Can't really make egalitarianism work until they believe in it.

egalitarianism isn't based in reality though

people have differences

And neither is any other political system I've ever seen. I see no difference.

Always a bunch of comprises at the end of the day. And since I want real change and not to just wish for it....

Well, I think the main problem with our society (Western) is that we've lost our collective identity. We are driven by consumerism and individualism.

It achieves nothing

Not on the whole. But I think I see the same problem. A lot of people are less understanding, more prone to being offended, and that's just to start.

The economy is structured in a way that purposely creates debt, it's like a form of slavery

While you can argue that.

People are being divided into camps by media and pop culture

On the flip side a lot of people still want to maintain high appearances, and don't live within thier means.

That debt was thier own mistake. If only they didn't have thier confidence come from such materialism and learned to be happy with what they had in the moment, especially if they could say they owned what they had?

there are too many problems for anyone to just simplify it with a single answer

This is correct.

Which makes the political-economic obession make even less sense to me.

Not really man, want to go to school? Take a loan. Transportation? Take a loan. Buy a house? Take a loan.

It's structured this way, you understand?

Take *responsible* loans.

you can always go deeper into those problems.

I was talking about excess.

The reason people give loans is because, well, they want to make money, or they are compassionate and offer help (but in such a way that they still make money.)

Realisticly there's no reason debt should be the norm.

>compassion

A loan for the means of achieving important needs and earning back that money is not just acceptable, it's necessary.

You can go into all different types of psychology for any one answer.

usury is not compassion, it's usury

It's morally gray. But hey, if you both earn and win, it changes it to a brighter shade, far as I'm concerned.

Andew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, and JFK were men who understood that the economy wasn't honest

You know what happened to them?

They made great scarfices for those around them.

Because clearly they didn't see much value in only benefitting themselves.

Something I find uncommon.

If you want to call it heroism, thinking it's some kind of useless thing to not try what they tried because of the threat of death, shouldn't deter you. No matter our problems today, they made a difference then.

Andrew Jackson killed the FED, and was subsequently the first president to earn an assassination attempt. Lincoln printed national currency dubbed greenbacks, and was shot in public. JFK printed his own $5 bills, and was shot in public.

I'm not sure what that economic stuff has to do with honesty.
But indeed, transparency and honesty is also a rare virtue.

International banking cabals

the hardest redpill to swallow is to embrace virtues such as honesty

politics can come later

And so. It's the kind of thing I care more for.

I just don't see how you work around problems caused by stuff like that without addressing those first.