The idea of unseemliness of that kind of wealth is better than limits imposed by some external authority. There's nothing wrong with having lots of money. What's wrong is people worshipping someone with lots, kowtowing to him and making him a celebrity. Someone using his wealth to help people should be the ideal. But as soon as the gover…
The idea of unseemliness of that kind of wealth is better than limits imposed by some external authority. There's nothing wrong with having lots of money. What's wrong is people worshipping someone with lots, kowtowing to him and making him a celebrity. Someone using his wealth to help people should be the ideal. But as soon as the government gets its stupid hands on wealth control you end up like every communist country. The wealth just gets transferred to the controlling party.
I don't like the idea of controlling people by shaming them. Some people revert to that about trivia. I was once shamed by an entire Facebook group because I discussed my use of a home milk frother. Everyone thought it was bougie and self indulgent. I think criminals like Gates should be executed, but people should not be shamed for owning coffee gadgets. This is where public shaming leads to.
Your FB group pounced on you for a home milk frother? How very petty.
I'm talking about restoring the idea of moderation as a virtue. Perhaps shaming isn't the best word. Viewed positively, encouraging charity is better than browbeating people. In a pagan society like ours, that's been replaced by veneration of ostentatious display of wealth. Gates' buying up of half of Nebraska should be regarded as sinister. But dumping on someone for a milk frother? That's reductio ad absurdum. I'd find another group of friends.
Of course I left the FB group. But my point is that shame itself is toxic and shouldn't be used as a tactic by the good guys, because some people use it so freely for little reason. And psychopaths like Gates don't feel shame, it can only be used on normal people, where it's often inappropriate. And what is moderation? Back in the day, some people told me I had a problem with alcohol because I went to the wine country to taste wine. For some people, one drink is too much. So I think shaming, judging and all that should be left for judging criminal behavior. If my neighbor drinks or owns a lot of appliances, this is none of my business. If my neighbor makes pathogens in the basement and puts it in the water supply, I should take action to get them arrested. Shame, moderation and all those concepts have nothing to do with arresting criminals.
The idea of unseemliness of that kind of wealth is better than limits imposed by some external authority. There's nothing wrong with having lots of money. What's wrong is people worshipping someone with lots, kowtowing to him and making him a celebrity. Someone using his wealth to help people should be the ideal. But as soon as the government gets its stupid hands on wealth control you end up like every communist country. The wealth just gets transferred to the controlling party.
I don't like the idea of controlling people by shaming them. Some people revert to that about trivia. I was once shamed by an entire Facebook group because I discussed my use of a home milk frother. Everyone thought it was bougie and self indulgent. I think criminals like Gates should be executed, but people should not be shamed for owning coffee gadgets. This is where public shaming leads to.
Your FB group pounced on you for a home milk frother? How very petty.
I'm talking about restoring the idea of moderation as a virtue. Perhaps shaming isn't the best word. Viewed positively, encouraging charity is better than browbeating people. In a pagan society like ours, that's been replaced by veneration of ostentatious display of wealth. Gates' buying up of half of Nebraska should be regarded as sinister. But dumping on someone for a milk frother? That's reductio ad absurdum. I'd find another group of friends.
Of course I left the FB group. But my point is that shame itself is toxic and shouldn't be used as a tactic by the good guys, because some people use it so freely for little reason. And psychopaths like Gates don't feel shame, it can only be used on normal people, where it's often inappropriate. And what is moderation? Back in the day, some people told me I had a problem with alcohol because I went to the wine country to taste wine. For some people, one drink is too much. So I think shaming, judging and all that should be left for judging criminal behavior. If my neighbor drinks or owns a lot of appliances, this is none of my business. If my neighbor makes pathogens in the basement and puts it in the water supply, I should take action to get them arrested. Shame, moderation and all those concepts have nothing to do with arresting criminals.
Absolutely.