Right Wing Discussion Thread XI: It's Okay To Be Right

[Hakons]

Sadly, the good folks in the Indiana state house finally caved to the hedonistic modernist demands. One can now purchase alcohol on Sundays.

Mike Pence would have never allowed this

[Albrenia]

Sadly, the good folks in the Indiana state house finally caved to the hedonistic modernist demands. One can now purchase alcohol on Sundays.

Mike Pence would have never allowed this

The booze must flow.

[Albrenia]

https://www.frontporchrepublic.com/2009/05/the-decline-of-middle-america-and-the-problem-of-meritocracy/

That was a brilliant article. This feels even more true for welfare countries like the one I live in where every conceivable hindrance a person might encounter in their life is taken care of by the state. If you don't succeed, it's entirely your own fault.

Because there's no such thing as accidents, disabilities, illness, malicious action or natural disaster. Right?

[Hakons]

Sadly, the good folks in the Indiana state house finally caved to the hedonistic modernist demands. One can now purchase alcohol on Sundays.

Mike Pence would have never allowed this

The booze must flow.

No, the wickedness must be stamped out.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Sadly, the good folks in the Indiana state house finally caved to the hedonistic modernist demands. One can now purchase alcohol on Sundays.

Mike Pence would have never allowed this

Think of all the victimless crimes that are now being committed!

[Albrenia]

Sadly, the good folks in the Indiana state house finally caved to the hedonistic modernist demands. One can now purchase alcohol on Sundays.

Mike Pence would have never allowed this

Think of all the victimless crimes that are now being committed!

Baby Jesus is the victim.

[Hakons]

Sadly, the good folks in the Indiana state house finally caved to the hedonistic modernist demands. One can now purchase alcohol on Sundays.

Mike Pence would have never allowed this

Think of all the victimless crimes that are now being committed!

Alcohol is totally unrelated to a plethora of medical conditions and doesn't contribute at all to illegal behavior.

I guess you also think morality is only about what affects others, too.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Think of all the victimless crimes that are now being committed!

Alcohol is totally unrelated to a plethora of medical conditions and doesn't contribute at all to illegal behavior.

I guess you also think morality is only about what affects others, too.

Yes, because the moment a milliliter of alcohol enters your system, you become a retarded killer.

And, can you give me an example of something that's immoral that doesn't effect others?

[Albrenia]

Alcohol is totally unrelated to a plethora of medical conditions and doesn't contribute at all to illegal behavior.

I guess you also think morality is only about what affects others, too.

Yes, because the moment a milliliter of alcohol enters your system, you become a retarded killer.

And, can you give me an example of something that's immoral that doesn't effect others?

Uh... I can.

Coverting your neighbour's wife.

[Hakons]

Alcohol is totally unrelated to a plethora of medical conditions and doesn't contribute at all to illegal behavior.

I guess you also think morality is only about what affects others, too.

Yes, because the moment a milliliter of alcohol enters your system, you become a retarded killer.

And, can you give me an example of something that's immoral that doesn't effect others?

No, obviously consuming small amounts of alcohol is not harmful. However, drinking in excess causes serious problems. Opening up another day on the weekend for drinking is going to increase alcohol consumption. This is likely to proportionally increase the amount of DUIs, alcohol related domestic abuse, and alcohol hospitalizations.

Plenty of immoral things affect only yourself. Not believing in God, not praying, not confessing sins are all immoral actions that are quite personal. Masturbation is immoral and personal. Morality matters when in public and when the door is closed.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Yes, because the moment a milliliter of alcohol enters your system, you become a retarded killer.

And, can you give me an example of something that's immoral that doesn't effect others?

Uh... I can.

Coverting your neighbour's wife.

That doesn't harm anyone though. Especially if you don't act on it.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Yes, because the moment a milliliter of alcohol enters your system, you become a retarded killer.

And, can you give me an example of something that's immoral that doesn't effect others?

No, obviously consuming small amounts of alcohol is not harmful. However, drinking in excess causes serious problems. Opening up another day on the weekend for drinking is going to increase alcohol consumption. This is likely to proportionally increase the amount of DUIs, alcohol related domestic abuse, and alcohol hospitalizations.

Plenty of immoral things affect only yourself. Not believing in God, not praying, not confessing sins are all immoral actions that are quite personal. Masturbation is immoral and personal. Morality matters when in public and when the door is closed.

Then it's up to the individual to be responsible in their alcohol consumption. DUI and dom abuse is already illegal and alcohol hospitalization is your own fault.

All of what you just listed relies on God existing. Can you see how someone who doesn't think God exists would think that you can't commit an immoral act that only effects yourself?

[Questers]

There's no compelling morality behind "I own myself so if I don't inflict direct harm to others, all my actions are moral". This is Rothbard reeeeeeeeeeee-ing and nothing more than that.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

There's no compelling morality behind "I own myself so if I don't inflict direct harm to others, all my actions are moral". This is Rothbard reeeeeeeeeeee-ing and nothing more than that.

It's not so much "all my actions are moral" as it is "it's none of your business."

[Questers]

There's no compelling morality behind "I own myself so if I don't inflict direct harm to others, all my actions are moral". This is Rothbard reeeeeeeeeeee-ing and nothing more than that.

It's not so much "all my actions are moral" as it is "it's none of your business."

Since that's the same thing: why not?

Edit: also do you want me to reply to your question about imprisoning people in the LWDT or the RWDT? I forgot about it.

[Albrenia]

Uh... I can.

Coverting your neighbour's wife.

That doesn't harm anyone though. Especially if you don't act on it.

From a Christian point of view, it's a sin and is bad.

I'm an atheist though, so I agree that it's more important if something harms others or not.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

It's not so much "all my actions are moral" as it is "it's none of your business."

Since that's the same thing: why not?

Edit: also do you want me to reply to your question about imprisoning people in the LWDT or the RWDT? I forgot about it.

Why is it none of your business? Because it doesn't involve you or effect you.

Sure, why not?

[Questers]

When did morality become "is a person harmed by this?"

What happened to virtue?

[Questers]

Since that's the same thing: why not?

Edit: also do you want me to reply to your question about imprisoning people in the LWDT or the RWDT? I forgot about it.

Why is it none of your business? Because it doesn't involve you or effect you.

Sure, why not?

In industrial society there is virtually nothing that affects you and does not affect me.

But again, you are present at the very foundational moral problem of libertarianism: there is no moral foundation in "you can only determine the virtue of actions which concern you and you can only be interested in those actions which affect you." It sounds nice. As a principle it may be useful in making functional societies. But it is circular and self-defeating, and was invented to justify liberalism, not the other way around.

As to the question I am in favour of imprisoning people for their political views and using violence on them when their political views are an existential danger to what I believe in. I don't think that's too controversial actually.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

When did morality become "is a person harmed by this?"

What happened to virtue?

Virtue's fine, but I don't think it should be legislated unless it effects others.

[Questers]

Morality can't be summed up by "I can do what I like as long as it does not affect you" because this would strongly imply that each person makes up their own moral code: if that is true then there is no (moral) reason for any person to accept the universal rule. If morality is de-centralised to each person's conscience then there is no central moral superstructure to force others to respect that. That's why I say the non-aggression pact is self-defeating & circular.

[Albrenia]

When did morality become "is a person harmed by this?"

What happened to virtue?

Harming others is one aspect of judging if something is 'moral' or not in my eyes, but not the only. Others are if it is honest/truthful, if it prevents or salves harm, and so on.

Inherent virtue is something I don't really believe in, so what happened to it? Nothing.

Morality can't be summed up by "I can do what I like as long as it does not affect you" because this would strongly imply that each person makes up their own moral code: if that is true then there is no (moral) reason for any person to accept the universal rule. If morality is de-centralised to each person's conscience then there is no central moral superstructure to force others to respect that. That's why I say the non-aggression pact is self-defeating & circular.

Since I can't see any evidence of objective morality, subjective is the best we're going to get.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Why is it none of your business? Because it doesn't involve you or effect you.

Sure, why not?

In industrial society there is virtually nothing that affects you and does not affect me.

But again, you are present at the very foundational moral problem of libertarianism: there is no moral foundation in "you can only determine the virtue of actions which concern you and you can only be interested in those actions which affect you." It sounds nice. As a principle it may be useful in making functional societies. But it is circular and self-defeating, and was invented to justify liberalism, not the other way around.

As to the question I am in favour of imprisoning people for their political views and using violence on them when their political views are an existential danger to what I believe in. I don't think that's too controversial actually.

You know what I mean. We don't live in a 1-dimensional world in which everything either doesn't effect you at all or is the total determinant of your life.

How is it circular and self-defeating? And yeah, it justifies liberalism, but that doesn't make it wrong.

What would you define as an existential threat, and can you please provide an example?

[United Muscovite Nations]

When did morality become "is a person harmed by this?"

What happened to virtue?

Harming others is one aspect of judging if something is 'moral' or not in my eyes, but not the only. Others are if it is honest/truthful, if it prevents or salves harm, and so on.

Inherent virtue is something I don't really believe in, so what happened to it? Nothing.

Morality can't be summed up by "I can do what I like as long as it does not affect you" because this would strongly imply that each person makes up their own moral code: if that is true then there is no (moral) reason for any person to accept the universal rule. If morality is de-centralised to each person's conscience then there is no central moral superstructure to force others to respect that. That's why I say the non-aggression pact is self-defeating & circular.

Since I can't see any evidence of objective morality, subjective is the best we're going to get.

If morality is subjective, then it doesn't exist at all. If morality is subjective, it's just a social construct, it's basically nihilism for people who think that morality is a convenient construct.

[Genivaria]

When did morality become "is a person harmed by this?"

What happened to virtue?

If I were the last person on Earth what then even IS morality?