A Perfect Society - a Vision.

My Recent Posts

A Perfect Society

 

Interacting with a variety of people over the internet; people with all manner of strong political views and social perspectives, gives me an angle on my own views. Someone asked me what a perfect society would look like for me and that set me thinking.

 

I believe all things start from a basic philosophy. So it is important to start with that.

 

My ideal society would no doubt be that of a small hunter/gatherer tribe living in harmony with nature. But that is a pipedream. Those days are long gone. With 7.6 Billions, and rising daily, there is not enough wilderness or enough animals to make it feasible. If everyone lived that way we’d have the planet stripped bare in a single year. No – we have to start with modern-day societies.

 

My ideal society would be:

  1. A society that respects and lives in harmony with nature and provides space for the natural world to flourish
  2. One based on equality, tolerance and caring
  3. A society with a democratic system with full accountability
  4. A society with excellent public services – schools, healthcare, provision for the elderly, libraries, swimming pools, leisure facilities, cycle paths, transport services, parks, playgrounds, sports facilities
  5. A society that puts quality of life above consumerism, status and power
  6. A happy, friendly place free of racism, bullying, crime, misogyny and nastiness – where a helping hand replaces the grasping hand
  7. A secular society where anyone’s faith is a personal matter and there is no indoctrination of children, discrimination or division
  8. A universal society that is outward looking and has a global perspective; where people can have their own cultural values but still buy into an overriding set of shared values
  9. A society where there is freedom of expression only restricted by the banning of hate-speech or incitement to violence
  10. A society where the individual has the space to grow and express themselves without discrimination, prejudice or coercion
  11. A society with a good work/life balance
  12. A diverse society
  13. A society that values the arts and creativity
  14. A classless society without an overriding elite or ruling class, where the rich and powerful do not pull the strings
  15. A society where hard work and effort is rewarded
  16. A society where nepotism and privilege plays no part
  17. A cosmopolitan society enriched by the mixing of cultures, races and views
  18. A society where people are not exploited
  19. A fair and just society where the laws and regulations are well thought through and applied fairly to create safety, order and yet retain freedom
  20. A society that limits its numbers so there is no overcrowding
  21. A society that does not pollute or waste resources

 

Well I probably could go on but I’d probably be repeating myself. It was an interesting exercise teasing out my vision. It is an idealistic vision. Without dreamers and ideals we have nothing to work towards. I’ll leave it to you to pick over. I’m sure the cynics among you will surmise that it is unattainable, unrealistic and against human nature.

 

I remain an optimist. It is the vision that drives my thoughts, actions and deeds and has done all my life. If we are not moving towards a better world we are moving towards a worse one.

 

I believe the vast majority of people are basically good.

Comments

opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 7:10am
It is at least a basis for debate.
Passion Blues Added Dec 7, 2017 - 7:40am
When do we start building?
Passion Blues Added Dec 7, 2017 - 7:42am
Optimism will get you much further in life than the dark shadows of negativity. Rejoice in your vision....I share it with you. Excellent piece sir, thank you.
The Burghal Hidage Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:13am
The title says it all. Its a vision.  It would all work fabulously if there weren't people involved :)
 
I guess I have become somewhat of a jaded cynic. Wonder how that happened? Anyway....
 
Opher for as often as we may differ in matters I think it is fair to say that for the most part we share in many of these same aspirations. We just part ways on the mechanics of how we might arrive there.  To be entirely honest I have little confidence of very many of these actually being realized, but this does not diminish their merit.  
 
Visions are healthy until they become mirages. Wisdom is knowing the difference.
Michael Cikraji Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:14am
In 1985, when I was a 9-year-old kid, my family took us to Prague, Czechoslovakia. One of the more interesting people I met was Leopold Lear, the then Minister of Finance of the country.
 
I remember he talked about writing a book recently about the problems the society had with incentivizing workers: if you have a classless society, you are essentially missing the "carrot and the stick" idea with workers. Where's the incentive to work hard or innovate? 
 
So Opher, I completely agree with all your dreams listed above, but I think the 10-billion dollar question is how do you reconcile #14 and #15? 
A classless society 
and
A society where hard work and effort is rewarded
 
What is the proper reward for hard work?
The Burghal Hidage Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:15am
Calloused hands and a full pot?
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:17am
Passion - thank you. I'm glad we share that positivity and optimism.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:22am
TBH - my philosophy is based on having an ideal - a destination - to work towards. A journey is made up of many little steps.
I think I believe in the intrinsic goodness of most people a tad more than you do. In my school I worked towards a similar vision. I was told it was impossible but we pretty much achieved it. My school was not perfect but it was a place of happiness, friendliness and optimism. The youngsters were an inspiration. All you need is love.
If you know where you are going you can at least head in the right direction and begin building the pieces.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:30am
Michael - many are the problems in creating a perfect society - some aspects of human nature being some - but I do not envision a perfect society without a hierarchy. I think people inherently want leaders. I just feel it is a question of balance. We need leaders based on merit and a system where the inequality is within bounds. In my perfect world there would not be a class apart but rather leaders within the community and of the community and wealth and status that was reasonable and not excessive. All my citizens would be of equal value but not of equal status.
I used to say to my students when I was a headteacher that I was no more important than them, we all had the same worth, but my position conferred authority, not greater worth. They understood that, respected it and responded to it.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:31am
TBH - in my experience most people want to work and should be rewarded and recognised for their efforts. I think recognition carried more weight than reward.
Leroy Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:39am
Opher, I agree with most of your vision.  I think most people would.  As I have said before, it is only possible at the barrel of a gun.
 
I think TBH has it exactly right; if it weren't for people, we could achieve this vision.
 
We have all this technology that empowers the individual.  We should need less government, not more.  As a practical solution, I would advocate the federal government playing a lesser with the power given back to the states and the state governments giving more power to the individual.  Let men and women define their own roles in society.  Let's not get our panties in a wad if one group of people choose to live in a way that is different from our own beliefs.  We all don't have to be equal in all things.  In fact, we want to avoid that situation.
 
 
George N Romey Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:41am
Given human nature we will never develop perfect societies. In the US in the 50s is though 70s income equality was much closer yet we still had societal issues. In some ways we’ve gotten much better, for example not considering gay people mental deviants. In some ways much worse with the extreme worship of money.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:43am
Good to hear from you Leroy.
Thanks for adding that into the mix - appreciated. I'm all for individuality operating within a loose framework.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:44am
George - you are of course right - but we can still have an ideal to work towards and may still make some progress.
Dave Volek Added Dec 7, 2017 - 8:56am
Opher
The world is full of great vision for a better world. The question is how do we move from here to there?
 
"A goal without a plan is only a dream."
The Burghal Hidage Added Dec 7, 2017 - 10:11am
Leroy - Oh! I get it! You mean we just have to follow the rules as originally written! What a great idea. Ok, let's synchronize our watches then on.....5,4,3,2...1. Go!
The Burghal Hidage Added Dec 7, 2017 - 10:12am
How ya been, btw? Not heard in a spell
Michael Cikraji Added Dec 7, 2017 - 10:34am
Regarding Opher's dream I HAVE A PLAN! Does anybody care to hear it? (if so, I'll write another article, no need to overtake Opher's)
 
Bill H. Added Dec 7, 2017 - 11:10am
 
Great article, Opher!
I suspect most of us would want the same, but where there is lots of money and wealth, there is also power. Sadly much of this power is being used to continue to build the wealth and power of the very small group at the top. As we are seeing (especially of late), they will always manipulate the system to work to their advantage at our expense. The byproducts of this are most of the negatives you list above that we wish would go away.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 12:25pm
Dave - we are already moving along the road.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 12:26pm
Michael - Great I look forward to it.
See - all you cynics - progress!! There will shortly be a plan.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 12:29pm
Bill - Thanks Bill. So it's about time we subverted their greedy schemes and got back on the right track. There's always hope!
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 12:30pm
TBH - What rules?
Stone-Eater Friedli Added Dec 7, 2017 - 1:02pm
My ideal society would no doubt be that of a small hunter/gatherer tribe living in harmony with nature.
 
Ok. I hunt for new songs and gather them on a stone wall. Then I look for a plug where I can play my heaviest solos to enlighten the gods of noise :-)
 
I can live with very few. But without that very few that allows me to express and enjoy myself it would be to dull. By all means - such a life is not possible for today's people. There ain't no way back.
 
We should have stopped long ago. But our intellect has driven us to a point of no return. It's not our fault. It's....nature. Maybe we're not intended to last.
Dino Manalis Added Dec 7, 2017 - 1:40pm
It begins with good morals and values that nurture good societies and wise policies.  It won't be perfect, but we should constantly strive to make it better!
Stone-Eater Friedli Added Dec 7, 2017 - 1:47pm
Dino
 
Should. Any proposls ?
Michael Cikraji Added Dec 7, 2017 - 2:13pm
Opher,
Just finished the plan, please let me know what you think:
 
Reinvent Democracy
Stone-Eater Friedli Added Dec 7, 2017 - 2:34pm
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 3:33pm
Stone - sadly I agree - we are the architects of our own downfall.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 3:34pm
Dino - striving towards an ideal is good enough for me.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 3:35pm
Michael - I'll check it out. Great stuff.
Dave Volek Added Dec 7, 2017 - 3:39pm
Opher
 
I see 1848 as a pivotal year in human history. Across Europe, common people took to the streets and the aristocratic classes ceded some of their power to citizenry. If we take the long term perspective, progressive causes have been ascending ever since then. If we are to extrapolate, we should expect more movement in this direction. In that sense, we need not do anything.
 
I would like to accelerate that movement. It's time that we put capable people in charge of our political affairs that are working for society, not the political parties.
 
 
 
 
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 3:40pm
Dave - I think you are right. we are progressing. The internet will prove effective if we can find a way through the monstrous stream of false information and mountain of data.
Neil Lock Added Dec 7, 2017 - 3:57pm
Opher: I agree with quite a few of your principles, but I disagree with your main thrust. A perfect society is one which allows other people, and other societies, to co-exist with it in peace and justice.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 5:36pm
Neil - I don't think my vision would preclude such an arrangement - though, in essence, it would be better if it was universal rather than on a national basis. Peace and justice, tolerance, empathy and respect are basic ingredients of what I see as a perfect society.
opher goodwin Added Dec 7, 2017 - 5:37pm
Neil - interestingly - what points do you not agree with?
Tubularsock Added Dec 7, 2017 - 9:05pm
op, what a great set of goals to start out on the trail. And yes the greatest downfall of humanity are humans but that is what we are stuck with and so one has to start from where on happens to be.
 
Tubularsock has a great deal of faith in individuals but once individuals become groups then things start to fall apart.
 
People should be left alone in their personal lives. Personal means that!
 
The best Tubularsock has come up with is to treat my fellow people and animals with respect and help when I can. But when it comes to a masterplan that is where the shit hits the fan!
Don Added Dec 7, 2017 - 10:11pm
Opher, you always show you have no concept, theory or explanation of evil.
Michael B. Added Dec 8, 2017 - 12:43am
Opher, for some reason, I have to lay out a quote from H.L. Mencken:
 
"An idealist is someone that believes that because a rose smells better than a cabbage, it must be more nourishing."
 
Something like that, lol.
opher goodwin Added Dec 8, 2017 - 3:02am
The best Tubularsock has come up with is to treat my fellow people and animals with respect and help when I can. But when it comes to a masterplan that is where the shit hits the fan!
But that sounds like a plan to me Tub! Treat with respect! Step 1.
opher goodwin Added Dec 8, 2017 - 3:06am
Don - quite right. I don't believe in evil. It's just another invention out of the medieval religious minds of men. What happens with people, even the most negative things, are the result of learning, psychological flaws, and experience. Some people have bad chemistry.
I have no doubt that all that is termed 'evil' will soon be treatable when we understand the way the brain operates more fully.
Evil doesn't exist Don.
opher goodwin Added Dec 8, 2017 - 3:10am
Michael - rose petals are OK but I'm not sure they are that nutritious.
I'm an idealist but I am also a pragmatist. I believe an ideal is something we try to work towards - a landmark in the distance - but we never get there. The journey is the important thing. We have to make things better.
Without ideals we are rudderless.
Neil Lock Added Dec 8, 2017 - 5:29am
Opher:
 
To add to my brief comment from yesterday evening. The main problem I have is with the idea that there can be a single society that accomplishes everything you want. For whatever laundry list of proposals you adopt, there will be those who disagree with some of them. And some of those proposals will need to be enforced; and those, who have different ideas of what a society should be, won’t like that. It’s better, in my view, to allow people to be members of many different societies with different emphases, and tie the whole together in a framework in which different people and societies can co-exist peacefully.
 
As to specific disagreements with your list, here’s a few:
 
#1 – That’s your particular view. Not that I want to stop you giving up some of your own life space to wildlife; but I and others shouldn’t have to do the same if we don’t want to.
 
#2 – “caring” I think is a bit of a dangerous word... It can too easily be used as an excuse to force others to do things they don’t want to.
 
#3 – “democratic” pre-supposes a particular political system. And not, in my view, a very good one.
 
#4 – “public” services. Again, this pre-supposes a big state/government “granting” these things as privileges. Why not simply let businesses provide them?
 
#5 – Quality of life is subjective. Whose quality of life will you put above consumerism, status and power? Different people have different tastes; which tastes will you allow people to satisfy and which not?
 
#6 – Total freedom from crime, I think, is unrealistic. There will always be a few idiots.
 
#11 – Work/life balance must be the individual’s decision. Closely related to #5.
 
#13 – it is individuals who value arts and creativity. And each values them in a different way. To me, it doesn’t make sense to have a society try to do these things.
 
#14/#15 – as Michael C. says, there’s a tension between these two – and #5, too. Are you, for example, going to stop people enjoying luxuries they have earned?
 
And #14 has a deeper issue. Several of your suggestions – #1, #5, #19, #20, for example – require positive “laws” that mandate action. Someone has to, in your words, “pull the strings.” In fact, I’m not certain it’s even possible to have a society larger than a certain size (a few dozen?) without a ruling class of some kind. Then we have to ask, who should be allowed that privilege? And why them?
 
#16 – also has a tension with #15. I think you need “unearned” before “privilege.”
 
#20 – whose numbers are you going to limit? And who is going to decide?
 
#21 – targets of zero pollution and zero waste are unfeasible. Far better simply to hold people responsible for the damage they cause to others in these ways.
 
Don Added Dec 8, 2017 - 6:38am
Believe me Opher, until you come up with a concept of evil, you will never understand this world.  Evil comes into our world by the renegade elohims just as the Scriptural revelations are trying to get through to you.
George N Romey Added Dec 8, 2017 - 8:21am
I think we as a society believe with the Internet and advanced technology we have put to bed the evils and the riots attached thereto. I don’t think we have and I see massive revolt and revolution in the future.
 
Now revolution might change. Just think if 25% of people walked away from the debt they owe to the vampire banks. The entire financial system would collapse. Yet not one shot fired. When enough people have been hosed by this system designed to destroy the middle anything is possible.
 
But the what replaces it? Think 20th century Russia and Germany. A society in revolt is ripe for a mad man to take control.
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 8, 2017 - 10:45am
A Perfect Society only has to answer one question, what is it to be a good or noble society? 
    A Perfect society should have Universal healthcare insurance?
     In a perfect society people would not get sick very often. There would not be a need for so much expenditure of prisons, and Courts, and litigation.
  In a perfect society people could trust each other, there wouldn't be a need for so many guns, and missiles and prisons.
Armies, prisons, so many police, nuclear missiles, anti missiles, surveillance technology, meta data collection,..
   If people are poor or starving they do their part, be good and ask the Lord and he gives to them.
     In a perfect society people would be good, honest and just. This all comes from worshipping the Lord for the sake of being good and Ethics.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 8, 2017 - 12:54pm
As a pro-gun guy I'm for the hunter society. Gathering is for pussies. ;-)
opher goodwin Added Dec 8, 2017 - 1:07pm
Neil - great - at least it has started a discussion about it. I will digest your words and get back to you in more detail when I get a minute.
opher goodwin Added Dec 8, 2017 - 1:08pm
Don - I don't need archaic ideas to help me understand the world. Those ideas are long past their sell-by date.
opher goodwin Added Dec 8, 2017 - 1:11pm
Barath - everyone gets sick and dies. Healthcare should be free.
Yes - hopefully there would be little need for guns or prisons.
Nobody should be starving. Unlike now where the starving call out to imaginary gods and are deafened by the silence.
opher goodwin Added Dec 8, 2017 - 1:11pm
Barath - there is no Lord - all archaic superstition.
opher goodwin Added Dec 8, 2017 - 1:12pm
Benjamin - a bit of gathering never hurt anybody. A bit of hunting did.
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 8, 2017 - 1:44pm
Opher:
    People need protection from illness, disease and death everyday, not just when they get sick. Everyday there are a billion things in the environment trying to kill us; tetanus, bacteria, e-Coli, hurricanes, Sharks, snakes and alligators, drunk drivers and even other people.
   The Lord is powerful, he protects believers and punishes those who try to harm them.
       Sacraments have many purposes; they make one good, they give one more of the Lord's Spirit, they purify,(i.e. Communion), they are medicines. Having worshipped the Lord with faith and having taken proper  sacraments (Communion) one is immunized from their environment.
   Therefore they rarely get sick.
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 8, 2017 - 1:47pm
Opher:
   Why do you keep telling me there is no Lord when I keep saying I believe in one and the Lord is real?
Stone-Eater Friedli Added Dec 8, 2017 - 2:32pm
Barath
 
I believe in one and the Lord is real?
 
Wrong. Why ?
 
I believe in one
 
True.
 
the Lord is real
 
The true before doesn't make the second "true"....
 
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 8, 2017 - 2:59pm
Stone Eater and Opher:
     Nobody gets too much heaven no more
It's much harder to come by
I'm waiting in line

Too Much Heaven 
That's what people are looking for in a religion. Wonder, awe- they want to know a little bit of Heaven. Why complain about someone who has found it?
Stone-Eater Friedli Added Dec 8, 2017 - 3:24pm
Why complain about someone who has found it?
 
An illusion can become reality for the person. That's ok for me. It's like self-healing. People believe god has cured them but in reality they themselves gained the power through belief to heal themselves.
 
I just don't understand in the first place HOW people can believe something that is so AFAR from any senses they have.
Stone-Eater Friedli Added Dec 8, 2017 - 3:32pm
BTW: Radio waves were unknown until we were able to capt and interpret them. Because they're out of our natural spectrum. Ok. But "god" would have be something that encompasses the universe as a creator.
 
The ultimate question is:
 
When there is a creator - what created "god" - and what created the creator of "god" etc. ?
 
And - forget the word "purpose", because that word is a human creation. It doesn't exist in nature. And when it doesn't exist in nature "god" hasn't planned to create a "purpose" for humans, because "it" created nature....
 
Cat bites its tail.
 
FAZIT: Religion and god are useful solutions for things our mind cannot explain. Or are not trained to afterthink.
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 8, 2017 - 3:35pm
Stone Eater:
     Why do you say it's an "illusion". You don't live in neighborhood, or know the experiences I have had. Because the Lord could not possibly have revealed himself to me and not you?
    Try worshipping him by his name.
    A father feels the greatest sense of pride when his infant learns to say his first word and it's "Dada" or father.  
     People say their infant is smart if he learns to speak early.
     People should be grateful to the Lord everyday for giving us life and a world to live in. The Lord only thanks people when they worship him by his name.
Michael Cikraji Added Dec 8, 2017 - 3:41pm
Oh no!!!!
The God discussion again!!!
Don Added Dec 8, 2017 - 3:42pm
Once more Opher and all your fellow travelers.  Try to build a utopia and you will right away discover a snake has entered your garden.  It happens to all utopias.  Name one that did not eventually disappoint you. 
The Burghal Hidage Added Dec 8, 2017 - 4:00pm
Its the 4:00 hour on a Friday, I've got a full bottle of Jamesons and jammin out on some Jimi. Boo-Yah! Perfect society!
John Minehan Added Dec 8, 2017 - 5:52pm
"So Opher, I completely agree with all your dreams listed above, but I think the 10-billion dollar question is how do you reconcile #14 and #15? 
A classless society 
and
A society where hard work and effort is rewarded
 
What is the proper reward for hard work?"
 
Just a thought, and certainly not an answer, answering this question:
 
1) needs to be based on understanding different people have all kinds of different motivations;
 
2) requires knowing a "classless society" also has to figure out how to be a meritocracy; and
 
3) such a society has to recognize some jobs have more economic value (and, thus, rightly claim a greater economic return); but
 
4) good work (that is needed) has an intrinsic value; and
 
5) unnecessary or valueless work is a waste of human potential, no matter how well it is done.  
John Minehan Added Dec 8, 2017 - 6:01pm
I think (based on what I have seen) that you probably can't do that on a societal basis, but maybe, for at least a while, you may be able to do it in an entity or part of an entity in the  business, social or government sector . . . and we can all learn from that no matter how long (or short) lived that endeavor might be.  (So long as "Lessons Learned" are captured and studied.)
 
You can't save the world, but you can make your part of it function better at least for today . . . . 
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 12:47am
In a World where everyone is honest and fair everyone could be free.
opher goodwin Added Dec 9, 2017 - 4:21am
Barath - believers get sick just as much as non-believers. I keep telling you their is no Lord, because there is none, and because you keep coming up with nonsensical statements like this on my threads.
opher goodwin Added Dec 9, 2017 - 4:22am
Barath - nobody is complaining about your personal beliefs. They are complaining about you stating them as truths.
opher goodwin Added Dec 9, 2017 - 4:25am
Don - it may well be, due to human nature, that a utopian society is not possible. But at least we are making progress. Life is better than it was a few hundred years ago. We are getting better. And we need ideals.
opher goodwin Added Dec 9, 2017 - 4:25am
TBH - there you go! It is achievable!
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 7:21am
Opher:
  Everyone states what they know and believe as being  true. Why complain?
     There should be a place on the marketplace of ideas for views that people disagree with.They complain that I state the truth as truth.
      Your article is your point of view. I wrote mine. What complaint is there in that?
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 7:48am
.  Opher:  
“Why should we not lie?” We feel that such questions are meaningful because in all discussions of this kind some ethical premises are tacitly taken for granted. ...
  Without (such) confidence, social cooperation is made impossible or at least difficult. Such cooperation, however, is essential to make human life possible and tolerable. This means that the rule “Thou shalt not lie” has been traced back to the demands: “Human life shall be preserved” and “Pain and sorrow shall be lessened as much as possible.”
Albert Einstein, The Laws of Ethics and Science
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 8:00am
    There is a deeper world than this
That you don't understand
There is a deeper world than this
Tugging at your hand
Every ripple on the ocean
Every leaf on every tree
Every sand dune in the desert
Every power we never see

(see Sting, Love is the Seventh Wave)
Doug Plumb Added Dec 9, 2017 - 8:22am
Several points opher, but I'm just going to tackle a few points here:
 
re "One based on equality, tolerance and caring"
So you would set common law aside in favour of a ruling class that makes policies to work toward these undefinable ideals.
 
re "A society that puts quality of life above consumerism, status and power"
This is a private thing, up to an individual, not a public government. Rights and obligations must first be divided in private and public before we can begin to discuss them. A government cannot legislate morality
 
re "A cosmopolitan society enriched by the mixing of cultures, races and views"
So that no two groups agree on what is right and wrong? Its well known that multiculturalism creates unhappiness for all groups being mixed. That is why we are getting it, because the PTB hate the West. They do not hate Japan or Israel or other countries, only ones that have common law are being destroyed through multiculturalism.
 
re "A society that limits its numbers so there is no overcrowding"
Who decides who lives and dies or is able to reproduce?
 
re "A society where there is freedom of expression only restricted by the banning of hate-speech or incitement to violence"
So no free speech, speech must be restricted or controlled by those in power. So what is hate speech anyway? Can you define? So if one group is seen as doing something bad, no one should speak out ?
 
re "A society where nepotism and privilege plays no part"
Someone has to make the decisions to create the reality you wish for. Will they do it for free and without privilege? Will they say that I will be the one not to have children to keep population under control?
 
  I do believe that people need to stop making up their own philosophies and learn what the great thinkers of the past have said before putting pen to paper and creating constitutions. Books on Theoretical Jurisprudence are relatively easy to read and do not require the deep though of good philosophy books.
 Immanual Kant has written Metaphysics Of Morals, and it is a guide to the good society. Very similar to USA constitution, but notably restricts freedom of association to prevent the emergence of secret societies.
The Burghal Hidage Added Dec 9, 2017 - 9:45am
Opher! How are ya this afternoon friend?  The Jamesons is good. I'm channeling James Joyce today :)
wsucram15 Added Dec 9, 2017 - 1:39pm
Opher..
Im coming to live in your world. Let me know the address and I will make reservations for the entire family.
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 2:11pm
Opher:
   I'm tired of your liberal ass phony, failed liberal solutions that don't work crapola. I make perfect sense unless you liberal crapola Christian pathological lying price of crapola.
     Lie for the sake of your Devil go kiss his Crucified ass you turnip.
    Scientists would lead this world to its destruction. Your stupid scientists are inferior asshole. I know because I see.
Don Added Dec 9, 2017 - 3:41pm
Other, I am not really talking about human nature.  The  snake in the garden comes from another dimension.  Unless one can build spiritual protection into their Eden, sooner or later they are always done in.
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 3:58pm
Opher:
     I apologize for getting too upset with you. I know you're basically good.
   But, I will tell you that scientists are arrogant. They are only mortals. In the vast expanse of the Universe what is man's rightful place? At the center. No. Most Other world's are still beyond the fastest Spacecraft. The Lord created this World for us, not the entire Universe.
    A man is a tiny being in the Universe be he a scientist or a manual laborer. Even the lowest Angel knows more than any scientist. 
   Though I know that talk of Angels seems nonsense to you, but then why do you think your experience is more valid than mine, or that of others recorded experiences?
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 4:18pm
Opher:
    Your reality is relatively comfortable, I would take it, so is mine. But, take a man like Solzenhytzn, unjustly trapped in a Gulag. Would you tell him all there is the power of the State, that he has no hope of salvation or Justice save the State alone? Then he has little hope. Not everyone is as lucky as you or me. People live in war torn places, and torture cells. What hope have they except recourse to the Lord?
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 4:27pm
.   The spirit of liberty remembers that not even a sparrow falls to earth unheeded;
    58.68 million deaths in 2016 so far, but rising at the rate of about 21 deaths every 10 seconds. World Population Clock: 7.5 BillionPeople 

www.quora.com/How-many-people-died-in-2016
    
The Lord cares when people die of injustice. People die everyday, or every 10 seconds.
opher goodwin Added Dec 9, 2017 - 5:26pm
Barath - what you believe is fine with me. It's a personal thing. But if you comment then expect people to come back at you.
Neil Lock Added Dec 9, 2017 - 5:31pm
Opher: I've just sent this e-mail to Autumn.
 
Hi Autumn,
 
An individual calling himself “Barath Nagarajan” has been disrupting my thread here: http://writerbeat.com/articles/19660-On-Community
 
I have dealt with the issue myself as well as I can. He seems to have a particular problem with another commenter called Jeff Michka. Initially I saw both as culpable, but having examined the evidence, I see that Jeff Michka was provoked. I’m not happy with how either of them have behaved, but I’ve already told Jeff Michka that I’m happy for him to comment on my threads in future.
 
But now I find that the same Barath Nagarajan is disrupting Opher Goodwin’s thread here: http://writerbeat.com/articles/19705-A-Perfect-Society---a-Vision-
 
In my view, it would probably be a good idea to ban Barath Nagarajan at this point. I’ll post a copy of this e-mail on Opher’s thread.
 
Cheers,
Neil
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 5:54pm
Neil Lock:
I'll give you an idea of the complaint I filed, since you're a liberal racist.
    Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights Ratified 7/9/1868. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
(U.N. Convention Against Torture)
 PART I
Article 1
1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 6:17pm
Neil Lock:
(See Snyder v Phelps)
     Westboro's signs, displayed on public land next to a public street, reflect the fact that the church finds much to condemn in modern society. Its speech is "fairly characterized as constituting speech on a matter of public concern,"
 
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2981429692939250360&q=snyder+v+phelps&hl=en&as_sdt=6,44
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 6:41pm
Opher:
   Okay, sorry for getting angry. But, I wanted to show you that a World with a Lord or God would be a better or 'more perfect' world as the Framers of the U.S.Constitution might say.
   Would you disagree with that in theory?
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 9, 2017 - 6:47pm
Opher:
    I've gone beyond the point of wanting material things to a large degree, so what would you say I should want if I don't want material things as an agnostic? That non material things like Heaven don't exist?
opher goodwin Added Dec 10, 2017 - 10:08am
Barath - I would suggest that you either start creating something or you become involved in some meaningful activity such as saving the elephants or the planet. They make life worthwhile.
opher goodwin Added Dec 10, 2017 - 10:09am
Jeanne - you are always welcome in my world.
opher goodwin Added Dec 10, 2017 - 10:09am
Neil - Barath does get carried away in some religious mania. I just leave him to it.
opher goodwin Added Dec 10, 2017 - 10:16am
John - thank you for that input. I've been away a few days so am just catching up.
Reconciling - A classless society 
and
A society where hard work and effort is rewarded
I do believe in a meritocracy and a degree of inequality. I believe that if things are fair and just then life is better for everyone. A simple formula whereby nobody can earn more that 20 times the pay of their lowest paid worker would alleviate most of the problems and make things a lot better for everyone.
The incentive for hard work needs to be there. In my experience just being recognised goes a long way. People resent being taken for granted, looked down on or exploited. They don't mind working hard if someone appreciates what they do.
 
 
opher goodwin Added Dec 10, 2017 - 10:26am
Doug -
re "One based on equality, tolerance and caring"
So you would set common law aside in favour of a ruling class that makes policies to work toward these undefinable ideals.
 
No. I would simply bring in rules - such as nobody can earn more that 20times the amount of their lowest paid worker. I would endorse laws against hate-crime, discrimination and prejudice. I would care about the weaker members of society.
 
re "A society that puts quality of life above consumerism, status and power"
This is a private thing, up to an individual, not a public government. Rights and obligations must first be divided in private and public before we can begin to discuss them. A government cannot legislate morality
 
No again. The ethos of a country stems from the top. Governments do legislate morality in so many ways.
 
re "A cosmopolitan society enriched by the mixing of cultures, races and views"
So that no two groups agree on what is right and wrong? Its well known that multiculturalism creates unhappiness for all groups being mixed. That is why we are getting it, because the PTB hate the West. They do not hate Japan or Israel or other countries, only ones that have common law are being destroyed through multiculturalism.
 
I have worked in many multicultural environments. They work very well as long as there is mutual respect. I do not know why you think it creates unhappiness. The unhappiness comes when one group feels excluded and discriminated against.
 
re "A society that limits its numbers so there is no overcrowding"
Who decides who lives and dies or is able to reproduce?
 
It isn't a question of deciding who lives or dies. It is a question of bringing in the structures - female education, welfare and contraception. In the West fertility is well down. It is social structures that make the difference.
 
re "A society where there is freedom of expression only restricted by the banning of hate-speech or incitement to violence"

So no free speech, speech must be restricted or controlled by those in power. So what is hate speech anyway? Can you define? So if one group is seen as doing something bad, no one should speak out ?
 
We have laws on hate speech in the UK and incitement to violence too. It does not restrict my freedom of speech. It certainly does not restrict me speaking out against injustice. I am free to castigate with impunity. I am not free to incite people to hate other groups or to use violence against them.
 
re "A society where nepotism and privilege plays no part"
Someone has to make the decisions to create the reality you wish for. Will they do it for free and without privilege? Will they say that I will be the one not to have children to keep population under control?
 
opher goodwin Added Dec 10, 2017 - 10:57am
Neil - I have finally got a bit of time -
As to specific disagreements with your list, here’s a few:
 
#1 – That’s your particular view. Not that I want to stop you giving up some of your own life space to wildlife; but I and others shouldn’t have to do the same if we don’t want to.
 
I am not talking about anyone giving up their own space Neil. I am talking about setting aside wilderness areas as sanctuaries for wildlife. We could quite easily do that without too much trouble. I do not think that designating 50% of the planet for wildlife is too big a deal.

#2 – “caring” I think is a bit of a dangerous word... It can too easily be used as an excuse to force others to do things they don’t want to.
 
I like caring. We need to do a lot more of it, use it a lot more and apply it to both the weaker members of society, each other, foreigners, other people in need as well as animals and plants around the world. Caring needs nurturing. It is the highest order of human actions.
 
#3 – “democratic” pre-supposes a particular political system. And not, in my view, a very good one.
 
I think people need a say in decisions that are made. That is democratic for me.
 
#4 – “public” services. Again, this pre-supposes a big state/government “granting” these things as privileges. Why not simply let businesses provide them?
 
The history of businesses providing education or health-care, transport or energy, etc. is not good. They exploit people by charging too much, cream off profits and have the wrong aims. Example - education is not just to provide fodder for industry. It has a far wider remit. When business or religion becomes involved the remit narrows. This is not only not desirable; it is simply wrong.
 
#5 – Quality of life is subjective. Whose quality of life will you put above consumerism, status and power? Different people have different tastes; which tastes will you allow people to satisfy and which not?
 
Quality is something that can be established by creating an ethos - such as we used to see with the BBC but has been dumbed down. It is ethereal and complex but is not impossible to nurture and create the ground for it to flourish. We all know what it is.
 
#6 – Total freedom from crime, I think, is unrealistic. There will always be a few idiots.
 
Yes but we can aim towards it and, with the greater use of brain altering technology, develop treatments that will be far more successful than the crude prisons and fines applied right now.
 
#11 – Work/life balance must be the individual’s decision. Closely related to #5.
 
To an extent. It isn't right now is it? Most people are tied in to a treadmill. We need to provide choice. We will not have the need for mass workforces. Automation will free us up.
 
#13 – it is individuals who value arts and creativity. And each values them in a different way. To me, it doesn’t make sense to have a society try to do these things.
 
Society can provide the means. Society can provide the finance. Society can set the ethos. Society can give the education and emphasis. What the individual does is up to them.
 
#14/#15 – as Michael C. says, there’s a tension between these two – and #5, too. Are you, for example, going to stop people enjoying luxuries they have earned?
 
I have no problem with a meritocracy and hierarchy as lo ng as it is limited to 20 times the pay of the lowest paid worker. There should be reward for hard work and effort as well as exacting jobs. That tension can be resolved.
 
And #14 has a deeper issue. Several of your suggestions – #1, #5, #19, #20, for example – require positive “laws” that mandate action. Someone has to, in your words, “pull the strings.” In fact, I’m not certain it’s even possible to have a society larger than a certain size (a few dozen?) without a ruling class of some kind. Then we have to ask, who should be allowed that privilege? And why them?
 
We do not need a hierarchy to do that; we need a committee of varied experts. That's why we make governments.
 
#16 – also has a tension with #15. I think you need “unearned” before “privilege.”
 
Too many people get to positions of wealth and power through connections or support rather than on merit. It shouldn't be who you know or who your mum and dad were.
 
#20 – whose numbers are you going to limit? And who is going to decide?
 
I'm not proposing to limit by force - just by the social structure put in place. In the West our fertility rate is falling. W
opher goodwin Added Dec 10, 2017 - 10:58am
Don - I don't believe in that other dimension.
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 10, 2017 - 11:28am
Opher:
    You suggest serving "saving animals or the planet". How about serving truth, justice, the law, Ethics, Art, music, plants, trees, birds, philosophy, theology, Astronomy, physics, (even Science,but not scientists), nature and the Lord(which you don't believe in, I know)?
   Is the only means of salvation to serve others?
opher goodwin Added Dec 10, 2017 - 3:09pm
Barath - all of those except Theology (the study of fairies and tales of the imagination) and the Lord (who is fiction too).
To serve others, improve the planet, and to help all creatures, to make people think, to evolve your art and create wonders, to appreciate the wondrous universe into which we have opened our eyes and absorb the beauty to enrich our dreams. To search for truth, to express ourselves most eloquently and to find fulfilment.
That's enough for me.
A. Jones Added Dec 10, 2017 - 8:46pm
My ideal society would no doubt be that of a small hunter/gatherer tribe living in harmony with nature. But that is a pipedream. Those days are long gone.
 
No, they're not long gone; they just never existed.
 
Hunter-gatherer clans did not "live in harmony with nature", nor did they practice "equality, tolerance and caring." You're not interested in history, I take it. No problem. Consder this:
 
You have at least 40 titles of self-published material on Amazon.com. Good, bad, or indifferent, I'm sure your writing took time and labor. Do you think that if you lived in your ideal society — hunting food, preparing food, looking for potable water, making your own tools, making your own hunting weapons, making your own clothing, making your own shoes, caring for the sick (including yourself), fighting wild animals, and trying to survive unpredictable weather such as storms or earthquakes — that you would time and energy left over to do something utterly useless to such a society like writing your personal opinions on rock groups?
John Minehan Added Dec 10, 2017 - 9:39pm
'Do you think that if you lived in your ideal society — hunting food, preparing food, looking for potable water, making your own tools, making your own hunting weapons, making your own clothing, making your own shoes, caring for the sick (including yourself), fighting wild animals, and trying to survive unpredictable weather such as storms or earthquakes — that you would time and energy left over to do something utterly useless to such a society like writing your personal opinions on rock groups?"
 
People did (as very primitive societies do today). 
 
People might have thought, wrongly, it had practical effects. 
 
On the other hand, for the people doing cave paintings in France or rock painting in the Outback, there were probably personal benefits. 
opher goodwin Added Dec 11, 2017 - 4:33am
A.Jones - hunter gatherer societies had an interesting lifestyle. there were periods of easy living and periods of starvation - depending on success of hunting, seasons and migrations of animals etc. They also varied greatly depending on climate in the regions they lived.
I have been interested in a few of these groups - the Plains Indians and South American Indians and Australian Aborigines. There was a division of labour with women doing the bulk of the gathering, water collection and domestic activities including child care and food preparation. There was plenty of time for leisure, sport and honing skills. While writing would not be an art they would pursue, story telling was definitely high up on their agenda.
You are right to an extent concerning living in harmony with nature. Certainly where-ever they went the first victims were always the megafauna. They were easy to find and kill and were hence wiped out. However, most hunter/gatherer societies lived in harmony with nature, gave thanks for a kill and respected their prey. They didn't kill for pleasure and used every part of the animal they killed. They knew the habits of creatures and the vagaries of the seasons. They respected nature greatly.
This is far from the picture you portray.
opher goodwin Added Dec 11, 2017 - 4:40am
John - I think the cave paintings, music, dance, costume, hair, body art and tales were elaborate and essential parts of those primitive cultures. They have passed down to our own times and are all still highly valued.
There were aspects of shamanism in those artistic endeavours. They had meaning in a spiritual/ritualistic sense. The spirits were involved in making a hunt successful. There was much that we can only guess at or glean from studying the groups who are still living in this manner.
Neil Lock Added Dec 11, 2017 - 7:05am
Opher: Your suggestion of limiting what people may “earn” I find a bit strange. My immediate reaction was: who are you to claim such a right to interfere in other people’s lives?
 
It looks as if you have, at the back of your mind, the idea that company bosses exploit their workers, and so shouldn’t be allowed to profit from that. The problem certainly does exist in some companies. But you neglect the fact that entrepreneurs and company directors are shouldering almost all of the risk that attaches to doing business. If a company goes down, the employees lose their jobs; but the bosses lose everything. (Unless, of course, they can “do a Trump” and weasel their way out of it). There is, therefore, a case to be made that when a company is doing well, the bosses should get more than their immediate and direct contribution to it would seem to warrant.
 
There’s another problem too, which you may not have thought about. Many highly paid people aren’t company bosses at all. Top sportsmen or actors, for example? Or the top surgeons and medical consultants? Or people who do dangerous or risky work? How, if at all, would you seek to apply your idea to them?
 
Then: “The ethos of a country stems from the top. Governments do legislate morality in so many ways.” You’re almost sounding like a religionist here. Instead of believing that ethical rules come from some deity, you seem to think they come from governments! But the reality is, that political parties and governments today are basically just criminal gangs. Do you really want to hand criminal gangs carte blanche to rule over everybody as they see fit?
 
And you don’t think that “hate speech” laws restrict your freedom of speech? Well, the civil rights organization Liberty (of which I’m a member) thinks otherwise: https://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/free-speech-and-protest.
 
Back to my specific points.
 
#1 – If you want to make a sanctuary for some species of wildlife you particularly care about, all you need do is join with some friends and buy a suitable piece of its habitat. Then it will be up to you and your friends who (if anyone) is to be allowed on to the reservation.
 
#2 – For me, before you can even think or talk about “caring” in a positive sense, you must show care in the negative sense: “First, do no harm.” Furthermore, caring must be a two-way process. You can’t expect anyone to care about those that behave badly towards them. You might want to insert the word “mutual” before “caring” in your original statement.
 
#3 – The subject of democracy demands an article in itself. It’s on the list.
 
#4 – You say the history of businesses providing certain services is not good. I’d say the same about governments providing services, like the ones you list, that have nothing to do with their core remit. And the reason is simple. When a business gets something wrong, it loses customers; and if it doesn’t fix the problem, it will eventually fold. When government gets something wrong, there is usually no fix; just lots more bureaucrats scurrying around, that in time become part of the problem.
 
#5, #13 – see what I said above about ethos. And what is this “Society” that is supposed to provide finance for arts? Who, specifically, do you think should pay for them?
 
#14 – Your faith in experts is touching. I agree with Steven Weinberg’s view: “An expert is a person who avoids the small errors while sweeping on to the grand fallacy.” Experts can be useful as advisors, but they do get things wrong (think dietary cholesterol, for example). And if experts let themselves become politicized… that’s trouble.
 
#20 – Is it, then, your view that population levels in the West are now acceptable, and it is only in those countries with above replacement birth rates that any action is needed to limit numbers?
opher goodwin Added Dec 11, 2017 - 8:37am
Neil - I find the level of inequality in society obscene. We have people living in doorways in subzero temperatures while others sit in their penthouses with so many billion squirrelled away they don't know what to do with it. It's an illness that sickens the whole of society. Capitalism and the free market has created a divided society. That is unacceptable to me. I live in the world's 6th richest economy and walk past homeless people. It is not right.
Yes - the obscenity extends to sportspeople and entertainers. I believe it needs capping just like it used to be. They are exploiting people through TV costs and ticket prices. I do not think that is right.
For me it is a moral issue. What is happening is immoral and unjustifiable. When you take it into a global perspective I find it even more despicable.
I am well aware of risks taken by entrepreneurs and they need rewarding for their risks - but within limits.
I agree that there are issues around free speech. Taken too far legislation prevents free speech. We need to carefully watch where the lines are drawn. But I still do not think that it has curtailed my speech in any way. My blog is full of all manner of contentious issues. We live in a community and need to compromise. Nobody should have the right to promote hatred or incite violence.
1. What you suggest is absurd. We are talking about areas of rainforest many times bigger than my country. We are talking about major ecosystems in deserts, oceans and savannahs. Only global action can protect these ecosystems. Individuals, or groups of individuals are powerless - unless they are called Zuckerman.
2. Neil - once again I disagree. Some of the people who need most care are the very ones who are antisocial, violent and antagonistic - drug addicts, criminals and those suffering mental illness.
3. Democracy can take many forms. It is not always wise to rely on the 'wisdom' of the masses as we have seen with Trump, Brexit and most governments that we end up with. However, these things can be addressed in various ways.
4. It is true than many Nationalised industries have not performed as well as they should have. They have a tendency to be monolithic, unable to change and have unmotivated staff. But all these things can be addressed using modern business methods. Many of the businesses (such as transport, water, energy, NHS, Schools) have a effective monopoly with little choice. I'd nationalise the lot of them.
5. Everybody should contribute. The Arts are an essential element of human life. It should be subsidised.
14. I've dealt with some great, dedicated experts in the course of my career (and so not so good ones).
20. No. It is heading in the right direction though. We need to build on it with incentives. I would like to see the human global population reduced to half of its present number. I reckon a world population between 3 and 4 billion would provide a sustainable population that could have a great standard of life without creating poverty, misery and destroying nature.
The major stupidity I see is this mantra towards growth and expansion. It is madness.
Neil Lock Added Dec 11, 2017 - 1:55pm
Opher: I live in the world's 6th richest economy and walk past homeless people.
 
You exhort us to be “caring” towards others, like the Good Samaritan. And yet, when presented with an opportunity to care for homeless people, you (in your own words) “walk past” them. Why do you not offer to take them into your home for the night, or even to pay for them to stay at a local hotel or guest house? And if you say, “I can’t afford it,” how could you have afforded to retire early? Or to travel to places like South America? Physician, heal thyself.
 
You call “absurd” my suggestion of privately creating a wildlife refuge. It’s not absurd at all; the National Trust was originally formed to do something very similar.
 
As to the Amazon rainforest, aren’t you aware that the Brazilian government set up initiatives for people to clear it back in 1964? And you think everything a political government does is morally right, don’t you?
 
Finally, the “mantra towards growth and expansion.” That’s another article I need to put on my list. (Sigh.)
A. Jones Added Dec 11, 2017 - 10:16pm
People did (as very primitive societies do today). 
 
Really? You'll provide evidence for that statement, please. Show me one example of written stories, myths, poetry, or anything else, from a hunter-gatherer society.
John Minehan Added Dec 11, 2017 - 10:21pm
How about this?
A. Jones Added Dec 12, 2017 - 3:52am
How about target="_blank">this?
 
I specified written works — stories, poems, myths, etc. — making use of written language.
 
Writing appeared after hunter-gatherer clans disappeared. 
Dave Volek Added Dec 12, 2017 - 1:46pm
One thing that amazes me about western people is their poor sense of relative wealth.
 
Back in my political days, I got the census stats for our constituency to gain some idea of who are voters were. At that time, the average household income was about $35,000.
 
I found it rather interesting at how many $100,000 income households still called themselves "middle class". Compared to most of the local population, they were rich. 
 
Westerners bemoan how the 1% wealthy dominates our national economies. Yet if we take a $50,000 annual income in the west, we come pretty close to being in that 1% group on a world basis.
 
Neil
I totally get where you are coming from when trying to point Opher to do his own charity work. It seems strange for some of us to admonish the state (or others) when there are so many opportunities right at our doorstep.
 
All I can say is that bringing a homeless person (or two) into one's house is a very disruptive process. We may no longer have that peace and contentment a home can give that helps us to be the good person we currently are. In essence, we just may become worse people because we are so charitable.
 
I'm in favor of lobbying for some basic housing and probably supervision of homeless people.
 
Jeff Michka Added Dec 12, 2017 - 4:47pm
Dave Volek sez: I'm in favor of lobbying for some basic housing and probably supervision of homeless people.-How do you mean "supervision of homeless people.  What sort and level of supervision to you see?  Highly germain at the moment, I've got a small enclave of homeless people staying on my property til month's end.  Am I their supervisor?  horrors! lol.
Jeff Michka Added Dec 12, 2017 - 4:50pm
They're technically "guests" to get around some of the regulatory hurdles and fend off the Trumpist neighbor scared of "the evil homeless," more crazed murderers and drug dealers, just like Latinos...
Barath Nagarajan Added Dec 12, 2017 - 6:15pm
Opher:
   Let's face it in America and western democracies the wealth inequality problem is because of race. People don't care about great disparities in wealth or wealth inequality amongst fellow Americans  because the poor are minorities, and yes the scientists believe the problems of the lowest class are to some degree genetically based.
 Though scientists are full of arrogant, atheistic, superioristic horseradish.
    The Lord can save almost anyone(I know you don't believe in the Lord).
A. Jones Added Dec 12, 2017 - 8:16pm
Let's face it in America and western democracies the wealth inequality problem is because of race.
 
Wrong.