Political Compass

[Al B. Sure!]

3.1, Ned? you dirty hippie... i want to see that authouritarian score higher!

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by MalevolentLight


Try walking into Iran and professing your religion is christianity then you can see what oppression really is. Last I checked in the US we allow muslims and anyone else to practice religion freely. In return they hide in their mosks and plot to destroy the US. Our problem is we're too nice. We go around trying to help people and we just end up getting our hand burned. Better to just wipe the offenders out and focus on our own nation. If you want to attack the US, expect to have your land leveled and turned into a parking lot. That should be our new foreign policy.

And a new Fez is born

[Ned]

Originally posted by Albert Speer
3.1, Ned? you dirty hippie... i want to see that authouritarian score higher!

Sorry, Speer. I like law and order, not thought control. (Thinking of Alpha Centauri.)

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

But the kind of conservatism you seem to like (Burke) has to do with implementation rather than principles. It is perfectly possible that the world could be such as to allow a free market to be compatible with Rawlsian justice.

I do realize that Rawls isn't totally against a market. Though he favors more of a socialist market (with his 4 branches of government). I'm not sure I'm with his principles either, however. I'm not that interested in looking at the least advantaged member of society when deciding economic policy. Remember, I'm an evil capitalist .

Hardly. If you are a Classical Liberal, that is. The "rising tide" theory is compatible with Rawls, and there seems no way to justify the market except that - well, unless you become one of the natural rights idiots.

Rawls conception of justice is completely independent of any particular economics - if a free market could be shown to cohere with the maximin principle, that is fine with him. And in fact, most Classical Liberals and many conservatives argue just that.

[Natalinasmpf]

I want you to stop being a muslim, because it is dangerous to me. Some people in your culture want to harm me and my family. I don't think it's too much to ask that you abandon your religion. It's evil.

I'm not Muslim. I'n Christian.

You realise Middle Eastern culture is greatly different from Malay culture?

Its asking a lot to abandon my religion, even if I was Muslim with your logic I think I should ask you to abandon your athiesm, it will plunge the world into moral decay. Its evil like Nietszche is.

Athiesm produces Stalins with no sense of morals that massacres millions. Or thieving criminals and drug lords.

Sorry, Speer. I like law and order, not thought control.

One does not need authoritarian elements to establish order or law.

[Ted Striker]

Yeah they do.

The bad guys don't respond to anything else.

[Natalinasmpf]

Remove socio-economic hierarchy, and crime will be eliminated.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't think it's too much to ask that you abandon your religion.

if a free market could be shown to cohere with the maximin principle, that is fine with him. And in fact, most Classical Liberals and many conservatives argue just that.

I realize that, but I don't think a free market will always correspond with a maximin, except in the long run. Though in the short run, it won't be nice at all to the least advantaged. From the way I read it, Rawls probably wouldn't like that.

[Agathon]

I realize that, but I don't think a free market will always correspond with a maximin, except in the long run.

In that case it is compatible with Rawls - see his chapters on our responsibilities to future generations.

[Kidlicious]

I don't think so. The Theory of Justice is an indirect attack on property rights IMO.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'll counter that by saying in Chapter 46: Further Cases of Priority where he refers to his Second Priority Rule:

"The second principle of justice is lexically prior to the principle of efficiency and to that of maximizing the sum of advantages"

Which I believe many capitalists would not necessarily agree with. While he does have his just savings clause, its his belief that it cannot be that great of a burden on the poor, even if the benefits for future generations will be great (see the discussion on Keynes earlier in the chapter).

And frankly, if I ever ran for President, I doubt Rawls would ever vote for me, knowing a bit of his personal political persuation as it relates to American elections .

[Imran Siddiqui]

So I have one person saying I'm compatible with the Theory of Justice and another saying I'm not compatible with the Theory of Justice.

Maybe I'll act like a pretty girl and watch you two men fight over me .

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Natalinasmpf
Remove socio-economic hierarchy, and crime will be eliminated.

Idealisitic

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
So I have one person saying I'm compatible with the Theory of Justice and another saying I'm not compatible with the Theory of Justice.

Maybe I'll act like a pretty girl and watch you two men fight over me .

I think one of us is just screwing with you. Hint: He were fashionable commie attire.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Neither of you wear fashionable anything! Aggie is a philosophy prof and I've been to college, I know what they where, and you keep saying you are poor and as far as I know that's not in style! So there!