I think what's at issue here, is that you hurl about the term 'collectivist' in a random and sanctimonious way. Enhanced by a sprinkling of smug, arrogant self-righteousness, your arguments do appear, to some, to hold some substance, but I see right through the hollowness.
I suppose we should all consider ourselves 'chosen' that you'll even speak to us.
But I admit, you talk shit rather well.
r
Let's see if I can provide the substance you feel is missing:
A "collectivist" is ordinarily understood to be someone who favors the interests of the group (the "collective") over those of the individual. There are degrees of this viewpoint. Some collectivists believe the interests of the group entirely trump those of the individual - historically, this has been expressed by the Communists, the German 3rd Reich, the Italian Fascists, the Red Chinese, Japan under Tojo, most of Africa, most of the 3rd world, and so forth. In every case cited, collectivism worked out very nicely for everyone. Witness, for example, the fine quality of life the Africans have enjoyed as they've protected their various tribal collectives.
Another view some at least try to hold is that the interest of the group and the individual must be "balanced". This is the view of most European neo-Leninists (Social Democrats) and so-called 'liberals' in the Anglosphere. This inevitably devolves into more and more power for the collective because no person or government can every agree what "balance" means. By default, power then flows to the few who govern the collective. That's how modern Marxists like Barak Obama ascend to power. It's also how phony conservatives like John McCain get a shot at power - they promise to protect the individual, and promptly start making laws for "the good of the nation". This kind of collectivism has also worked out very well. It has given the Western powers a crushing burden of debt because of social services spending, and the consequent corruption of government that follows the money. This has also led abuses of individual liberty. Examples include hate-speech laws in the US and Speech Tribunals in Canada, wherein unpopular speech is actually prosecuted as criminal. There are many other examples of the evils that follow collectivism - not the least of which is the current economic mess in the West.
Then there are those of us who are anti-collectivist to our roots. We believe that the only role of government is to keep us free. This restricts government to interdicting in matters of force, fraud, or threat. This limitation is necessary because government without such limitation will naturally use its power to oppress people as the examples above demonstrate. We who oppose collectivism also tend to have a much higher degree of confidence in the intellect, good will, and ethics of our fellow citizens: We believe that good people will step up to help those in real need without having to stick a gun to the head of those good people and make them do it. We are generally called "libertarians" (which is different than "Libertarian", a political party).
Collectivists operate by force and mob rule masking their intentions and methods in the guise of doing good things. Libertarians operate by cooperation and good will and manage to do good things without harming those around them.
Still think this is "random and sanctimonious"? If you do, here's a way to shut me up: Show me a single example of collectivist rule that does not over time cause harm to individual liberty and lead to a net reduction in freedom. Hint: You won't find one.
You chose to engage every bit as much as I did. This is called a "conversation".
Good conversations are built on good manners. Using vulgar language undermines the former because it demonstrates a lack of the latter. Grow up.
Sorry. I forgot the height of your horse.
Really? Read the second paragraph and then tell me it's bull again.
Oh, excuse me. If you say it, then it must be immoral. Kind of like your second amendment eh? You know, the one that protects the right to keep and bear arms. But, that wouldn't be immoral would it, shooting some hapless government employee come to tax you further for healthcare? How many guns do you have Tim? You cry so much about the collectivists lining up to take your money that I'm betting cower in fear at night with a gun beside you.
I'm not the only one who says so, nor am I the first. Pretty much everyone I know (except you evidently) thinks that stealing is wrong, even if they have no particularly deep religious practice.
The "Rights" enshrined in the US Constitution are understood to be "natural rights" - the government is not *granting* them, but rather affirming them. In the case of the 2nd Amendment, the actual right being affirmed is that right to self-defense and defense of property.
It would be immoral to initiate violent force in the absence of a similar level of threat.
I never cower in fear. I have never had to use a weapon or even my fists in violence. That's because I behave in a civil manner and the respect the property and person of the people around me. In particular, I do not try to steal from them in the name of my self-anointed charity by assuming that I know better than them what they should do with their lives and property. You should try this some time. You end up get along with people much better that way.
Of course you wouldn't think so. However, the past few days reading your thoughts on the immorality of universal health care has displayed your naked fear for all to see. Can't get away from that.
And you oppressive collectivists - the self anointed saviors of mankind - lacking any skill to do much on your own - are happy to continue and even grow the enslavement. You are actually
*proud* of the loss of freedom the West as undergone. Your ideas are really revolting. It's a shame you can't spend a few years in a true Marxist paradise that embraces your values fully. Sadly (for you), they're almost all gone now, having failed under the weight of their own evil.
I am not trying to be arrogant - I just dislike vulgar public discourse.
Yup, you're even more deluded than I thought. That vaunted "freedom" you support with all your might is mostly an illusion. You (and our society) haven't had the full freedom you're talking about for centuries.
It's an illusion and has been for a long, long time. You only survive because you've settled into a comfortable state of self-delusion. I guess that's something that makes us uniquely human, the ability to delude ourselves. Only problem is that you've taken it to the extreme. You're sick Tim, get some help.
Proportionally, it is bigger because it's country wide. And, it's not the same as your medicaid which only treats the poor as long as they don't have any assets. Canadian health insurance supplies full medical access to anyone who is a Canadian citizen. Yup, it's not a perfect system by any means, but that's discussion for another time.
I think you've your eloquence here entirely befits your worldview...
But I admit, you talk poop rather well. There is that better?
To chose a word to make a point, a word you may not like, does not automatically negate the rest of the statement. You'll need another skirt to hide under. Next thing you know, you'll disagree with someone and the strength of you position is based on the fact that he uses a different typewriter than you do.
r
Guess you don't know too many people. You're shunned by most who know you and you're a sanctimonious hypocrite at the same time. Must be a tough life for you, eh Tim? I don't feel sorry for you though, because you've earned the isolation you know.
Riiiiigggghhhhttttt!!!!! But of course, healthcare isn't a natural right. You are so clueless as to what's right and what's not that you wouldn't know it if it bit you in the ass. With you, it's all about what you can get and keep. Naturally, owning firearms bolsters that need you struggle to fulfill.
The really sad part out of all of this is that you're a pretty smart guy, but your values are so screwed up that you appear to be relatively stupid to all that know you. Quite the contradiction. Life has been tough on you hasn't it? Dirt poor family, worked for everything you have.
You really want to make money and succeed Tim? Go open your own manure farm. With all the bullshit you sling, you'll be filthy rich in no time at all. :)
Only slightly.
I never said it did. I said it was poor form, bad manners, etc. and that it is.
I don't disagree with you because you used rude language. I disagree with you because you have false ideas.
Quite right. I offer my apologies to the group. My position is has already been presented in this group, and I don't feel the need to waste additional bandwidth on this individual. He seems perfectly capable of digging his own hole.
Thanks for your reminder.
"Proportionally, it is bigger because it's country wide." So, it's bigger even though it's smaller? Can't argue with that logic.
todd
False ideas? You mean ideas you disagree with? In my mind, ideas can never be 'false'. I can see that if an idea leads to a solution which may not solve a problem, the idea might not be suitable, but I can't see an idea being 'false'. Maybe one needs to be a collectivist to have false ideas? Or is this another one of your slight-of-thoughts again?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.