Would probably be a mutualist anarchist society that only needs norms but not laws or force to function as all individuals there understand what's good or right. The will of every one will be the general will as Rousseau thought.
humans are animals but with more developed cognitive abilities. thats like some animals have more developed muscles, others are more developed in climbing etc, humans developed mental abilities.Morality relies on logic. You can't use reason to disprove it. It's what separates humans from animals. No such thing as "wild" morals like someusers here think "muh sex is good cus is natural", "rape is natural"! If imitating animals is their goal then that's fine. No happiness would come from it.
Any discussion about God is I think philosophical and religious, sciences have another way to explain the beggining of the universe. They don't know how something simple originated the complex world we live, we don't have the science for it yet.
imo mutualist anarchist society is some kind of version of communism
There's no such thing as an state in history that has not been created from violence and oppression of people, it's always the result of war.
state emerges when class stratification emerged, and class stratification emerged when some people have better genetics, thus able to collect more stuff and become richer. that only happened in farmer societies because hunter gatherer primitive societies were more egalitarian since its just their best way to survive. here's where state emerges: people who became rich just wanted to protect their property through oppressing the thiefs and those who wanna murder them. aka state is not a bad thing unless you wanna steal something
Not really, atleast historically. The first civilizations and great states were created through religion. Should I mention India, China, Sumeria, Babylon, Mayans, and so on... All of them had a ruling class which was supported by religion, created a tale of how the world was created, then convinced people around they were special or conquered those who did not agree (only states make wars, civil war is an oxymoron). Private property is the opposite of comunal property, private property is only possible if the state controls the territory and who owns the land (usually ruling class). Workers and soldiers support the goverment, they are brainwashed by nationalism or religion. Politicians would never give away their wealth. Kings were not always the most genetic gifted people but they were part of a dinasty which had access to education. Humans should be free and live in anarchy.
you are mixing cause and affect tbh
How do you adquire capital? How these people became rich. Again, to have property of something you need force to protect it. These people already had others working for them, the people working were slaves conquered by large communities. Maybe they were not for sale but still had to change work to get food. Such as when Akkadians invaded Sumeru, they made them work for the empire. Rich and poor class are relative concepts, you can't have one without the other. Rich and poor quality of life a is different thing, you're talking about how state was formed. There isn't a scientific proof the ruling class had to be biologically superior, like if they all had 140 IQ and the rest had 90 IQ despite being the same race.
Has Kant and Aristotle as one of his favs
yeah if you are strong then you conquer others and make them your slaves and if you are a weakling then you will be forced to work for the master. its not universal because in some ways you can just farm more on your own to get surplus of material property but in general ur right
Hidden gem that will be read again in the right time sciences change their current mathematical-material paradigm. Atleast panpsyquism is a first step. My next thesis on philosophy is inspired by this.
Some people will always be employees, yes.
if you want communism, isn't it better to kill all workers, so there's no class struggle anymore?
why
If you kill workers, the property owners will have to work because you can't live in this world without working. Food isn't handed to us by an angel.
it still would be much better than communism in common sense (where workers kill the rich) because workers are more dysgenic than the rich, thus if you get rid of workers then the population will get more superior in biological sense (since rich people have the qualities that made them rich, aka higher iq, strenght and so on)
If you mean by that capitalists I agree since they created companies but if you did that in modern french monarchy, oops. Even then, these people would fight each other instead of cooperating because that's what they're good at. No humanity would come from it. The high class is not much more smarter than the lower, that's a myth. The sons of rich people are dumb and lazy because they never had to earn wealth but if one uses his power wisely he will become even more rich.
nigga stfu you Jewish kike, even gear wouldn't save your feminine ass from being raped by any nazi
tbh i don't like capitalism either. my social ideal is something like indian caste system, where society is stratificated on your ancestry not just how rich you are. i think its better because its much more effective, since some people have ancestors who naturally selected to be better toilet cleaners, and other people are naturally better at fighting wars since their ancestors were selecting for such traits in their partners
you are not going to rape shit with your tiny excuse of a dick with swastika tatoo on balls.
if you honestly believe this
You lost me at indian caste system that's straight up racism and esclavism. I like indian philosophy/religion but their political system was an aryan distopy.
he's Jewish why ru even taking him seriously bruh, obviously he'd say something retarded
how?
im european. not indian
how is caste system bad? like, its obviosly much more effective than capitalism and especially socialism. since it takes into account your ancestry who selected for certain traits thus you are better specialized at certain field of working or whatever
yeah
Skills are not inherited that's water knowledge. Forcing you to be what your parents did is also something non human, we are not bees or worms.
you cannot become a good painter if you have bad genetics for that. environment matters too ofc (since if you got good genetics for something yet don't try to do that, then you wont become good in that field)
half jew half indian
im 100% europeanhalf jew half indian
thats not enforcement. you will naturally like what your parents did because you were selected for it hundreds of years, thus mechanism in brain develops that gives you dopamine for doing what your parents did
