Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221328Don't try that postmodernist, deconstructionist, moral relativist horseshit here, Engine.

If it's worth anything to you, I was asking an honest question; I didn't intend any horseshit, except perhaps deconstructionist horseshit, which is how I come to understand things. My apologies for any offense I may have inadvertently caused.

Quote from: HinterWelt;221343And I hope you are raped by a rabid kangaroo...is there a point to this? I mean really? Do you want to discuss how decisions and risk analysis in your life can keep a great deal of these problems at bay or are you just venting at someone you feel has not suffered enough in his life?

I've been laid off three times, my wife has been laid off twice, I've had tons of debt and an income lower than my basic expenses and managed to get out of it without declaring bankruptcy, which I easily could have.  In fact, I lost one of my jobs in government because the politicians I voted for cut taxes as promised and laid off goverment workers to pay for the tax cuts and I was one of them.

What some people just don't grasp is how a person could go through any sort of hardship without getting angry at the system and turning into a Marxist.  It's an extension of the silly idea that if we just understand issues the right way, we would all agree with each other.  So what they are really saying is that if you really understood the issue exactly the way they do, they'd expect you'd agree with them.  Since you don't, then either you don't really understand the issue properly (weren't poor enough, didn't suffer enough, etc.) or you are a heartless bastard who deserves to be cursed for eternity.

Well said.

Here's the thing, in my moral universe, fucking someone when they are over a barrel is wrong.

If you run across someone who is watching their kids starve, and decide it would be a good idea to write up a contract where you pay them little, and then fuck them down to nothing on some sort of bullshit "room and board" deal because you know damned well that they don't know how these things work, and don't have the means to figure it out ahead of time until they are a thousand miles from home, then you are a fuck.  Pure and simple.  There was no real choice there.  We should not demand that people be some sort of minor hero in order to navigate life.

Now, to break it down a bit, if it helps.  This is bad in both Kantian and Utilitarian terms.

In Kantian terms, you have the whole categorical imperative.  Which means that you can only consider something moral if it would be good for this to be a Universal Principle.  Now, fucking over the desperate doesn't look good on that level, because most of us can expect to be desperate one day, and presumably, we'd rather not be fucked.  But, see, you don't even need to go there for this to be wrong under Kantian morality.  The reason is, under Kantian morality, you have to respect a person's value as a person.  You are not allowed to use them as a means to an end.  By even making the kind of contract where someone signs up out of ignorance and desperation, you are trying to use them as a means to an end, which under Kantian morality, is bad.

From the Utilitarian perspective it is more complex, as everything is.  First off, there are advantages to fucking desperate people over in the short term.  You get as close as you can to all three of the Fast, Cheap, and Good trifecta that is so elusive.

But there are problems. The first off is that these people you have taken advantage of are fucked.  They are working their ass off for practically nothing, and at this point, can't do much about it.  There bad situation counts here.  Also, they were probably counting on that money to send back to the wife and kids, and now they get none either, so additional people are fucked, and probably fucked worse than the person you are fucking in the first place.    This counts too.  What counts also is that there are other ways to do this.  You could just pay these guys something a bit better than minimum wage, they'd probably still do the job, and even if you are covering room and board for this project you are still getting an awesome profit margin, probably, and they are still sending their paychecks home.  Or, you could pay locals to do the work, which costs more, but gets the community going with money in pocket as well as rebuilding, and likely they'll be looking to you to do business with in the future.

Or, we could make it really simple.  We could have compassion for people in shitty conditions who didn't do a bunch of stealing, raping, or murdering to get themselves there.

QuoteSo what they are really saying is that if you really understood the issue exactly the way they do, they'd expect you'd agree with them. Since you don't, then either you don't really understand the issue properly (weren't poor enough, didn't suffer enough, etc.) or you are a heartless bastard who deserves to be cursed for eternity.

I don't expect anyone to agree with me. I just think Bill deserves to lose it all again. You can agree or not.

I don't care how much you've suffered, nor anybody else. Anybody who displays that kind of attitude, though, gets no sort of sympathy or pity from me. Fuck you too, basically. If I saw Bill in a gutter after what he's said, I'd laugh.

Quote from: droog;221621I don't expect anyone to agree with me. I just think Bill deserves to lose it all again. You can agree or not.

I don't care how much you've suffered, nor anybody else. Anybody who displays that kind of attitude, though, gets no sort of sympathy or pity from me. Fuck you too, basically. If I saw Bill in a gutter after what he's said, I'd laugh.

And if I saw you with your arse in the air after being violated I would try and help you out. But that is just me, I am a nice guy and you, sir, are little more than a troll.

Bill

You're not a nice guy. I've got your number now.

Just remember: I returned, and saw under the sun that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

For man also knoweth not his time: as the fishes that are taken in an evil net, and as the birds that are caught in the snare; so are the sons of men snared in an evil time, when it falleth suddenly upon them.

Quote from: John Morrow;221414What some people just don't grasp is how a person could go through any sort of hardship without getting angry at the system and turning into a Marxist.  

Who the fuck's a Marxist? Maybe some middle class pampered fuckers on Tangency, but nobody here, not even droog.

You don't have to believe in Marxism to believe it's wrong to fuck people over as much as they'll put up with.

Don't give us that rush to extremes horseshit, Morrow. Just because I believe in human rights does not make me a Marxist. That's as stupid as Engine's deconstructionism.

Quote from: John MorrowSince you don't, then either you don't really understand the issue properly (weren't poor enough, didn't suffer enough, etc.) or you are a heartless bastard who deserves to be cursed for eternity

No, I think this:-

Quote from: HinterWelt[/I]I guess I am a bit of a hardass here. I am sure someone will do a bait and switch on me but indentured servitude, voluntary by a consenting adult, is the fault of the signee.

is the words of a heartless bastard. Whereas the words he had in his original post were not. Which is why I was confused.

When someone says, "I don't care about these guys, they got what they asked for," then yes, I say he's being heartless. Amazing, I know. And absolutely fuckall to do with Marxism.

I've told you before, but it's still true, Morrow: fight the fight that's here, not some fight you made up in your head from years ago. You're not on StalinHasNiceUndies.org. There are no commies here. Respond to what people have actually said.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221714That's as stupid as Engine's deconstructionism.

Hey! I'm standing right here.

More seriously, if you don't want to publicly analyze the sources of your morality, I completely understand that - you've probably done so a dozen times in past discussions, with no real benefit to you - but it really isn't stupid to want to do so. If someone told you the sky was red with purple polka-dots, I'd think you'd try to figure out why they think so, too; thus it is for me with morality.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221714Who the fuck's a Marxist? Maybe some middle class pampered fuckers on Tangency, but nobody here, not even droog.

What d'yer mean, not even?

Leaving aside the question of whether I am or am not, in fact, a Marxist, nothing I've said in this thread has been from a Marxist perspective.

Quote from: droog;221727What d'yer mean, not even?

Well, I do think it's fair to say you're the most left-leaning person active on this forum...

Quote from: droogLeaving aside the question of whether I am or am not, in fact, a Marxist, nothing I've said in this thread has been from a Marxist perspective.

Of course not. It's been from the "it's bad to be an utter cunt to people even when you can get away it" perspective.

Which apparently is wild radicalism when we're talking to this particular bunch of Americans, who really belong on SJGames talking about bringing back duelling or something equally nutty.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221714Who the fuck's a Marxist? Maybe some middle class pampered fuckers on Tangency, but nobody here, not even droog.

If you say so.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221714You don't have to believe in Marxism to believe it's wrong to fuck people over as much as they'll put up with.

I never claimed you did.  Not only have I been disagreeing with Bill on the consent issue but I also agree with the points you've made on that issue concerning moral relativism.  To make it clear, I think taking advantage of the despiration of people is wrong and immoral.  However...

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221714Don't give us that rush to extremes horseshit, Morrow. Just because I believe in human rights does not make me a Marxist. That's as stupid as Engine's deconstructionism.

...where I'm seeing extremes is when people start assuming that almost any employment situation is exploitation and abuse.  That's where the class warfare and the Marxism creeps in and, on the flip side, where moral relativism and nutty libertarianism creeps in.  Isn't there a middle ground here and, if so, what is it?

Kyle, I will try and address the parts directed to me. To be honest, I think you are fighting someone in your past or some other person. You are not reading me and that is partly my fault for treating this as a quick vent. I made an off the cuff comment and you have taken it as a basic fundement of my morality.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221714No, I think this:-

is the words of a heartless bastard. Whereas the words he had in his original post were not. Which is why I was confused.

No, if you really read those words and do not add your own definitions, it says:
You are responsible for your own decisions.

It does not say:
Slavery is good.
Indentured servitude is good.
Con men are good.
Deception is acceptable.
Hurting someone when they are down is good.

NONE of the above are true to me except that you are responsible for your own decisions. If you are not, then a person would need someone to care for them and make those decisions. At time (childhood, sick, wounded, etc) you need help but you still need to be moving towards or take partial responsibility for your decisions, your actions.

Now, the point I think you missed and filled in with your own fight was that I use the word choice. If someone takes choice away from you, you do not have choice and this is wrong. This happens more seldom than people like to admit. When I was destitute, I could have gone on welfare. I was young and you could have easily outlined a scenario that sounded like "He has no choice, he must!" I refused the common wisdom, the advice of friends and family. I ended up chopping wood for food and place in the garage to sleep for two months. Did I have choices? Hell yes. What I lacked was opportunities. I used that time to manufacture some opportunities. I took the ACTs. I passed with incredible scores and god a scholarship (no, my parents aren't rich and will pay my way). I went to college. I improved my marketability.

So, what you sited in you examples to me, is endemic to poverty. Poverty sucks. You can wallow in your tears waiting for a handout or you can make your opportunities. The problem for some people is the opportunities are not there. However, that is not endemic of slavery, slavery is a symptom of poverty. We need to fight it.

And thus, we come full circle to me saying there should be the death penalty for owning/selling/making slaves.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221714When someone says, "I don't care about these guys, they got what they asked for," then yes, I say he's being heartless. Amazing, I know. And absolutely fuckall to do with Marxism.

No, that is what YOU said. Let's talk about choice for a moment. Do you consider it fundamental to freedom? No, nothing loaded, I am using the dictionary definition as in "exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc." Sitation. I do. That means sometimes you make bad decisions. Sometimes, you make fatal decisions. Now, before you go off labeling with the ad absurdum that has rushed to your frontal cortex, I am not saying that people should have the freedom to act anti-socially. I am saying, within the societal bounds, you should have the right to make your own choices. That choice should not be to perform an illegal action, your choice would be abridged then. Then we wander into the legal vs the moral or philosophical. These differ considerably in my mind interms of practical vs what we aspire to and would need a entire thread and more energy than I am interested in investing at the moment. Suffice it to say that you can often do the morally wrong thing but be perfectly legal.

Honestly, I am rather surprised this line of reasoning (we need to take care of people, make their decisions for them) would come from you who are so strident about not invading other countries, letting them decide for themselves. However, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you do not see capable of giving me and assume there is more to your position than I have seen here.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221714I've told you before, but it's still true, Morrow: fight the fight that's here, not some fight you made up in your head from years ago. You're not on StalinHasNiceUndies.org. There are no commies here. Respond to what people have actually said.

This is good advice Kyle. I hope you take it.

Bill

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;221741Well, I do think it's fair to say you're the most left-leaning person active on this forum...

I don't know, Walker wants us to kill ourselves off for the good of the planet.  Surely they are at least in a dead heat for the "most liberal" prize.

Quote from: John Morrow;221775...where I'm seeing extremes is when people start assuming that almost any employment situation is exploitation and abuse.  That's where the class warfare and the Marxism creeps in and, on the flip side, where moral relativism and nutty libertarianism creeps in.  Isn't there a middle ground here and, if so, what is it?

I agree with Morrow on this.  My point about the exploitation of illegal immigrants (which I was not saying was as bad as actual slavery btw, I just think its in the same ballpark of evil) was basically that people were being taken advantage of because of their situation.

I see Bill's point about consent, but for me the simple test is - could these companies get regular citizens to consent to the deal, or does it only work with illegal immigrants?  That's where I draw the line.  If the employment deal is something that regular citizens would consent to (even if it isn't the best deal), and it follows all the laws, then I agree with the "employee beware" philosophy.  There are lots of crappy paying jobs, after all.  But, if its an employment contract specifically designed to exploit someone because of their situation, then I think its morally and ethically wrong.

Rather than respond to any specific point, I'll just toss in my two cents about the general thrust of the conversation:

I think at the end of the day there are basically two kinds of people in this world:  People who will toss you a life preserver when you're drowning, and people who will sell you a life preserver when you are drowning.

Capitalism at its heart is basically a system by which those with life preservers sell them to those who are drowning.  I'm not surprised when the selling price for life preservers in shark infested waters is your very life and soul.

I find it a bit easier to sympathize with the drowning guy's need for a life preserver, and find it a bit easier to be disgusted by the guy selling it to him at an exploitive price.