3 ms·

Serious answer: it is hardly a given that a "higher power" will favor your idea of "good" over your idea of "bad". Or even if it does, that it will always conti

by SiVal 6y ago

Serious answer: it is hardly a given that a "higher power" will favor your idea of "good" over your idea of "bad". Or even if it does, that it will always continue to do so and will always continue to enforce your preferences, even if your preferences someday change. All that a higher power will enforce is uniformity, which could just as easily be (or later become) uniformly bad for you as uniformly good for you. Without the enforcement of uniformity, you might still have the option of choosing for yourself by moving elsewhere instead of having the choice imposed on you wherever you go.

s5300 6y ago
I just don't understand having "United" states at that point. In your vision... which I'm not arguing for or against - I can't fathom a reason in which we don't just break up into countries. As it stands, the states with the highest levels of education and economic output in the U.S. truly do tend to prop up the states with the lowest levels of education and output. However, the states being propped up also seem to actively disagree and attempt to impose their own preferences onto the very states that prop them up. There's no logical reason to not just be your own country at that point. Maybe even then going on to steamroll over the arguably weaker countries for their natural resources, as humanity has throughout most of history. I don't care about favoring my idea of good or bad. The education mandated by nearly all states and the fed government has been teaching all students about equality and a standard level of defined human decency that should be seen to ensure a prosperous nation. The imposed curriculum showed us other variants of government that didn't include these basics leading to failed states/failed other forms of government throughout the centuries. However, even though this is what was mandated to be taught to us, we're growing up and being thrown into a system in which we see what we were forcibly taught in the mandated gov education system... simply isn't applied in some places. Whether or not this is "good" or "bad" - they forcibly taught us this... so it think there's a general consensus of surprised pikachu face to be had as to why things are different. I personally think we're to far accelerated towards great filtering ourselves either way, to be honest. Very pessimistic view point, I know. Aside from that - the majority of the U.S. population cannot just decide to move elsewhere. Therein lies the issue. If we grow up being taught that we're a United nation, though for some reason something is legal/enforced in one place and not in the other despite being under the same "Unity" - and we don't even have the choice to go to the place we would personally prefer... Where is the incentive to care much about anything? Any when there's no incentive to care much about anything... how well does the prosperity of the nation fare?
- SiVal 6y ago
  The "united" part was to prevent large, external states (initially, Great Britain) from taking away the liberty of each small state to live as its own citizens chose to live. The US Constitution was a mutual-defense pact meant to defend that liberty while, at the same time, defending the states from similar threats from one another. Most things in life would be state-based, where the citizens lived. Federal things were for state vs state, both internal and external, not state vs citizen. The point of it was to defend the independence of small groups against the large. When local opinions changed about the "right" way to live, which history shows happens again and again, this system allowed the local group to change how they lived without requiring the "permission" of other states (internal to the union or external). If your own group (or you) changed, and you no longer liked your local state as much as some other where they made "better" choices, you would have the option to vote with your feet, as hundreds of millions have over the centuries. This system also attracted vast numbers of people from other places who chose not the "country" but the specific state that most suited them.

by SiVal 6y ago

s5300 6y ago

I just don't understand having "United" states at that point. In your vision... which I'm not arguing for or against - I can't fathom a reason in which we don't just break up into countries. As it stands, the states with the highest levels of education and economic output in the U.S. truly do tend to prop up the states with the lowest levels of education and output. However, the states being propped up also seem to actively disagree and attempt to impose their own preferences onto the very states that prop them up. There's no logical reason to not just be your own country at that point. Maybe even then going on to steamroll over the arguably weaker countries for their natural resources, as humanity has throughout most of history. I don't care about favoring my idea of good or bad. The education mandated by nearly all states and the fed government has been teaching all students about equality and a standard level of defined human decency that should be seen to ensure a prosperous nation. The imposed curriculum showed us other variants of government that didn't include these basics leading to failed states/failed other forms of government throughout the centuries. However, even though this is what was mandated to be taught to us, we're growing up and being thrown into a system in which we see what we were forcibly taught in the mandated gov education system... simply isn't applied in some places. Whether or not this is "good" or "bad" - they forcibly taught us this... so it think there's a general consensus of surprised pikachu face to be had as to why things are different. I personally think we're to far accelerated towards great filtering ourselves either way, to be honest. Very pessimistic view point, I know. Aside from that - the majority of the U.S. population cannot just decide to move elsewhere. Therein lies the issue. If we grow up being taught that we're a United nation, though for some reason something is legal/enforced in one place and not in the other despite being under the same "Unity" - and we don't even have the choice to go to the place we would personally prefer... Where is the incentive to care much about anything? Any when there's no incentive to care much about anything... how well does the prosperity of the nation fare?

SiVal 6y ago
The "united" part was to prevent large, external states (initially, Great Britain) from taking away the liberty of each small state to live as its own citizens chose to live. The US Constitution was a mutual-defense pact meant to defend that liberty while, at the same time, defending the states from similar threats from one another. Most things in life would be state-based, where the citizens lived. Federal things were for state vs state, both internal and external, not state vs citizen. The point of it was to defend the independence of small groups against the large. When local opinions changed about the "right" way to live, which history shows happens again and again, this system allowed the local group to change how they lived without requiring the "permission" of other states (internal to the union or external). If your own group (or you) changed, and you no longer liked your local state as much as some other where they made "better" choices, you would have the option to vote with your feet, as hundreds of millions have over the centuries. This system also attracted vast numbers of people from other places who chose not the "country" but the specific state that most suited them.