Who Here Believes in Equality?

Do you believe that every one is equal? Do you think that we can work to make the playing field level so that everybody is has an equal shot in life? How do you think we should treat each other if we're all equal? Like, how much should you care for people? Because you can't treat everyone like they're family, I'd travel to the other side of the world to help out my family but I can't do that for everybody.

What are your views on equality?

Attached: Katamari.jpg (1920x1080, 156.3K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=9EHnUsV1J2M
philosophyexperiments.com/singer/
youtube.com/watch?v=b2iJ5mQLfj8
web.archive.org/web/20140203004320/https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/39215
web.archive.org/web/20131022160609/http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/34008
nber.org/papers/w18441
youtube.com/watch?v=j4PTf7LgsIE
boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/205594304
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_03_18.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/mar/11.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=pzQZ_NDEzVos

Give everyone the same chances to study and work, they will eventually end up in the job they are more suited for.

"Equality" is not a clearly defined political goal and thus not something we adher to. Next.

Everyone is not equal but should be provided for equally.

If you mean equal in the autistic retard liberal sense where you sort people into groups, pick a representative of that group, break the representative down into component parts (genes, Autism Level, bmi, hair color, smell, political beliefs, whatever), then compare its components to representatives from other groups, and if the components aren't identical then the groups aren't equal, then I don't believe in equality.

Why should I work to feed some fuckwit like you

because i want to feed you too fren C:

Because it leads to a better life for everyone. What if you had a disabled sibling or child? Wouldn't you want them to be taken care of? And I know it's impossible to imagine now, but wouldn't we all feel less stressed and depressed if there were no people starving or suffering from poverty in this world? You could just put your feet up on your day off and not have to think about the fact that you should be doing more to help others and not be able to fully relax.

Do you really worry that hard about it?

yeah

Damn

damn right bro

you already do
*nice quints*

Not all the time but I would definitely worry less if it wasn't the case.

youtube.com/watch?v=9EHnUsV1J2M

I think it would be better if everyone just helped the people close to them. How far away do you send your aid?

Are you a communist? as far as possible.

Helping people in profoundly impoverished areas is a lot more important than helping people locally dollar for dollar.

I give £20/month to the 'Against Malaria Foundation' which gives 100% of the value of donations as aid and is thought to be the best charity in the world in terms of lives saved - money spent. Of course, the dilemma is that you could always give more - that video misses out the second and arguably more important part of the thought experiment.

philosophyexperiments.com/singer/

Go ahead and try it so you'll get what I'm trying to say.

The people close to me are the working class, because I share a common interest with them. Achieving a post-scarcity society would make life more productive and enjoyable for the overwhelming majority of people.

No, I'm not a communist.


This gets back to my original question.
If it's just about saving the maximum number of lives that must mean that you think everyone is equal

Abolition of class is the only demand for "equality" there should be. Political equality and equality in regards to the means of production are what socialism is concerned with.

Ehh, not exactly, it depends what sense of 'equal' you're using, I don't think people close to me are more inherently valuable if that's what you mean. I think that human life should just be given a default value of 'worth'. Of course if I knew more about the people involved I might be able to make a more informed judgement about who is more worthy of saving but I can't assume a child in Africa is 10x less valuable than one near me (it would probably take a lot more than £200 to reliably save the life of a western child).

the whole point of equality is to reduce antagonism and suffering. your fate shouldn't be determined based on what class you were born into.

the lower the inequality, the better outcomes in rates of life expectancy, drug abuse, mental illness, trust, educational scores, homicide rates, imprisonment rates:
youtube.com/watch?v=b2iJ5mQLfj8

Attached: Index-of-health-and-social-problems-vs-Income-inequality.png (850x638, 161.77K)

it's almost like humans aren't a fucking logic circuit and have more complexity in their thinking

Nice quints. In such a system you'd probably work a lot, lot less.

What does a post-scarcity society look like to you?


That's a good point


That seems fishy, dude. I can't imagine there's that strong a link between them. And there's a couple things that are misleading in the video. The graph that shows innovation being lower in more unequal countries is measured in innovation per capita. Who looks at innovation on a per capita basis though? And they also say that everyone with less money that the richest person in the world feels the health effects of inequality but I don't look at Bill Gates or any of those rich people as the depiction of health

web.archive.org/web/20140203004320/https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/39215
web.archive.org/web/20131022160609/http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/34008
nber.org/papers/w18441

Attached: Patent-filings-in-Anglo-Saxon-countries.jpg (528x384 39.11 KB, 38.99K)

No, but that's not the issue.


Yes. For instance, everyone should have a chance to be a doctor, and to get there they must do the necessary work. The work they all do should be the same, and once they've completed it they should be allowed to be doctors.

RE treatment - treat people like people.

Go look at some severely autistic and deformed people and you tell me again that they have "worth".

what the fuck juche poster are you drunk? i thought you wanted to ban booze

I do want to ban booze, but euthanasia is the most humane solution for some of these people. To be born in such a state is not a life worthy of living and it puts an undue burden on both the family and society. If I, for example, got in a severe accident that left me brain-dead or completely deformed, unable of living any semblance of a normal life, I hope and pray that my family would show me the mercy of killing me. The same goes for members of my family. If that happened to them I would pull the plug for their own good.

Look at the video below and tell me why people like this should be kept around. To humanely eliminate them or prematurely abort them if possible is the best option. Recently Iceland has made laudable moves in nearly completely eliminating down-syndrome through the use of abortions.

youtube.com/watch?v=j4PTf7LgsIE

And also have guaranteed access to leisure, education, healthcare etc.

How does "unequal" automatically lead to "undeserving of dignity"? Some people aren't naturally strong or smart, but that doesn't make them useless. For that matter, being gifted is not an excuse to be antisocial.
Besides, measures of human inequality are often arbitrary and stupid. Zig Forums constantly screeches about race, but it's extremely rare for them to discuss actual issues like hereditary disability.

Specifically, I have no clue. No one does, since it will be one of human society's greatest changes.

I'm okay with aborting babies with defects, have luck trying to impose that on unwilling mothers tho. As for euthanasia on living patients, brain-dead absolutely counts as a reasonable excuse, however i don't see how "completely" deformed couldn't be fixed with surgery or getting over it, which i wouldn't force anyone to go through of course, euthanasia in those cases could be optional. But still, i long ago stopped believing in the idea that there should be free euthanasia everywhere and people should be allowed to kill themselves easily, people sometimes feel really shitty, you know? they aren't always capable of making good decisions, even when it comes to choosing to live or die.

Allowing people to give birth to babies with developmental defects or even allowing people with heritable diseases to reproduce is like anti-vaccination autism. Especially in the former case of heritable diseases the concern for public wealth should trump the feelings of individuals or prospective parents, just like how vaccination should 100% be mandated by law. Their personal decision goes beyond themselves and effects society at large.
If someone has none of the issues that we've been discussing I completely agree. Have easy access to suicide, which is generally a temporary urge or treatable environmental response, is extremely silly. If there was easy access to suicide I'm sure people would (at least under our current society) kill themselves over all sorts of silly and inconsequential things.

Are you admitting we should feed capitalists? But yea someday some fuckwit will work to feed you.

I was trying to avoid generic answers like this. How well on a scale from enemy to family should you treat them? How well can you possibly treat everybody?


I don't know how I said that they don't deserve dignity but why should I have to open up my wallet to show dignity? Wouldn't they feel more dignified if they solved their own problems? The more I think about it dignity doesn't even seem like something you can give.
I agree race is a pretty crude measure of inequality, I guess it's just easy to draw those conclusions when you look at who's giving the help versus who's receiving it.


I can't really tell what those graphs show but they don't really look like they disprove my point. I'm also not going to read those blogs, I want you to write a reply to me that summarizes your point, I wrote a reply to you it's only fair that you write one back

such is the alienated view of a middle class individual in capitalism

Alienated from what?

down syndrome is one thing but we should digitally preserve their genetic code for future research incase there are unique combinations that could be beneficial to unknown challenges.

We don't know enough about autism to know if "severely autistic" is not a healthy reaction to the trauma of living in late stage capitalism.

Even if you don't worry that much about it it'd make you a lot less cynical about the world you live in, right?

It sounds to me like this isn't really an argument of principle as much as you are butthurt that welfare exists, which is only because of capitalism.

Read nigga read. The summary is inequality is bad

Fuck off. People should be allowed to have kids if they want to. I'm alright with a program promoting voluntary eugenics but don't force it on people by law. We can deal with the consequences as a society.

It would be like birthing a baby that will develop those defects in his latter life.

It's not as autism onsets in early childhood, long before the person has any meaningful interaction with capitalist society. Unless you mean to imply that living in capitalist society increases the likelihood of prospective parents producing eggs/sperm with the genetic defects that cause autism or that living in capitalist society introduces stress that damages the DNA in sex cells.

(me)
Aging increases the risk of having children with autism so there are natural mechanisms that cause damage to sex cells, particularly sperm. It's not a stretch to imagine that stress can also cause damage. The research into this question is still sparse.

how about for selfish reasons? putting food on someone's table means they are less likely to turn to crime in order to survive

So you're all about welfare and donating to charity?

I don't think everyone is equal in terms of ability, or character, or (in extremis) humanity. But we have the technical ability to give everyone a decent standard of living and I think that is worth striving for.

No, this board is for anti-capitalists.

Ultimately poverty can't be eliminated without destroying the global capitalist system. But on the other hand, that doesn't mean we can just wash our hands and say we shouldn't do anything to try prevent suffering today.

We Communists don't believe in equality.

We want the Means of Production to be seized and then thus who are best at stuff will succeed and those who are awful will die.

Attached: 71E1F65D-C951-455A-9852-B58D1E7A8823.png (733x464, 97.29K)

Marx hated Welfare, called for the extermination of lumpen, and so on. The idea of everyone being equal is a Liberal idea.

If you are terrible under Communism then lol
If you are great under Communism then it will be excellent.

The reason why Capitalism should be hated is because it is inefficient. It allows people who are awful at shit to succeed and those are great to fail.

Attached: it's time to stop posting.jpg (600x450, 40.01K)

But it's true. If you are a Marxist then you want everyone to have weaponry and for everyone to have the MoP. This will mean that the State is gone. Everyone can use violence and everyone can make whatever they want. Then if anyone or a group of people can't survive under this then they deserve it.

We don't want losers to have a chance to succeed or winners to lose.

honestly Marx's idea of killing the lumpen might be the most retarded part of anything he wrote, like what we kill incels and all other social outcasts now? can't we seriously just give them a job?

i think you're confused about what marxism is

Attached: libertarian society socialist society.jpg (411x640, 50.69K)

It’s terminal

Attached: 3dcbc8d1a0ae6476b7fffab20d227fa3c0bfb9e9e4fd44cc07cd674f2a313be2.jpg (565x354, 10.17K)

How else are workers supposed to own the means of production if not by the power of the state?

No we have to kill them

3D printers :DDD

Star Trek is Fascist Rand Corporation propaganda.

The Westphalia definition of a State is when it has a monopoly of the Violence. If everyone in it has the means to commit violence and not the State then the State is gone.

we just gotta seize the puss of reproduction and they will become chads within seconds amirite fellas

With my new patented pharmaceutical blend; 'Just Don't Call It A State'!

Marx wills it

It's beautiful
boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/205594304
I've never been so happy before in my life

It won't be a state because it will be upheld by the population from the bottom up. They'll just enforce whatever benefits them at some time. This will usually entail global cybernetic planning because of the value of mutual aid.

Jesus Christ, I literally posted a thread about this strawman. I don't understand why everyone didn't first post the actual communist position on "equality".
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_03_18.htm
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/mar/11.htm
You work in lower phase communism (socialism) because you must in order to survive or be provided anything. Your pay is based on how much you work/produce, and different positions do not share equal pay. You work in communism at your leisure because full automation allows for that. There is no need for pay because any and all necessary materials can be acquired on demand. Simple as that. To simplify it further, in Socialism the principle of distribution is "To each according to his contribution", while in Communism it is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"

Attached: a25.png (811x710, 541.98K)

ONE BIG UNION

Attached: 220px-One_Big_Union_02.jpg (220x290, 17.02K)

I has to be lefypol to not understand the importance of race, Once your country gets flooded by mussies , raping, murdering and reading the Quaran your gini goes way up.

yes not everyone is equal but there are reasons and causes for this that need to be investigated instead of just ignoring it or blaming genetics.
for example the average dutch height has increased ~20cm in the last 200 years
IQ scores are significantly different in those who got educated compared to those who didn't even though both were of the same ethnicity
children of educated parents have higher Autism Level
facial beauty which everyone thinks is genetics is more than half environmental factors and diet

“The chief advantage that would result from the establishment of Socialism is, undoubtedly, the fact that Socialism would relieve us from that sordid necessity of living for others which, in the present condition of things, presses so hardly upon almost everybody. In fact, scarcely anyone at all escapes.

Now and then, in the course of the century, a great man of science, like Darwin; a great poet, like Keats; a fine critical spirit, like M. Renan; a supreme artist, like Flaubert, has been able to isolate himself, to keep himself out of reach of the clamorous claims of others, to stand ‘under the shelter of the wall,’ as Plato puts it, and so to realise the perfection of what was in him, to his own incomparable gain, and to the incomparable and lasting gain of the whole world. These, however, are exceptions. The majority of people spoil their lives by an unhealthy and exaggerated altruism – are forced, indeed, so to spoil them. They find themselves surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by all this. The emotions of man are stirred more quickly than man’s intelligence; and, as I pointed out some time ago in an article on the function of criticism, it is much more easy to have sympathy with suffering than it is to have sympathy with thought. Accordingly, with admirable, though misdirected intentions, they very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of remedying the evils that they see. But their remedies do not cure the disease: they merely prolong it. Indeed, their remedies are part of the disease.
They try to solve the problem of poverty, for instance, by keeping the poor alive; or, in the case of a very advanced school, by amusing the poor.

But this is not a solution: it is an aggravation of the difficulty. The proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on such a basis that poverty will be impossible. And the altruistic virtues have really prevented the carrying out of this aim. Just as the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves, and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it, so, in the present state of things in England, the people who do most harm are the people who try to do most good; and at last we have had the spectacle of men who have really studied the problem and know the life – educated men who live in the East End – coming forward and imploring the community to restrain its altruistic impulses of charity, benevolence, and the like. They do so on the ground that such charity degrades and demoralises. They are perfectly right. Charity creates a multitude of sins.

There is also this to be said. It is immoral to use private property in order to alleviate the horrible evils that result from the institution of private property. It is both immoral and unfair.”

Attached: 4913B458-E17B-4A68-910F-EDEE8F10BB77.jpeg (604x340, 54.62K)

Equality isn't some metaphysical pipe dream to me, its a real material goal that must be approached. A lot of this handwringing philosophy falls apart after a landlord doesn't sign you on for an apartment, because you are a tranny when they see your license. I can legally and actually have been discriminated.

Attached: mtfirl.jpg (500x282, 41.14K)

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (680x447, 198.62K)

Not everyone on there own choice, will want the same way of living with the same amount/type of resources and shelter being needed. This means that we should focus more on meeting and assuring that people can work enough and revive materials. This is to meet the living standards the way they want! Some will want to live in the city some out in the woods some live in minimalism some want/need a more resource intensive life. The whole of production distribution and infrastructure should be individual determined say for the home food,water power/wifi… all else should be request based and with in a generally accepted limit so as to not be clearly wasteful. Equality is vague and assumes will give all the prescribed same and that will br that. I think we all can argee we all think individual through the collective show in reason move resources by individual need and want!

Equality is a liberal idea.
It is entirely obvious that the only reason why the Soviet Union was so successful for over 80 years (!) was the inequalities in the people. Because all ppl were special.
Thanks for reading.

youtube.com/watch?v=pzQZ_NDEzVos

as in everybody is a literal biological clone of each other: no.
as in everybody is a human and shares mutual interests with all other humans: very much.
yes, it can be done and it works. i was born in the german democratic republic which was much much better in terms of law than the retarded burger style porky liberalism and neo-reactionary crap we have to deal with now.
with fairness and justice. if you aren't a sociopath (which is an actual brain disorder) or artifically raised to be a sociopath every human knows intuitively what is "just" and "fair", because humans are social animals. being social is most of the time in the self-interest of every human individiual. exceptions are situations such as the prisoner's dilemma. however these remain exceptions.
kant's categoric imperative and the universal declaration of human rights are a good start. don' t disregard humanism, just because liberals like to associate themselves with it. humanists were early socialists and communists, but bourgeois liberals never were and still are not humanists, they aren't even real democrats, they are only hypocrites and pretenders. liberals are not interested in human rights, but use them basically as a marketing strategy for getting more power. liberals/libertarians (yes, that's literally the same) are just as anti-humanist as reactionaries, except they are far more hypocrit than reactionaries about it. reactionaries openly despise human rights and they consider the enlightment movement and french revolution as the biggest catastrophies in history. from their perspective it bears some truth of course, because aristocrats lost a lot of self-given privileges back then.
that's why laws exist. and as soon as humanity leaves this planet and perhaps has to deal with extra terrestrial species you're likely to consider a lot more people "family". namely at least those you can biologically procreate with.

Attached: immanuel kant.jpg (1280x720, 137.9K)

Dont post that Kant asshole, we graffitied his grave in 1945 LMAO

fuck off to Zig Forums

yes its why I am marxist

state enforced equality or the gulag

Rolled 2, 2 + 1 = 5 (2d4)who is the most Zig Forums faction?
NCR:generic soldiers
Mr House: Actually she was in cyrostasis for 100 years so its ok
Yes man: Edgy route
Legion: Le edgy route for the sake of being evil

Attached: fallout_-new-vegas-hd-wallpapers-33091-7676653.jpg (1600x900, 340.08K)

no. people are very unequal.
culture makes people different too.
We shouldn't dedicate our lives to work for porky until we can retire at 70, if we get to live that long. Two reasons, it's unnecessary, it's inefficient.
I rather work alongside a[n] [insert your favorite bigotry] than suffer under capitalism. And, we either all work (according to one's abilities), or nobody works. Equality is a side issue. We need to learn to co-exist with our coworkers, doesn't matter if you like them or not.

Beautifully written.

This is much like the comparison of value that Marx speaks of in Capital. Commodities have a use value, and an exchange value. Use values can not be compared, only by reducing them to a specific common trait can they be compared, in capitalism that trait is labour and it's represented as dollars. Socialism seeks to abolish money, thus any abstracted notion to see things as more or less equal will vanish.

This is the worst mentality and what has caused everyone in the western world to become completely docile. "Just worry about your own little circle bro, you can't save the entire world, just chillax man".
Everything and everyone is connected. For me, my country, my family and friends to be safe, I need me, my country, my family and my friends to be in a safe world. AKA a communist world. World war 3 is coming bro, and if communists don't seize power during/after, we'll have a WW4 too.

Later iterations of it are, but the original few series were leftpilled as fuck. Gene Roddenberry was an unapologetic anti-capitalist.

AHH LE NOT MAINING MEMe :)

le charlie epic random wildcard fake vidya xd tv/ editon ;^^^)

gentleman :—)


XD
D
LOL
O


[YouTube] Epic sax guy 10 hours (embed) [YouTube] Epic sax guy 10 hours (embed)
[YouTube] Epic sax guy 10 hours (embed) ]

PIZZA ROLLS r DONE!!!
le epic so ebin dae le epin win xD pwn’d ftw le bacon narwhale xP
*unsheathes katana*
wellllllllll m’goodsir, I think u thought u had me beat, but wacht this !!!!
*charges up energy*
*goes super sainant*
*raises paw*
hhmmmmmmmmm…….


XD NINJAS RAWR PIE CAKE IS A LIE XDDD


xD xD
[YouTube] eiffel65 im blue 10 hours (embed)

AYYLMSOOOO
Y
YY
YY
Y
YY
Y
Y
L
M
A
OAYYYYLMAO


le epic so ebin dae le epin win xD pwn’d ftw le bacon narwhale xP

le epin troll i coax youed int o al e ruxze xD D D tfw no gf xD ayy lmao! :p
upboated good sir i tip my fedora to you, fine gentlemen le real men have class xD real human bean!!1 dae cake is a lie lel
epic fail!!!!!!!! ;p for YOU!! :DDD XD we r :)iwiusns