joshuastarlight

- friends
9,474 link karma
92 comment karma
send messageredditor for
what's this?

TROPHY CASE


  • Two-Year Club

    Verified Email

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own!

Does Inequality Invalidate Social Contract Theory? by Plato_Karamazovin philosophy

[–]joshuastarlight 1 point2 points ago

Considering that there has been inequality since before the time of Socrates, I don't think existence of inequality now should invalidate the idea of a social contract. I always thought of the social contract as more of a justification for individuals to submit to the will of democracy (the majority opinion combined with the 'right' or 'just opinion) than the other way around. Libertarians and social conservatives tend to shy away from the idea of a social contract partly because they are inherently distrustful of the idea of submitting to government rules/regulations/laws. As I understand them, the founding documents of the United States do not guarantee complete equality to American citizens, but as the Declaration of Independence states 'certain inalienable rights' which include the pursuit of (but not necessarily attainment of) happiness. I don't know if specific versions of Social Contract Theory are still applicable, but I definitely think the idea of a social contract is still necessary for justifying democracy and individuals giving their consent to be ruled by the government/state. I hope that made sense ...

'Whatever you may think of the left, it is liberals and moderates who are asking the right questions about where we should go on national security policy. Agree or disagree, we have to pay attention.' by joshuastarlightin politics

[–]joshuastarlight[S] -1 points0 points ago

And even when they were nominally in control of the federal government starting in 2009, Senate Republicans effectively delayed or outright blocked about 500 bills passed by the Democratic controlled House from even being voted on in the Senate, not to mention the delay tactics on important pieces of legislation such as the Affordable Care Act that was finally passed after almost a year of delays. Democrats never had a lock on 60 votes in the Senate for anything somewhat controversial, plus this ridiculously high threshold was often not even possible because of sickness (Ted Kennedy), contested election results (Al Franken), and outright douchebaggery (Joe Liebermann). And after the surprise upset of Martha Coakley by Scott Brown for Ted Kennedy's old Senate seat after his untimely death, the Democrats didn't even have a supermajority on paper to deal with the unprecedented obstruction by Mitch McConnell and his cohorts. Frankly it is a small miracle that the centrist Health Care Reform bill actually passed at all, given the complete universal opposition by all Republican Representatives and Senators, and the Senate Republicans' clear willingness to block and delay any and all legislation that they did not agree with.

What's the thought on this. OWS v. TEA by jasonofcompsciin politics

[–]joshuastarlight 0 points1 point ago

By 'arbitrary quality standards,' do you mean product safety? I understand it is harder for small businesses to follow one-size fits all regulations that probably have been influenced by corporate lobbyists. Fortunately not all regulations apply to small businesses; one big example being environmental regulations on air pollution emissions, water pollution, etc. And if environmental regulations do happen to apply to small businesses, then it is to the benefit of society that the small businesses comply.

"Safely and securely dismantling surplus weapons is a critical step along the road to achieving President Obama's vision of a world without nuclear weapons." by joshuastarlightin politics

[–]joshuastarlight[S] 0 points1 point ago

We don't need them and they cost lots of money to maintain, plus we already signed on to the nonproliferation treaty which means we are obligated to work towards nuclear disarmament, and disarming means we have more authority to tell other countries they should not work towards nuclear capability, not to mention we don't need them and they cost lots of money. No sense throwing good money after bad.

view more: next