Society or its members?
TheManyMeaningsOf Moi
17-06-2006, 20:21
Which one is more important? Also related question would be: do the state and the goverment exist for the society or vice versa? This is a question that came to my mind when reading the thread on torture and I believe is related to many other hot debates that often arise.
So - tell me what you think and why.
Ostroeuropa
17-06-2006, 20:24
Which one is more important? Also related question would be: do the state and the goverment exist for the society or vice versa? This is a question that came to my mind when reading the thread on torture and I believe is related to many other hot debates that often arise.
So - tell me what you think and why.
Society and State are more important than its members.
The State comes first.
This DOESNT mean that people cant live relatively liberated lives, but it does mean they shouldnt take power from the State.
Klitvilia
17-06-2006, 20:27
Without the people, there is no society or government. The people come first. The government exists for the protection of the people, any other government is not a sovereign state.
TheManyMeaningsOf Moi
17-06-2006, 20:30
I guess the trouble with my question is the separation between state and society (they of course are closely linked) but I believe state is a creation of its members and therefore could be in principle for "us".
Then it would mean that members come first.
TheManyMeaningsOf Moi
17-06-2006, 20:35
Without the people, there is no society or government. The people come first. The government exists for the protection of the people, any other government is not a sovreign state.
Yup. A bit of topic here but in Finland there's a new law that makes wearing helmets while bicycling compulsory. This is a tiny thing but is wrong just in principle: just so the government could save money (in medical costs) it imprisons my hair under a horrid cascet)
God knows how many spelling mistakses, sorry for those
Anti-Social Darwinism
18-06-2006, 06:47
An author whose name I forget said something to the effect of "If I had to chose between betraying my country and betraying my friends, I hope that I would be ethical enough to betray my country."
Its members. Society itself has no value; only the individuals within it do.
The society would be nothing without its members so the members are definately more important.
The state and government should exist to serve the people. The state usually wants to and tries to turn this around and make the people serve it but that's nothing a little revolt can't fix.
And people need to take some personal responsibility. When something (including blame) belongs to everyone it belongs to no one.
"The good of the many outweighs the good of the few, or the one"
As much as I love Spock, I value my member more than society.
Europa Maxima
18-06-2006, 07:01
Individuals, of course.
Neu Leonstein
18-06-2006, 07:02
Its members. Society itself has no value; only the individuals within it do.
Exactly.
The choice is between "individuals are more important", and this (read the text) (http://www.fordham.edu/HALSALL/MOD/mussolini-fascism.html).
Infinite Revolution
18-06-2006, 07:03
the people come first. society and the state work for the ruling class, i.e. for themselves.