I was trying to point out the fallacious reasoning you’re operating under but you apparently come into discussion threads to talk about things that aren’t the subject of the thread so you do you, champ.
he nation built on slavery and genocide, that fomented 99% of the coups and dictatorships of the 20th century… started “failing” around Reagan’s time
Truly though, I thought they were making a connection between a nation built on slavery and genocide, fomenting much of the coups and dictatorships of the 20th century and recent failures. I thought they were just pointing out that there’s a pattern, and that it’s rooted in our country’s history.
I guess it hinges on whether you think a “successful” state is one that is life giving versus just “stable”. I’m not saying morality has to do with stability, but rather what (to me) is the sign of a successful state of affairs. Evil doesn’t fit in to my idea of success.
I don’t disagree, but it’s hard to think of many states that are still around today that haven’t done evil shit. If you’re against the idea of uneven trade and exploitation of developing countries, it’s probably not impossible to find a moral state.
I was trying to point out the fallacious reasoning you’re operating under but you apparently come into discussion threads to talk about things that aren’t the subject of the thread so you do you, champ.
Truly though, I thought they were making a connection between a nation built on slavery and genocide, fomenting much of the coups and dictatorships of the 20th century and recent failures. I thought they were just pointing out that there’s a pattern, and that it’s rooted in our country’s history.
Doing those things didn’t result in the nation failing. Being evil doesn’t mean a nation is failing.
Are you actually serious?
Yes. If being evil was what defined whether a nation was failing, I’m pretty sure the world would have nothing but failed states.
How can you possibly believe that morality has anything to do with whether or not a state is stable?
I guess it hinges on whether you think a “successful” state is one that is life giving versus just “stable”. I’m not saying morality has to do with stability, but rather what (to me) is the sign of a successful state of affairs. Evil doesn’t fit in to my idea of success.
I don’t disagree, but it’s hard to think of many states that are still around today that haven’t done evil shit. If you’re against the idea of uneven trade and exploitation of developing countries, it’s probably not impossible to find a moral state.