On Aug 27, 8:53 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
> I believe in accurate premises BB. The following is not.
>
> "What is interesting to me is how those of you who keep going back to
> “we are helping those in need” prefer not to do it all yourselves
> but
> rather turn it over to the state, which is an external entity
> composed
> of bureaucrats. ..." - BB
Not entirely accurate, you are right, but not completly inaccurate is
it?
>
> On Aug 27, 8:43 pm, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > What is interesting to me is how those of you who keep going back to
> > “we are helping those in need” prefer not to do it all yourselves but
> > rather turn it over to the state, which is an external entity composed
> > of bureaucrats. It is almost as if you are saying ”I can’t decide
> > how to do it best myself, I don’t even want to choose where to put my
> > helping money, I can’t organize a group or a charity, (even though
> > they use mostly volunteers, which are WAY more cost effective, FREE in
> > fact.) No, I would rather you the State just did everything and I can
> > still have that helping the needy feeling and not have to choose”
> > States do not use volunteers very often. They have to pay them
> > exceptional wages and benefits, thus diluting the effectiveness. What
> > you seem to be saying is “they know better than I do” That is OK with
> > me, it just seems like giving away yourself to the state, which is the
> > thing I am against. If you believe so strongly in helping the needy,
> > why not just do it without the state? I would like to choose the
> > areas I think need the most help. Governments that take most of your
> > money don’t let you do that.
>
> > Doctors without Borders is an amazing group, (who need MONEY for
> > some reason, I don‘t know why. ) They didn’t wait around for some
> > bureaucrat to do something, they just did it themselves.
>
> > And when the State sends troops to Afghanistan or does something
> > else you don‘t like? In the name of “helping and protecting?” Too
> > late, you handed your money and your control over to “them” already.
> > It is always “them” who get to choose. You think you are choosing,
> > but it is clear that you are not. You can make a fuss, but it did not
> > stop them did it?
>
> > You know what the ULTIMATE in “voting” is? Capitalism. Every
> > single dollar you spend is a vote. A vote that will be counted too!
> > Can’t be taken away from you. Everything you choose to spend money on
> > is a vote for it. Think about that the next time you spend your
> > money, what you have left of it, you already voted to give most of
> > your choices away already. You don’t approve of something? Don’t buy
> > it. There is no more powerful message, and it is your direct vote.
>
> > I believe in personal choice. If you don’t, that is OK with me.
>
> > On Aug 27, 7:44 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I do like Kunkel's take on capitalistic ventures and time. "Not the
> > > least way that Marxism is opposed to capitalism is in its relationship
> > > to time. Capitalist culture approaches a pure instantaneousness: no
> > > future, no past".
> > > Sure it's true that the culture of capitalism sees the now and
> > > disregards the ramifications, such as issues of environmental
> > > destruction, causal poverty and overall degradation of the extended
> > > life cycle. So we do have profits in the hundreds of billions while
> > > little attention is paid to the imperative which then leads to the
> > > death of ducks.
> > > Overall I don't think there is anything new when viewing the annals of
> > > human history, the deaths of many for the ideals of the few. I think
> > > it's a great topic which hopefully can elevate the group perspective
> > > and focus. Thanks Chris!
>
> > > On Aug 27, 10:12 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > From
> > > > here:http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/08/24/what-we-are-not-emb...
>
> > > > "
>
> > > > Here is a good debate proposition: It ought to be less embarrassing to
> > > > have
> > > > been influenced by Ayn Rand than by Karl Marx.
>
> > > > The most powerful way to argue the affirmative is to compare the number
> > > > of
> > > > human beings murdered by the devotees of each. That line of attack
> > > > ought to
> > > > be decisive, but I’m afraid it won’t get you far with the multitude of
> > > > highly-self-regarded thinkers influenced by Karl Marx. Fact is,
> > > > commitment
> > > > to some kind of socialism and fluency in the jargon of Marxism used to
> > > > be
> > > > mandatory for serious intellectuals. And there’s something glamorous in
> > > > the
> > > > very idea of the intellectual. Even for those of us who came of age
> > > > after
> > > > 1989, Marxism, like cigarettes, remains linked by association to the
> > > > idea of
> > > > the intellectual, and so, like cigarettes, shares in the intellectual’s
> > > > glamour. I don’t know if cigarettes or Marxism have killed more people,
> > > > but
> > > > it’s pretty clear cigarettes are more actively stigmatized. Marxists,
> > > > neo-Marxists, crypto-Marxists, post-Marxists, etc. have an enduring
> > > > influence on intellectual fashion. So it is not only possible proudly to
> > > > confess Marx’s influence on one’s thought, but it remains possible in
> > > > some
> > > > quarters to impress by doing so. It ought to be embarrassing, but it
> > > > isn’t.
> > > > Being a bit of a Marxist is like having a closet full of pirate blouses
> > > > but
> > > > never having to worry."
>
> > > > This gave me pause for consideration. Rand's philosophies have been much
> > > > maligned as "uncompassionate", while certain "socialist" (Marxist
> > > > Communist)
> > > > policies have been held up as an ideal, and yet, how many people have
> > > > been
> > > > killed in the name of Randian philosophy, and how many have been killed
> > > > in
> > > > the name of Marxist philosophy?
>
> > > > What do YOU think? ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
