The Euro

[utgibbs]

You call his point of view "debauchery", but to him your point of view (that someone can objectively identify a genuine "greater good" and make it so) is beyond pretentious.

I can't tell if you are joking or not. I'm assuming you are since your argument was used as a defense by the Nazi quislings.

 

[n_huffhines]

I can't tell if you are joking or not. I'm assuming you are since your argument was used as a defense by the Nazi quislings.

So the social engineers in the Nazi party argued against the notion that big government can effectively bring to pass the "greater good"?

The state ceases to be a piece of utilitarian machinery intended to help individuals in the fullest development of their individual personality and becomes a 'moral' institution - where 'moral' is not used in contrast to immoral but describes an institution which imposes on its members its views on all moral questions, whether these views be moral or highly immoral. In this sense the Nazi or any other collectivist state is 'moral', while the liberal state is not. - F A Hayek

 

[utgibbs]

So the social engineers in the Nazi party argued against the notion that big government can effectively bring to pass the "greater good"?

Hayek is no help to you here, and your way out in left field anyway.

Google "the banality of evil" to understand that, actually, we can differentiate between the "greater good" and much, much worse, and very bad things happen when we don't.

 

[n_huffhines]

Hayek is no help to you here, and your way out in left field anyway.

Google "the banality of evil" to understand that, actually, we can differentiate between the "greater good" and much, much worse, and very bad things happen when we don't.

You should probably quit with the smarmy attitude since I am probably one of the few here actually open and interested in knowing where you are coming from.

I had not heard of the banality of evil, and I find it of value. I don't really understand how it is applied in this instance.

You cannot establish a greater good, because you cannot even define it. What is it? Peace? Prosperity? Liberty? Happiness? Security? Health care? A combination of them all? What weight is given to each value? If you can actually define a greater good, how on earth can you accomplish it through policy?

The reason you cannot define the "greater good" is because "good" is relative to the individual. Therefore it is impossible to centrally plan.

 

[rjd970]

The reason you cannot define the "greater good" is because "good" is relative to the individual. Therefore it is impossible to centrally plan.

This is a pretty cool point. :hi:

 

[BigPapaVol]

This is a pretty cool point. :hi:

Isn't that the basis of the failure of centralized government and why individuals, all with different worldviews can't make it work. It's the same reason that public ownership, ie socialism, is a bullshiz fantasy. The buck stops somewhere with a decision maker and that guy is driven by something different than everyone else. Profitability tends to make good bed buddies, but only to an extent. Everyone seeks different ends.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[n_huffhines]

2 of my favorite quotes:

Distinctions in society will always exist under every just government. Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth cannot be produced by human institutions. - Andrew Jackson

There is a dark side to the human character. After people have enough to eat and a roof over their heads, they care more about their relative wealth than their absolute wealth. - Bonner & Wiggin