Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Critical Race Theory, and why...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by siam View Post
    I have been pondering many of these same points---particularly since many muslim-majority countries are failing/broken...there may be an opportunity to construct a new socio-political vision....?...
    As you mentioned---The declaration of Independence was a hypocrisy from the start. So called "unalienable rights" were the privilege of only an elite group of white landowners (Native Americans not included). The first change that would be necessary in any new vision of Unity would be an understanding that Equality of all humanity and "unalienable rights" (or basic human rights) would apply to ALL humanity globally and would be non-negotiable.

    The "Islamicate" (various caliphates and empires) period was flawed and problematic---but the concept of unalienable rights meant that slaves had (basic) rights and they could go to court for redress if their rights were infringed. If all of humanity are brothers---of the same family---then (undeserved) basic rights should belong equally to all members of the (human) family---all humanity regardless of their position in the family.

    Suppose we say that the right to education is a human right. Then one needs to examine policies and customs that accord privilege as well as create inequality---such as legacy admissions and tax policies such as school/education funding based on property taxes...(U.S.)...etc. Access to education can also become an obstacle, and this needs to be considered---If one needs to travel to and live in Massachusetts to be able to go to MIT then it could hinder equal accessibility....and policies that exclude access to those non residents of a district or province....etc. Therefore, the right to education means that all peoples will be able to have an education without financial issues, mobility issues, issues of access (including test scores)....etc. .The right to education must also include a vision for non-institutional education systems such as work-based education, training programs, apprenticeships, internships, and other methods of gaining skills that are non-institutional....therefore, institutional education systems will not be the only choice for people---but will compete against other forms/systems of education....(Diversity of choice can balance the power that monopolies create)
    This vision then needs to be translated into laws, policies and customs for that society. The implementation of the vision may be diverse as the circumstances of the communities may vary. A one-size fits all solution may create more problems than it solves....?...
    The principle of the right to education would be a non-negotiable right---its implementation would be flexible so that while the principle remains constant---the solutions that implement this vision/principle can adapt to changing needs of the community. It also means there is no "enemy" to fight against. All humanity work together to ensure the principle (right to education) gets safeguarded.

    If u had to come up with a set of non-negotiable rights for humanity---what would they look like?
    I would be very resistant to enumerating positive rights based on government education, shelter, food, water, and jobs programs for the reason you mention, that it necessitates extensive examination and elaboration as well as exploitation, even if I think they should be provided. Less complicated, well-tested programs like minimum wage, a speedy and fair trial, or healthcare should be rights. Otherwise, the rights for humanity should be almost wholly negative (religion, speech, slavery, property). I would also want a right to government oversight, because that's the easiest way for a bill of rights to be without teeth as ours is in the US. For example, having supreme court members appointed by a president and a legislative majority is not a good way to ensure a country's rights. I think the greatest enemy of unity is self-interest, and the more protections there are in place for equality measures and against snowballing power grabs (for example, wealth inequality or corporate monopolies), the better.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
      I understand Communism and the times we are in. Communism has nothing to do with the US because the number of people who live here and want a Communist government are minuscule. If you have been convinced otherwise from conspiracy peddlers that's a rather large burden of proof.



      Whose propaganda?
      WOW. I didn't think you were that behind on the times. The BLM is organized by people that openly admit they are trained Marxists. Then our Democrat governors let these riots go on unhindered. Our media says that their burning of buildings are peaceful aspects of the riots. Bernie Sanders openly says he is Communist. Our major internet companies have been doing full on censorship. The the background of the head of WHO is as a Communist revolutionary. I think the proof is on the head-in-the-ground deniers of the evidence before us.

      Oh well. The people are asleep. This leaves only our Lord and Savior to deliver us from this mess.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
        Oh well. The people are asleep. This leaves only our Lord and Savior to deliver us from this mess.
        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
          I would be very resistant to enumerating positive rights based on government education, shelter, food, water, and jobs programs for the reason you mention, that it necessitates extensive examination and elaboration as well as exploitation, even if I think they should be provided. Less complicated, well-tested programs like minimum wage, a speedy and fair trial, or healthcare should be rights. Otherwise, the rights for humanity should be almost wholly negative (religion, speech, slavery, property). I would also want a right to government oversight, because that's the easiest way for a bill of rights to be without teeth as ours is in the US. For example, having supreme court members appointed by a president and a legislative majority is not a good way to ensure a country's rights. I think the greatest enemy of unity is self-interest, and the more protections there are in place for equality measures and against snowballing power grabs (for example, wealth inequality or corporate monopolies), the better.
          Very interesting point.
          ---Positive rights. Yes, it does require intense examination, but this results in a much clearer vision of what rights look like and who is/are responsible and to what degree...so I think it is worth it....?
          exploitation...?...how so?
          ---Negative rights. Yes, these are simpler...but ideas of rights based only/mostly on Negative rights is imbalanced....?....a vision of both positive and negative rights is more wholistic?...and may perhaps lead to better promotion of equality---and therefore justice?
          Conceptualizing negative rights encourages one towards a binary...for ex---the right from religion necessitates the binary of no-religion/secularism = good, religion = bad. While such a conceptualization is necessary, it alone cannot bring wholisitc equality because it does not provide any vision for how/whose ethico=moral values will prevail/be privileged. This is left upto the majority (in a democracy) which means secular countries with a Christian heritage will be bent towards Christian values, or those with a Muslim heritage will be bent towards Islamic values---etc Therefore minorities will have problems---and these problems will escalate when the demographics of the majority begins to change....(culture wars)

          Suppose we define religion/religio-philosophy as a collection of ethico-moral principles that one (voluntarily) agrees to (and we can include humanism and other non-theistic philosophies in this category also)---then freedom from religion would mean that one persons ethico-moral principles/practices cannot infringe on another person, nor be forced onto another person. However, this concept does not adequately address the issue of how one is to live an ethico-moral life (the right to religion). (The "sharia" hysteria in the West) In the Islamicate period, this positive right (freedom of religion) meant that each religio-philosophical community was free to live their own ethico-moral principles which were adjudicated/arbitrated in their own courts by their own legal systems. This resolved the problem of culture wars related to demographics and majorities.

          Government oversight---I agree that this right should belong to the people ---and also that the judiciary should be independent of the government.
          do you have some ideas on what this might look like?

          Unity vs self interest---I agree. In your opinion....how can we promote large groups of people towards sharing/altruism?

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by seer View Post
            I thought it to be ironic that an atheist is forcing the only possible resolution is through our Lord.
            Last edited by mikewhitney; 09-17-2020, 01:53 AM.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
              OOh well. The people are asleep. This leaves only our Lord and Savior to deliver us from this mess.
              That has always been the case.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment

              Working...
              X