Re: This is the future of mankind anyway

"Al" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Aleksandar Sarovic wrote:
>
> > "Al" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> >>
> >> The society you envision would do this. You wrote that society would
> > choose
> >> the values it felt most important, and then assign to each individual a
> >> value ('the productive power of man') that reflected how many of those
> >> values he had. By definition, the values that commanded the greatest
and
> >> widest support in society would be the lowest values supported by most
> >> people: the lowest common denominator.
> >>
> >> It is popular to say "Blame the immigrants! Send the home!", and wise
to
> > say
> >> "Immigration improve our country! Welcome them in!". In your
'Democratic
> >> Anarchy', what is popular is more important than what is wise; what
> >> gratifies immediately the largest number of people is more important
than
> >> what is best for the longer term.
> >
> > I am glad you did not complain to rules established by the consensus of
> > political parties that will create the value of productive power of man.
>
> Only because I didn't get round to it. :-)
>
> > That rules will be the most important ones at the beginning and they
would
> > never make "Blame the immigrants! Send the home!" because at least one
> > party will never allow it.
>
> Then if one party says "No to Any Taxes", the same thing would happen? Who
> then would pay for the roads to be maintained?


All parties has to agree with "No to Any Taxes" in order that happens but
that would hardly happen.


> > Also in my system the "immigrant problem" will be a totally non existent
> > one and you may find more about it by reading my book However, I am
taking
> > the "Immigrant problem" as metaphor for all others non acceptable
opinions
> > and behaviour that exists in today's society. First of all, my society
> > will be totally different one and that means it will probably generate
> > totally different problems. Here is a sample: If your chief is a jerk,
> > most likely you would not have guts to respond to him but you may be
hard
> > to someone else just because of it. Do you believe that kind of
behaviour
> > is the main origin for nationalism and racism?
>
> I don't believe that, no.


Then you need some education and wisdom.


> > In my system there will not
> > be privileged people so that such problem would hardly exist.
>
> There must always be privileged people; those who do more for their
> community must be rewarded, if only to motivate others to emulate them.



Rewarded does not mean privileged. In other words, people will be rewards
according their contributions to society and that does not mean they are
privileged.



> > But it may
> > exist of course. For that reason I said the power of evaluation among
the
> > people will at the beginning probably be one cent. If you get hundred
> > negative evaluations it will cost you one dollar. No one would actually
> > care about one dollar. The most important information that such receiver
> > will get is that a 100 people do not like something about him. Well it
is
> > up to the gay who receives such evaluation to find out who is to blame,
> > him or these hundred people? I would know the answer immediately right
now
> > even in today's society. He may correct himself for his own good and
then
> > make a better society or not and everything would be as it is today.
>
> You will not make many friends with such words, and your system will need
> many, many friends before it is taken seriously.
> --
> Al

It seems to me that you cannot get a basic logic. But don't worry you are
not different from others here. I practice little bit for the real
challenges that will come soon.

Aleksandar Sarovic