is your definition of an "advanced civilization" then I believe you are both in need of some native brewed huayasca. That and a smaller empathy gap. The Nobility With No Ability You're talking about the most degenerate members of a formerly great Western civilization that has lost its way. When such a society is overthrown by your precious Rainbow primates, it will cause a new Dark Ages anarchy. LIfe will become disgusting, predatory, and short. One sure sign that we are terminal is that we don't ridicule mercilessly a self-hating, zero-standards concept like "noble savage." 1 1
Recommended Posts