Nut Nut's Attempt At A Book About Politics & Society

NN, North Koreans can also go to restaurants, play sports, watch movies, go bowling, they get hammered drunk. They can call a taxi and freely move around their cities within reason.Their Healthcare is free. Their living is paid and offered by the state. They get smartphones and can order food with their phones. Any potential dengerous media is also controlled. They flew their soccer team across country to play in the World cup.

Why does it not sound like an appealing place to live or are you just propagated by the west?

Reminds me of the tantrums my 5 year old had when it was bedtime and she didn't want to go to sleep.

Poor geezer ..... his liberty to unlimited pollution removed. What a draconian nightmare !!

So says every conspiracy theorist and cult leader on the planet.

Because absolute power corrupts absolutely.

And there were hundreds (thousands?) of tribes that operated independently. They were governed locally, not globally. The Native Americans were literally the OPPOSITE of what you're proposing.

Another tactic torn from the pages of the Cult Leader/Nutjob playbook.

Money and capitalism is the closest thing we have to an absolute power at the current moment. How's it going ?

Basically, it's completely corrupt and failing as a societal organizing mechanism.

History is just a succession of the rise and fall of different powers. My proposal is not intended to be permanent. It's simply intended to give future generations the opportunity to choose for themselves. The status quo is corrupt enough to close all future opportunities forever.

Pretending “Indigenous Americans” had one system that they practices for 20k years is the peak of dumb history.

It could be going much better, but historically it has been the best path forward for freedom and prosperity.

I don't disagree. But it will only get MORE corrupt when government seizes even more power.

Do we the people get to vote on whether we want your system or not? Or do you and your cohorts just implement it by force?

I never said you were doing something immoral. Please don't put words in my mouth. I know you get upset when other folks do that to you.

I just think you're a good old-fashioned nutjob.

Freedom and prosperity. Nice buzzwords, but no meaning without context.

Capitalism meant the freedom to buy slaves. Not the freedom of the slaves. Today it means the freedom to pollute, not the freedom to live free of that pollution. There is no way to keep the plastic from invading your body. It's in the air, water and soil.

Where does the freedom to defend oneself from plastic infiltration rank among your list of freedoms?

For what it's worth .... I don't disagree on the historical benefits of capitalism. But like dodo's and the horse and buggy, some things become obsolete.

For a user with the word chess in his name, I suspect that this is a form of conversational checkmate. Not a question he will want to respond to.

Since each particle of plastic is impossible to pinpoint causally where it comes from, probably very low on the list of negative freedoms.

Do you really think the source of the particulates is equivalent in importance to their destination and the resulting consequences?

You'd make a good candidate to run the EPA under Trump. "Pollute freely everyone. So long as it can't be traced to you, you're home free to destroy the shared environment".

Nothing makes my points better than your authenticity CRD. You embody the embrace of environmental wreckage.

I think I need to better understand the cults with prophecy related to Book of Revelations. It seems that there are a lot of people who want to manifest an apocalypse. Is there a secret society somewhere trying to organize this?

1. Except both capitalist and non-capitalist countries have allowed slavery. It's not a function of capitalism. And to the best of my knowledge all capitalist countries have outlawed slavery.

2. I believe we are to be good stewards of our planet and regulations to limit pollution are very important. But there are many other important considerations as well which must be balanced accordingly. And I don't claim myself to know how to do that. It's for us to decide collectively as a democratic republic.

3. I rank my freedom to breathe clean air and drink clean water very highly. The air is much cleaner here in California than it was fifty years ago.

Some environmental damage is a negative freedom (freedom from plastic particles as you put it isn’t as causally easy to defend from as freedom from your neighbor dumping chemicals into your backyard) some of them are a positive freedom (freedom to have a good environment). I would classify it as the latter, not the former, which means its upkeep is done differently than a “freedom from” freedom.

I'm happy to respond to any and all good-faith questions. If I've failed to answer any good-faith questions, please let me know. Thanks a bunch!

(And I believe I addressed the question you were referring to as me not wanting to answer.)

So you don't regard the plastic you are eating and breathing in as dirty? There's a whole more of it than 50 years ago.

I don't know how dirty the plastic I'm consuming is. Maybe the amount will show up in my next blood test, so I can ask my doctor then.

Now there is some serious bs word salad.

You clearly have the freedom to make arguments which have no logical or ethical basis. Defining and rationalizing tortured definitions of freedom on the fly to create an argument with no principle behind it.

Positive freedoms and negative freedoms are inseparable. The freedom to drink clean water can't be separated from the freedom from dirty water. One does not exist without the other.

Lol you think I made up the concept of positive and negative freedoms?

And no, those two things are not the same. Having access to clean drinking water is definitely not the same as not being forced to drink dirty water.

Having studied philosophy for almost fifty years, I can confirm that you did not personally make up the concept of positive and negative freedoms (or 'rights') , NutNut's hot take notwithstanding.

Hysterical (but not surprising) that NutNut would find your post to be 'bs word salad.'

You would think nut nut would be receptive to the distinction since much of what he talks about could be better framed as positive freedoms. But he chooses to explain them as negative freedoms for some reason.

Access to clean drinking water is the same as 100% of the water not being dirty.

All water is dirty today. It is all loaded with plastic.

You do not have the positive freedom of drinking clean water. You do not have the negative freedom of being free of dirty water. Both freedoms disappear simultaneously when all of the water becomes dirty.