Democracy is tyranny, it is majority over minority. Are stampedes just, are mobs just? No! Are mobs of teething, biased idiots just? No!
So, democracy is tyranny, but what do you propose to replace democracy with? What system is more just than democracy?
I know that you say it is but I don’t think that entitles you to assume that everyone else shares your opinion. Seeing as you are the one complaining about democracy perhaps you should be the one to come up with a preferable alternative.
I am telling you the facts. Majority over minority is inherently unfair, this is an unbiased fact, an absolute.
Any society with more than one person living in it is going to be unfair, you might as well accept it. You seem to be a realistic person, you must realise that any system involving human beings is going to be unfair.
Republicanism would be one alternative, just like the founding fathers argued, for this same reason.
Do you have an existing example of a totally fair society?
The DNA machine would make everyone rational, beautiful, and full of energy. When the DNA Machine is made, it will change history. Therefore the calendar dates will refer to a new AD, (After the DNA Machine.) Therefore every political decision will be made with the most rational minds, and in every organisms best interest. Everyone will be beautiful, and noone will be treated unfairly or denied anything. People will work for free and enjoy helping their neighbors, every scientific problem will be solved, and everyone will be beautiful and so noone will ever have to suffer of being ugly and socially unwanted ever again.
There is no need for war, why must we war, when all of the efforts and money’s of war could be put on making a single DNA machine?
I was just answering your question. The U.S.A is a republic and goes to war, the founding fathers advocated that people bear arms to stop the government becoming tyrannical as they knew people crave power. Not really sure what you’re saying.
Fair by whose standards? Poor people think fair is wealth distribution, which is not fair to those who make the wealth. That is like answering what is moral, there is no objective answer.
And who is going to make your DNA machine? The people who have the money and the power, that’s who. And who’s interests will the DNA machine be designed to serve? Their own, of course.
If you don’t think that there is a definitive definition of “fairness” then what are you playing at by proposing a system that you are claiming would achieve it?
There is an objective answer. That lower-class people can be just as egoistic as upper-class people can be is no proof that there is no objective answer. Don’t be discouraged by numerous failures for these failures were never an attempt to create a just system in the first place, it was always an egoism that was annoyed at the fact of not being the dominant egoism.
Well, I have my own answer. That would be republicanism and capitalism. True, capitalism has never and most likely never will exist. This would be my definition of a fair society.
To use your words “fair by whos standards”?
No, if the Japanese make the DNA machine they will use it to promote Aryan ideals. It is likely they would make it anyway since they are superior at that form of technology.
If Americans (Gentiles) make the DNA machine, what they will do with it is unclear, perhaps use it to make super soldiers, but then the ethics commitee would shut the program down and the machine documents would leak and be retrofitted to more peaceful ends.
If Jews make the DNA machine, my gamble is that they won’t use it to produce more Jews, since Jews know they are uglier than Aryans. My gamble is that they will turn themselves into Aryans. We know this because Jews don’t like other Jews, and they are constantly scheming to destroy their own brothers.
Only the uneducated poor think the wealth distribution is fair, so you are incorrect.
The wealth distribution in America is absurd, the poor are on welfare, a pittance, the middle class pay the majority of taxes, and the filthy rich actually get more tax welfare than poor people. Corporations like Raytheon and Google receive 90% of American tax money. The rich get 90 percent of welfare, and the poor get a pittance. Meanwhile, the middle class bears the brunt of the damage, therefore poor have no incentive to stop being poor, because middle class is even worse off. This is how the elite maintains their mechanism of control.
Sometimes your logic is plain crazy but if you ever decide to put it all in a book and publish it I’ll be the first one to buy it.
There wood be no problem with democracy if three things could happen: a) people accept that they should have the privilege to choose only insofar as they are competent, b) everyone can agree on what competence means in a world of irresolvable conflicting iambiguian goods, and c) people didnt cheat.
Since these are impossible expectations I default to oligarchy. It is the most rational thing to do.
I get the feeling you are not sure what the word aryan means. It refers to an ideal beauty standard, for example blacks can be aryans. Its all explained on aryanism.net, but I dont agree with all of their views, such as state controlled reproduction or excessive regulations. I am not a fascist. I also think Hitler went overboard by starving jews and putting them in ovens.
I can see why makeup might be bad, because it encourages people to be passive, not wanting to improve their genetics, but instead, settling for less. Same with fat removal, it encourages people to settle for less, to stop trying to lose weight naturally. What we need is not fascism, but the DNA machine. After such a machine, war and famine will be a thing of the past.
Mine? Like I said before. Ask someone who is poor and generally the answer will be that capitalism is unfair. From a society POV there is no answer but everyone has their own.