Freedom or Equality?

Discuss literature (e.g. books, newspapers), educational studies (getting help or opinions on homework or an essay), and philosophy.

Unread postby Fan Kong » Sun Dec 22, 2002 10:21 pm

James wrote:I believe that prejudice isn’t the major reason why blacks outnumber whites on death roe. I believe the major reason is true crime. I have explained in my post above that providing benefits to a minority groups separates them from the average part of culture and promotes segregation. The majority starts to look down upon the minority because the minority enjoys benefits that they do not, and in return the minority starts to dislike the majority.

Your supporting statements do not explain why blacks outnumber white because of "true crime". So is it when a black guy kills somebody, its considered a "true crime". But when a white guy kills somebody, its not?

What I said about jail is very true. If you attack a minority you run a high risk of being accused of a hate crime. Once you go to court for hate crimes you are in serious trouble, even if it wasn’t a hate crime. The government strongly opposes racism and they are very hard on members of majority groups that attack minority groups. As for serial killers, the whites are prosecuted every bit as hard as the blacks.

Its only considered a hate crime if you are accused to saying something racist. Though I have some of my own problems with "hate crime" laws, as long as you don't say something racist during a crime, than you don't have to worry about it being considerd a "hate crime."

Once a crime moves to the higher levels of court, however, I do not see how prejudice plays a role. It may be part of the defense attorney’s attack against the prosecution, and something the family complains about at home, but they aren’t sent off to die because of the color of their skin. From the highest levels of court people are sent off to die because they committed a crime, and both minority cultures and majority cultures alike can be improperly prosecuted.

Even though the government makes a huge mistake in providing benefits to minority groups, they aren’t messing up as seriously in higher levels of court. We have to look at the reasons behind the numbers, not the numbers themselves. Society has some serious flaws that will be worked out with time, I believe, but providing non-universal benefits to special interest groups is not the answer.

Just wondering, what is considered higher level of courts? Blacks go down for murder much easier than white folks, so I'm assuming that murder cases don't usually go to the "higher levels of court".

Now back to the topic.......most of you guys think programs like equal oppurtunity and affirmitve action is not needed? You don't like the fact that some blacks and hispanics get jobs over a white person because of their race? Look at who controls the economy, who hires the labor force.....if these programs aren't in place, who do you think these "white" bosses are going to hire? You don't think they would higher a white guy over a more qualified black guy because of his race? Of course not everybody would act in this way, but look around.......the answer is obvious. City management should be distributing resources evenly throughout the entire city. But why is it that the minority areas look like crap compared to areas where the white folks live? White schools are better funded, their streets don't have potholes, their traffic lights work. That is why minorities may need a little extra help to be on an "even" playing field with whites.

Don't forget the group that has benefited the most from these type of social programs........WHITE women.
User avatar
Fan Kong
Langzhong
 
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 6:39 am
Location: Chasing the citizens of Shu........ChangBan part deux!!! >:)

Unread postby Lion's Mane » Sun Dec 22, 2002 10:24 pm

Anarchy is, according to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:

:arrow: Absence of any form of political authority.

:arrow: Political disorder and confusion.

:arrow: Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.

Would you like to live somewhere that is chaotic confusion ALL the time? Where the people have NO morals, because there's nothing that says they CAN'T do anything, AFTER they've lived with laws?

There is a tribe of Innuit, in the Northwest, whom have no written laws. None. However, they rarely have any crimes whatsoever. Why? Number one, because they've lived like this for generations upon generations. Before a Code of Laws was even established, in Babylon. In their culture, if someone randomly kills or rapes another person, their way is such that the perpetrator will be killed, because they are obviously not in their right mind. All things may be shared equally, but life and love are held upon the highest sanctity, and thus, are not to be infringed upon.

Anarchy is not some solution for the human race. We've been under laws OF OUR OWN MAKING for over 7000 years. How long do you think it would take for the pandemonium and chaos to settle if suddenly, the world lost all forms of government and law retroactively? Would your decendants even be around to see it?

Keep in mind, I don't care much at all for government at all. As much of a Democracy as people call America, we're not. America is a Representative Republic, where an elected few hold the majority of power. We put our vested interests into people whom we feel will represent the general populaces best interests. However, the elected few also use tactics that most would see as devious, underhanded, rude, uncouth and vicious in order to get into power, by slandering, and generally just making their opponents look bad.

Freedom and equality are subjective. Anarchy does not provide basic rights of humanity. Anarchy does not make everyone equal. Freedom does not equal capitalism. Freedom is being able to walk down the street and not be afraid if someone is going to take offense to you somehow, and gun you down. Equality is being able to know that this world is going to remain diverse, without someone deciding that members of a certain race or religion, or what have you, do not belong in the world.

If you want to keep a topic from going off topic, don't post anything that could be contrued as a tangent. Which would make debate pretty pointless, wouldn't it?
Last edited by Lion's Mane on Sun Dec 22, 2002 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Remember, children, "No two people are not on fire."
User avatar
Lion's Mane
Lord of Annwn
Lord of Annwn
 
Posts: 1274
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 9:25 pm
Location: Challenging the wind...

Unread postby Travis » Sun Dec 22, 2002 10:35 pm

Xiao Gui wrote: Most people,including you, sees freedom as capitalism. I see capitalism wearing the sheep skin of freedom. This is why I argue against capitalism. I really can't argue about which one is better: freedom or equality. They are so different that they may be the same thing, just like fascism and communism. Sorry about that.


I myself don't see capitalism as complete freedom, just a form of it. Captialism is about as close to true freedom as one can get with out having to live on an Island really. You can't just make everyone free, because it would be choas, and you can't make everyone equal it would be chaos.

Capitalism has shown itself to work, though cruel at times, it Works best. The US is a prime example, The Superpower of the world. The US is a super-power and got that way through Capitalism. Russia stood a long time with Communism but had to go to extreme measures to get it, and It crumbled trying to match it. Even the Japanese in WWII were outclassed by how much America could produce in weaponry. Capitalism is the only way a government can sustain itself and last with somewhat of stability. England, France, and other European countries that have Capitalist Societies have lasted years upon years with it and are the worlds Major powers. There is really no argueing Capitalism works, and is the better system to live under.
"Be on your Guard, Stand Firm in the Faith, Be Men of Courage, Be Strong, Do everything in Love" - Master Lee's School Motto-

Formerly Schwarz Bruder/Taishi Ci
User avatar
Travis
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 5:18 am
Location: Master Lee's TKD School (LaFayette, Ga USA)

Unread postby Xiao Gui » Sun Dec 22, 2002 11:28 pm

Taishi Ci wrote: Capitalism has shown itself to work, though cruel at times, it Works best. The US is a prime example, The Superpower of the world. The US is a super-power and got that way through Capitalism. Russia stood a long time with Communism but had to go to extreme measures to get it, and It crumbled trying to match it. Even the Japanese in WWII were outclassed by how much America could produce in weaponry. Capitalism is the only way a government can sustain itself and last with somewhat of stability. England, France, and other European countries that have Capitalist Societies have lasted years upon years with it and are the worlds Major powers. There is really no argueing Capitalism works, and is the better system to live under.


Ooops, I don't prefer anarchy over anything. It was purely a joke. Please don't take it so seriously. Sorry about that. :oops:
I disagree with you though and I will explain chronologically. US, England, France, and other European countries did not become major power because if capitalism but because of colonialization where they rob from countries that are less technologically advance and bring the raw material back to their home nation for further processing. Pure capitalism at that time could be see in London during industrialization where poor people including children work and live in impoverish conditions and rich upper and middle class gets richer.
US became the leader of all other nations because both world war one and two. While Europe is war torn and Canadian is busy sending troops over, US is busy making money off weapon. (US join both wars late in the wars) When all European nations are in heavy debt, US become the economic and political leader.
Japan becomes economic powerhouse not because of capitalism. Look at it this way, US and Japan is both capitalistic even before the war, but why did Japan raise so quickly. Ha! It's because of Japanese value teamwork and collective success more than individual accomplishment. The bureaucracy in Japan (previously anyway) promises lifetime employment and the participation of employees in their company decision-making. Their organizational model has been long admired by their North American counterparts, but American based corporation have problem implementing it because of the strong individualism.
Now Russia, they did pretty well until Stalin went crazy. Nevertheless, I also have problem with communism, but capitalism is not much better. Cuba is a good example. They are as bad as the US media portray them to be. Without the economic section and political pressure US puts on Cuba, they would be doing even better.
The superpower US enjoy now is built up from all the advantage I have listed above, not because of capitalism.

Oy, wait a minute. US is only superficially super power anyway. Only 20% of the population possesses 80% of the wealth. There are lots of poor people there. In other words, is anything good about capitalism apart from its superficial economical advantage? If there is none, perhaps capitalism needs to improve on its humanistic side of it.
User avatar
Xiao Gui
Cannibalistic Kitten
 
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 4:40 pm
Location: Vancouver

Unread postby Travis » Mon Dec 23, 2002 12:09 am

You made you point it wasn't entirely Captialism, but it did aid in all of these processes. American is not a superficial Superpower. American's have the best living conditions on the planet, America is the Super power wether others refused to believe it or not. America is the most powerful country in the world. And Show me proof about your superficial Superpower and I might believe it.
"Be on your Guard, Stand Firm in the Faith, Be Men of Courage, Be Strong, Do everything in Love" - Master Lee's School Motto-

Formerly Schwarz Bruder/Taishi Ci
User avatar
Travis
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 5:18 am
Location: Master Lee's TKD School (LaFayette, Ga USA)

Unread postby James » Mon Dec 23, 2002 1:44 am

Xiao Gui wrote: Here is my view on freedom and equality. They are both unrealistic and are simply terms invented by philosophers and Christianity to give people the illusion that they have freedom and equality. But, I won’t go into explaining my view, because it might be too philosophical for this debate. 8-)

I would like to hear the explanation of your views, even if it is philosophical. As for freedom vs. equality, one of the two can become a reality and that is freedom. Although for freedom to become a reality there must not be government or leadership, and that make it out of the question in major world powers and it will never become a complete reality in any form of collective culture.

Xiao Gui wrote: :roll: Anyway, I will argue against freedom, because it’s winning so far. Let’s assume it does exist. The topic digressed, because people were confused about the definition of freedom. There are two kinds of freedom: freedom to pursue and achieve human potential and freedom to peruse and accumulate material wealth. However, most people need the incentives of wealth and the fear of poverty in order to motivate themselves to achieve their potential. This is why capitalism marks the prosperity of a country. However, are we truly free to achieve our potential? No, there are many reasons. In a capitalistic society, our goals are only limited to those that are, selfishly, good only for us, and those that are practical. If my goal in life is to help out with charitable causes, I’d better change my goal since I probably will starve to death. Similarly, if my goal is to be a millionaire, I am not achieving my greatest potential or being a useful member of my community.

free·dom n – 1. a state in which somebody is able to act and live as he or she chooses, without being subject to any, or to any undue, restraints and restrictions. (nine more definitions are included, but they all basically mean the same thing, only applied on another level besides that of a single human).

Freedom, by literal definition, is a very simple term to grasp. I feel the first sentence sums it up nicely; a state in which somebody is able to act and live as he or she chooses. There are not multiple kinds of freedom, in my opinion; there is only one freedom and the countless ways in which someone chooses to use it. I also believe that our only limitations are the ones we don’t find a way to work around.

Xiao Gui wrote: :evil: True face of capitalism is very ugly. :evil: Let’s use U.S. as the example, capitalism thrives on and can only survives with the exploitation of natural recourses, the abundance of cheap labors, and excess of poor people (who provide the cheap labor). People DO have freedom to pursue, but have very little opportunity to achieve. The lack of cheap education, medical support, welfare programs contribute to this problem. Those who can afford the most expensive lawyers corrupt even the justice system. There are people who are earning too much for doing very little work, and there are people working themselves to death but receiving very little pay. Also, inflation, recession, and depression are the characteristics of capitalistic economy. :? I can go on forever.

In the United States people are only limited by their potential. Bill Gates had the knowledge and ambition to create Microsoft Corporation, the thirty-year-old employee answering his technical support phone does not have this ambition, this is why he is not a millionaire.

When you provide assistance to a minority group, through welfare for example, you encourage that minority group not to grow, but to remain the same. Society cannot nurture failure or failure will grow like a weed.

If an institution is forced to drop its prices to something other than demand, a significant rift is caused. If prices are forced up, the product won’t sell. If prices are forced down, the product continues to sell, but quality diminishes proportionally. The education system and welfare are no exception to this rule.

If we are going to aid people in our society, we should be aiding people who are doing something with their lives. Welfare to the full time college student, never to the woman living in government housing because she doesn’t want to get a job or doesn’t want to learn enough to make that a viable reality.

Some say that these people don’t have a chance. I disagree. If I were made homeless and all my possessions were stripped from me I would be willing to bet my own life that within a month I could have a job in a field I hold no previous education to and a brand new Apple computer. Why? Because I am willing to take the steps necessary to make this a reality. Well… I would have the apple computer as long as some other homeless bum didn’t beat the crap out of me and take it.

Xiao Gui wrote: Some might argue for the survival of the fittest. This term is awfully outdated and flawed. First, whoever says that sounds very much like Nazis. :x Natural selection does mean the survival of the fittest, but humans are far from being naturally selected. We live in an artificial environment where we alter our environment to FIT us, so we wouldn’t be naturally selected. If we went along with the belief in the survival of the fittest, who can be the judge to decided who is the fittest, and why don’t we just kill off all the physically challenged people instead of making ramps and special elevators for them. :?:

Survival of the fittest is outdated, I agree. I think we should help our fellow man whenever possible. I also happen to think that providing them with benefits they refuse to earn is not helping them, it is in fact serious hurting them.

Xiao Gui wrote: Freedom is not realistic goal (itz a ugly one), but equality would not do it either. Communistic society can only successfully operates if no capitalism exists to tempt people to be greedy. I won’t go into detail, but here is a simple analogy. Anybody with younger siblings would agree with me: when you get into arguments with them and obviously you win, your younger brothers or sisters go running crying to your mom who would then tell you to let them win, because they are younger. And you will say it’s not fair. :x On the other hand, anybody with older siblings would also agree with me that it is only fair this way. Since you have no choice but to be the miserable younger sibling, it is absolutely essential that your older bully brother or sister let you have your way, because you will never win their games. It’s not fair that they get to decide the rules of the game, so they can win all the time. :cry:

Society forms a dependence on material possession and status, this is human nature and I know for a fact I will not live long enough to see a change in this thinking. We have to learn how to survive in a world like this without letting it trample us.

The younger child gets the short end of the stick with their older brother because, in most cases, the older brother is bigger and more knowledgeable. He is in a higher grade level of school and his is older… he holds a higher level of status in the world.

If a youth is much smarter than his older brother though, it isn’t very hard to seize his authority away from him and make him look the fool. The youth may get a pounding for it later, but strength will only carry the older brother so far.

Everything is a little different in the real world. It isn’t a young boy fighting with his older brother of equal intelligence. It is a collection of adults fighting with each other for acceptance, money, and power. The intelligent, resourceful, and the able win and they provide a comfortable living for those below them that know how to manage their resources. You don’t need to be Bill Gates to be happy (I bet there is a lot of stress in his life, he cries like the rest of us, he feels pain too), but you can be an educated employee under him living with complete joy from day to day with a 32K/year salary.

Xiao Gui wrote::idea: Anyway, I would like to propose the system Denmark has. In Denmark, people are free to pursue their goal and free to accumulate wealth (if that is their goal). The catch is you are taxed heavily. If you make a million a year, you end up with 50000 plus huge income tax refunds. If your neighbor makes 100000 a year, he ends up with 55000 plus some income tax refund. Hey, you are still making more than your neighbor and still have lots of money left to spend. Your family has free medical care and your kids have free education and free post education. Denmark has the highest GDP in the world, so obviously capitalism works under these terms.

Ah, I was waiting for someone to bring up this view in this discussion. In a society like this freedom cannot exist. The person strong, intelligent, dedicated, and ambitious enough to make one million dollars a year winds up making just a little bit more than his fellow citizen that is content to contribute nothing of value to society. This system is very heavily flawed in my eyes. Why? Well…

I imagine when most people hear read the notes above, folks to make only 24K a year, many were thinking for a moment, “wow, I could move to Denmark and I wouldn’t have to worry about spending six years in college” – even if it was just for a moment. However, people who made more than 50K/year were thinking, “why should someone who isn’t willing to spend six years in college get the benefits I worked so hard to achieve?”

Society depends on status, influence, dedication, power, ambition, and innovation to achieve. As long as Denmark maintains this system they will never become a world leader in innovation, at least that is how I see it.

If we were to attempt something like this in the United States we would severely maim innovation and technological advancement. Why would someone spend eight years in college working to become a leader in a very advanced field when they can spend only two and make a comparative amount doing something much less important and much easier?

Obviously people will still do it, not everyone cares about money, but it wouldn’t be the same. If every place in the world were like this society would be very lucky to advance at even half the previous speed.

Why would Bill Gates want to release an innovative revision to his operating system when his salary isn’t going to do anything he really likes?
Kongming’s Archives – Romance of the Three Kingdoms Novel, History and Games
“ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
  — Ben Franklin
User avatar
James
Sausaged Fish
Sausaged Fish
 
Posts: 18000
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: Happy Valley, UT

Unread postby Justin » Mon Dec 23, 2002 3:12 am

I view freedom as having the time and opportunity to do whatever you want. In this respect I think the US and other capitilist countries are the freeist nations on the planet. No where else on Earth can a man or woman play video games every day because they have nothing else to do. I think this is in essence due to capitalism. Capitalism promotes a very strong innovation factor in a society. With this desire to innovate we are constantly improving how we do things. No longer does a person have to slave the majority of their day away simply to provide sustenance for their families. I think most people in the world want the type of life we have here in the US.

Also I believe most countries eventually will shift to a capitlastic type of system. It's simply due to the laws of supply and demand. And lastly America is not a true capitlistic country, true capitlism can only exist without gov't interference of any kind.
My Website

My Blog

The Dungeon

Trouble maker extraordinaire!
User avatar
Justin
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 3356
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2002 2:08 am
Location: Dropping it like it's hot

Unread postby Xiao Gui » Mon Dec 23, 2002 3:36 am

Taishi Ci wrote:American's have the best living conditions on the planet, America is the Super power weather others refused to believe it or not. America is the most powerful country in the world. And Show me proof about your superficial Superpower and I might believe it.


This comment is awfully US-centric. Anyway, best living condition in the world: Geneva Convention: first place, Zurich, Switzerland, second, Vienna, Austria, and third, Vancouver, Canada. No American city made it to top ten. Actually, highest ranking US city (excluding Howaii) is Seattle which is the 31st place. :shock: Yes, American does have the military superpower. Bush said it himself that he would nuke if he wants to (although he is awfully nice to China). Here is my proof about problematic superpower: If the top seven richest people (all computer nerds) in the world are Americans, but how about the rest of the US citizens?

According to United Nations Devlopment Programme, human development is “the process of increasing people’s options to lead a long and healthy life, to acquire knowledge, and to find access to the assets needed for a decent standard of living.”
Here are some stats:
1. Human Development Index: Canada 1st , France 2nd, Norway 3rd, and US 4th.
2. Human Poverty Index for industrial Countries. Human Poverty index for industrial countries (there are 17 of them and first means the least poverty: Sweden, Netherlands, Germany, Norway, Italy, Finland, France, Japan, Denmark, Canada, Belgium, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, UK, Ireland, US)
Sweden 1st - Denmark 9th - US 17th (i.e. last place…)
People not expected to survive to age 60: Sweden 9% -Denmark 9% - US 13%
People who are Functionally illiterate: Sweden 7.5% - Denmark 0% - US 20.7%
Population below the income poverty line: Sweden 6.7% - Denmark 7.5% - US. 19.1%
Canada was ranked the best place in the world to live.
Source: United Nation Development Programme, 1998

Well, US has the richest people AND the poorest people and lots of poorest people.
US is powerful in the sense that they can beat up other countries physically and economically, but it’s not very good in taking care of its citizens.
Last edited by Xiao Gui on Mon Dec 23, 2002 5:34 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Xiao Gui
Cannibalistic Kitten
 
Posts: 918
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 4:40 pm
Location: Vancouver

Unread postby Travis » Mon Dec 23, 2002 3:55 am

........ :cry: ...........


Well I'm American, that's just the average American attitude :lol: Fine we may not have the best living condtitions but all that really matters is Military Power and Economic Power. Another reason for such low statistics: way more people. The fact is The largest class is the Middle Class in America. The Poor and Rich classes are both lower than the middle class, which shows 80% of the money can't be controlled by the Richest people. Say what you like I live here :lol: and I know way more people in the middle class than the Hobos :wink:
"Be on your Guard, Stand Firm in the Faith, Be Men of Courage, Be Strong, Do everything in Love" - Master Lee's School Motto-

Formerly Schwarz Bruder/Taishi Ci
User avatar
Travis
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 5:18 am
Location: Master Lee's TKD School (LaFayette, Ga USA)

Unread postby Jimayo » Mon Dec 23, 2002 4:09 am

Taishi Ci wrote:........ :cry: ...........


Well I'm American, that's just the average American attitude :lol: Fine we may not have the best living condtitions but all that really matters is Military Power and Economic Power. Another reason for such low statistics: way more people. The fact is The largest class is the Middle Class in America. The Poor and Rich classes are both lower than the middle class, which shows 80% of the money can't be controlled by the Richest people. Say what you like I live here :lol: and I know way more people in the middle class than the Hobos :wink:


As a matter of fact, middle class doesn't make all that much money. 40,000-100,000 is middle class. Bill Gates has billions of dollars.

It's actually 5% of the pop controls 80% of the wealth, and 20% of the pop controls 95% of the wealth in american.
98% of the internet population has a Myspace. If you're part of the 2% that isn't an emo bastard, copy and paste this into your sig.
Jimayo
Lord of the Thirteen Hells
 
Posts: 3308
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 1:38 am
Location: Nothingness. And that's where I'll be returning in oh, about 15 minutes.

PreviousNext

Return to Literature, Academics, and Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved