Welcome to KaW News, with your host Snoopers de Loopers. Sorry that was the most garbage intro to a thread I've ever made, but I am making this on the road, so excuse me for any minor mistakes. Anyways, I have a question I would like to ask the KaWmunity. One that I was asked in real life while sipping wine at a party in Clinton's mansion (hypothetically) and thought it would be interesting to see your opinions. I was asked by a guy, we will call him Brock. Brock asked, "Looking throughout history, and comparing times when people were free and when they were oppressed, looking at that, can we say that social equality has actually helped further society? Or has it hindered it?" I was extremely baffled at this question. "How could inequality ever be better than equality in any situation?" Before I go further I am a supporter of the rights of people, but I do not support the forcing or disrespect of people's opinions if they are separate from yours. Anyways, Brock gave an interesting response. He said, "Equality is good and right, but it hasn't always seemed to help society. Currently it seems a social war is being waged and causing unrest and disunity amongst the people of the free world." I want to know your thoughts on this. What's your response? Should we allow unicorns and horses to be equal?
Institutionalized racism exists. I agree that you shouldn't push your views on others but when people are born and brought up in a system that is designed to discriminate against people who have dark coloured skin and send them to jail for petty crimes to work as cheap labor somethings gotta change.
Snoopy- Respect. A very valid thought, and one which few even wonder. I'll be short here... If we allow empathy and compassion to guide societal "majority" so to speak, I believe that "equality" is a much more common side effect. "People's Rights" unfortunately is also a human invention. < Same thing applies. We ouselves ultimately dictate the "equality" by our foundational standing- Compassion, or "other stuff"? The universe is in constant motion of finding balance. Are we? Support!
Can and will racism ever be fully defeated? Not until we fix the system, I agree on that. I'm not sure if we are finding balance. I feel like when we as a society take a step forward, something pushes us two steps back. How can we find that balance?
Every great, memorable feat humanity has ever accomplished has been done using horrendous slave labor. Pyramids, great wall, transcontinental rainroad, industrial revolution, sustaining agriculture pre-world war era. Historically, we have thrown people madly to their deaths in great number to do anything great. Frankly, the existence of slave labor is evidence enough of social inequality. But I'll push on; all of the societies that have spawned great thinkers, great leaders, great achievements, have also managed to do so while actively oppressing one or more subsets of the population. Is that right? Probably not by conventional standards. But it has worked. Even recent great achievements, like space travel, were initially done by throwing human life at it until it worked. It also started as a predominantly male thing (if you want to count women as oppressed to pursue this example [I'm not saying you should or shouldn't, don't jump down my throat, just that you technically can argue either way]), although some absolutely vital contributions were made by women (e.g. Margaret Hamilton's code). If everyone was equal throughout history, we wouldn't have much to study that was exciting. Imo, and this is not an argument, just a basic thought, our technology is astoundingly better now, and will continue to get even better. Many of the hell-jobs have been partially or entirely replaced by machinery and/or robots. There are certainly many, many more of those jobs left with people doing them right now (e.g. mining, sweatshop industry, a lot of agriculture, etc), but I think increasing automation will eventually take care of most of them, leaving those workers to pursue better things. So that turns this into another question: robot rights? We'll eventually have true AI, will they fight for their nonsentient brothers' rights? Finally: I know there's a comic strip about this somewhere. If I can find it, I'll post it.
Honestly for me inequality has only hindered the advancement of the human race Now look at this, in Europe there was a time know as the dark ages and this is cause almost all human information was lost because of an oppressive institution frowned upon advancement of information because it was a direct affront to their religious views, I'm talking about the Christian church, now this is one case of religious ideals crushing the advancement of society and this is a form of inequality Now on the other hand this could be prevented as we see with the Muslim religion advancing Human Society but they too had inequality such as women being oppressed but this is the same with the Christian church but the major difference is Islam advanced society even though they oppressed the women Now I'm not advocating which religion is better but just showing the difference that religions and scientific advancements can go hand and hand with both having inequality So in conclusion it determines the state of mind the "oppressers" have to advance society even though they have inequality in the system Now in today's society any form of inequality is unnecessary and is only because of prejudices, thoughts of superiority, or personal biases (like in a dictatorship) Great thread idea btw really can make people think
Interesting ideas, slim. Do you have any historical references to how Islam improved society more than Christianity? I'm not saying they didn't make improvements, but I am saying both sides made improvements. I wanted to see what things Islam did compared o Christianity to allow them to have the better social improvements.
When I made mention of balance lol, I was talking about the universe in general, not Humanity. Inequality in any societal model dictated by humanity is a guarantee. I think the best we can do is work towards limiting that inequality
Yes during the "Dark ages" the Christian nations destroyed alot of information including math (because they believed it was an affront to God) and the Islamic Nations created the numbers we used today and even zero (which is a very important number lol) Now evidence to back up this impacted Society is that we still use it and we don't use Roman numerals (IV XX ect.) Except of course in some special cases where people are being fancy like Star Wars Now there are also medical advancements such as setting bones in the Islamic Nations while on the Christian Nations they actually believe that rubbing human feces in the wounds and even using leeches was appropriate for curing their wounds/sickness And there are more but those are just some that I personally believe are the most important
@slim - That's gd to know e.e. always appreciate anyone who takes the time to know what they talkin bout. props
Slim, if inequality has only hindered the human race how do you reconcile the fact that those Muslims you're championing kept slaves? Christianity also isn't the big bad boogeyman of the dark ages, it was caused by the collapse of Rome and the power vacuum that left. Rome was more technologically advanced than any other civilization at that time, and they kept slaves. Much of their knowledge was absorbed from the Greek city-states that were the dominant regional force before them, who also kept slaves. The Egyptians and Chinese also had slaves. I don't know what gave you this hatred of Europe and this belief that everyone else was a shining beacon of equality but you may want to re-check your sources. While you're at it, think about the calendar you use and the scientific method used to this day. Both brought to you by the Church. Just thought I'd bring those up in the interest of fairness.
Both good points. Is it safe to say any one era has had more or less equality? Imo I think each era has its own inequalities. It used to be racial inequality. Now it's marital and relational inequalities(primarily gay rights)? A few more thoughts to think about.
Well maybe if you actually READ what I'm posting you would know that I'm not "championing" the Muslims and I pointed out that they had inequality as well with the Christians at that time I'm just saying that there are two forms the inequality that just oppresses people and their views (Christians during dark ages) and the inequality that oppresses people and supports advancements (Muslims during dark ages) Now don't get me wrong I think both are bad but of the two the Muslims are the only ones to actually contribute to society as a whole Without their advancements we literally wouldn't be having this discussion because there wouldn't be coding and the numbers in said coding were created by the Muslims during the Dark ages the same time almost every in Europe was destoryed by the Christian nations because it was an insult to God (what they believed at the time)
In the whole Muslim vs Christian thing, I think people forget that Catholicism and Christianity are two different things. They may be labeled the same, but Protestant and Catholic Christianity are completely separate. Muslims brought us the numerical and mathematical system, but they really didn't contribute to the Arts and Literature much in comparison to Christians in the Dark Ages. Many works of literature, sculptures, architectural accomplishments, and paintings came from Dark Aged Christians. Also Johannes Gutenberg, inventor of the printing press was a Christian. Not saying ones better than other, just saying that the Christians did actually help advance things, specifically culture.
You right but to be fair I'd rather have my broken bone set properly then look at David or Venus di Milo but I'd still be depressed if they never happened And on the printing press the church was angry with Gutenberg because they believed that only members of the church should be literate because it's, basically a power thing the church believes that if people can read they wouldn't need them if they could read it's a pretty stupid reason by today's standards but it is a legitimate reason if you think about it But on a hypothetical imagine what it would be like if the dark ages never happened, of course you wouldn't have the arts but the level of technology because we never had to relearn it, it would be unimaginable tbh it could be exactly like it is today but itay be even more advanced Lol ok tbh I reread that and it makes me sound like I'm hating on Christianity but I am and I'm not honestly idc about anyone's religious beliefs but I personally just really, really, really hate the dark ages because of the attack on technology by Christianity but also I want to stress (lack of a better word) again that idc about anyone's religious beliefs and this "hate", as I'm sure a few would classify it as, is coming from the attack on knowledge Knowledge is the greatest thing (more or less) that Humanity can preserve for future generations and we should never attack it (like science deniers ex: flat earthers)
I'll stress again that during that age of "Christianity" it was Catholicism, which are completely different from the Christians before and after the Dark Ages. From the time the Christian Church started (a few months after the death of Christ) the Church was completely different. They helped the poor, and even helped and risked death to help the sick during the second century outbreak of the measles and/or small pox (known as the plague of Galen). It wasn't until the third century Council of Nicea proposed by Constantine, that Catholicism really took place as the symbol of Christianity and the traditional Christian church died out. This was of course fixed by the Reformation and it seems Christianity is back on track. Just wanted to make that point. The Catholics were the ones making all these terrible oppressions. Not the Christians. As you can see there is a difference. I see your point on the Muslim's, but how can you explain them invading the Christian lands first and doing the same oppressive things Christians did to non-Christians? Not trying to say ones better, just trying to get all the facts we can get out!
Well with the Muslims invading lands topic people confuse it alot The Christian forces (at this time Christian and Catholic was the same thing in Europe the different "Christianity" was in the Balkins under the Byzantine Empire but in Europe like France and Germany the religion was the same it's confusing tbh the split we know between Christianity and Catholicism isn't until the 1400s and the time I'm talking about is long before that) claimed that the Muslims invaded Christian lands with an army but really they didn't the various city states in Africa and the middle East willingly converted and joined the Islamic Empire (mainly because they were a powerful trade force and they were rich tbh) then of course they moved soldiers in to protect the cities from raids for bandits and even pirates, from the Mediterranean Sea that were based in Cypress or some of the place Now after these conversions the the Byzantine Empire (eastern Orthodox Christians which actually hate the Christian (Christianity and Catholicism) in Europe) cut off trade with the Islamic Nations and even started to raid small villages (normally this would be ok in say Europe but the Muslims took it as a direct affront because any attack on any muslim is an attack on all) so the Muslims started to beseige Constantinople but couldn't get through their walls because they didn't have the gunpowder yet so the Byzantine Empire ass the Pope to send an army to help them and he replied yes he would (even though their differences shouldn't have allowed it) And that marked the First Crusade now it's completely understandable why they did it but I personally wouldn't have the European Nations weren't attacked and the Byzantine Empire attacked the Islamic empire first and really the byzantines just wanted to expand their lands again like in the old Roman empire days