[url="http://therebelfaction.com/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=9377"]
[/url]
[/url]
The Rebel Faction » Forums » General Discussion » Rebel Cafe » If we were to create a new World
<b>Taj Daemun<br><i>Worship Me</b></i>
I don't care to create a thread of individual utopia's, but would rather like to create a fundemental ideal in which we all could agree would be better than the current and ideal for all, while at the same time catering to everyones needs.
Supreme Commander, Skygge's Empire
Heir Raktus:As Beff said, that is impossible.
I don't care to create a thread of individual utopia's, but would rather like to create a fundemental ideal in which we all could agree would be better than the current and ideal for all, while at the same time catering to everyones needs.
In attempting to cater to everyone's needs, you inevitably cater to no one's. In attempting to make it ideal for all, you make it ideal for none. The question would be better phrased as one of compromise; which form of government is one with which everyone can live?
<b>Taj Daemun<br><i>Worship Me</b></i>
Wes, thats exactly what I've been saying
[url="http://therebelfaction.com/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=9377"]
[/url]
[/url]
Bounty Hunter
The difference here; Wes was being rhetorical. Logically then, are we to take your entire premise as similarly rhetorical, Heir?
<b>Taj Daemun<br><i>Worship Me</b></i>
I really expected something more radical, given our technology and cultural awareness. Instead all I see is the same old thinking... What I was hoping for was intelligent discussion and debate on real world implications of a worldwide system of governance that would be an improvement upon what one would consider nothing more than an impovereshed caste system of have's and have-nots....
[url="http://therebelfaction.com/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=9377"]
[/url]
[/url]
The Slothful Padawan
We all have our views relatively set. Just because you make a thread about it doesn't mean we'll suddenly start talking about views we haven't talked about a bajillion times while comparing all the different factions that've popped up throughout TRF's history.
So, how about instead of making demands you try to... oh I dunno... stimulate conversation in ways other than saying 'You're doing it wrong'?
So, how about instead of making demands you try to... oh I dunno... stimulate conversation in ways other than saying 'You're doing it wrong'?
<b>Taj Daemun<br><i>Worship Me</b></i>
Hows about you post an idea instead of trying to ruin the thread?
[url="http://therebelfaction.com/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=9377"]
[/url]
[/url]
assistant regional titus & epic space jesus
Heir Raktus:
Hows about you post an idea instead of trying to ruin the thread?
Quid pro quo.
Supreme Commander, Skygge's Empire
Heir Raktus:
I really expected something more radical, given our technology and cultural awareness. Instead all I see is the same old thinking... What I was hoping for was intelligent discussion and debate on real world implications of a worldwide system of governance that would be an improvement upon what one would consider nothing more than an impovereshed caste system of have's and have-nots....
1) 'Have' and 'have-not' are terms that automatically assume a worldview and political view to which certain people, like myself, do not ascribe. I think that a world in which hard work is encouraged and laziness is punished would be an ideal world; where people keep what they earn, however much it is. If a person can't afford a cellphone, then don't buy one - don't expect the government to give you the money for one. If you can't afford a family, don't have kids. In that sense, there are not 'haves' and 'have-nots' but rather there are those who earn a lot and those who earn a little.
2) Which cultural awareness is this of which we speak? I was not aware that every individual had achieved some set standard of cultural awareness.
3) I am a firm believer in individualism. As such, I think that the above-quoted statement is fundamentally flawed. It focuses on the community rather than on the individual who makes up the community.
4) Who's to say the same old thinking is not the best of all possible worlds? If you bring up a topic like this in which your new system is supposed to be better than the old, then why not debate the merits of the old system instead of assuming that it is bad?
<b>Taj Daemun<br><i>Worship Me</b></i>
Wes Vos:
1) 'Have' and 'have-not' are terms that automatically assume a worldview and political view to which certain people, like myself, do not ascribe. I think that a world in which hard work is encouraged and laziness is punished would be an ideal world; where people keep what they earn, however much it is. If a person can't afford a cellphone, then don't buy one - don't expect the government to give you the money for one. If you can't afford a family, don't have kids. In that sense, there are not 'haves' and 'have-nots' but rather there are those who earn a lot and those who earn a little.
2) Which cultural awareness is this of which we speak? I was not aware that every individual had achieved some set standard of cultural awareness.
3) I am a firm believer in individualism. As such, I think that the above-quoted statement is fundamentally flawed. It focuses on the community rather than on the individual who makes up the community.
4) Who's to say the same old thinking is not the best of all possible worlds? If you bring up a topic like this in which your new system is supposed to be better than the old, then why not debate the merits of the old system instead of assuming that it is bad?
1) There are those that do very little work and contribute nothing to the system yet make alot more than those that work their fingers to the bone. Management is a skill to be used, not dominated with. Business would be better used as a way to promote the general welfare, as a system of comunal undertakings propogated by industry and owned by the employees who then run it themselves or hire the managers. The government need only provide what it stipulates, as in 'the general welfare' for one specific case in point-failure. In a democracy where you cant afford a home, your vote is a joke.
2) Cultural awareness of that around you, if not a localized cultural awareness... then a global awareness if such a thing were possible.
3) Incorrect, it focuses on individuals caring for one another just as much as themselves. It produces an enviorment in which the community develops as each member of it prospers. This isn't an intigrated farm of soviet russia we are talking about, its non-selfish people helping one another.
4) Look at the world and tell me its not bad.
[url="http://therebelfaction.com/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=9377"]
[/url]
[/url]