I used to agree, but once you understand that altruism (sacrifice) is evil (which doesn’t seem like it should be as controversial as people make it out to be), Socialism sounds like a fucking terrible idea. #ayn_rand #objectivism
Discussion
I dont mind altruism, as long as it's consensual.
I.E, i help you out of my own free will with no thought of being owed something in return.
It's when people start leveraging it i get annoyed...
"Help me with this because i helpd you two years ago with that..
Nah, fuck off with that idea mate" . At least thats how the conversation goes in my head.
😁
That’s not altruism, if you want to do it it’s not a sacrifice. Unfortunately altruism lays claim to both positive things (benevolent actions chosen by an individual such as the situation you describe) and negative things (sacrificing yourself, i.e. doing something you don’t want to do through shame, guilt, ect.). We need to cut the good from the evil and reclaim it as the good. Altruism means to prioritise another over yourself, and it claims this is the moral ideal, that when you do not pursue it you are being evil. So the idea you can do it some of the time and not all of the time would not be accepted as moral by a genuine altruist. But the problem is, it’s clearly impossible to do it all of the time. It demands the impossible and damns you to an eternity in hell for not following it completely.
I say, why not do the good this all the time. Pursue your values always. If you value positive interactions with strangers, that’s perfectly valid and not altruistic sacrifice like they would lead you to believe. I don’t mean to be too critical, but we live in a world dominated by the idea that altruism is the good, there’s a lot of unpacking to do.
which history are you referencing?
Abraham Lincoln's funding of the Yankee's? Premier William Aberhart funding roads? Momar Qudaffi funding hospitals? All via the treasury under the banner of socialism. (printing money directly from the treasury). Perhaps you believe that only bankers across the ocean should print money at interest?
I’m not quite following your point, if you care to expand I’d be happy to respond.
To try and address your post, I don’t believe anyone has the right to have a monopoly on money. We should end centralised banking. No one should be able to spend someone else’s money without their consent. Roads and hospitals existed before government funding. The 19th century was one of the most charitable (i’m not against voluntary charity, but I consider “government charity” evil because it is not their money to begin with) era’s in human history. Think of all the great libraries, parks, hospitals and museums funded by the wealthy as gifts to the public. I’m not saying every single one of them was given with benevolent intent, but since becoming more socialist in the early 20th century (both the USA and the UK), how many of these sorts of things have been gifted to the public? When you force people to be charitable (which i no longer think is charity, just theft) they become less willing to help and resentful of thos that call for their heads to be removed from their shoulders. Which is nearly every so called altruist socialist i know.
The thing about private banking is the big bankers are private bankers with the privileged of conjuring currency. They guard this with vigor and is the reason that most world leaders are killed.
When a world leader realizes that the bankers have a monopoly and this leader uses the state treasury to issue interest free currency the international bankers initiate destruction of that leaders country. (reject the hook and then send in the Jackal)
This to me is the definition of Socialism. The issuance of currency from the state treasury. A few examples of this is, Alberta Treasury Bank, Bundes banq, Abraham Lincoln's Green Back, Qudafi's oil for gold. Just to name a few.
It is the international bankers that push the hatred of socialist. and the destruction of public banks, which is the solution to the banker monopoly. We need to free ourselves! Why did UK love Germany in the 1930's? Germany issued it's own currency! Freeing itself from the cluches of the Bankers. Then came Churchill from now where and bombed the Germans out. The same for Qudaffi.
The solution to our problems is BITCOIN, State issued currency for projects, and the issuance of local currencies like Calgary Dollar. Only then will be free. 💪
A few questions.
1. Do you think that only private bankers should issue currency? (which is what happens today.)
2. Are bankers the only ones with Special Drawing Rights?
3. Should states be able to build a bridge at net 0 or must they borrow Currency from a banker across the ocean at interest?
I believe private banks should compete for customers, which was the case in both the UK and USA before centralised control. Competition puts pressure on banks offer competitive rates of inflation of around 2%, as close to the rate of inflation of gold as possible, hence it being called the golden era.
Bankers across the ocean can print as much “money” as they want, they only damage themselves. I think they are evil for doing so, as they are stealing from their own populations (as happens literally everywhere), but what another country votes for is none of my business. I may find it disgusting and immoral, but some people choose to be evil, and unfortunately often those in power listen to the cries to eat the rich, government subsidies and so called government charity. All of which is theft, it does not build, it destroys. You can never know the counterfactual of what those people would have done with the money if it was still in their pocket. But I think the 1800’s were a pretty good example of the sorts of things they would have spent money on in terms of charitable public services.