We need EQUITY

Post Reply New Topic

I'm aware of what the term means. But you have to understand I'm somewhat of an anarchist (which is ironic because I depend on the system for my medications and foodstamps which I could never survive without). I believe that if people could learn not to depend so much on any style of government we would all be a lot happier, even if our lives would possibly be shorter and we were all left to defend ourselves from other humans.

Communism may have worked in your country but I don't see it working for mine. I feel that it would devolve into exactly the same sort crap the USSR had.

Sometimes I think the only real difference the US and USSR is thar in the US we are at least granted the privilege of being able to complain and badmouth our government, and now even that privilege seems to be slowly fading away.

I wouldn't risk lowering life expectancy in the name of instantly abolishing the state without any conditions.

People in Governments generally in order to maintain their powerbase ,, it is almost manditory to keep these cultures at odds with each other .. Even if they seem to bring in bad actors to pretext being one side of a culture or the other ..
And generating some kind of violence or unjust reactions into one side or the other .This IS manditory.. If people get together and think ( or organize) it becomes a threat to power . ( ie. People whom control power/ Corporate situations)
It becomes better ( more profitable to build WEAPONS , instead of housing , Unless it might be housing for factories or corporate housing . Bigger world market to sell weapons ! ( Think Industrial Military corporate lobbyists) .
eg. Over 2/3rd of the national budget in the USA goes to the War Mongers. So Culture wars are absolutely important .
Who so ever culture, Think Black Lives matter and Wokeism, and prior , 9/11 ,destruction of building three . And blaming it on Iraq . basically feild testing for Nation crushing , weapons and tactics , and excuse to remove privacy concerns by the USA via the PatriotAct, (removing civil rights protections). And enough Media propaganda here to get people to want it.(btw look who controls USA media outlets).
All this is designed to set aside inalienable human rights. Including promoting culture wars , preventing unification of persons for their own good . .. But these are just my thoughts, based on all input have seen via all media sources and some very real life circumstances. These circumstances are not conducive to any human life, except ,top teir monsters.
By the way ..Mr OP for your age listed here you demostrate some really aware concepts of Your own countries areas real life circumstances.. Actually would have considered you could be much older given your writing

That picture is a good illustration of why equity is an evolutionary dead end. They're all doing the same activity, just with some folks being given an unfair advantage over the others. If this was just them watching a sportsball game without paying, there would be wider consequences to society at large from it. The issue there is that perhaps the other two should be out doing something that's more in line with their abilities and interests?

A really good example would be women in STEM fields. There's been this obsession going back the last few decades about how few women are in those fields and so they pretty much burned the college system down trying to force women into those fields and it's done very little other than prevent men from having equal educational opportunities. The last time there was a year where more men graduated college in the US than women was 1981. At this point we're sitting at somewhere around 2 women in college for every one man and women are still "underrepresented" in those fields. Perhaps it's time that we just admit that there aren't enough women that want to go into those fields, it's not women being discouraged from it. I'm not even sure that it's a matter of women not being capable of it. It's somewhat unclear why men are so willing to crawl through a field of broken glass to enter those fields when women won't even take any of the advantages handed to them to, but here we are.

Personally, I don't support this sort of thing just because of how bad of an idea it is. I've got no issues with removing unfair barriers to entry and perhaps giving a bit of a boost for those that could be good at something with a bit of help, but in a lot of cases, the better solution for everybody is to just stop pushing people into fields that they don't want to be in and perhaps focus on getting people into fields that are more aligned with their personal interests and talents.

Loves the images of the boxes ...

Don't be fooled.  TRUE equity would have involved giving each person a free ticket to watch the game from the stands.

That's the trouble with using memes to support an idea -- they are limited in scope, and never go far enough.

jest; Consider in a Good Communistic culture , all must be equal...by order of the Proleteriat , Legs must be amputated. such that all workers have a common length to work from . ...j/k...
Any stilts or boxes must be confiscated

Last edited by Jakki on 25 Apr 2024, 3:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

If there are not enough seats in the stadium, the stadium should be expanded. If there is always a traffic jam, the road should be widened.

It is only the shortage of equipment that prevents you from entering the gym, not the security guards or the people who near u.To turn a blind eye to the objective conditions and focus on the struggle between people (whether demanding equality outside the fence or free tickets) is to be fooled.

People who devote all their energy to competing with others for resources rather than production are bad for society.

About the only thing you and I seem to agree on is the fact that communist propaganda sounds better in theory but fails in reality.

". . . in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is" -- Benjamin Brewster, a student at Yale University, recounting a philosophical argument he had with a friend in 1882

Communism looks good on paper only to some sadly misguided people, while Capitalism -- the economic system wherein the workers own no share of the means of production -- has been around for thousands of years.

Capitalism used to work for us and it doesn't seem to be working anymore but I don't believe replacing it with another failed system is the answer.

I would think that coming up with a new economic system for modern times would be best, but that's easier said than done. We don't get revolutionary thinkers like we used to anymore.

Capitalism is merely a phase that began in the 16th century and rose to prominence in 19th century with the Industrial revolution. The system that has been around for thousands of years is called "conflict" and in Marxist theory is called "class struggle" between the poor and the rich as they go through different class societies from slaveholders and slaves, through lords and peasants, to bourgeois and the proletariat. Capitalism is the last stage of class conflict which must be put to an end at once by international action of the workmen.

If communism failed economically, why not go with Market Socialism? If the central economy was too stagnant for communism, it could have opened up for market economy but still limit capitalism to prevent degenerate bureaucracy. The reason it didn't do that is because Marx said that markets are useless for communism and Stalin pretty much used his "orthodox Marxist" thinking to get rid of Lenin's market socialism and replace it with a nationalized central economic system which did help modernize the USSR but resulted in massive deaths due to the harsh collectivization and industrialization without any remorse or regret for the lives.

However, in later period, this was simply revealed to be very evil due to the political paranoia that followed in the 1930s when Stalin wanted all power for himself. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Juche are examples of a totalized state ownership of the means of production and lack of flow within the mode of the production. Market Socialism enables flowing economy thanks to the social ownership (owned by the workers, not the state) of the means of production guided by market prices that help keep the economy flowing and allow for motivation and hard work in order to get surplus that can be distributed among the working class itself and be even exported to other communist movements in need of such material equipment.

Exactly. The issue with capitalism is that capitalism is an economic system that exploits the labor of the proletariat through competition. In "Das Kapital", the value of the commodity is determined by the quantity of the labor itself, rather than the quality of the labor. What Marx argued is that under Capitalism, products by enterprises and corporations aren't produced with effective quality for the service to the users of the products but instead as a means of giving a mediocre design to the product with a rather low lifespan of usage as a means of earning profit quicker by making products deliberately mediocre to awful. That is because quantity is valued over quality. If Capitalism is about competition among the rich individuals, then quantity is all they need in order to win their own game of "Monopoly" in the capitalist society.



It is also a fun fact to mention that Karl Marx advocated for free education, having said so in his 1852 work "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte".

This may sound convincing and reasonable but the results have been always the opposite. Widening a road will simply resume the cycle of traffic congestion as more drivers would consider the widened road. No matter how wide it will be, congestion will be inevitable as widening the road will increase the number of vehicles commuting through said road. To reduce traffic is to invest in public transport by making it free for travel which also helps encourage carpooling. There should be no car parks within busy intersections in order to keep the traffic flowing smoothly.

It is specifically for this reason that highways should be considered as a means of avoiding unnecessary traffic congestion in urban and rural roads as highways are what should encourage massive traffic flow. They must be wide for sure but they must be continuous without any serious stoppages (unless a major car crash happens or a construction is taking place) because highways are roads that are long haul and rarely do stop but simply merge with one another at certain intersections near major cities. The busiest road is the Highway 401 in Ontario, Canada with a record of 500,000 cars but is also one of the widest highways in the world and its sheer size is what encourages hundreds of thousands of vehicles to go through it every single day.

Even then, this should be avoided by simply encouraging carpooling as well as making bus transport less expensive.