Egalitarianism

A "someone on Veeky Forums setup straw man of x thing based on their meme interpretation" thread.

I'll pass.

Its shown by simple history and the state of our society.

In our society, we have rich college educated persons who think they are less privileged then working class white males.

In our society, we suffer the delusion that third-world religious fundamentalists share the same basic values as modern liberals.

In our society, we suffer the delusion that poverty is the basis for the massive crime rate among minorities groups [mostly blacks].

In our society, every time we see a circumstance in which one group is excelling [white, asian males in STEM] and one group not [women] not overly entering it, we assume the reason is sexism and not differences in interest.

Our society is a mess of lies growing out of the idea of 'equality' in all its forms.

He's wrong about egalitarianism as an idea, but not about it in practice; most egalitarians are "muh tabula rasa" idiots who assume that the only possible reason for one demographic doing better or worse than another is that one or both is cheating or being cheated and that therefore it's not REAL egalitarianism and further legislation is needed to even the playing field.

This is all just generalisations, I don't quite know how to respond really. Even if it were all true, it wouldn't mean these ideas inherently the same way under a different model of society.

If you can't judge a philosophy by its practical results through repetitive practice, you can't judge it at all.

This is the same delusional thinking that makes people want to try Marxism again, and again, and again.

They just keep telling themselves "Its not the ideas fault, its the conditions in which they were implemented" and thus they try again, to everyone's ruin.

You can say there is some imaginary conditions under which a philosophy of equality would be beneficial but here on Earth, its poison.

People who think they're a victim of a changing society that no longer caters to them usually make HUGE generalisations about their supposed enemies. It's a way of continuing the idea in their heads that things would be better under their supposedly utopic ideology.

>If you can't judge a philosophy by its practical results through repetitive practice, you can't judge it at all.
There is a difference between 'judging it from it's outcomes' and 'writing it off completely because of some generalisations I plucked from my arse'.

Why should unequal people be given equal opportunity?

I'm not an egalitarian. I'm simply pointing out his misconceptions surrounding egalitarians.

So you don't get massive riots and social unrest demanding equal opportunity.

Have you ever heard of the French Revolution?

To prove that they are unequal.

They're not misconceptions. The very idea of 'equal opportunities' is ridiculous, because of two facts

1. Inequality in potential exists, meaning the playing field will never be level. Some people are born geniuses and others are born retarded. No amount of money or outreach will fix that.

2. Inequal persons tend to accumulate wealth to themselves and thus pull themselves into an upper class that provides more opportunities.

We should be concerned with making sure the bottom rung of society has a good quality of life, and that exceptional persons in lower classes have a chance to excel, NOT with equality in any form, not even the word.

>Modern youth
ANd your mum & dad.
And your grandpa.
And everyone who believed in the nationalism/liberalism ever since the French revolution.

>Some people are born geniuses

and if they are born in some shitty household they will amount to nothing.

>We should be concerned with making sure the bottom rung of society has a good quality of life, and that exceptional persons in lower classes have a chance to excel, NOT with equality in any form, not even the word.

That what is happening dumbass. God it's like you are so isolated from reality that you occupy a dimension of inanity and ignorance.

>and that exceptional persons in lower classes have a chance to excel
How do you distinguish those with a chance to excel from those who don't?
>NOT with equality in any form
With what?
>not even the word.
Autism.

This, well said

What causes the riots is the public awareness of greater opportunity, not the fact that there isn't any equal opportunity available (even though there very much is). The problem here is universal readership.

>many would acknowledge differences.
>Instead they wish to offer equal oppurtunities so those may be outliers among their group still have the ability to attain their potential.

But wouldn't this by definition mean that they're not egalitarian? I've always held egalitarianism to mean that everyone regardless of sex or race is a total tabula rasa without inherent differences other than physical appearance and individual talent/capabilities, in other words, no group differences. I think the guy did a good job of summing it up; if you're an egalitarian then equality of opportunity and equality of outcome are one and the same, in the sense that if you give say women the exact same opportunities as men then there would be exactly as many female engineers, for example.

You're right those things aren't equal in all traits but I think what is more important is providing means of institutions and regulations which give people equal opportunities that can be comprehended in a basic, fundamentally value-based way, regardless of what or who they are, to(and here's the important part) succeed and thrive in an environment with others who can be unequal with them. Why is it when you have larger corporations and horizontally broad conglomerates you start to view people as systematically equal. There is something unbelievably alienating about industrial and post-industrial work (which some could say matches the industrially paved regulatory customary relations of the working and producing company). The pecuniary institutions are of course post-industrial because they comprise a large proportion of our heavily service-based economy. As Veblen stated, they also have imbued in them a spirit of Darwinist conservatism combined with, in my opinion, egalitarianism which seems to produce the alienating spiritual effect in the first place. But big and large wholesale traffic commands we do it. It's not the end of the world as production is still dependent upon the services and goods we can exchange for them as a nation, but the joint-stock companies of the 1700s and 1800s seem much better ways to organize a group of people than the linear, hierarchical organizational group of modern corporations in the 21st century. Mill always lauded these corporations and I cannot dissent that the atmosphere involved with being able to vote your manager out of office and the various multifaceted duties each employee had according to the needs of the company would be an enjoyable change of pace and a better organization culturally.

>There is no problem with egalitarianism or its modern offshoots and interpretations that regularly oppress successful groups and set up privileged classes through deception and ignorance!

Meanwhile, in reality...

So let's ship 'em all back to the fields! Hell, let's just implement feudalism whilst we're at it! Couple that a religious institutions that tell 'em reading's bad and bob's you're uncle.

If you want to live in this fantasy world, you can take a one way way flight to the middle east where people still live in these kind of hell holes and renounce your ideas of Western Individualism.

Maybe because they want to be treated equal before the law and rights.

>He thinks modern Leftist Authoritarianism is the same thing as classical liberal individualism

Oh man I'm laffin. I bet you think the United States is a democracy too.

Actually, I don't care that there are riots. I'm just informing you that so-called lack of equal opportunity is not what causes riots. Greed does.

"Equal opportunity" is a bogus concept anyway. The opportunities laid out in front of a person are never the same as the ones for someone else because the people themselves aren't equal.

Literally didn't address my argument at all. You're an immature kid.

You hardly made an argument, so I hardly made a response.

So you're actually telling me that people who revolt over their terrible conditions in life as almost second class citizens are just being greedy when they want to improve their lot in life and should learn to enjoy their place at the bottom rung?

History tells us society does NOT work like this.

French Revolution was about the unequal people making themselves equal and the old regime unequal.

Probably because you have dogshit reading comprehension. Not my fault, really.

Whatever you say Satan.

not an argument

Yes.

>their terrible conditions in life as almost second class citizens
They suffer these conditions because they ARE second class.

>when they want to improve their lot in life
In most cases, what they really want is an easy ride to the top.

>and should learn to enjoy their place at the bottom rung?
No one is saying that. Rioting like uncouth apes, however, is what PUTS them at the bottom rung of society. They won't get anywhere for it. Doesn't mean you have to just passively accept and spread your cheeks.

This. The conditions of modern day blacks/etc has nothing to do with oppression. We aren't holding them back, we're extending literally every possible line of aid, we've burnt billions of dollars in their communities, to little to no avail.

It isn't like modern people are going around with whips oppressing and stealing from poor people and giving them higher taxes, we're doing the exact opposite.

Seeing these people riot by burning down and looting their own communities and then complaining about poor conditions and wacissism is more funny then sad by this point.

But the question is whether you are viewing this question spiritually or demographically(situational variables requiring a minimum amount of education). Whether people are unequal in the former is not up for debate. The purpose of organizing a society for the benefit of the citizens is for achieving the latter. Sometimes the system of making college public seems to be an ultimately non-socialist point of view because it increases the opportunity of others to succeed in the level of effort they are willing to put forward, as opposed to their parents and surroundings.

>Doesn't mean you have to just passively accept and spread your cheeks.

What should the French have done, or the Russians or the English or the Chinese or whomever else has violently revolted in history against an oppressive government?

>this whole thread

Don't worry, you'll grow out of your edgy reactionary phase eventually.

>we've burnt billions of dollars in their communities, to little to no avail.
funnelling cocaine and god knows what into black communities is technically spending money on them, sure

In many cases they were justified. What we're saying is that modern riots are not the same situation as ancient revolutionaries.

If nigs wanted to get shit down, they'd crack down hard on crime and vulgarity in their own communities, which is their real problem. The government is not oppressing them, they're oppressing themselves by being barbarians.

>tfw America, Britain, and rising nationalism worldwide says the world won't be growing out of its 'edgy reactionary phase' anytime soon.

The Don lied on the campaign trail. I'm still not tired of all this winning.

>In many cases they were justified. What we're saying is that modern riots are not the same situation as ancient revolutionaries.

Oh, fair. Thought you were talking about this from a historical perspective.

so slavery is good, yes?
we should kill the mentally inferior, yes?

What makes one thing justified and another one not asides from your meme reasoning or "if it's something I like it's okay but if it isn't it's trucking bad"?

No. We should be benevolent to the bottom rung of society and make sure outliers have opportunities.

Just people someone doesn't believe in equality doesn't mean he believes in being a heartless asshole.

>If nigs wanted to get shit down, they'd crack down hard on crime and vulgarity in their own communities,

They do though if yo bother to read up on it.

>The government is not oppressing them, they're oppressing themselves by being barbarians.

that's blame shifting. there's plenty of times state and federal governments did things that directly harmed the citizenry and especially the lower class.

You do know the Veeky Forums core demographic is like 15-21 I think?

What makes it justified is whether they're actually being fucking oppressed.

Who is oppressing modern blacks? Who is denying them opportunities?

Because its sure as hell not the government, or the media, or culture in general, which is shilling shilling shilling for them all day long.

And then consider their methods!

>French/Russians get oppressed by the government
>Attack the government

>Nigs get 'oppressed by the government'
>Attack themselves

If they were actually being oppressed and actually launching a revolution I'd have more respect then just them using imaginary oppression as an excuse to rob and burn shit.

equality being the highest value of society is the major problem.

everyone does

And as such they shouldn't be held as equal in front of the law?

So what kind of system do you propose then? How do we weed out the superior? Genetic testing? Cognitive abilities tests as children?

Then, once they are separated, what do we do with the inferior? How inferior is "inferior,"? Would they live in separate casts like Brave New World?

I'm asking these un-ironically. How would system that stratifies inequality work?

*castes

Technically we don't even have equality before the law, nor should we. People of higher station should be held to higher standards however, not lower, which is only sometimes the case.

>make sure outliers have opportunities.
wow so egelitarianism
nice going faggot

This desu

I think he means "inferior opportunities."

Like McDonald's most likely.

Why? And what do you mean by "People of higher station should be held to higher standards"?

that happened but it is not some big conspiracy the problem is way bigger than that

The modern US government is not as a severe an oppressor like these rioters are making them out to be. Fuck, I mean this shit has been going on since 1992, if not longer, and even THEN the rioters were just being assholes about it.

Strong borders, strong immigration tests, high standards of excellence and the extension of opportunities to people of lower economic/social station without lowering the standards.

End affirmative action.
End racial and gender quotas
End progressive propaganda
Decrease welfare

I'm not saying we should eat the weak or anything cruel like that, I'm saying we should promote excellence and stop tearing down and shitting on high achievers for the sin of being high achievers, while shifting blame regarding people who fail to measure up. Practically applied to certain issues, this would mean

1. Stop blaming whites for problems in the black community. Realize the problems with the black community reside in the black community. Stop throwing money at the problem.

2. Stop shilling about how women make less then men for the same work [they don't]. Stop trying to increase women participation in fields they clearly [taken as a group] are not interested in.

3. Stop defending Islam as a sane ideology.

Etc.

They should be punished harder which is actually just supporting bringing the successful down as this retard is saying.

Equal punishments for equal crimes. If a poor/rich guy does a crime the exact same way they get equal punishments the minute you diverge from that shit goes bad.

Did you just escape from /pol/?

Also do you know how gutted welfare is? Something tells me you are still in highschool