Message from @Oboe

Discord ID: 685239400245755919


2020-03-05 21:21:59 UTC  

Now take this unnecessary convo elsewhere.

2020-03-05 21:22:07 UTC  

**@Zoltanous** has been detained.

2020-03-05 21:22:12 UTC  

lol

2020-03-05 21:22:22 UTC  

>fuck you libtard

2020-03-05 21:22:23 UTC  

bruh!

2020-03-05 21:22:32 UTC  

What is detained?

2020-03-05 21:22:36 UTC  

muted

2020-03-05 21:22:38 UTC  

Isolation.

2020-03-05 21:22:42 UTC  

Dang

2020-03-05 21:22:50 UTC  

Anyhow, let me and Oboe continue our serious conversation please.

2020-03-05 21:23:42 UTC  

I also can't help to feel that some of your reasonings presuppose that killing is wrong which doesn't make sense to me sense you maintain that morality is subjective but I don't think you are very eager to concede that killing for my advantage is permissible within certain contexts either.

2020-03-05 21:28:54 UTC  

Okay, if you want to put morality aside, we can do that. But before I do so, I'll let you know that if you think that killing is moral, you have serious problems, and I don't say this to insult you, but I really worry about your mental state.

Now, when it comes to killing people because there are advantages with go with that action, I must remind you that there are also disadvantages, which, when it comes to killing a people, they always -and I mean always- overshadow the advantages. For example, if we go by the example of yours, you killed a number of people because you wanted to have full control of their resources. Why kill them? You can certainly keep them alive, and use them to your own advantage. By removing all value, you remove many advantages as well.

2020-03-05 21:28:59 UTC  
2020-03-05 21:29:34 UTC  

Ok but that poses the question of slavery

2020-03-05 21:29:44 UTC  

Is it better to enslave that people than kill them?

2020-03-05 21:29:52 UTC  

I don't see how that would be any less imperialistic

2020-03-05 21:30:01 UTC  

You don't need to enslave people to use them to your own advantage.

2020-03-05 21:30:16 UTC  

Their mere existence is one great advatange.

2020-03-05 21:31:10 UTC  

I gotta go, I'll be back in a couple of hours. Feel free to respond, I'll just respond to you later. @Oboe

2020-03-05 21:32:45 UTC  

Alright

2020-03-05 21:36:44 UTC  

My issue with that is you seem to assume that in *every* case that letting people be free and alive works to my advantage and I just don't see that as true. We can work up hypotheticals wherein a given group's destruction would work to my group's advantage and within this framework I am trying to figure out whether you think that working to my group's advantage is what defines morality or that there is some kind of over-arching sense of right and wrong which prevents you from seeing killing as a morally acceptable option. So I have to ask, which is it? Is killing supremely wrong or is working to my own advantage supremely right? I don't see how the two can both be true.

2020-03-05 22:10:44 UTC  

Isolationism only makes sense if you have obtained autarky

2020-03-06 00:41:50 UTC  

The possibility of obtaining autarky is a impossible for most countries in the modern world; so it should no means be taken into consideration.

2020-03-06 00:43:28 UTC  

Heres an idea

2020-03-06 00:43:36 UTC  

Also, Isolationism + Autarchy os practically a bullet througth the head. Most modern attempts of autarchy were not derived from isolationist policy, but the contrary, expansionist policies (Japan as an example).

2020-03-06 00:43:43 UTC  

America is already imperial

2020-03-06 00:44:08 UTC  

It holds factions of people in its borders who hate each other

2020-03-06 00:58:34 UTC  

@Lettow north korea

2020-03-06 01:02:29 UTC  

I said "most" for a reason. North Korea is a very special case.

2020-03-06 01:09:49 UTC  

The US is more an empire in its exportation of globohomo.
Pretty much all nations in NATO act like its subjects.

2020-03-06 01:18:23 UTC  

Globohomo

2020-03-06 01:22:22 UTC  

If we all return to agrarian society, then autarky is easy

2020-03-06 01:35:37 UTC  

You could probably do that, but that wouldn't be a good idea chief.

2020-03-06 02:10:03 UTC  

It would be a great idea

2020-03-06 02:18:50 UTC  

Nah.
Autarchy + Agrarian society = not the sufficient material conditions to survive as a political entity and probably gonna end up pretty backwards.

2020-03-06 04:01:16 UTC  

Ok

2020-03-06 04:01:19 UTC  

And?

2020-03-06 06:47:33 UTC  

Autarchy in our economy? Wew.

2020-03-06 06:47:43 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/588205956039442452/685378060245008409/deposits-1.jpg

2020-03-06 06:48:56 UTC  

You don't even have all raw materials in every country. Even if you combine expansionism, that would mean Germany would have to conquer as far as Eastern Europe for a few measly silicone deposits.

2020-03-06 06:52:21 UTC  

Countries like China, Russia or the USA could get away with it, maybe. Even then, the question is if it's worth it. Autarchy in military and medical goods and foodstuffs (to a degree) is pretty much common sense and does not warrant an ideology, in everything else, it's simply a waste of resources. Look at the map above. Why are not all silicone deposits tapped? Because sometimes, buying that stuff is cheaper than building a factory from scratch and keeping it running. Also, comparative advantage something something.