Old social values you could get behind

HalfTangible

New member
Apr 13, 2011
417
0
0
thaluikhain said:
HalfTangible said:
But the absolute worst thing our culture has right now is a sense that failure is acceptable. That it's okay to be poor, to be a horrible person, to be a violent sociopath because of your home life, or you had a bad day, or because bringing up your bad behavior somehow makes the other person 'racist' or something dumb like that. Just... no, okay? Can we go back to thinking that failure is a BAD thing that you should do everything in your power to fix?
I don't see anything inherently wrong with being poor. There will always be large numbers of people on the bottom of society, and it's not always their fault that they are there.

Sociopathy is a mental disorder, and likewise not the person's fault.

There's no reason to assume that someone must be a horrible person just because they are poor. That, at least, is a choice, and something we can most definitely condemn them for, should we get round to defining what a horrible person is.
You misunderstand (or possibly i misspoke) - I don't mean that a poor person is there because they're horrible. I mean that there is a prevailing attitude that it is inherently BETTER to be poor than rich. There's no inherent good or evil in either, but more and more I am told that being rich is evil and being poor is good. This attitude encourages complacency from the poor, which is absolute horrible if you ever want the poor to STOP being poor.

'Violent' sociopath, I said. As in 'this man is a mass murdering psycho, but he's still a good kid'. No. He's not. Doesn't matter if it's "not his fault" - he killed anyway.
 

Vault101

I'm in your mind fuzz
Sep 26, 2010
18,863
15
43
HalfTangible said:
]You misunderstand (or possibly i misspoke) - I don't mean that a poor person is there because they're horrible. I mean that there is a prevailing attitude that it is inherently BETTER to be poor than rich. There's no inherent good or evil in either, but more and more I am told that being rich is evil and being poor is good. This attitude encourages complacency from the poor, which is absolute horrible if you ever want the poor to STOP being poor.
.
I'm preeeeeety sure this doesn't come from actual poor people...because being poor SUCKS
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
15,707
1,344
118
HalfTangible said:
You misunderstand (or possibly i misspoke) - I don't mean that a poor person is there because they're horrible. I mean that there is a prevailing attitude that it is inherently BETTER to be poor than rich. There's no inherent good or evil in either, but more and more I am told that being rich is evil and being poor is good. This attitude encourages complacency from the poor, which is absolute horrible if you ever want the poor to STOP being poor.
Not seen this attitude around too much, excepting that the 1% are up to stuff nobody else has the money to get up to and so on.

But...I think most people would still rather be rich if they had the choice.

HalfTangible said:
'Violent' sociopath, I said. As in 'this man is a mass murdering psycho, but he's still a good kid'. No. He's not. Doesn't matter if it's "not his fault" - he killed anyway.
Ah, ok, misread you a bit there.
 

HalfTangible

New member
Apr 13, 2011
417
0
0
Vault101 said:
HalfTangible said:
]You misunderstand (or possibly i misspoke) - I don't mean that a poor person is there because they're horrible. I mean that there is a prevailing attitude that it is inherently BETTER to be poor than rich. There's no inherent good or evil in either, but more and more I am told that being rich is evil and being poor is good. This attitude encourages complacency from the poor, which is absolute horrible if you ever want the poor to STOP being poor.
.
I'm preeeeeety sure this doesn't come from actual poor people...because being poor SUCKS
Probably not, no.
 

Sean Milligan

New member
Sep 15, 2014
4
0
0
Dholland662 said:
Pretty much all of them excepting empirical evidence to the contrary.

Women should be chaste? yep. Studies show promiscuous women get divorced more often and are more likely to be depressed. Our ancestors knew that unleashing promiscuity and hypergamy was bad, just as permitting the strongest man to have a harem was bad. hence why every advanced society had the same gender roles more or less, from Rome to China. Some more progressive (Egypt), some not so (sparta).
Not can I think of any tangible benefit the lack of chastity has given society. So while the issue of correlation and causation hangs over this issue I do think the overall pattern suggests that this tradition had validity.

http://www.academia.edu/209711/Sexual_Behaviour_and_its_Mental_Health_Consequences
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2645616/posts

However... I don't want the evangelical bs with the "leave room for Jesus" nonsense.

That's the most controversial one. And no I dont think women should get back in the kitchen although I do dislike how we rend our garments if women aren't in a job position enough. Women have different priorities and strengths.
It is bold of someone to link a thesis I assume was originally for a graduate degree, but up until I stopped, it was a worthwhile read. Though, it may be that rather mental health issues deriving causation from promiscuity, the inverse may hold true in at least some cases. While studying for my own degree(unfinished mind you) I was seeing a great deal of substance abuse and related behaviors correlating with undiagnosed, untreated (or self-treated) mental disorders... but I also am aware and acknowledge the stigma and prejudice against most being open or accepting of a mental health issue with themselves, a family member, or peer.

In my opinion, everyone is at least a little crazy in some way at times, since I dare anyone to define "normal" on an individual level, rather than as a median among a large population.
 

Sean Milligan

New member
Sep 15, 2014
4
0
0
HalfTangible said:
There's no reason to assume that someone must be a horrible person just because they are poor. That, at least, is a choice, and something we can most definitely condemn them for, should we get round to defining what a horrible person is. You misunderstand (or possibly i misspoke) - I don't mean that a poor person is there because they're horrible. I mean that there is a prevailing attitude that it is inherently BETTER to be poor than rich. There's no inherent good or evil in either, but more and more I am told that being rich is evil and being poor is good. This attitude encourages complacency from the poor, which is absolute horrible if you ever want the poor to STOP being poor.

'Violent' sociopath, I said. As in 'this man is a mass murdering psycho, but he's still a good kid'. No. He's not. Doesn't matter if it's "not his fault" - he killed anyway.
I actually have known multiple generations of households that (with some exceptions) focus their efforts simply on attaining, maintaining, and maximizing assistance from government sources, instead of attempting to support themselves via education, employment, or such. My county actually had to put into law that benefits cease increasing after two children in an attempt to combat the budget crisis in the area when benefits increased per child in infinitum as you can imagine would occur in extremely rare situations, but exponentially dire ones at the same time.
 

Verlander

New member
Apr 22, 2010
2,449
0
0
Very few, if any. I wish the "free love" movement had properly evolved into something bigger, but alas it was born (and thus died) in the US.

Most of these old values sound better on paper than they actually were, or they came with a ton of baggage. Also, some of the things that people are mentioning are values now, and you're just annoyed by the people who don't abide by them.
 

Sean Milligan

New member
Sep 15, 2014
4
0
0
thaluikhain said:
Sean Milligan said:
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." If more people treated others the way they would like to be treated, a lot of stuff just clears itself up on its own. Honestly this is all I would like to see, and its a very old principle never seeming to catch on with most people, and very likely never will. But it would be nice to see more of, without any bias toward my own life choices. I respect others freedom to live the life they want to pursue, and defend my own right to do likewise, just as I defend the right for others to make choices I may not agree with... but isn't that the fair way to try and do it? Maybe "Live and let live." fits too some what.
There is a lot of truth in that, of course, but it's based on the assumption that everyone is the same, that what others want is the same as what I want...there's a lot of problems there.
True, in some cases people pursue things entirely against their self-interest, but assuming most want to be content, happy, comfortable or similar core simplicities, I can also assume most people don't want to be cheated on, stolen from, physically hurt, endangered, killed, their family preyed upon, et cetera et cetera. I see the vast issue being somewhat, that today the rule of, "Do unto others first, and don't get caught/have a top notch legal team" getting worse as time creeps on.

Reminds me of a saying someone I used to know had, "You aren't allowed to get mad if someone steals your stolen stuff." which sounds absurd but to some it was a reprimand/reminder.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
15,707
1,344
118
Sean Milligan said:
thaluikhain said:
Sean Milligan said:
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." If more people treated others the way they would like to be treated, a lot of stuff just clears itself up on its own. Honestly this is all I would like to see, and its a very old principle never seeming to catch on with most people, and very likely never will. But it would be nice to see more of, without any bias toward my own life choices. I respect others freedom to live the life they want to pursue, and defend my own right to do likewise, just as I defend the right for others to make choices I may not agree with... but isn't that the fair way to try and do it? Maybe "Live and let live." fits too some what.
There is a lot of truth in that, of course, but it's based on the assumption that everyone is the same, that what others want is the same as what I want...there's a lot of problems there.
True, in some cases people pursue things entirely against their self-interest, but assuming most want to be content, happy, comfortable or similar core simplicities, I can also assume most people don't want to be cheated on, stolen from, physically hurt, endangered, killed, their family preyed upon, et cetera et cetera. I see the vast issue being somewhat, that today the rule of, "Do unto others first, and don't get caught/have a top notch legal team" getting worse as time creeps on.
That's true if you are keeping it that simple, I meant more in behaviour and how people interact. You don't talk to your friends the way you talk to you mother or vice versa and so on.

Cap: lizard poisons spock

Huh?
 

viscomica

New member
Aug 6, 2013
285
0
0
Leon Declis said:
In the U.K, where I grew up (in the South, bruv), people were often impressed and the default assumption is that your parents are divorced. I remember I was about 12 before I had met someone of my generation who had both parents together and being seriously impressed by it.

I know that it kinda messes with you, and even today, I often say to my girlfriend "I want you to meet my parent..." tripping over the "s" that is supposed to be there. I know my mother did everything she could and I love her, but I honestly intend that when I get married, that is it. I won't have a broken house, I won't cheat and I will make sure my family is happy.

It is probably a sad statement on society when that is considered a lofty goal... A happy family.
Yes, it is sad, but consider this: sometimes parents do everything they can to stay together, be happy, encourage their children and still it doesn't work. After years and years, some parents are not happy anymore. Who is to tell them that they should supress that and stay together despite being miserable with each other? Way back, when unity was a family value, a lot of people stayed in a loveless marriages and resented themselves for it.
 

Johnny Impact

New member
Aug 6, 2008
1,528
0
0
Accountability for everything big and little. These days you can excuse any habit you have or any bad thing you do:
-I'm obese because metabolism problem/McDonald's won't stop advertising.
It's not a metabolism problem. Those exist, but only in a very small percentage of the population. What you have is a stuffing your fucking face problem. This woman lives in the same world you do: http://www.beautymuscle.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/tina-nguyen-14016882548nk4g.jpg Shut your stupid fat mouth, put down the Cheetos, and get on the Stairmaster.
-I'm a criminal because I grew up in a poor neighborhood with a high crime rate.
Crime, crossing the boundary to a "career" of law-breaking, is always a choice. The pressure to go down that road can be considerable. Some folks never get out of the ghetto. It absolutely is a trap and it absolutely should be better. But even in poor neighborhoods, most people are not criminals. What do they have that you don't? Odds are, only the desire to be better than their surroundings. You are making it worse and you need to own that.
-I have no attention span because ADD is a medical condition.
Again, yes it is, but you don't have it. You're making an excuse to cover the conceit of thinking nobody deserves your attention. I bet I'll have your attention after I slap you upside your empty little head.
-I'm an alcoholic because my father was one.
Didn't you hate his drinking with every fiber of your being? Don't you have even the faintest scrap of desire to be better than he is? My dad was a drunk, that's why I never have more than one drink at a time.
-I cheated on my girlfriend because humans evolved to sleep around, monogamy is not natural.
No, you cheated because you're a lying shitbag who'd rather make excuses than do the right thing. Anyone who has ever benefited from modern technology should know natural is not always better. Do you use a cell phone or shout and hope the intended recipient is close enough to hear you? Do you drive or walk for miles and miles? Do you have heat in your home? Natural does not equal better. As for evolution, we also evolved the capacity for moral decision-making: honesty, sacrifice, compromise, loyalty. Transcending our base instincts is what makes us civilized.
-I beat my wife/kids because....
Stop right there. There is nothing, nothing you can say. There is no act as cowardly, as shameful, as deeply destructive as raising a hand to your own family. You are the one doing the hitting. That makes you responsible: not your shitty job, not your asshole boss, not getting stuck in rush hour traffic, not your kids testing your patience, you and only you.
-It's perfectly fine to bring my spoiled, squalling offspring with me to the restaurant or theater.
You are simply wrong. We don't want to hear it. They are your children, their behavior is on you. You do not have the right to make two hundred people angry, or even outright ruin the experience they just paid good money for, simply because you don't bother to control your children. And don't say you can't afford a sitter. If that's true, you can't afford to go out. You chose to have a kid, you chose that responsibility, well congratulations, it's all yours. Now stay the fuck home.
-I did it while I was drunk. That means I didn't do anything wrong.
No, it just means you fucked up twice.

I suspect accountability was never really in vogue. My dad talks about responsibility today but he's also told stories about stealing blueberries from the local farmers at night and hot-rodding up and down every back road in the state when he was young. Nevertheless, more accountability!
 

Mossberg Shotty

New member
Jan 12, 2013
649
0
0
I certainly wouldn't mind if all of the cultural sensitivity were to make a disappearance. If you don't want to offend anyone alive today, you're forced to live life as a weak, follow the flow type of person. That being said, the past wasn't exactly a great place, but at least people didn't live in a constant state of being offended at the opinions of others.

We should bring back Victorian England.
 

beastro

New member
Jan 6, 2012
564
0
0
Sociopathy is a mental disorder, and likewise not the person's fault.
Try living with one.

It's easy to say something like that about a sociopath, it's another to spent a good deal of your life living in the sake of their destruction. After that you realize mental illness is no excuse for anything someone does not only willingly but eagerly. They know full well what they do and what's missing from them, but they do it anyway.

I have met far too many people who strongly oppose those values to say they are Canadian.
I'm one.

My support of health care hinges on its sustainability. We may be able to pull that off atm, but as our population grows it'll become an issue.

"Respect and dignity regardless of race or religion"? Don't all Western nations now have this or is this your way of saying Multiculturalism without saying it? If it is then I'm directly opposed to it and its ill effects upon Canada and Western Civilization as a whole.

Gun control? Nope, sorry. I would prefer to keep the law abiding armed because the unlawful will find ways to arm themselves.

Westaway said:
America has manifest destiny, The American Dream, the stars and stripes, baseball, jazz music, Westerns, etc. The difference between The United States and Canada (and perhaps Australia, I wouldn't know seeing as I've never been there) is that America went through some rigorous nation building. America has a wealth of distinct literature, film and art. Canada has none of these things. So when I said Canada has no culture, I meant Canada specifically.
Canada does have a culture, but it's one many politicians hate and most Canadians have forgotten: It's being the good the loyal Dominion and one that will back Britain to the hilt even if the Quebecers whine and squabble, it was one that took pride in being a part of the Empire and always being ready to answer the call of King and Country... one that was struck down after WWII and now resides in a minority of Canadians who know that Canada's culture, like America and the rest of the Anglosphere is first and foremost British with others added to it but still minor.

There is one lingering bit of the Old Canadian sentiment still strong in Canadian culture and that's Anti-Americanism. We were the first Anti-Americans and have been hard at work ever since the War of Independence and the expulsion of the Loyalists being everything America isn't, namely quiet, meek, compromising, loyal to Britain and as a result we've found it difficult to find who we are ever since we began to abandon the idea of being British and Imperial.

Westaway said:
My ignorance in regards to Canadian heroes, artists, etc serve to demonstrate how these things are not engrained enough to actually construct a coherent culture, or a culture at all.
We have plenty of those, but you'll find that most of the names that come easy to Canadian tongues like MacDonlads and billy Bishop are Canadians of the Dominion. The more to approach modern days the more our icons become increasingly wrapped in Multicultural and Anti-British Sentiment - just look at Louis Riel. Once he was rightly regarded as nothing more as a rebel save for the opinion of Quebecers and Metis, but now he's become a multicultural martyr, all the more because it gives people the chance to spit on Britain while raising up someone who wasn't British.
 

beastro

New member
Jan 6, 2012
564
0
0
Sean Milligan said:
HalfTangible said:
There's no reason to assume that someone must be a horrible person just because they are poor. That, at least, is a choice, and something we can most definitely condemn them for, should we get round to defining what a horrible person is. You misunderstand (or possibly i misspoke) - I don't mean that a poor person is there because they're horrible. I mean that there is a prevailing attitude that it is inherently BETTER to be poor than rich. There's no inherent good or evil in either, but more and more I am told that being rich is evil and being poor is good. This attitude encourages complacency from the poor, which is absolute horrible if you ever want the poor to STOP being poor.

'Violent' sociopath, I said. As in 'this man is a mass murdering psycho, but he's still a good kid'. No. He's not. Doesn't matter if it's "not his fault" - he killed anyway.
I actually have known multiple generations of households that (with some exceptions) focus their efforts simply on attaining, maintaining, and maximizing assistance from government sources, instead of attempting to support themselves via education, employment, or such. My county actually had to put into law that benefits cease increasing after two children in an attempt to combat the budget crisis in the area when benefits increased per child in infinitum as you can imagine would occur in extremely rare situations, but exponentially dire ones at the same time.
And an associate of mine became a civil servant after being a medic in Afghanistan only to be crushed by having to deal with most of those on the dole. One particularly haunting memory of his was when a girl barely out of her teens told him straight that she didn't want to get better and be free of dependance, she wanted to pop out a fifth kid because then she knew the government would give her a house because it's UK law to do so.

I know there are good people who seek assistance, I have been one of them, but too many only seek dependance and all the evil that unleashes on society. Going down to get on disability I wore the best cloths I could and was grateful for the help given, those standing ahead of me in line only spoke of getting their cheque, dropping the kids off at a friends and spending their money on beer and weed to last them until the same time next month.
 

Korolev

No Time Like the Present
Jul 4, 2008
1,853
0
0
Stoicism and self control. I'm not religious, and I don't think God is up there willing to reward people for self-denial of pleasurable things. But I still think it is valuable because it builds discipline. The ability to tell yourself no, to hold back, to resist urges - that is invaluable.

Politeness is another one - in contemporary Australian culture, it seems that every third or fourth word spoken is a swear word. I make it a point to never swear in public and I do my very best to refrain from swearing at home.

A strong longing for self-improvement. This was big amongst the Romans. Always try to be better today than you were yesterday and hope to be better tomorrow than you are today. Build on your skills, always keep learning, don't settle for who you are - work on your flaws, realize your imperfections and strive to be better. You'll never eliminate your flaws, but you'll become a better person.

Respect for scholarly endeavours is another old-world value.
 

Machine Man 1992

New member
Jul 4, 2011
785
0
0
Dueling.

We should bring back the gentleman's duel; two evenly matched opponents settling their differences with sword or pistol.

Now, don't get me wrong, people died all the time from these. But the point of duel wasn't to kill your opponent (usually). In British honor culture, you were considered more of a man for putting yourself in danger than for fighting the guy you were quarreling with. And with modern medicine, the chances of either of you surviving are much higher. Hell, there could be thriving market for custom dueling tools.
 

The White Hunter

Basment Abomination
Oct 19, 2011
3,888
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
One parent staying home to take care of the kid(s).

If you have kids I feel it's a bit too easy to just dump them in a creche. Ofcourse, for a single parent it's a good solution, but I just don't like little kids being left to strangers like that. Maybe it's me just not trusting some random person with my kid if I ever had one. I know everything is expensive and it's nice to have two paychecks coming in instead of one, but for the child's well being I think it's better to have their real parent look after them in the pre-school years of their lives.

I don't know how popular the use of a creche is other countries, but over here it seems pretty much the default and that's never felt right to me.
My parents worked opposite shifts when I was a toddler. Not ideal by any stretch but a workaround when food is an issue.

OT: More people need to wear hats.

Also it should be more unacceptable to be fucking drunk at 10am on a monday morning giving shit to retail staff.
 

themilo504

New member
May 9, 2010
731
0
0
Despite not having a religious upbringing my views on sexuality are rather negative, sex is evil or at least potentially highly dangerous, I think that people in the past understood that and tried to remove the dangerous aspects, the problem is that they wanted to accomplish that by repressing sexuality, instead people should learn to control their sexuality and not simply do what your body tells you to do, unfortunately most people simply lack the willpower to do that.