UK Online Pet Store, Plenty for Pets are now delivering pet products internationally, we have recently shipped Green Lawn Feed to Romania, Bulgaria and Germany.
Garden lawn seed and lawn food products plus water storing crystal product for hanging baskets. Brands inc H&t proctor, Dif perryfields, Doff portland ltd.
TheAmericanAnarchisthttp://gdata.youtube.com/feeds/api/users/theamericananarchistNewsLibertarian, Socialism, Socialist, Libertarianism, Anarchy, Anarchism, Individualism, Mutualism, Collectivism, Anarchist, Communism, Individualist, Mutualist, Collectivist, Communist, Anarcho-CapitalismThe reason Anarchists reject Anarcho-Capitalism
Duration : 0:8:58
Anarchism 101 – Three Minutes at a Time. In Lesson #11 we take a look at the reasons why there might be less crime in an anarchist society, and we discuss the principles involved in dealing with that crime.
Duration : 0:3:1
….needs and individual rights are only an obstacle to creating a Global Collectivist Society based on science and mutual benefit for all humans.
Before you make your mind up, please take a look at the height of collectivism, this society is totally selfless and all actions are beneficial to the collective…
Isn’t that a beautifull thing, how could you not want to live there ?
imagine that…"human nature" (i.e. "reality") is the only, teeny little thing standing in the way of a life of pure, joyous, and completely abstract theory.
damn that pesky "human rights" thing!!! If only our greatest needs were chlorophyl and a little sunlight…
OK, i REALLY need an answer to this question k? im in NEED!!! i have a civic competition coming up and i have researched and researched about these topics. but i just dont get it!!!! so plz SOMEONE answer these two questions. i PROMISE the best answer gets 10 points! thank you for everyone that answers. plz answer! im desperate. ill give you how ever many points are possible to give, k?
1. How have the natural rights of philosophy (state of nature, meaning every man for himself, no government) and classical republicanism (govt for the common good) influenced the way americans think about citizenship today?
2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of using the jus soli principle (if you are born in the US then you are automatically a citizen of the US) of national citizenship today?
PLZ ANSWER! IM BEGGING!!!!! i need opinions and a lot of facts but nething will do. plz.
hey
This is true Classical Liberalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
It seems like Modern Conservatives seem to stand for most the those things; free trade, small or limited government, individual rights etc.
I’m talking about it being true modern conservatism, not the neo-cons like Bush and Cheney.
Absolutely, if you are discussing true Conservatism in the United States. It gets very confusing, in fact, to speak with Europeans about liberals and Conservatives, because Americans have somehow changed the terms around. The other side, though, is that FISCAL Conservatism is certainly classically liberal, while social or foreign policy Conservatism is not necessarily. President Reagan quoted classical liberal texts and thinkers in many of his key speeches.
I agree with your distinguishing of Conservatives, and the neo- whatever mess that has been created recently. Conservatives stand for decreasing government interference with the individual (not eliminating, and that’s an important distinction), leading to lower taxes AND lower spending. The neo-whatevers seem to enjoy lowering taxes while drastically increasing spending, and vastly expanding the role and power of government.
Just wondering, I see many Christians on here,blasting their colleagues left right and Centre.are there values we need to learn in capitalism and others to abhor? likewise in socialism?since it is said that human beings are social beings?
Most philosophers through the centuries have believed that history is shaped by ideas, the pursuit of actual reality, or human reason. But there is one famous philosopher who instead argued that the driving factor behind all of human history is economics. Karl Marx was born to German Jewish parents in 1818 and received his doctorate at age 23. He then embarked on a mission to prove that human identity is bound up in a person’s work and that economic systems totally control a person. Arguing that it is by his labor that mankind survives, Marx believed that human communities are created by the division of labor.
Marx studied history and concluded that people had for hundreds of years been more agriculturally oriented and that society had been based on agrarianism. But the Industrial Revolution was a game–changer, in Marx’s mind, because those who had freely worked for themselves were now forced by economics to work in factories instead. This, Marx felt, stripped away their dignity and identity because their labor defined who they were, and now they were reduced to mere slaves controlled by a powerful taskmaster. This perspective meant that the economics of capitalism was the natural enemy of Marx.
Marx surmised that capitalism emphasized private property and, therefore, reduced ownership to the privileged few. Two separate “communities” emerged in Marx’s mind: the business owners, or the bourgeoisie; and the working class, or the proletariat. According to Marx, the bourgeoisie use and exploit the proletariat with the result that one person’s gain is another person’s loss. Moreover, Marx believed that the business owners influence the lawmakers to ensure their interests are defended over the workers’ loss of dignity and rights. Last, Marx felt that religion is the “opiate of the masses” which the rich use to manipulate the working class; the proletariat are promised rewards in heaven one day if they keep working diligently where God has placed them (i.e., subservient to the bourgeoisie).
In the earthly utopia Marx envisioned, the people collectively own everything and all work for the common good of mankind. Marx’s goal was to end the ownership of private property through the state’s ownership of all means of economic production. Once private property was abolished, Marx felt that a person’s identity would be elevated and the wall that capitalism supposedly constructed between the owners and working class would be shattered. Everyone would value one another and work together for a shared purpose.
However, there are at least four errors in Marx’s thinking. First, his assertion that another person’s gain must come at another person’s expense is a myth; the structure of capitalism leaves plenty of room for all to raise their standard of living through innovation and competition. It is perfectly feasible for multiple parties to compete and do well in a market of consumers who want their goods and services.
Second, Marx was wrong in his belief that the value of a product is based on the amount of labor that is put into it. The quality of a good or service simply cannot be determined by the amount of effort a laborer expends. For example, a master carpenter can more quickly and beautifully make a piece of furniture than an unskilled craftsmen, and therefore his work will be valued far more (and correctly so) in an economic system such as capitalism.
Third, Marx’s theory necessitates a government that is free from corruption and negates the possibility of elitism within its ranks. If history has shown anything, it is that power corrupts fallen mankind, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. A nation or government may kill the idea of God, but someone will take God’s place. That someone is most often an individual or group who begins to rule over the population and seeks to maintain their privileged position at all costs.
Fourth and most importantly, Marx was wrong that a person’s identity is bound up in the work that he does. Although secular society certainly forces this belief on nearly everyone, the Bible says that all have equal worth because all are created in the image of the eternal God. That is where true, intrinsic human value lies.
Was Marx right? Is economics the catalyst that drives human history? No, what directs human history is the Creator of the universe who controls everything, including the rise and fall of every nation. In addition, God also controls who is put in charge of each nation, as Scripture says, “The Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and bestows it on whom He wishes and sets over it the lowliest of men” (Daniel 4:17). Further, it is God who gives a person skill at labor and the wealth that comes from it, not the government: “Here is what I have seen to be good and fitting: to eat, to drink and enjoy oneself in all one’s labor in which he toils under the sun during the few years of his life which God has given him; for this is his reward. Furthermore, as for every man to whom God has given riches and wealth, He has also empowered him to eat from them and to receive his reward and rejoice in his labor; this is the gift of God” (Ecclesiastes 5:18–19).
Bible Answers for Almost All Your Questions
By: Elmer L. Towns
http://www.christianbook.com/bible-answers-almost-all-your-questions/elmer-towns/9780785263241/pd/63241?event=AFF&p=1011693&
Yes they support it now, but Jesus will be an Absolute Monarch. Why the change Christians? Why don’t you find someone and crown them king? Why live in democracy when you should go ahead and get used to having an Autocrat?
The Dark Ages are enough proof to me to show they are not.
I think theres a common belief that Hispanic and Black people are culturally closer because they usually live with one and other and share the same values. Same with White people and Asian people, they live in the same neighborhoods more often than other races and seem to have closer ties and common goals.
My question is what about the other races? Where do Indians, Arabs, Pacific Islanders, etc. Were do they go?
Not hardly.
Really rare awakening movie now available in English.