( R )evolution
25th February 2007, 22:58
Hey guys I need a little help debating one of my friends.
1. Anyone can get rich if they work hard enough
I said that look at the Rockefeller's and other rich families and how the person who made the company worked hard but his children and grandchildren did absolute nothing for the money.
He said that we should rather just raise inheritances taxes and then use that toward building a more humane and equitable society. And then he said,
"Currently, the conservatives are winning the war of common sense arguments.
They appeal to the values of every day Joe America. Here is there argument: It
is anti-American for the government , "Big Brother", to rob you of the
opportunity to share the fruit of your life's work with your children and
grandchildren. This argument takes the focus off of the barons of capitalism
and brings it to every day middle America - strategically brilliant. NO ONE is
going to support a revolution that is perceived to have the goal of reliving the
failures of the USSR. I'm sorry to say but that revolution is DEAD. If you
wish to bring your dreams of a utopian society to reality you need to reinvent
the revolution, come up with new arguments, and a new vision: not just replay
what has already been discredited in the world of popular opinion."
2. This argument was about Human nature.
I said
That Human Nature was a product of capitalism and the threat of financial insecurity led people to be greedy. But the finical security under socialism would make greed dissapear. Also, in response to the argument that there will always be one greedy person, I said that we will find that person and shoot him. and I also said that there will always be some sociopaths who have a need to hurt another person but we do not tolerate this, we will deal with that by re education or some form of repression.
he said in response
"A response to your argument on human nature. It looks as if we may have to
respectfully agree to disagree on this point. Just look at the poor Chinese
peasants of Mao's Giant Step Backward who curtailed their productivity in the
face of forced communal living (please don't attribute all of the failure to
wheather or to the sparrows). Were they being greedy sociopaths because they
did not meet the parties quotas as a result of choosing not to toil for the
"greater good"? I liken their behavior to that of all creatures of the animal
kingdom who do not pursue a meal that would require them to go past the point of
diminishing caloric returns. Good or bad, MOST people will not exhert
themselves for something that they believe will not be directly benificial to
them or their offspring."
I need some help. Thanks guys
1. Anyone can get rich if they work hard enough
I said that look at the Rockefeller's and other rich families and how the person who made the company worked hard but his children and grandchildren did absolute nothing for the money.
He said that we should rather just raise inheritances taxes and then use that toward building a more humane and equitable society. And then he said,
"Currently, the conservatives are winning the war of common sense arguments.
They appeal to the values of every day Joe America. Here is there argument: It
is anti-American for the government , "Big Brother", to rob you of the
opportunity to share the fruit of your life's work with your children and
grandchildren. This argument takes the focus off of the barons of capitalism
and brings it to every day middle America - strategically brilliant. NO ONE is
going to support a revolution that is perceived to have the goal of reliving the
failures of the USSR. I'm sorry to say but that revolution is DEAD. If you
wish to bring your dreams of a utopian society to reality you need to reinvent
the revolution, come up with new arguments, and a new vision: not just replay
what has already been discredited in the world of popular opinion."
2. This argument was about Human nature.
I said
That Human Nature was a product of capitalism and the threat of financial insecurity led people to be greedy. But the finical security under socialism would make greed dissapear. Also, in response to the argument that there will always be one greedy person, I said that we will find that person and shoot him. and I also said that there will always be some sociopaths who have a need to hurt another person but we do not tolerate this, we will deal with that by re education or some form of repression.
he said in response
"A response to your argument on human nature. It looks as if we may have to
respectfully agree to disagree on this point. Just look at the poor Chinese
peasants of Mao's Giant Step Backward who curtailed their productivity in the
face of forced communal living (please don't attribute all of the failure to
wheather or to the sparrows). Were they being greedy sociopaths because they
did not meet the parties quotas as a result of choosing not to toil for the
"greater good"? I liken their behavior to that of all creatures of the animal
kingdom who do not pursue a meal that would require them to go past the point of
diminishing caloric returns. Good or bad, MOST people will not exhert
themselves for something that they believe will not be directly benificial to
them or their offspring."
I need some help. Thanks guys