Carnism as compared to Statism

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

@Red come on, stop trolling.

I do not see what you mean.

Ha! This guy's a treat!

[Red]

@Red come on, stop trolling.

I do not see what you mean.

Ha! This guy's a treat!

What the fuck?

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

I do not see what you mean.

Ha! This guy's a treat!

What the fuck?

Whining about tyranny, you'll never achieve anything with anarchy. I only keep you around because you shut their speech down.

[Red]

Ha! This guy's a treat!

What the fuck?

Whining about tyranny, you'll never achieve anything with anarchy. I only keep you around because you shut their speech down.

There should be no platform for government or Nazis!

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

What if Bernie Sanders or Alexandria Ocasio Cortez come to power? America will end up like Venezuela, and it seems rather possible they will come to power.

Why do you believe that Bernie or AOC coming to power would lead to the United States becoming like Venezuela?

[teo123]

Well what the fuck do they know, right?

Hey, listen, a few years ago, I argued for some quite crazy stuff on this forum, ridiculous conspiracy theories such as that the Moon is a hologram, that the Earth is flat and that airplanes don't exist (I've later used that as a basis for my parody of the conspiracy theorists).
Now people here connect whatever I say to those things, even though there is very little in common between what I believe now and what I used to believe a few years ago.
It's instinctual to think the Earth is flat or that airplanes don't exist, but the reason and evidence tell us otherwise. On the other hand, it's instinctual to think that a big government can protect the poor and the powerless (as most of the people on this forum appear to believe), but the reason and evidence tell us otherwise.
As for my linguistic theories, I don't actually see how they can think there is a connection between them and what I used to believe years ago. If you ask me, it's clear they don't understand what they are talking about, like "Red" apparently insisted that sound laws were somehow not falsifiable, and later it turned out he/she thinks sound laws are some form of laws in the legal sense of the word (seriously!). "brimstoneSalad" insisted that the way linguists know which languages are related is that they borrow that knowledge from genetics and then make it look like there is visible evidence for that inside of languages (seriously!). That's quite emotionally abusive and counter-productive, if you ask me.

He obviously underestimates the person he is talking to.

Well, he's bothered to do a PhD. I'd never do such a thing.

I have a feeling the 6 who beat you just got lucky.

Well, they went to a better high-school, I guess. I went to a grammar-school in Donji Miholjac, while most of those on the first few places were attending the high-schools in Zagreb in which they learnt a lot about computer science.

You clearly have a very solid grasp on physics, and any past mistakes you've made definitely have been corrected now.

Well, that's what I am telling them when they tell me I have a terrible track record: that a bad track record may make my opinion even more reliable because I had a chance to learn from my past mistakes.

You probably are the next Einstein the way I see it.

Well, thanks for the compliment.

WTF is wrong with this 'brimstoneSalad?' He/She is obviously just jealous of your intellectual abilities at a young age.

I don't think that's what's going on. Studying some fields, such as physics or philosophy, has a tendency to make people arrogant, to make them feel qualified to speak about stuff they don't have a clue about. It's not that most of the people who have studied physics or philosophy are like that, but some of them are. And my guess is that they actually don't know much about their own field either, that those are people who know just enough to get themselves into trouble. And I think "brimstoneSalad" is one of those.

Why do you believe that Bernie or AOC coming to power would lead to the United States becoming like Venezuela?

Because their policies are rather similar to the policies of Maduro. Actually, the AOC policies are even more similar to the early catastrophic policies implemented by Mao (the Great Leap Forward). You know, using mass movement to carry out an economic change...
At least their policies lot more similar to those things than to the policies of the Nordic countries they claim to copy.

[BrianBlackwell]

Governments did not exist for the majority of human history.

What makes you think that's the case? The first written documents are about taxation. And somebody has been forcing people to go to war way before recorded history (there is evidence of massacres dated back to stone age). Maybe it's not like that first humans had governments to opress them, but it's certainly not far from that.

As for other things, I couldn't agree with you more.

If we agree on the rest of it, then we're good, since that's the main thrust of the post. But to your point, I want to clarify what I mean here: I'm not actually asserting this in the absolute (despite the colloquial usage of that grammar), since I make no claim to absolute knowledge on the subject, having been born in 1977 and historical knowledge being dubious in all cases.

However, by the same low standard of knowledge that one asserts government as normal, natural, and necessary, I would say that government is not intrinsic to humanity, and has not existed for most of its history. By mere common sense we can say that government as we know it represents a level of organization that would require a certain degree of technological advancement (at the very least, the ability to ride horses, such that one may assert their control over long distances).

Now the core essence of government - the unfounded belief in the rightful authority of one man over another - may certainly exist on a smaller scale then we see in modern times, though it is far more likely that any expression of oppression in the far recesses of the ancient past was more of the overt domination variety, rather than an assertion of a moral claim. We know from looking at tribal systems (seemingly the inherent organizational tendency of man), that the structure of the tribe itself was based upon respect for elders and other leaders, not their claim to rightful authority, and that their peril at the hands of other tribes was based on sheer physical domination, not a belief that they were morally obliged to serve at the behest of their enemies.

A matter for little concern, really, since we may concede the historical point and still refute the normal, natural, necessary arguments on more solid grounds. As we both know, the fact that something has always been done does not necessarily imply that it's natural or necessary, and "normal" is not a basis for any claim of propriety, righteousness, or efficacy.

P.S. I understand your struggle to move from veggie to vegan, as this was my progression as well. However, having moved to a diet that's largely raw (somewhere between 80-90%), vegan now seems like a free-for-all cakewalk. It all comes down to habits and perspective. Right now I'm 7 days into a juice fast, consuming no solid food, only fresh juices. This is a great way to break food addictions and to create a circumstance so restricted as to make all other diets appear easy by comparison. This would be the most healthful and effective option for making the desired change. Alternatively, I would recommend choosing a single common non-vegan meal that you often eat, and creating a vegan alternative for that meal alone. After establishing that change securely over a number of days, choose another, and before you know it, you'll be full vegan with little discomfort.

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

Because their policies are rather similar to the policies of Maduro.

Which policies of Maduro?

Actually, the AOC policies are even more similar to the early catastrophic policies implemented by Mao (the Great Leap Forward). You know, using mass movement to carry out an economic change...

Can you expand on what you mean by "using mass movement to carry out an economic change"?

At least their policies lot more similar to those things than to the policies of the Nordic countries they claim to copy.

In what ways?

[teo123]

Which policies of Maduro?

Massive confiscation of the property, for example...

Can you expand on what you mean by "using mass movement to carry out an economic change"?

I mean, the Green New Deal, obviously.

In what ways?

Well, AOC and Sanders want to increase the taxes on the rich, but they want most of the people not to pay any taxes (many Republicans are also keen onto that idea). In the Nordic countries, it's precisely the opposite, the taxes are relatively high, but at least everybody pays their fair share: a middle-class citizen of Sweden may pay up to 50% of its income in taxes. And AOC and Sanders generally want more regulation of businesses, while Nordic countries have a lot fewer regulations than the United States do now. AOC and Sanders want to increase the minimum wage, while, in many countries in Europe, there are no minimum wage laws at all. And so on...

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

Massive confiscation of the property, for example...

Can you elaborate on what you mean by that?

I mean, the Green New Deal, obviously.

I have my problems with the Green New Deal, but I think it's a bit of a stretch to compare it to Mao's Great Leap Forward purely on the basis of them both being mass movements to carry out economic change.

Well, AOC and Sanders want to increase the taxes on the rich, but they want most of the people not to pay any taxes (many Republicans are also keen onto that idea).

Do you believe that the Republican Party is close to the ideology of the Venezuelan regime?

In the Nordic countries, it's precisely the opposite, the taxes are relatively high, but at least everybody pays their fair share: a middle-class citizen of Sweden may pay up to 50% of its income in taxes.

I don't see how this shows that Bernie and AOC are closer in ideology to Venezuela than to the Nordic countries as the top personal income tax rate in Venezuela is 34%, which is less than that of Norway, Denmark and Sweden.

And AOC and Sanders generally want more regulation of businesses, while Nordic countries have a lot fewer regulations than the United States do now.

The regulations AOC and Bernie want on business is regarding worker's rights, environmental protection, etc. The ways in which there are fewer regulations in the Nordic countries in the United States are in regard to stuff like how easy it is to open a business. There isn't really any way of measuring the differences in regulations in regards to what AOC and Bernie plan on increasing.

It's also notable that there is a lot more of the economy of some Nordic countries is under public ownership than in Venezuela. In Venezuela, 29% of the economy is publicly owned, whereas in Denmark it is 31.4% and in Norway it is 37.8%.

AOC and Sanders want to increase the minimum wage, while, in many countries in Europe, there are no minimum wage laws at all. And so on...

That's largely because the situation as regards wages is vastly different in the United States than it is in those countries. Those countries generally have high wages due to strong trade union power leading to collective bargaining, whilst this is not the case in the United States. In European countries such as Britain, France and Germany, however, the minimum wage is much higher.