2

6 comments

[–] [Deleted] 1 points (+1|-0) Edited

It says the guy dumpster picks for parts of his meals. I think that is hard living, yes.

This would also restrict a lot of travel, for business as well as pleasure.

The laws you describe requiring people to live a certain way is a fascist system.

[–] smallpond 0 points (+0|-0)

It says the guy dumpster picks for parts of his meals. I think that is hard living, yes.

I know people that dumpster dive as a lifestyle choice in a wealthy society as mentioned in the article:

He gets much of his food from dumpster diving or from the leftovers at buffets from conferences he attends, describing himself as a "supply-and-demand vegan."

it's not all that uncommon, and is not indicative of actual hardship. To be forced to dumpster dive from poverty is quite a different thing. Of course in a poor county I wonder if dumpster diving would even be effective at alleviating hardship.

This would also restrict a lot of travel, for business as well as pleasure.

And? You sound pretty soft.

The laws you describe requiring people to live a certain way is a fascist system.

Fascism is such a bullshit word devoid of meaning that I thought I'd look it up. The Merriam-Webster definition of fascism:

1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition 2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

Your use of fascism in sense 1. makes no sense. If you're using it in sense 2 you might as well call any existing laws that require us to live a certain way fascist. Do you seriously consider adjusting the prices of goods to reflect the fair cost to society, fascist?

[–] [Deleted] 0 points (+0|-0)

You wouldn't call laws like that ...

severe economic and social regimentation

?

And a lot of our laws are fascist.

[–] smallpond 0 points (+0|-0)

No, I don't consider such laws "severe economic and social regimentation", and even if I did, you still don't meet the actual definition of fascism as above. You've reaffirmed my opinion of fascism as a word that's become devoid of actual meaning.

So if we incorrectly redefine 'fascist' as something that is too socially/economically regimented for your liking, which current laws do you consider fascist? How do you feel about laws against murder, or more uncontroversial environmental laws that might prevent companies from dumping toxic pollutants into public water supplies?