Enslave the Poor Options

[Dogmeat]

It's really dawned on me that the poor, be they white, black, mexican, eskimo, french, who or whatever ..

Essentially contribute nothing to society.

They're lazy, they have bad attitudes, they aren't motivated, and generally speaking are just leeches on the rest of us who are actually attempting to be productive in life.

The problem with slavery in the past is that it targeted people by race, relegion or other politically incorrect classifications.

I propose that with the last century of what I'll call "Civil Rights Development" in mind, we re-instate slavery however we only enslave those who are jobless.

In essense, we can find everyone a job and then provide them with healthcare, etc, if they are enslaved.

It would be bad business for us to not take care of our slaves, however, the price for us taking care of them will be their slavery.

IE, they will work when, where, and how we tell them to work.

Eventually, once they've worked long and hard enough and are able to support themselves, they will be free of slavery, and than can own their own slaves.

I mean think about it ..

The poor in the ghettos, trailer parks, igloos, whatever... are poor, dejected, on drugs, etc ... they hate where they are, yet somehow, they refuse to leave.

I say we make em leave the shitholes they live in. If they won't get out on their own, we'll make them, enslave them, and force them to better themselves..

All the while contributing to the economy ... we'll have a society of productive people who aren't lazy anymore.

Sound good? I think so.

Dogmeat for President!

[impala454]

All you need to know is what the world socialism means. Would you live a happy life if you knew that whatever job you currently have is all you would ever be allowed to amount to by the government?

Sure, some people in communist countries are/were probably happy. Because they never knew anything else.

[Psykopath]

All you need to know is what the world socialism means. Would you live a happy life if you knew that whatever job you currently have is all you would ever be allowed to amount to by the government?

Sure, some people in communist countries are/were probably happy. Because they never knew anything else.

You're oversimplifying the varying shades of socialism into one propagandized term.

Read my above post. I think I've already pointed out this inconsistency in regards to Aaron/Dogmeat.

Nobody here is arguing in favor of pure socialism, which is what you seem to assume we are, as well as what you think is all that exists in that spectrum.

Sure, some people in communist countries are/were probably happy. Because they never knew anything else.

And GODDAMMIT: Communism and Socialism are not the same.
Marx argued that "Socialism was a stage on the road to Communism." Key difference?: Socialism has a State, Communism does not.
And again I emphasize: Nobody here is arguing for pure Socialism (on the vein of Marx's definition in the very least).

This post has been edited by Psykopath: Feb 25 2008, 05:16 PM

[impala454]

You're oversimplifying the varying shades of socialism into one propagandized term.

Read my above post. I think I've already pointed out this inconsistency in regards to Aaron/Dogmeat.

Nobody here is arguing in favor of pure socialism, which is what you seem to assume we are, as well as what you think is all that exists in that spectrum.

What does it matter whether it's "pure" socialism? Why do you need the government to control any aspect of your life whatsoever?

[Psykopath]

What does it matter whether it's "pure" socialism? Why do you need the government to control any aspect of your life whatsoever?

A--HA!
So you're against wire-taps? The Patriot-Act? Selective Service? etc. etc. etc...



And if you can't understand the different terminology that is being addressed here then you have absolutely no clue wtf you're trying to argue against or for in this thread.