RE: Social Darwinism: Right or Wrong
November 12, 2012 at 11:49 pm
(This post was last modified: November 13, 2012 at 12:01 am by Cato.)
(November 12, 2012 at 11:06 pm)TaraJo Wrote: He's a troll; you don't expect a troll to answer questions like that, do you?
No. You are right. I don't expect it; however, he/she must consider it even if the choice is made to ignore me.
(November 12, 2012 at 11:11 pm)Polaris Wrote: Since I am a Democratic Socialist, I am adequately opposed to Social Darwinism having any impact on society whatsoever. It is a system that favors the 1% and sadly exists in America because of the corruption of the two-party system.
Praytell, what does it mean to be adequately opposed? I am opposed to hair weaves. People still get hair weaves. I doubt saying I'm 'adequately' opposed to hair weaves will change the frequency of people getting hair weaves or significantly enhance my opposition. What's the purpose of the 'adequate' qualifier? You can't say, can you?
It's like American football announcers using the term 'differential' instead of saying difference.
(November 12, 2012 at 11:33 pm)jonb Wrote: The problem with democratic socialism, is that who sets up the policies? In britain the labour party has become a rich man's club, with just enough working class people to pretend it has some credibility, but they never get their hands on the power.
Precisely. This goes back to my question to Vinny (troll or not)...says who?
