3 ms·

You are arguing people should be prevented from prioritising their resources to their kin. You are free to think such an action is contrary to your sense of eth

by meric 11y ago

You are arguing people should be prevented from prioritising their resources to their kin. You are free to think such an action is contrary to your sense of ethics. My opinion is - if a person can't even love their own children, how can they love others'? A long time ago all matter originated from the Big Bang, uniform and same in every way. Does that mean that is where we should aim towards? If you care about 'all', why not throw everyone and everything into another giant Big Bang yet again and be done with it? Because that is exactly what globalisation is doing - extinguishing unique cultures, languages and demolishing identity.

danharaj 11y ago
We don't live in a free society. If we lived in a free society, we would have to, from scratch, determine how best to cooperate. You complained about taxes: Taxes exist for a reason, because they are part of an enormously complex social structure whose main purpose is to support the concept of private property. I am asking you to consider that if you want more freedom to love your kin, then maybe you ought to abolish the system of coercion that props up capitalism. It's not the taxes at fault. The taxes are there because without them, the system destabilizes. History teaches us that much. If you want private property, you're going to have taxes. The best you can hope for is to be the top of a feudal hierarchy where all the taxes feed into your estate. That does not endure, as we are all aware. I don't think caring about everything means you want it to be homogeneous. I also reject globalization at a personal level, because I see it as a horribly violent system of interlocking political, social, and economic forces seeking to assimilate more and more of the world into their hierarchy of exploitation. What I think it means to care about everything, is to not be myopic. It may be your intent to love your children, and even love them more than other children, but it may very well be that the best way to do so is to love all children. Is that unreasonable? It may be that the best way to love your children the most is to care about the entire ecosystem. Is that unreasonable? I think human beings are remarkably good at seeing the connections between things, and even if instinct is what tells us what is important, it is something far more dynamic and intelligent that tells us what is true. If you want to be an individual, I think, personally, that it means you must find a society that supports the kind of individual you want to be. I can't imagine being an individual without other human beings around. Realizing that, I see that my individuality is found in my community; my place in my community is part of my individuality. I can't imagine being an individual without the world I live in. Realizing that, I see that my individuality is also found in my planet; how I treat the Earth is part of how I treat myself. P.S. If we ever get to the point as a species where we can generate a new universe, I think it would be enormously important for every individual to contemplate what that means about what we are.
- meric 11y ago
  Everything is connected. Everything and everyone are merely shards of the same universe. And that is exactly the point. By my parents, I and my brother are one. By my grand parents, my cousins and uncles and aunts and I. By my ancestors, I am connected to the rest of humanity. And through me, my children will inherit this same connection. And, so, to take care of the world, I must take care of my parents first, and concentrate my resources on my children. The same mindset that creates excessive high taxes for redistribution to everyone else, taken to the extreme, would abandon elderly in elderly homes, prevent children from receiving the love of their parents, take babes from the arms of mothers, and in doing so, tear the fabric of society apart, dissolving the connection between nodes and turning humanity into one giant glob, devoid of uniqueness of individuals, by equalising everything. And the mindset to do that, as hackuser so fervently advocate, at its core, is narcissism. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10038933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10038933 The idea that his ideas are all important and others have zero standing, to impose his ideas of how society should be structured on others. I know nothing. I cannot convince him, and I cannot convince you. Are my ideas the only way people can build societies with? 100% no. What's important is for me to leave others to figure out their own humanity. People will find their own way and from your comment I can see you are already most of the way there. As long as I do nothing to meddle in others, there will be no need for me to meddle.

by meric 11y ago

danharaj 11y ago

We don't live in a free society. If we lived in a free society, we would have to, from scratch, determine how best to cooperate. You complained about taxes: Taxes exist for a reason, because they are part of an enormously complex social structure whose main purpose is to support the concept of private property. I am asking you to consider that if you want more freedom to love your kin, then maybe you ought to abolish the system of coercion that props up capitalism. It's not the taxes at fault. The taxes are there because without them, the system destabilizes. History teaches us that much. If you want private property, you're going to have taxes. The best you can hope for is to be the top of a feudal hierarchy where all the taxes feed into your estate. That does not endure, as we are all aware. I don't think caring about everything means you want it to be homogeneous. I also reject globalization at a personal level, because I see it as a horribly violent system of interlocking political, social, and economic forces seeking to assimilate more and more of the world into their hierarchy of exploitation. What I think it means to care about everything, is to not be myopic. It may be your intent to love your children, and even love them more than other children, but it may very well be that the best way to do so is to love all children. Is that unreasonable? It may be that the best way to love your children the most is to care about the entire ecosystem. Is that unreasonable? I think human beings are remarkably good at seeing the connections between things, and even if instinct is what tells us what is important, it is something far more dynamic and intelligent that tells us what is true. If you want to be an individual, I think, personally, that it means you must find a society that supports the kind of individual you want to be. I can't imagine being an individual without other human beings around. Realizing that, I see that my individuality is found in my community; my place in my community is part of my individuality. I can't imagine being an individual without the world I live in. Realizing that, I see that my individuality is also found in my planet; how I treat the Earth is part of how I treat myself. P.S. If we ever get to the point as a species where we can generate a new universe, I think it would be enormously important for every individual to contemplate what that means about what we are.

meric 11y ago
Everything is connected. Everything and everyone are merely shards of the same universe. And that is exactly the point. By my parents, I and my brother are one. By my grand parents, my cousins and uncles and aunts and I. By my ancestors, I am connected to the rest of humanity. And through me, my children will inherit this same connection. And, so, to take care of the world, I must take care of my parents first, and concentrate my resources on my children. The same mindset that creates excessive high taxes for redistribution to everyone else, taken to the extreme, would abandon elderly in elderly homes, prevent children from receiving the love of their parents, take babes from the arms of mothers, and in doing so, tear the fabric of society apart, dissolving the connection between nodes and turning humanity into one giant glob, devoid of uniqueness of individuals, by equalising everything. And the mindset to do that, as hackuser so fervently advocate, at its core, is narcissism. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10038933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10038933 The idea that his ideas are all important and others have zero standing, to impose his ideas of how society should be structured on others. I know nothing. I cannot convince him, and I cannot convince you. Are my ideas the only way people can build societies with? 100% no. What's important is for me to leave others to figure out their own humanity. People will find their own way and from your comment I can see you are already most of the way there. As long as I do nothing to meddle in others, there will be no need for me to meddle.