This is a discussion I have in my ethics classes. I like to use Kohlberg's Model of moral development (one of many options) as the framework for the discussion.
Under than model, all too many people (upwards of 40% in one study) get stuck at level 4, which means they see the law as the moral system. Dangerous thinking that's often how bullies, political evils, and Authoritarians gain power over the public. Once they can control the laws, those people will just follow along because they can't even envision how challenging the law for humanity's well-being is even possible.
Stage 7: we are just another species on this rock.
What if a Rhesus Ape dominated and burned forests for their crop, littered persistent and poisonous plastic everywhere? Would you also sometimes get mad like Elephants do?
Ah, so this is the first reply from that "moth" character. Arrogant, self-absorbed, doing whatever he pleases, acting like everyone else is beneath him, and always putting on that preachy little act. He's just a complete lowlife. Or, more accurately - a clown. Truly, a legend in his own mind. 🤣👉🤡👈🤣
The underlying theory behind The Holocaust, chattle slavery, and segregation was the upholding of property rights. @[email protected] has the problem dead to rights. Holding property above people consistently leads to hypercriminalization of the underclass.
Because im_fine_sandy is fine with the rule makers owning private properties and capitalization, otherwise they wouldn't demand lawyering be a convention for morality.
Morality existed far longer than laws and court.
Anarchists are saying lawyering made rulers ruler.
Better keep on reading then. ’Cause even both young Marx & Conservative Marx wrote extensively on lawmakers, law enforcement, and courts. Not that I approve of his ideas, I honestly doubt you read even both eras of Marx to be unaware of why laws exist.
Self-belief
Thank you for acknowledging it was your uneducated opinion, and not something I have yet to peer review. Altruism even exists among insects.
Yellow, Orange and red represent places where it is illegal to be gay with orange and red being places where being gay is punishable by death. In the holocaust, gay people were not just loathed by the Nazis, but also loathed by other groups who were also being persecuted and murdered. When other groups were freed from the concentration camps, gay people were often sent from the camps to prisons due to their “liberators” still considering them to be criminals.
Protesting racism wasn't criminalized. The issue was that the legal means to protest racism weren't very effective. So, people intentionally broke certain laws to draw attention to the struggle. The overreaction by the police to those laws being broken drew attention and gained sympathy for the protesters.
39 replies
This is a discussion I have in my ethics classes. I like to use Kohlberg's Model of moral development (one of many options) as the framework for the discussion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development
Under than model, all too many people (upwards of 40% in one study) get stuck at level 4, which means they see the law as the moral system. Dangerous thinking that's often how bullies, political evils, and Authoritarians gain power over the public. Once they can control the laws, those people will just follow along because they can't even envision how challenging the law for humanity's well-being is even possible.
Stage 7: we are just another species on this rock. What if a Rhesus Ape dominated and burned forests for their crop, littered persistent and poisonous plastic everywhere? Would you also sometimes get mad like Elephants do?
Right?
Who has the right to live?
The spider, which subsists on it's prey? Or the fly, stuck in the spider's web?
That's true, but the purpose of laws is to establish a bare minimum of satisfactory behavior in contemporary society.
That is to say, people who don't understand why you shouldn't steal things, are still held to that standard of behavior.
if that was the case, the stealing class wouldn't have robbed people for hundreds of years. yet, stealing is now called “profit.”
Very strong I'm-13-and-this-is-deep energy. Well done.
don't snipe at people 'cause they understand society better than you do. that's exactly why you should be taking notes instead of talking back.
Do I have to take my notes in the existing shower thoughts format or can I transcribe to plain english?
Ah, so this is the first reply from that "moth" character. Arrogant, self-absorbed, doing whatever he pleases, acting like everyone else is beneath him, and always putting on that preachy little act. He's just a complete lowlife. Or, more accurately - a clown. Truly, a legend in his own mind. 🤣👉🤡👈🤣
I find most of the anarchists difficult to engage with.
I was the same in my early 20s.
I think there's a saying, the more you learn the less you know. Or sonething.
I certainly feel like I know less now than I felt I did in my 20s.
Very strong I-don't-have-any-actual-counter-arguments-so-I-resort-to-personal-insults energy. Well done.
There's not really any counter argument to be made to a argument like "profit is theft"
No idea why this is being downvoted.
The underlying theory behind The Holocaust, chattle slavery, and segregation was the upholding of property rights. @[email protected] has the problem dead to rights. Holding property above people consistently leads to hypercriminalization of the underclass.
Because im_fine_sandy is fine with the rule makers owning private properties and capitalization, otherwise they wouldn't demand lawyering be a convention for morality.
Morality existed far longer than laws and court.
Anarchists are saying lawyering made rulers ruler.
Wait, what?
Which Anarchist has ever said this?
Morality without consensus, which leads to conflict and violence
Plenty
Self-belief, or do you have anthropological evidence demonstrating otherwise?
I can't find this quote anywhere in here.
Doesn't settle disputes
Better keep on reading then. ’Cause even both young Marx & Conservative Marx wrote extensively on lawmakers, law enforcement, and courts. Not that I approve of his ideas, I honestly doubt you read even both eras of Marx to be unaware of why laws exist.
Thank you for acknowledging it was your uneducated opinion, and not something I have yet to peer review. Altruism even exists among insects.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_rights_by_country_or_territory#/media/File:World_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression.svg
Yellow, Orange and red represent places where it is illegal to be gay with orange and red being places where being gay is punishable by death. In the holocaust, gay people were not just loathed by the Nazis, but also loathed by other groups who were also being persecuted and murdered. When other groups were freed from the concentration camps, gay people were often sent from the camps to prisons due to their “liberators” still considering them to be criminals.
Argh, Wikipedia/media duplicating browser functionality is annoying fiddly.
It should not be illegal to be gay with orange, but it is a bit weird
This shouldn't have a US flag, it's a fucking global issue.
US flag? where??
Look behind "FRIENDLY REMINDER"
i see it now aswell
The US is a global hegemon.
Ah, but you guys are the leaders of the
freefascist world.In a world full of Musks be a George Hayduke.
Protesting racism wasn't criminalized. The issue was that the legal means to protest racism weren't very effective. So, people intentionally broke certain laws to draw attention to the struggle. The overreaction by the police to those laws being broken drew attention and gained sympathy for the protesters.
It should be "resisting" or something. "Protesting" is more specific.
Resisting racism was allowed too. What wasn't allowed was say sitting in the wrong place on the bus.
Dealting it was legal Smellting it was criminalized
Liberals be like:
::: spoiler satire
I am extremely aware the illegalization of fonts played also a key role in the Nazi literature burnings. Thus my artistic mockery.
:::