5 ms·

What makes "Indians" and "Finns" morally meaningful groups? Many individual Finns didn't make Finland nice. Quite a few just came along for the ride, and some

What makes "Indians" and "Finns" morally meaningful groups? Many individual Finns didn't make Finland nice. Quite a few just came along for the ride, and some were downright harmful. So it would be equally valid to say "Finns, except Sven, but including Sandeep built a nice country". (Assuming of course that Sven was one of the ones who didn't contribute much.) So we could equally well change the groups and get the same positive claims. Suppose I were to say "whites built a nice suburb, why shouldn't they be the ones who enjoy the benefits" (with regards to, say, an all-white suburb that they want to keep blacks out of), what principled objection would you make to this claim?

blfr 10y ago
What makes Finns a morally meaningful group here is what makes family a morally meaningful group: blood ties and inheritance. It's not unfair that people inherit after their ancestors, whether it's a stamp collection, height, or a country. I don't have an objection to people maintaining their own communities, closed or not. I believe in freedom of association. I'm not an American either so US taboos around race don't hold much sway over my opinions.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  Ok, fair enough. I guess that's our point of disagreement; I only believe in individual rights, and don't view any group as being special.
  - blfr 10y ago
    You don't see your family as special for example? Just another random collection of individuals?
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      I don't see a family as being a morally privileged group in the way you seem to. For example, if A threatens B with violence should B employ C, I believe that's wrong. I don't believe it becomes morally acceptable if A and B are members of the same family, or the same ethnic or national group. I believe parents owe a certain individual obligation to their children (due to the fact that they chose to birth them), but little else.
      - blfr 10y ago
        You just restated the same thing without addressing the core similiarity. If you consider the accident of birth in a certain country unfair. That is, Sven being born in Sweden and Sandeep in India which should be rectified by allowing Sandeep to move to Sweden (or Finland, or wherever), do you consider other instances of inheritance unfair? For example, if Sven stands to inherit an apartment in Stockholm and a nice cabin in the woods, while Lucas' parents were renters who won't leave him much, should Sven's parents' estate be taxed at 100% to rectify this unfairness (or 50% to pass it to Lucas)? If not, why not? What is the principled objection? It seems to me that both lines of arguments for inheritance (whether better capital allocation and stewardship, or simple blood ties) work just as well for material goods as they do for citizenship. And property is guaranteed by the threat of violence (often from the same actors) just like borders are.
        yummyfajitas 10y ago
        I restated my principle in terms of family because I don't think you disagree with my principle there. Do you think my brother should threaten me with violence if I employ someone other than his son? I have no problem with individuals disposing of their property as they see fit. Just as Sven might like to pass his house to Lucas, I might like to rent my house to Jose the Mexican. And I object to laws that would prevent both of these things. I guess another disagreement we have is that I don't see citizenship as property.
barpet 10y ago
You are racist against Whites. There are literally millions of whites (Central + Eastern Europe) that have it way worse than your beloved black,asian immigrants in the West ? What entitles your Sandeep to earn more doing the same job just because he moved his ass and immigrated to Germany and my mother did not ? Because she loves her country and does not want to move elsewhere but her own country is eaten by corruption and can't compete with West's unfair practices ? THE solution is not for everyone to move somewhere else. LIFE IS NOT FAIR. Get over it. Stop feeling ashamed and stop spitting on your own race.

blfr 10y ago

What makes Finns a morally meaningful group here is what makes family a morally meaningful group: blood ties and inheritance. It's not unfair that people inherit after their ancestors, whether it's a stamp collection, height, or a country. I don't have an objection to people maintaining their own communities, closed or not. I believe in freedom of association. I'm not an American either so US taboos around race don't hold much sway over my opinions.

yummyfajitas 10y ago
Ok, fair enough. I guess that's our point of disagreement; I only believe in individual rights, and don't view any group as being special.
- blfr 10y ago
  You don't see your family as special for example? Just another random collection of individuals?
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    I don't see a family as being a morally privileged group in the way you seem to. For example, if A threatens B with violence should B employ C, I believe that's wrong. I don't believe it becomes morally acceptable if A and B are members of the same family, or the same ethnic or national group. I believe parents owe a certain individual obligation to their children (due to the fact that they chose to birth them), but little else.
    - blfr 10y ago
      You just restated the same thing without addressing the core similiarity. If you consider the accident of birth in a certain country unfair. That is, Sven being born in Sweden and Sandeep in India which should be rectified by allowing Sandeep to move to Sweden (or Finland, or wherever), do you consider other instances of inheritance unfair? For example, if Sven stands to inherit an apartment in Stockholm and a nice cabin in the woods, while Lucas' parents were renters who won't leave him much, should Sven's parents' estate be taxed at 100% to rectify this unfairness (or 50% to pass it to Lucas)? If not, why not? What is the principled objection? It seems to me that both lines of arguments for inheritance (whether better capital allocation and stewardship, or simple blood ties) work just as well for material goods as they do for citizenship. And property is guaranteed by the threat of violence (often from the same actors) just like borders are.
      - yummyfajitas 10y ago
        I restated my principle in terms of family because I don't think you disagree with my principle there. Do you think my brother should threaten me with violence if I employ someone other than his son? I have no problem with individuals disposing of their property as they see fit. Just as Sven might like to pass his house to Lucas, I might like to rent my house to Jose the Mexican. And I object to laws that would prevent both of these things. I guess another disagreement we have is that I don't see citizenship as property.

barpet 10y ago

You are racist against Whites. There are literally millions of whites (Central + Eastern Europe) that have it way worse than your beloved black,asian immigrants in the West ? What entitles your Sandeep to earn more doing the same job just because he moved his ass and immigrated to Germany and my mother did not ? Because she loves her country and does not want to move elsewhere but her own country is eaten by corruption and can't compete with West's unfair practices ? THE solution is not for everyone to move somewhere else. LIFE IS NOT FAIR. Get over it. Stop feeling ashamed and stop spitting on your own race.