By ripped off, I mean that there are a set of agreements that are not upheld. I want your tomatoes and you want some shoes I make so we agree to an exchange of X# of tomatoes for a pair of shoes. When I open the box of tomatoes, they are rotten and so I have been 'ripped off'. You misrepresented your goods. That of course is your choice and you may be willing to live with possible repercussions.stringtapper wrote:Now you're speaking my language. I apologize for assuming that you were imposing your own moral dilemma on the issue. It just sounded so because of the very nature of your assertion that people are "being ripped off," which carries an inherently negative connotation to it and therefore seems to reflect a judgement value and a particular bias.deva wrote:stringtapper wrote:Which takes priority? Whichever has the power to assert itself. Good or bad has nothing to do with it. At the moment, for example, Goldman Sachs is able to take hundreds of billions of dollars from the general public and they provide nothing tangible and necessary in return. Their plans and goals are enacted to the detriment of many millions of people. They are a parasite. Parasites are part of life and are not good or bad as such. Due to various social and environmental circumstances, the 'people' (meaning the general population of lower and middle-class citizens) currently have an impaired immune system. Eventually those people will decide to stop getting ripped off and do something about it. It is an historic cycle. It would not surprise me if a few hundred folk with pitchforks go into a Goldman Sachs board meeting and string them all up. Such has happened before and will happen again.
No 'God' or moral authority or discussion of 'better' is necessary (just healthy self interest). That stuff is nothing but a logic trap to keep people from acting. I'm going to take all your resources and who are you to say I shouldn't! 'Common sense' pays that no mind.
So would you agree with my assertion that some degree of force, whether it be through violence or through imposing laws that inhibit humans from doing things they want to do, is necessary in order to change things like the situation of "the people being ripped off" that you cited? I believe, as you stated, that the historical cycle bears this out.
Yes, I agree with your assertion that force is needed. Whether that force is used or implied, it is necessary.