>First of all, no where in my last statement did I mention
>anything about socialism -nowhere! Sure, I am a socialist
>but could you at least wait until that comes up before you
>decide that you are going to base your whole counter
>argument on it?

We've had another convo about this, I felt I knew where you were headed. I tend to jump the gun sometimes. My bad.

>
>Second you make such strong claims about this phenomenon you
>call "human nature". Human nature arguments are write off
>statements for people who don't want to think something
>through.

Why do you think this? I believe human nature is not ever given enough credit. For some reason people like to forget that we are animals. If you want truth, first look to Allah and secondly look to nature. I believe you can find many answers in nature and social concepts are not excluded.


Personally, I don't believe that there is such a
>thing as human nature. History has shown us that we behave
>according to our social structures.

What are these structures based on? They are a mechanism. When you break down these mechanisms they are based on the simplest of things: 1.) Procreation 2.) Ensuring the next generation.
no?


There are as many
>examples of cooperation and unity as there is for division
>and conflict. In a society where the dogmatic view of human
>beings is one of individualism and accumulation through
>greed and competition we are going to have greedy and
>competitive people.

So greed is only born out of society? This isn't an age old problem found in many different cultures with many different ways of approaching life? Show me a group of people that have never had to deal with greed. Are they any? Do you have evidence of this? You are telling me that you know of or believe to be a group of people that nowhere in their writings, or oral traditions they encountered the concept of greed? Interesting. If so, there might be an argument.


These are learned behaviours not natural
>ones.

Prove it.

If you don't believe me then tell me why 14 hour work
>days were acceptable 100 years ago but we would regard such
>a work day with disgust today?

In which countries, which county, and what particular people?


Why did American society
>believe slavery was acceptable 200 years ago but is deplored
>today?

It was deplored then by many as well. Money is a powerful blinder tho. We don't need slavery money today. If folk needed a slave to pick tabacco in their front yard to make their mortgage TODAY- I bet you'll have some pro slavery folk RIGHT NOW.

Why weren't women allowed to vote at the turn of the
>20th century but now they can?

In which country? In Islamic law women have had the right to vote as well have own title and property rights for over one thousand years. But Islam is supposed to be oppressive to women. So I guess I'm trying to ask, what is your point?

Could these changes possibly
>have anything to do with the consciousness of people
>changing as we have collectively fought for them and
>rearranged the way we live our lives?

I think that every person is mentaly capable of everything the next man/woman is. I feel no consciousness has changed since the beginning of time. People always had the same core values. The only thing that changes is the power structure at the time and what can benefit it. If it wasn't beneficial for someone to allow the womens arguement in the door, it would not have happend. I'm sure folk had it on the brain for years but had no impetus to respond.


>
>Your little claim about humans being nothing but mere
>animals is as equally unprofound.

We aren't animals? Why is that a put down? How do you feel about animals?

First of all, if we are
>the same as most animals, most species of animals do not
>survive at the expense of other animals within their
>species.

Explain. Wolves will kill other wolves bordering their territory on sight because it effects competition for food. So do lions. This isn't a case of animals surviving at the expense of other animals within their species? The very existence of a wolf pup of a bordering clan in fact ultimatley means death to the next. They understand that, and will kill the pup.


Most animals cooperate for survival.

explain what you mean by "most".

Furthermore,
>human beings are different from other animals for the sheer
>fact that we consciously produce things whereas other
>animals produce instinctively.

Explain your proof of this. I do not subscribe to the humans THINK but animals act instinctley arguement. It's hogwash. Explain animals doing great feats of THOUGHT and ACTION out of LOVE for either a human being companion or another animal companion. Explain a crow nursing a lost kitten to adulthood. You can't. Because by all rights that crow should KILL and EAT that kitten and share it with it's murder, but instead I know of a DOCUMENTED case where a crow decided to raise a kitten it found, it left it's flock or "murder" and raised the abandoned kitten feeding it and grooming it, never leaving it's side. and now they are best friends. Is that instinct? Can't be. There is no DNA strand for that. Meanwhile I see humans acting on instinct rather than processed though patterns everyday. You underestimate the animal kingdom.


How many wolves have
>programmed computers?

They have enough mastery of their enviornment and capabilities that they don't NEED to. They can tell you if you have cancer before a computer can tho...and they'll KNOW it's cancer that can kill you. Which is more brilliant?


How many lions have built enormous
>bridges across large bodies of water?

Not any I know of. But ants do it all the time. Beavers have made contraptions our engineers still cant get the math on.


>
>If what you are attempting to say is true then why even
>struggle for racial unity?

I don't want to. I want those capable of understanding to continue in their growth and I want everyone else to live thier life. I don't think you can have a greater good. Because in the end, certain people in a perfect world would have died because of their ignorance/indifference. What we have done with "society" is staved that process off so that we have megadeath cycles instead where millions die in a short time period only to start over again. Fine.

If someone is going to eff things
>up for everyone else, then surely this applies to the black
>movement and the womens movement too, no?

Yup! sure does. But that is a movement, not a style of government- the ramifications can be very different.

Why should we
>reject the war in Iraq? Hell, by your logic Bush is the
>perfect person in power! Heil frickin Hitler!

Why?

Come to think
>of it, I remember you once said that you were once quite a
>republican. I can see why, the logic is still there.

This is unfair. In fact, it's downright crude. Just because I don't agree with socialism u doin all that? Wow. I thought u were bigger than that.

>
>>It claims to eliminate differences and societal evils and
>>level the playing field. The problem is human nature.
>>People will always seek adavantage and group together based
>>on that. We are animals. There is no escaping that. Sure
>>we are responsible fo our thoughts and actions, and so what?
>> In the end someone will eff up the system. I'd rather have
>>my bs right up front where I can see it.
>>
>>
>>
>>______________________________
>>
>>Instores Feb. 8th NothernArc's very own Black Bill
>>Gate's
>>Hosted By John Legend.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_________________
>>Inaug'ral Member of the OkaySports Hall of Fame.


______________________________

Instores Feb. 8th NothernArc's very own Black Bill Gate's Hosted By John Legend.





_________________
Inaug'ral Member of the OkaySports Hall of Fame.