Right, mob rule. Otherwise “the people” is merely the state.
No, you are literally excreting this from your own ass hole. When in history have the general population ever controlled the state? The state is a small group of people which is designed to molest the people at large. The only time "the state" is anywhere near the same thing as "the people" is when the majority tells the state what to do rather than the state consisting of a small group that tells everyone else what to do.
That’s not the opposite of what I said, that’s exactly what I said.
Stop yanking my nut sack.
Yeah? Tell me the difference between the “workers”, and the “people”. Then tell me how they control anything if not through mob rule or the state.
First of all "the people" means the general civilian population, most of whom are workers of some kind. Second of all "the people" do not actually control anything with mob rule or the state. With mob rule any opinion which is not the majority opinion is never acted upon, with the state the people are subject to a small body of individuals who make the decisions. The people can only control things if there is no state and the mob cannot over rule better ideas just because the mob has more people. This requires the collective ownership of the means of production (which is equivalent to no one owning anything) and the use of methodology to scientifically determine what the best decision is rather than any one person or group deciding. It also requires an educated population and a society where everyone has the same opportunities and individual freedoms as well.
The state IS the people, and “the people” is never more than the state, except for when it is the mob. To believe otherwise is the height of naïveté rooted in fantasy.
You sound like you're just trying to bend reality to fit your own projected worldview. The state is a group of certain people who have more political power than the vast majority of the people. Only in a pure democracy would "the people" become "the state" and so the opposite of everything you said is true, because "mob rule" is the only time the people actually control the state. Socialism is when workers control their labour and producers own the means of production. In order to equate that to the state you have to change the definition of "the people" to "the small group of people that control the rest of the people" and then assert that anyone who thinks otherwise is naive'.
Human nature is a fallen nature.
We've been evolving for billions of years, do you call going from a single celled clump of protoplasm to a human being "falling"?
This means that human nature is sinful.
The definition of sin is that which goes against the will of God. If you believe God created you with a certain inherent nature then every sin you commit is his fault.
Human nature has something other lifeforms do not have. It's called "free will". This means that humans can act outside of its nature.
How convenient, except there is no evidence whatsoever that humans have "free will" because in reality our consciousness is generated by physical matter and electricity rather than some magical "soul" and we are subject to causality just like all other physical matter and electricity.
You were looking for a demonstration of Hitler practicing socialism. The “People’s Car” was the product of an all new, Hitler sponsored, state (people) owned factory.
If the factory was owned by the state, how does that make it socialism? How on earth do you equate state ownership with "people" ownership?
How are you going to influence a system where you are ethically against having any influence?
I'm not. I am ethically against having influence for no good reason or an upper class having influence while the people collectively have none. I will gain influence only to change things, not for influence in itself. Like your profile on DA says, you seek power for power's sake because you are a Voldemort Darth Sidious Slytherin Sith Lord.
You cannot have too much influence, it is something to infinitely enjoy and aim for.
I don't want to control everything, I want humanity to ascend. I am working for truth and to lift humanity up and you are working for the dark lords who keep the masses in their trance. I hate you, you are evil scum and you think you are the good guy and I am the scum. When humanity's potential is cultivated, there is less need or room for a handful of individuals to control and influence society, because people will be ready to govern themselves and govern each other collectively. You want a society where that never happens and the masses are kept as dumb slaves, always with a small ruling class to use and control them.
Too poor, absolutely yes.
Too rich, absolutely no.
One person having too much money is like one person wielding too much political power. Of course, in capitalism your political influence is determined by money as well so there is really no difference. But you don't see a problem with that do you Mr. Napoleon?
Anyway, let's be practical , if you have good economy that means you also have good environment look at the 1st world country
A good economy does not = a good environment. A good economy = a high rate of production and a high rate of the usage and exchange of resources. This means that on a capitalistic market the better the "economy" is the more resources are being expended, there is absolutely nothing about capitalism that gives two solid shits about the environment.
because with the good economy you have money, money to fund those environmental services
Rich people don't give a single wet fuck about the environment kid, get that through your cerebral cortex before it's too late.
Having good environment doesn't mean good economy, economy comes first. Look at the poorest country in the world, the central African republic, they have good environment yet they have very low economy. You know what's more terrifying inside the country? The famine
Economies come from natural resources because commodities come from natural resources, resources depend on the environment, the entire existence of humanity is thanks to the conditions on our planet. Our economies would not exist without the environment. Africa does not benefit from it's own resources because of multinational corporations exploiting them.
@Amarel
You are the idiot who believes morality is some inherent part of human cognition and not a learned program in the human brain, isn't that right? When you learn what morality is come back, until then suck my gruffalo nuggets. Morality is incompatible with reason because it is essentially a social construct that gets imprinted on your brain from society, and has no inherent connection to empathy or compassion contrary to popular belief. Yes, most people would say it's "immoral" to kill people but morality also deals with trivial and illogical things such as whether homosexuality or masturbation is right or wrong. Morality is absolutely meaningless, when people say it is "immoral" to molest toddlers what they really mean is "unethical". Morality is just the arbitrary taboos and values people come up with within different cultures and has nothing to do with empathy or compassion in an inherent sense like I said before.
No. You can support anything from all of it to nothing except one part of it. I don't support the constitution because it is basically a list of false rights. If you need a government to tell you what your rights are then all you have is privileges. People have never actually had rights because society/the government always decides what "rights" you have. If there was such a thing as "rights" they would be inherent and no one would be able to take them from you. The US government has violated every single one of the constitutional amendments at one time or another and they will continue to do so whenever they see fit.
