Is it moral for our governments to impose poverty on us?

Started by Greatest I am, July 25, 2019, 03:49:55 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Greatest I am

Quote from: Mike Cl on August 14, 2019, 09:50:58 PM
Tell that to trump/bolton.

Trump is like a bug on a windshield.

Americans are not that bright, but they are not stupid enough to actually follow such a fool into a fight.

I am surprised your military has put up with trump this long.

His oligarch owner must also own a bunch of Generals.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am

Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 09:58:50 PM
There's no a priori reason trading a bigger government for two or more smaller ones leads to war. The Soviet Union went from one government to fifteen with almost no bloodshed. Czechoslovakia split peacefully with Ceaușescu and his deer in the headlights expression one of the only fatalities. Yugoslavia turned into a shit show, but some parts broke away without a shot fired, such as Slovenia.

In fact, a good case can be made that wars are more likely when governments encompass groups who simply don't get along, such as Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire leading into WWI.

You are thinking political and individual power bases.

In a universal system, demographics rule. Not individuals.

Universalism is smaller cheaper governance. Not bigger and more expensive governance.

Regards
DL

aileron

Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:06:51 PM
You are thinking political and individual power bases.

In a universal system, demographics rule. Not individuals.

Universalism is smaller cheaper governance. Not bigger and more expensive governance.

Regards
DL


I really don't know what "Universalism" means as a government because the definitions have been so squishy, touchy-feely, and all over the map.

Let's move beyond semantics and go to a functional definition... Where has this form of governance been tried in the real world?
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room! -- President Merkin Muffley

My mom was a religious fundamentalist. Plus, she didn't have a mouth. It's an unusual combination. -- Bender Bending Rodriguez

Greatest I am

Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 10:11:52 PM
I really don't know what "Universalism" means as a government because the definitions have been so squishy, touchy-feely, and all over the map.

Let's move beyond semantics and go to a functional definition... Where has this form of governance been tried in the real world?

It has not. Not yet.

We have started though, mostly through the U.N., to introduce a universal religion and harmonized government reporting to help their demographers in their work.

The G 12, Commonwealth, U. K. and Eastern block coalitions are joining up as well.

Funding to mitigate the harm from climate change and immigration will force even more countries to cooperate more.

The U.S. has been pushing for a new world order for a long time and they will get it. They just wont lead it.

Regards
DL   

Mike Cl

Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:03:27 PM
Trump is like a bug on a windshield.

Americans are not that bright, but they are not stupid enough to actually follow such a fool into a fight.

I am surprised your military has put up with trump this long.

His oligarch owner must also own a bunch of Generals.

Regards
DL
I hope you are correct.  But as it turned out, Hitler was a bug on a windshield--but before that mess was finished, he had managed to break a whole lot of windshields.  And the German people were not that bright, but they were not stupid enough to follow Hitler into a fight.  Right?????
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Cavebear

Quote from: Baruch on August 13, 2019, 06:03:56 AM
Yes.

Thank you...  I learn something new every day.  But I bet I forget this one tomorrow.  Weak neuropath for that kind of detail.  I'd rather remember how to flip an omelet properly.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Baruch

Quote from: josephpalazzo on August 14, 2019, 08:35:58 PM
Trying to apologize for your idol?! His hate for Hitler clouded his judgment. The smart thing would have been to let Hitler and Stalin fight it out. Whoever would win would be so exhausted that for the Allies it would have been a walk in the park in cleaning up any German resistance in West Europe. Very few historians are willing to admit openly that our so-called "heroes", Churchill and Roosevelt, were dumb to help Stalin, and were outplayed by Stalin at Yalta.

That was the plan, but Hitler/Stalin botched Allied plans.  They were never supposed to be allies.  But Hitler had a genius stroke to both ally with Stalin,and then betray him as soon as practical.  Hitler betrayed Stalin, much to Stalin's surprise because of paranoia.  Churchill was getting too close to Stalin.  Stalin naively had no intention of fighting Germany or allying with Britain.  Just nibble a few E European territories.  Hitler on the other hand found it incomprehensible that the British wouldn't settle.  Invading Britain was plan B, for after the fall of the Soviet Union.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:03:27 PM
Trump is like a bug on a windshield.

Americans are not that bright, but they are not stupid enough to actually follow such a fool into a fight.

I am surprised your military has put up with trump this long.

His oligarch owner must also own a bunch of Generals.

Regards
DL

The "ownership" of the West goes back several levels.  The military of the US isn't a Latin American junta, yet.  CIA/FBI does all the skullduggery.  Right now, the US military is the most "typical representative" of all public institutions.  The best we have to offer (because voluntary).
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 09:47:17 PM
Not really. Just changed to a moral nation.

Regards
DL

BS.  Humans have no morality.  That is why your POV is utopian.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 09:50:02 PM
Global climate change and mass immigrations and migrations will cause us to either war a lot more or unite a lot more.

I don't think the world want's to war more. Especially in the West.

Regards
DL

That is the plan.  Caligula ... "I wish humanity had a common neck, so I might more easily slit it".  War is human nature. Pacifism is degenerate.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:06:51 PM
You are thinking political and individual power bases.

In a universal system, demographics rule. Not individuals.

Universalism is smaller cheaper governance. Not bigger and more expensive governance.

Regards
DL

Like socialism/communism.  Lose money on each item, but make it up on volume.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:54:05 PM
It has not. Not yet.

We have started though, mostly through the U.N., to introduce a universal religion and harmonized government reporting to help their demographers in their work.

The G 12, Commonwealth, U. K. and Eastern block coalitions are joining up as well.

Funding to mitigate the harm from climate change and immigration will force even more countries to cooperate more.

The U.S. has been pushing for a new world order for a long time and they will get it. They just wont lead it.

Regards
DL

French foreign policy since Avignon.  World ruled by a French Pope, who is ruled by the French monarchy.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: aileron on August 14, 2019, 10:11:52 PM
I really don't know what "Universalism" means as a government because the definitions have been so squishy, touchy-feely, and all over the map.

Let's move beyond semantics and go to a functional definition... Where has this form of governance been tried in the real world?

Sargon, Nebuchadnessar, Cyrus, Alexander, Shih Huang Di, Caesar ....
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: Greatest I am on August 14, 2019, 10:54:05 PM
It has not. Not yet.

We have started though, mostly through the U.N., to introduce a universal religion and harmonized government reporting to help their demographers in their work.

The G 12, Commonwealth, U. K. and Eastern block coalitions are joining up as well.

Funding to mitigate the harm from climate change and immigration will force even more countries to cooperate more.

The U.S. has been pushing for a new world order for a long time and they will get it. They just wont lead it.

Regards
DL

China will lead it.  France will be taken over by Disneyland Paris, run by communists.  All of Europe will be tourist traps for Chinse tourists.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

josephpalazzo

Quote from: Baruch on August 15, 2019, 03:27:32 AM
That was the plan, but Hitler/Stalin botched Allied plans.  They were never supposed to be allies.  But Hitler had a genius stroke to both ally with Stalin,and then betray him as soon as practical.  Hitler betrayed Stalin, much to Stalin's surprise because of paranoia.  Churchill was getting too close to Stalin.  Stalin naively had no intention of fighting Germany or allying with Britain.  Just nibble a few E European territories.  Hitler on the other hand found it incomprehensible that the British wouldn't settle.  Invading Britain was plan B, for after the fall of the Soviet Union.


Are you kidding? Hitler gave a thousand speeches in which he declared he would destroy communism. Sorry you've got it wrong. Stalin knew that Hitler knew that alliance was temporary. After splitting Poland with Hitler, he moved into the Baltic region, invaded Finland, did everything to prepare Russia for the onslaught. Thanks to Allies (mainly the US), Russia got the following:


Quote
What these figures mean when broken down into specific items may be seen from the following statistics on the Soviet Union.
By the end of June 1944 the United States had sent to the Soviets under lend-lease more than 11,000 planes; over 6,000 tanks and tank destroyers; and 300,000 trucks and other military vehicles.
Many of the planes have been flown directly from the United States to the Soviet Union over the northern route via Alaska and Siberia, others were crated and shipped to the Persian Gulf, where they were assembled and flown into Russia.
We have also sent to the Soviets about 350 locomotives, 1,640 flat cars, and close to half a million tons of rails and accessories, axles, and wheels, all for the improvement of the railways feeding the Red armies on the Eastern Front. For the armies themselves we have sent miles of field telephone wire, thousands of telephones, and many thousands of tons of explosives. And we have also provided machine tools and other equipment to help the Russians manufacture their own planes, guns, shells, and bombs.
We have supplied our allies with large quantities of food. The Soviet Union alone has received some 3,000,000 tons.
https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-archives/gi-roundtable-series/pamphlets/em-13-how-shall-lend-lease-accounts-be-settled-(1945)/how-much-of-what-goods-have-we-sent-to-which-allies

That kind of help was anything but insignificant.