Just out of curiosity. Would you say that every luxury you own was not a result of modern day slavery/child labour? If not, how does your view on this co-exist with your position here?
Ok you are a Pharoah and you need to move ten ton stone slabs 50 miles through the desert with practically zero tools. How the hell are you going to do it?
I don't know if you've worded this correctly but I'm curious.
Do you believe that because people were such a greater resource in history that it justified their enslavement to meet the means of production for the sake of progress.
--Or--
Are you saying that due to the circumstance of history it was "ok" in the minds of the people at such times but would not be ok today by your own moral standard to sacrifice freedom for progress even if we were majorly set back and couldn't rely on what you believe made slavery obsolete?
Look, I know I'm not Lloyd and obviously he's free to repeat himself a third or fourth time, but he did already answer this. Clunk tried to bail him out as well but he doubled down instead of reaching for a hand out of the water. I wouldn't say he's backed in a corner because he's perfectly fine with owning this.
He's not in a corner saying the white wall isn't white; he's saying it's white, and in this particular case the white wall is him saying slavery was okay in the past, not just _considered_ okay, but that it's wrong at the point that tech is a better option anyway.
I won't speak for him beyond all that, which the man both initially asserted and then doubled down on himself, so from here are only my own further extrapolations, but I actually doubt either of us will see any way around them.
• Words like "obsolete" make it apparent that the fact that tech is simply more efficient is playing a role as well. Us slaveholders aren't simply freed of a "necessary" evil alone, but we'd simply be inefficient for not upgrading anyway because this gets _more_ done. It's not just a way out of slavery; it's way better than it. That's not to say we're not happy just to be letting slaves go though. Except... well, we did also earlier go on about how slavery was such an awesome answer as to what to do with prisoners. None of the other options seemed to be valid. But, you know, at the point that tech is the better answer in terms of expenses, all that goes out the window.
• Yes; it's about progress. That said, moving a bunch of fucking rocks around so future people remember how bad fucking ass you were counts as vital progress. (Still absolutely cannot believe that was the example he chose out of everything. Even despising slavery, I could play the Devil's advocate and do so much better of a job defending it. Probably the worst example possible, that one.)
I don't know if you've ever had to do any manual labor but Lloyd and I have, and like he said, it's "really hard work" man. Looking back on it, I remember, and actually I think he's converted me. Sure, you won't find me supporting universal healthcare or expanded welfare because I'm not some leftist looking out for those lazy bums who should have had a better job before they decided to get cancer. Hate laziness and people mooching off others. But if I ever need some giant fuck-off blocks hauled miles and miles to build shit so people remember how lucky they would have been to suck this dick for 2 seconds, you expect ME to do that shit? Shiiiid. It's really hard work man! I better just beat the shit out of some other people until they do it for me. This is okay because I don't have any alternative here and this must be done.
Both of those points. Technology and society progress together.
In 1900s america 40% of the population was involved with growing food. 60% every other job. By 2000 it was 2%. What changed technologically over the last 100 years? Fucking everything. If people were set back technologically there would be mass starvation.
Morals are subjective to the circumstances. Canabalilsm is seen as discusting and wrong, yet canabalilsm was common during times of famine. It wasn't seen as a good thing but it was to prevent starvation which is a shitty way to go.
For the bulk of human history human power was needed to do practically everything. If we got set back to that time, you will see slavery again.
Slavery becomes a moral issue when the proper technological progress already exists. The treatment of the slaves are a different issue all together
Both can't exist together. I'll be a bit more blunt. Do you think society's "progress" should come at the expense of the freedom of others or that the freedom of others should come at the expense of progress if it came down to those two options?
I think I understand your argument as one that comes from necessity but if there was other options at the expense of progress happening at a much slower rate, would you prefer that outcome if it protected the perceived rights we view people as having today in Western civilization?
Theres a certain threshold of when slavery becomes not necessary anymore, thus not moral. I dont know what historical point is where slavery is, there are numerous factors you have to take in consideration to determine that threshold. Geopolitics being a primary factor.
Slavery is not and will never be morally alright. Racism included. Problem is that they both connected. The slavery pill is easier to swallow. When you literally think that some people are lesser based on skin tone.
In my belief morals are subjective to the circumstances that you are in. That being said society is important so we restrain individual freedoms in order to progress. Though I soundly believe at the rate we are progressing we dont need the goverment determining who can have X or Y ideas.
We dont need to forgo human rights to achieve more progress currently since we are progressing fine enough with our technology.
We have reached the point societally where we can actually give a shit about the individual.
So you believe slavery was required to meet goals set by people of the past who held different views of what progress was and that we can't expect the people of the past to have the same moral system as we do today that would of prevented them from believing that sacrificing what we see as human rights today for their idea of progress BUT you don't share that standard in today's world and think slavery today can't be justified?
You know, I thought about it and you're right. I really do absolutely need to get these narcissistic monuments to myself built. I probably wouldnt utterly violate humans rights if there were some sweet tech that worked better anyway, but there's not, so I'll just utterly violate human rights. This is okay.
Amazing response.
You know, I used to laugh at your profile going on about "sociopathic reasoning" because you're so rarely logical and it was clear what you really meant was "logical at all cost" rather than "sociopathic" since you had just called yourself a nice guy. But sociopathic and logical are not synonymous at all and sociopathic reasoning can just as often be illogical. Right now I'm amused at the fact that we just take it as is. You're spewing shit that's both illogical and certainly sociopathic.
In fact it's actually making me laugh aloud right now that your sociopathy (and perhaps unwarranted narcissism) is so much higher than your logic that you would even use _THIS_ as your example without the possibility of just _NOT_ making the narcissistic love-me monuments even so much as crossing your mind. It's like a given that it must be done for you.
Anyway I gotta go murder a bunch of people at a heavily guarded bank I'm robbing so I can buy myself a sick new whip and bachelor pad. I mean obviously I'd prefer they just hand me the money or there were some kind of tech that made robbing banks obsolete but there's not. Lot of people are going to have to die. Is what it is.
Okay put yourself in my shoes bro. I already have a really nice house, vacation house, and multiple vehicles. We're really trying to get some new shit for vanity's sake though and we've recently overinvested too much to do this right now. We have to rob this bank bro. How are you doing it?
Life always has a hierarchy, the exsistance of the slave class has been present for most civilizations. Why? Because slavery solves a problem of production, this is easier when you have the idea that you are superior to your slaves by some arbitrary reason.
I'm a utilitarian mixed in with libertarian (they do complement eachother) I want people to be happy. We are at the technological level to make individual life fairly easy... that is not the case for the vast majority of human history. You needed more hands to make stuff. Slavery just makes the best of a shitty production problem. It frees up other people do make advances in culture and technology.
You are being wholly ignorant of human nature. Humans are neutral and slavery solves a pretty big problem of cheap labor. They wouldnt be using slavery if there was a better option because revolts were feared. While it's better to have a workforce that is happily chugging along. But the shit jobs ie mining, farming, milling are jobs that people avoid because people are lazy yet they don't wanna starve.
How can you not grasp that theres a clear distinction between it being a necessary evil and it being a good practice.
Slavery was ok because slavery was pretty common! Humans were racist and xenophobic. 1+1=2
Slavery was a completely logical conclusion to the problem of production which is why it's so common throughout history.
I suppose you're really down with radical Islam, right? Fastest growing religion in the world. Beheading infidels is okay because beheading infidels is pretty common!
You just said that you don't need to back out from supporting the process of child labour/slavery for your luxuries because it's so common that you not taking part won't stop anything.
1. Yes, as a supplement to the fact that I'm still removing everything I'm capable of while existing in this society in some form at all whenever knowledge of it is presented, in a very closed-lip world where the only way I can be 100% is to return to the wilderness and not enough would do that with me.
2. And? Acknowledging that I can't singlehandedly stop it from the bottom-up is no more saying it's acceptable than saying an invading militia of 1,000 men raiding my home is acceptable because I know I can't outshoot them all alone.
Either way, neither point is even relevant because you're still getting the analogy twisted. We are not the slave drivers. We are the people who need bamboo with virtually no way to be sure how it was harvested. No longer needing bamboo was not the solution we needed. Slavery to end was. Companies like Apple are the slave drivers. It was unacceptable then, it's unacceptable now, companies like Apple _do_ have the scoop on everything as they're the ones doing it, and they should just full stop just like slave drivers of the past should have.
Lloyd here would agree, because they have better ways to be doing this. However, if that tech didn't exist, what they are doing would be fine because hierarchies are natural, slavery is how they pull their ideas off and get shit done, they're at the top, and the slaves are at the bottom. Sucks to be the slaves. Oh well.
why are you atheist? why are you theist?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Hole. Lee. Shit.
This just in: Slavery was okay confirmed.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Just out of curiosity. Would you say that every luxury you own was not a result of modern day slavery/child labour? If not, how does your view on this co-exist with your position here?
Genuine question.
Ok you are a Pharoah and you need to move ten ton stone slabs 50 miles through the desert with practically zero tools. How the hell are you going to do it?
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I don't know if you've worded this correctly but I'm curious.
Do you believe that because people were such a greater resource in history that it justified their enslavement to meet the means of production for the sake of progress.
--Or--
Are you saying that due to the circumstance of history it was "ok" in the minds of the people at such times but would not be ok today by your own moral standard to sacrifice freedom for progress even if we were majorly set back and couldn't rely on what you believe made slavery obsolete?
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Look, I know I'm not Lloyd and obviously he's free to repeat himself a third or fourth time, but he did already answer this. Clunk tried to bail him out as well but he doubled down instead of reaching for a hand out of the water. I wouldn't say he's backed in a corner because he's perfectly fine with owning this.
He's not in a corner saying the white wall isn't white; he's saying it's white, and in this particular case the white wall is him saying slavery was okay in the past, not just _considered_ okay, but that it's wrong at the point that tech is a better option anyway.
I won't speak for him beyond all that, which the man both initially asserted and then doubled down on himself, so from here are only my own further extrapolations, but I actually doubt either of us will see any way around them.
• Words like "obsolete" make it apparent that the fact that tech is simply more efficient is playing a role as well. Us slaveholders aren't simply freed of a "necessary" evil alone, but we'd simply be inefficient for not upgrading anyway because this gets _more_ done. It's not just a way out of slavery; it's way better than it. That's not to say we're not happy just to be letting slaves go though. Except... well, we did also earlier go on about how slavery was such an awesome answer as to what to do with prisoners. None of the other options seemed to be valid. But, you know, at the point that tech is the better answer in terms of expenses, all that goes out the window.
• Yes; it's about progress. That said, moving a bunch of fucking rocks around so future people remember how bad fucking ass you were counts as vital progress. (Still absolutely cannot believe that was the example he chose out of everything. Even despising slavery, I could play the Devil's advocate and do so much better of a job defending it. Probably the worst example possible, that one.)
I don't know if you've ever had to do any manual labor but Lloyd and I have, and like he said, it's "really hard work" man. Looking back on it, I remember, and actually I think he's converted me. Sure, you won't find me supporting universal healthcare or expanded welfare because I'm not some leftist looking out for those lazy bums who should have had a better job before they decided to get cancer. Hate laziness and people mooching off others. But if I ever need some giant fuck-off blocks hauled miles and miles to build shit so people remember how lucky they would have been to suck this dick for 2 seconds, you expect ME to do that shit? Shiiiid. It's really hard work man! I better just beat the shit out of some other people until they do it for me. This is okay because I don't have any alternative here and this must be done.
Both of those points. Technology and society progress together.
In 1900s america 40% of the population was involved with growing food. 60% every other job. By 2000 it was 2%. What changed technologically over the last 100 years? Fucking everything. If people were set back technologically there would be mass starvation.
Morals are subjective to the circumstances. Canabalilsm is seen as discusting and wrong, yet canabalilsm was common during times of famine. It wasn't seen as a good thing but it was to prevent starvation which is a shitty way to go.
For the bulk of human history human power was needed to do practically everything. If we got set back to that time, you will see slavery again.
Slavery becomes a moral issue when the proper technological progress already exists. The treatment of the slaves are a different issue all together
Hope this clarifies it.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Both can't exist together. I'll be a bit more blunt. Do you think society's "progress" should come at the expense of the freedom of others or that the freedom of others should come at the expense of progress if it came down to those two options?
I think I understand your argument as one that comes from necessity but if there was other options at the expense of progress happening at a much slower rate, would you prefer that outcome if it protected the perceived rights we view people as having today in Western civilization?
--
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Theres a certain threshold of when slavery becomes not necessary anymore, thus not moral. I dont know what historical point is where slavery is, there are numerous factors you have to take in consideration to determine that threshold. Geopolitics being a primary factor.
Slavery is not and will never be morally alright. Racism included. Problem is that they both connected. The slavery pill is easier to swallow. When you literally think that some people are lesser based on skin tone.
In my belief morals are subjective to the circumstances that you are in. That being said society is important so we restrain individual freedoms in order to progress. Though I soundly believe at the rate we are progressing we dont need the goverment determining who can have X or Y ideas.
We dont need to forgo human rights to achieve more progress currently since we are progressing fine enough with our technology.
We have reached the point societally where we can actually give a shit about the individual.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
See More Comments =>
So you believe slavery was required to meet goals set by people of the past who held different views of what progress was and that we can't expect the people of the past to have the same moral system as we do today that would of prevented them from believing that sacrificing what we see as human rights today for their idea of progress BUT you don't share that standard in today's world and think slavery today can't be justified?
You know, I thought about it and you're right. I really do absolutely need to get these narcissistic monuments to myself built. I probably wouldnt utterly violate humans rights if there were some sweet tech that worked better anyway, but there's not, so I'll just utterly violate human rights. This is okay.
Amazing response.
You know, I used to laugh at your profile going on about "sociopathic reasoning" because you're so rarely logical and it was clear what you really meant was "logical at all cost" rather than "sociopathic" since you had just called yourself a nice guy. But sociopathic and logical are not synonymous at all and sociopathic reasoning can just as often be illogical. Right now I'm amused at the fact that we just take it as is. You're spewing shit that's both illogical and certainly sociopathic.
In fact it's actually making me laugh aloud right now that your sociopathy (and perhaps unwarranted narcissism) is so much higher than your logic that you would even use _THIS_ as your example without the possibility of just _NOT_ making the narcissistic love-me monuments even so much as crossing your mind. It's like a given that it must be done for you.
Anyway I gotta go murder a bunch of people at a heavily guarded bank I'm robbing so I can buy myself a sick new whip and bachelor pad. I mean obviously I'd prefer they just hand me the money or there were some kind of tech that made robbing banks obsolete but there's not. Lot of people are going to have to die. Is what it is.
Okay put yourself in my shoes bro. I already have a really nice house, vacation house, and multiple vehicles. We're really trying to get some new shit for vanity's sake though and we've recently overinvested too much to do this right now. We have to rob this bank bro. How are you doing it?
--
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Life always has a hierarchy, the exsistance of the slave class has been present for most civilizations. Why? Because slavery solves a problem of production, this is easier when you have the idea that you are superior to your slaves by some arbitrary reason.
I'm a utilitarian mixed in with libertarian (they do complement eachother) I want people to be happy. We are at the technological level to make individual life fairly easy... that is not the case for the vast majority of human history. You needed more hands to make stuff. Slavery just makes the best of a shitty production problem. It frees up other people do make advances in culture and technology.
You are being wholly ignorant of human nature. Humans are neutral and slavery solves a pretty big problem of cheap labor. They wouldnt be using slavery if there was a better option because revolts were feared. While it's better to have a workforce that is happily chugging along. But the shit jobs ie mining, farming, milling are jobs that people avoid because people are lazy yet they don't wanna starve.
How can you not grasp that theres a clear distinction between it being a necessary evil and it being a good practice.
Slavery was ok because slavery was pretty common! Humans were racist and xenophobic. 1+1=2
Slavery was a completely logical conclusion to the problem of production which is why it's so common throughout history.
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Commonness does not equate acceptableness.
I suppose you're really down with radical Islam, right? Fastest growing religion in the world. Beheading infidels is okay because beheading infidels is pretty common!
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You just said that you don't need to back out from supporting the process of child labour/slavery for your luxuries because it's so common that you not taking part won't stop anything.
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
1. Yes, as a supplement to the fact that I'm still removing everything I'm capable of while existing in this society in some form at all whenever knowledge of it is presented, in a very closed-lip world where the only way I can be 100% is to return to the wilderness and not enough would do that with me.
2. And? Acknowledging that I can't singlehandedly stop it from the bottom-up is no more saying it's acceptable than saying an invading militia of 1,000 men raiding my home is acceptable because I know I can't outshoot them all alone.
Either way, neither point is even relevant because you're still getting the analogy twisted. We are not the slave drivers. We are the people who need bamboo with virtually no way to be sure how it was harvested. No longer needing bamboo was not the solution we needed. Slavery to end was. Companies like Apple are the slave drivers. It was unacceptable then, it's unacceptable now, companies like Apple _do_ have the scoop on everything as they're the ones doing it, and they should just full stop just like slave drivers of the past should have.
Lloyd here would agree, because they have better ways to be doing this. However, if that tech didn't exist, what they are doing would be fine because hierarchies are natural, slavery is how they pull their ideas off and get shit done, they're at the top, and the slaves are at the bottom. Sucks to be the slaves. Oh well.