What’s Good/What’s Evil?
I am defining good and evil here as what is in the moral and ethical best interests of a human being, the culture humans live in, and the time span of 100 years-- specifically 2017 to 2117--or, what is good and evil as they pertain to this civilization surviving until 2117. The list will be comprehensive over time. Please add to it if you like:) Please read the aforementioned one more time so that you clearly understand the definition and parameters of the use of good and evil here. The good here may allow humanity to survive and perhaps even thrive; the evil practiced here is to our own destruction.
Loaning money: good.
Loaning money at excessive interest: evil.
Creating money: good.
Creating money via monopoly and debt: evil.
Making money: good.
Making money via unnecessary exploitation and coercion: evil.
Owning a house: good.
Owning more than 1 house: evil
Owning a hotel: good.
Owning more than 1 hotel: evil.
Financial speculation on the basic needs of having a home: evil.
Producing fuel from oil in 1917: good.
Producing fuel from oil in 2017: evil.
Doing everything humanly possible to recycle pollution: good.
Denying pollution is a problem in 2017: evil.
Equality for women: good.
Women who use freedom to wage war: evil.
LGBTQ: good.
LGBTQ who use freedom to wage war: evil.
Benign religiosity: good.
Religiosity premised on bigotry and geography: evil.
Being Jewish: good.
Being Jewish and protecting Jewish people who commit evil via the code of silence ethic: evil.
Being Arab: good.
Being Arab and thinking being Arab is privileged because of what The Koran says about Ismael: evil.
Believing in The Torah: good.
Believing The Torah is a divine revelation: evil.
Believing in The Koran: good.
Believing The Koran is a divine revelation: evil.
Believing in The New Testament: good.
Believing The New Testament is a divine revelation: evil.
Believing in Hinduism: good.
Believing Hindu books are a divine revelation: evil.
Mindful immigration and integration of races: good.
Immigration as hidden agendas for Israel: evil.
Immigration as hidden agendas for Islam: evil.
Immigration as a method of funding central banking debt systems of currency creation: evil.
Immigration to fund the interests of corporations: evil.
A necessary abortion: good.
All manner of unnecessary abortion: evil.
Intelligent used of controlled substances: good.
Abusing controlled substances: evil.
Freedom of speech: good.
Political correctness: evil.
Freedom of speech to say bad things: good.
Political correctness which tries to ban people from saying bad things: evil.
Eating any kind of food in moderation and good health: good.
Eating any kind of food just to eat: evil.
Treating animals inhumanely if they are a food source for humans: evil.
The utmost care and ethical treatment of animals which are a food source for humans: good.
Corporations: good.
Corporations who have used legal devices to get away with every manner of criminal activity: evil.
Thank you for sharing, I'm happy I am not that evil lol. 😊
Anything I could do for you, my dear:)
I'm getting schooled in evil this weekend from a very special guest. So no, this person wouldn't think you are evil...But I'm also being given knowledge of the good although they are amazed at the efficacy of the evil on this planet--it's extraordinarily effective and organized.
There is hope though...
I hope you had a pleasant break from the screen.
Owning more than one house evil? But what if I am renting it at an affordable price for someone who needs it?
(PS I do not have More than one house. I barely have the one)
Decent list here though. Resteemed
The landlord mentality is when it all got terribly worse on this planet. Earning income via rents is spiritually immoral but would need a book to cover why. This ethos primarily came out of England about 250 years ago when the elites started passing laws kicking the commoners of the land. This twisted ethic took over the mindset of the peoples on the planet and became normalized via colonialism and imperialism.
What I'm trying to do here is bypass the false choice of communism and capitalism and offer a compromised system of economics which is sustainable and non-coercive and non-exploitive as possible.
But again, please consider the context carefully: rent seeking was fine ecologically in 1750 but will end up killing us in the next 100 years...It's a type of hoarding and people need to be taught to be more creative when it comes to making money and not rely on exploiting humanities basic needs to do so...
Thank-you so much for the resteem, chelsea...I know this one is tough.
Yeah Okay i see what you're saying. I also don't think the hoarding mindset is good either. However, if inherited an extra house and chose to sell it, is that wrong? No.
If i chose to rent it, i see that as wrong only in the hoarding mindset.
Lets say I offer such a decent deal that it gets a set of parents and two kids of the street. Not wrong
Let me try and explain this from another point of view. But first, the world would be a much better place if there were more Chelsea's in it:) So this is in no way personal. I'll use some metaphors and analogies.
A house will be associated with the candy Skittles herein. In PRE-conventional societies, humans found the candy was given to them for free. They settled the lands they found themselves upon and guarded their Skittles but didn't really feel that they owned them.
In modernity, conventional people decided that they could sell their free Skittles and make a profit from them. This was initially a very creative act. which led to a new way of thinking about Skittle ownership and created an amazing civilization. But alas, some Skittle owners wanted to buy up ALL the Skittles and gorge on them. This has created enormous problems in late postmodernity. Too many Skittles are making people sick with various illness, and the price of Skittles now is getting out of reach for many. Enter in a new developmental ethic called POST-conventional thinking which recognizes the truth of the pre worldview and the conventional but sees and is able to predict the outcome of conventional pathology when it comes to excessive Skittle obsession.
The solution, then, would look very much like what I'm proposing. A reintroduction of PRE ethics where everyone had a Skittle for free (the fact of being born on earth in premodernity--one had free access to land), it would honor the creativity of the conventional Skittle ethos, but create a new POST conventional model which would address the pathologies of the conventional....
So, in the POST Skittle world, those folks you mentioned wouldn't need a house rented to them because a house would be their birthright as humans--this is similar to how it was in PRE but in POST they would be able to have 1-legal title to 1-home. As would we all.
The very good creative urge of the conventionalists would need to be re-imagined whereby generating income would not be gained from humanities basic needs--that is old conventional thinking--and we new creative ways to gain income.
I hope this awkward little example helps as far as coming to understand this new way of thinking about the human condition. Thanks:)))
I love this analogy! Makes sense to me in terms of greed & entitlement...I actually thought about this post a couple times today and here's what doesn't make sense:
Owning a house: good (got it)
Owning more than 1 house: evil (got it)
Owning a hotel: good
How is that any different than owning 20 rental homes? Assuming your hotel has 20 rooms. Economically I don't get it.....
Owning more than 1 hotel: evil
Not transparent enough. For example, above I said assume you owned a 20 room hotel, well what if u owned two of those or just one 40 room hotel. I guess it's better to have the one larger hotel?
Also, kudos to you for explaining without being defensive or antagonostic. I hope I haven't/ or am not coming across in that way either. =)
You're a smart cookie:) I've solved this incongruency in a larger model of this post. It's called The Global Commons Civilization. In it, I propose two economic systems: one is a basic needs economy that I call The Four Pillars; the second is a stripped down commercial capitalist system which generates capital without relying on The Four Pillars. So hotels and such wouldn't be a part of the basic needs economy which would be funded by something like www.positivemoney.com or a dividend or basic income, or social credit currency--any of those modes would be debt free currency. Exploitation and coercion of humanities basic needs would end.
Now, is this ever going to happen? Of course not! Why? Becuase this planet isn't a democracy! It ruled by divine right from the top down and the person with the most influence at the moment (the demiurge/Anu) will never allow what I'm saying to happen. We live under cynical misanthropy.
My hope is that someday this misanthropy ends...and that something better replaces it.
I'm enjoying the exchange...I very much enjoy smart cookies with thinking caps:D
Not only are we not going to achieve this because of malevalent outside "powers that be." We also aren't because the model(s) you are proposing seem to assume that all humans are the same and don't want anything more than "basic needs. " that'll never happen there will always some basic evil person in every "basic needs" socioeconomic group that will try to prey or capitalize off of that. I got elderly patients who get to be resusicated multiple times at 90 lbs and get to live "Happy lives" with broken ribs because their live in grandkid wants to keep cashing that social security check each month and not work. And by "work" I mean contribute to society. I'm just saying there's abuse at every "class" level.
So this smart cookie feels she got very tangential here but that's how her mind works sometimes.