The Old and the New - the Ant and the Grasshopper

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Arrian




You're either incredibly naive, or being deliberately obtuse.

-Arrian

Please demonstrate to me how precisely there was an inequality of opportunity between the ant and the grasshopper.

[Nubclear]

I am helping the poor, I just don't want it to be done with coercive methods and by stealing or extorting people's wealth.

Because charity is so much more effective than government taxation I for one have no problem with governments taxing their people in order to help the disadvantaged and poor.

What sort of communist are you, then?

One that believes in helping the people.

What barbaric story?

The "modern" retelling of the old story. The old story was a nice fable about how hard work is a good thing. You perverted it into a defence of the already-established and how they have a moral right to everything whereas the poor person has a moral right to absolutely nothing, not even a passable existence It disgusts me and all right-thinking people everywhere.

Neither I, nor the people in whose society I move, are caste-conscious. What's the point you're trying to make?

Perhaps the society is not, though it does remain.
I have my doubts as to the other part of your statement.

That is obviously not what I mean, and I presume you know it.

What other conclusion am I suppoesd to derive from your endorsement of an atrocious of a "fable" as the above?

My "pet" religion is the one whose every institution is engaged in a fierce effort to eradicate caste.

On paper, yes. On paper, the US attempted to purge slavery and racism from its national consciousness, and it even to this day is not completely gone.
Of course some always cling to how things used to be.

Wait a minute. I think NOW I see where you're coming from. Which ideology exactly are you referring to? My support of capitalism? Or of freedom of religion? Or of separation of church and state? Or of the freedom of speech and press? What exactly are you against?

Ah, I suppose this is another misunderstanding. In the civiliesd world, "seperation of Church and State" means that religion is not allowed to infringe upon the rights of the people or their mechanisms of government.
I suppose to you, it means that the government is not allowed to infringe upon your pet religion's attempt to violate the rights of the people.

I believe that these social institutions must not be coercive. Is that such a bad thing?

You say these things, and yet the natural consequence of your views is that even your "right to opporitunity" will be completely surpressed. Anarcho-capitalism necessarily lends itself to this. Thus, I have to conclude (especially given your endrosement of a story that painfully details the consequences of anarchocapitalism) that you have some deeper reason for espousing such belief.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Tacc

Because charity is so much more effective than government taxation I for one have no problem with governments taxing their people in order to help the disadvantaged and poor.

Interesting that you dismiss this so easily. I for the life of me don't know that charity is NOT necessarily better at helping the poor and disadvantaged. What information/data have you that says otherwise?

[Sandman]

CPM in Kerala immediately passes a law preventing Ants from working hard in the heat so as to bring about equality of poverty among ants and grasshoppers.

Kerala, lest we forget, is the one state in India with a respectable life expectancy and literacy rate.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Sandman


Kerala, lest we forget, is the one state in India with a respectable life expectancy and literacy rate.

You oh-so-conveniently forgot West Bengal.

Muslims are the most backward in West Bengal, when compared to themselves in other parts of the country. Who do the communists blame for this situation - why, Lord Curzon, of course!

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by aneeshm
You, sir, are crazy, and I say that in the kindest possible way. I do not "hate" the poor. I do not "despise" them, as you claim. If you saw the sort of poverty I do on a daily basis, and the reasons for it, it would be impossible for you to EVER hate the poor. I consider myself extremely lucky to be born into a situation where I am not poor, given the prevalence of poverty in India, and the sheer abjectness and wretchedness of the poor. I am thankful for being born into the middle-class.

So if we apply this to the original analogy, you were gifted your house whereas the grasshopper never had the means to have one in the first place. Yes?

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


So if we apply this to the original analogy, you were gifted your house whereas the grasshopper never had the means to have one in the first place. Yes?

That is absolutely correct. Which is why I maintain that the original story does not cover the case of the inequality of opportunity at all.

[Provost Harrison]

Quite right it doesn't. And do you propose charity alone is sufficient? It is no guarantee, nor does it have the scale to allow organised improvement of the lot of the less fortunate. Remember, charity begins at home, and in hard times, the charity will be the first thing to be axed.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Quite right it doesn't. And do you propose charity alone is sufficient? It is no guarantee, nor does it have the scale to allow organised improvement of the lot of the less fortunate. Remember, charity begins at home, and in hard times, the charity will be the first thing to be axed.

Charity as it exists today - no.

My views on charity are a bit complex. I'll post in more detail if that's what you want.

[Provost Harrison]

Charity is charity. What are you proposing. Coerced charity? Sounds like you are not making a connection between that and the welfare state...