London Bridge
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
hedgehog50  Croydon 08 Jun 17 9.57am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by legaleagle
Well,there certainly seem to have been weights tied to your powers of objective analysis... For me,egalitarianism=equality of opportunity;all humans regarded as of same inherent potential worth. Though sometimes your posts do make even me query this. Your understanding of egalitarianism: Garry Borrowdale level of footballing. Well it is pretty obvious that we don't all have the same inherent potential worth. Edited by hedgehog50 (08 Jun 2017 9.58am)
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 Stirlingsays 08 Jun 17 10.13am |
   |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by legaleagle
Well,there certainly seem to have been weights tied to your powers of objective analysis... For me,egalitarianism=equality of opportunity;all humans regarded as of same inherent potential worth. Though sometimes your posts do make even me query this. Your understanding of egalitarianism: Garry Borrowdale level of footballing. Ah, the touchy freely part of egalitarianism that very few people would disagree with.....By the way that's just a titbit of egalitarianism. It's the consequences where people differ.....Also most people who call themselves egalitarians are in fact just admitting to hypocrisy. Edited by Stirlingsays (08 Jun 2017 10.14am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 08 Jun 17 10.19am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Money talks. Once you strip them of nationality they aren't British anymore.....If they hate the country as it is then they don't deserve residence here. I know of one of them, Anthony Small on Youtube....He agrees that he shouldn't be in Britain...a country he hates.... but he says he isn't allowed to leave by the state because we suspect he'll leave to fight in Syria. These radicals make their own paths. We are so tolerant in this country that we allow our children to be blown apart because we don't want to offend the sensibilities of egalitarians who think they are on some human rights crusade. I think they have the balance incorrect. Doesn't talk as loudly as nationalism. If countries just started deporting anyone with a British heritage line to the UK, no matter how much they were paying, we'd be up in arms complaining. We had a massive issue with people coming from other countries, to work in the UK and contribute to the UK. How well do you think sending people we regard as a threat to human life is going to go down in another country. Even if we pay big for the privilege. I don't think it matters how much you pay them, political opponents in those countries will use it as a nationalist rallying cry.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 08 Jun 17 10.29am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Exactly - all matches should be nil nil draws, supporters should not wear team colours and the teams themselves should wear the same kits. Players like Wilf should have weights tied to them to slow them down and to make them equal [Benteke won't need slowing down].
Actually that's not what Egalitarianism is at all. Its that irrespective of superficial differences, people should be entitled to the same rights and obligations. Only the mental would argue that it means all people have the same level of ability. Egalitarians just argue that its only their ability that should count, not say that because they have a p**** they should earn more for doing the same job.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 08 Jun 17 10.33am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Actually that's not what Egalitarianism is at all. Its that irrespective of superficial differences, people should be entitled to the same rights and obligations. Only the mental would argue that it means all people have the same level of ability. Egalitarians just argue that its only their ability that should count, not say that because they have a p**** they should earn more for doing the same job. So why do you have shortlists with quotas based on the likes of gender, ethnicity, sexual preferences, disabilities etc.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 08 Jun 17 10.34am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Doesn't talk as loudly as nationalism. If countries just started deporting anyone with a British heritage line to the UK, no matter how much they were paying, we'd be up in arms complaining. We had a massive issue with people coming from other countries, to work in the UK and contribute to the UK. How well do you think sending people we regard as a threat to human life is going to go down in another country. Even if we pay big for the privilege. I don't think it matters how much you pay them, political opponents in those countries will use it as a nationalist rallying cry. Yeah all those Islamic countries that really worry about pressure groups. Most Islamic nationalist groups have opinions not a million miles away from radicals. I very much doubt our radicals will be allowed to roam free in their new country. I don't really care how they deal with it, that is for them. This is a concern of the country that accepts our money. I'm quite confident that an arrangement could be come to. Like i say, it's the misguided egalitarians and the money grabbing lawyers that need to be overcome. Unfortunately and tragically we have more children that will be blown to pieces before that happens.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 08 Jun 17 10.37am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Well it is pretty obvious that we don't all have the same inherent potential worth. I don't think that correct, we all roughly have the same level of potential worth, we don't all have the same level of actual worth. Until someone acts, you cant really judge them accurately. Potentiality exists prior to evidence output. Obviously there are biological and genetic differences, but for most of the population these more or less balance out to an average. Social factors are a big player as well.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 08 Jun 17 10.40am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Actually that's not what is at all. Its that irrespective of superficial differences, people should be entitled to the same rights and obligations. Only the mental would argue that it means all people have the same level of ability. Egalitarians just argue that its only their ability that should count, not say that because they have a p**** they should earn more for doing the same job.
It is a human construct which has no meaning in nature. It does underpin our legal system of course,in theory at least. In reality, the wealthy still get the breaks. When it comes to the greater good, there is definitely a case for treating those who disrupt the status quo differently, if it serves the vast majority. The needs of the many, and all that.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 08 Jun 17 10.41am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
I don't think that correct, we all roughly have the same level of potential worth, we don't all have the same level of actual worth. Until someone acts, you cant really judge them accurately. Potentiality exists prior to evidence output. Obviously there are biological and genetic differences, but for most of the population these more or less balance out to an average. Social factors are a big player as well. He wasn't being serious. He was getting back at legal because legal made a swipe at him.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 08 Jun 17 10.44am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Yeah all those Islamic countries that really worry about pressure groups. Most Islamic nationalist groups have opinions not a million miles away from radicals. I very much doubt our radicals will be allowed to roam free in their new country. I don't really care how they deal with it, that is for them. This is a concern of the country that accepts our money. I'm quite confident that an arrangement could be come to. Like i say, it's the misguided egalitarians and the money grabbing lawyers that need to be overcome. Unfortunately and tragically we have more children that will be blown to pieces before that happens. Most of those Islamic nations don't really need the money, and have spend the last decade export their problem, which has become our problem. Plus exporting them to countries which might have sympathies or support for such groups, provides them with intelligence assets, who have contacts and information about potential recruits in the UK that we haven't discovered: potentially giving them a safe haven from which to operate support networks. An example here: We should be very concerned about Jihadists who return from Syria. Not because they might just commit a terrorist action here, but because they'll have contacts and allies in different countries made during their time in Syria who have also returned. A network in the UK that's just UK members is a problem, and can generally be uprooted. When cell networks start to form with contacts that spread across different cell strutcures and into 'safe nations' its almost impossible to destroy them.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 08 Jun 17 10.49am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
It is a human construct which has no meaning in nature. It does underpin our legal system of course,in theory at least. In reality, the wealthy still get the breaks. When it comes to the greater good, there is definitely a case for treating those who disrupt the status quo differently, if it serves the vast majority. The needs of the many, and all that.
Doesn't exist either, its a human construct. We should treat those who disrupt the status quo differently (and we do). The problem is fairly determining who those people are. Which is what we have a criminal justice system for. We don't say 'ah right, he's not a very good driver he could kill someone'. We establish that once he is a qualified driver, he is treated like anyone else, unless they break the laws of the road. And that's the problem here. We're talking about suspects, people for whom their is insufficient evidence to convict of any crime. Remember that the kind of evidence that security services use is not admissible in court (and not necessarily obtained legally, or fairly).
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 08 Jun 17 10.50am |
|
|---|---|
|
I think the majority of people accept at least some aspects of egalitarianism.....though some more the theory than the practice. Anyone who has humanity should know that at a fundamental level by default human beings all deserve fairness and decency. However....it's from there that the differences between us on egalitarianism become apparent.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.