Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beekeeper)
    Oh FFS. If you're going to reply to my post then can you atleast read what i've said.



    Hehe looks like the evil capitalist news corps have brainwashed the hell out of you!
    The Governments are doing a pretty shameful job at handling global warming anyway, the biggest authoritarian communist government in the world, China, is arguably the single biggest 'threat' to the planet right now.
    No china isn't the biggest threat to the planet. Its the biggest threat to US and indeed western domination. China and the US are two sides of the same coin. Neither communism or capitalism offer a perfect system. Perhaps in theory communism is perfect. "All members of society should be equal" Sounds like perfection to me. However, it is not a workable system due to the imperfection inherent in human society. Greed itself is enough to cripple communism. However, i hope both sides can strike a balance and perhaps work together in the future.

    And thinking up a new way of changing society is easy. Its convincing people to change which is the hard bit. Social inertia just gets stronger the longer we accept the flaws of capitalism.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apollo)
    Well correct me if i'm wrong, but i'm pretty sure the problem has been identified :rolleyes:
    But you were moaning about this...saying whats the point identifying the problem without the solution.

    And no its a complicated issue so a lot of discussion is probable required...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    "All members of society should be equal" - Ogranised sports would be pretty boring...

    Surgery might be interesting though.. you know - having your hip replaced by a guy who got the job on lottery.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Out of interest - Am I being ignored for the sport of it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beekeeper)
    Congratulations. Now that you've identified what you think is the problem, what do you think the solution would be?

    Do you think that if every country in the world suddenly swung to the left in favour of communist Governments, if we had loads and loads of mini Chinas, a Global concensus would be more likely?
    Communism has already been proved to be unworkable. Just to clear things up i'm not a communist.

    But i don't think capitalism will work either. Forgive me for not having a solution.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    Communism has already been proved to be unworkable. Just to clear things up i'm not a communist.

    But i don't think capitalism will work either. Forgive me for not having a solution.
    Perhaps because there is NO system that will "work" according to your definition.

    I think you are falling victim to the Nirvana fallacy.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    No china isn't the biggest threat to the planet. Its the biggest threat to US and indeed western domination. China and the US are two sides of the same coin. Neither communism or capitalism offer a perfect system. Perhaps in theory communism is perfect. "All members of society should be equal" Sounds like perfection to me. However, it is not a workable system due to the imperfection inherent in human society. Greed itself is enough to cripple communism. However, i hope both sides can strike a balance and perhaps work together in the future.

    And thinking up a new way of changing society is easy. Its convincing people to change which is the hard bit. Social inertia just gets stronger the longer we accept the flaws of capitalism.
    Even someone like Rawls wouldn't agree with this. In any case it makes no economic sense at all! If a pareto efficient trade could make one party better off without making another worse off it couldn't take place under such a scheme. Which is why we must appeal to the 'invisible hand.'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm only "falling victim to the Nirvana fallacy" If capitalism is the best system which we could use to govern our world. I don't believe this is the case and think that a better system could be devised.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gideon2000uk)
    Even someone like Rawls wouldn't agree with this. In any case it makes no economic sense at all! If a pareto efficient trade could make one party better off without making another worse off it couldn't take place under such a scheme. Which is why we must appeal to the 'invisible hand.'
    So you agree communism is unworkable.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gideon2000uk)
    Even someone like Rawls wouldn't agree with this. In any case it makes no economic sense at all! If a pareto efficient trade could make one party better off without making another worse off it couldn't take place under such a scheme. Which is why we must appeal to the 'invisible hand.'
    Yes, anyone who thinks that everyone should be equal is stupid! It's unrealistic to think that people should be equal, as humans we're designed to gave an elite rise to power! Luckily for me I was born into this elite so it's easy for me to hold such opinions and degrade those who dare to believe in decent humanitarian ideals!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    With all due respect, Supersonic; what on earth are you blithering on about?

    You have now conceded that you have no solution other than the current that would actually realistically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, yet you persist to rant on generally about capitalism...??
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    I'm only "falling victim to the Nirvana fallacy" If capitalism is the best system which we could use to govern our world. I don't believe this is the case and think that a better system could be devised.
    If you are incapable of designing such a system why are you so confident it is possible?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gideon2000uk)
    Even someone like Rawls wouldn't agree with this. In any case it makes no economic sense at all! If a pareto efficient trade could make one party better off without making another worse off it couldn't take place under such a scheme. Which is why we must appeal to the 'invisible hand.'
    You certainly are a Rawlsian refer to him like a Christian to christ

    Good man though... even if I dont quite agree with all of it... Much sense.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Yes, anyone who thinks that everyone should be equal is stupid! It's unrealistic to think that people should be equal, as humans we're designed to gave an elite rise to power! Luckily for me I was born into this elite so it's easy for me to hold such opinions and degrade those who dare to believe in decent humanitarian ideals!
    Perhaps then "society should strive to give each member an equal opportunity to become unequal" ?

    This is certainly not the case at present.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beekeeper)
    With all due respect, Supersonic; what on earth are you blithering on about?

    You have now conceded that you have no solution other than the current that would actually realistically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, yet you persist to rant on generally about capitalism...??
    Like i've already said...just because i don't have a solution dosen't mean i have to accept the flaws of our present system.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    Perhaps then "society should strive to give each member an equal opportunity to become unequal" ?
    (Original post by Supersonic)

    This is certainly not the case at present.


    The dichotomy you are looking for is between:

    1. Equality of opportunity
    2. Opportunity of outcome.

    Communism looks to 2.

    A meritocracy looks to 1.

    We certainly aren’t at 1, but we have made immense progress in the last few decades. Its a process... not a magic wand.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    Perhaps then "society should strive to give each member an equal opportunity to become unequal" ?

    This is certainly not the case at present.
    If you are interested in a 'humane capitalism' read Rawls...

    “It seems to be one of the fixed points of our considered judgements that no one deserves his place in the distribution of native endowments, any more than one deserves one’s initial starting place in society. The assertion that a man deserves the superior character that enables him to make the effort to cultivate his abilities is equally problematic; for his character depends in large part upon fortunate family and social circumstances for which he can claim no credit. The notion of desert seems not to apply in these cases”

    First Principle [takes priority over the second principle]
    Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.
    Second Principle
    Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both:
    (a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged
    (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity [takes priority over the first part of the second principle]”
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    Like i've already said...just because i don't have a solution dosen't mean i have to accept the flaws of our present system.
    Actually thats precisely what you have to do. Until you can replace or alter the system you have to accept it as it is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    If you are incapable of designing such a system why are you so confident it is possible?
    Because everything that has a beginning has an end LMAO!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supersonic)
    Because everything that has a beginning has an end LMAO!
    And a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

    Whats your point?

    The fact is I would like to know what your basis is for believing there is a feasible and superior alternative to the core principles n which western society is based.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 9, 2008
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.