TED Conversations

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Ideological topics: Wealth Redistribution, Equality, Universal Health Care are quite contentious. Is there common ground for common good?

How do you obtain common ground in an ideological argument? What methods have proved fruitful in the past? Is there even a solution?

I am still working through Rousseau’s Origins of Inequality but, this statement stood out.

“Thus, as the most powerful or the most miserable considered their might or misery as a kind of right to the possessions of others, equivalent, in their opinion, to that of property, the destruction of equality was attended by the most terrible disorders. Usurpations by the rich, robbery by the poor, and the unbridled passions of both, suppressed the cries of natural compassion and the still feeble voice of justice, and filled men with avarice, ambition and vice.”

What methods do you use to sway the idealist who in reality means no harm yet causes harm with each keystroke?

+3
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Feb 6 2014: Provide everyone with the basic needs of survival free garanteed. Make the punishment for intentional crimes not led to by ignorance, a quick painless death. Make education free. Insanity is grounds for a medical cure or death. Ignorance is the only defence, the response to which is confined reeducation. Beyond these there would be no prisons. Basic transportion and communication are part of the basic needs of survival. Couples not working or otherwise supporting the system would be limited to two children. While grumbling about expenses, the rich would like the tight government controls and the sense that no crime is justified. The poor have food , shelter, medical care, and access to education to rise out of poverty.
    This would be stage one...
    • Feb 6 2014: Bradley, welcome to the conversation. I almost hesitate to dip my toe into pool on this one. To much death. Is there another view which does not eliminate the disinfranchised?
      • Feb 7 2014: Sounds like a totalitarian death machine on first impression doesn't it. It's not. It's more like sweden or Norway. Death rates fall as do the rates for crime and illness. The poor were disenfranchised by the lack of opportunity imposed on them by the desparate struggle to survive. Stage two is where those so motivated can use free education to learn to be doctors and lawyers, engineers, teachers, writer, artists, etc.. For everyone fear of failure fades a little. We try to live by doing the things we love doing.
        In stage three fear fades a little from all aspects of life and we begin to realise that putting 60% of our national budget into a military industrial death machine is less efficient than providing food shelter, medical care and education to the rest of the world...
        • Feb 9 2014: Bradley! Now this I support. Very good observation, how much creation has our current economic system lost because people were afraid to fail. Not because of their dream, but because of the posssible damage their attempt woul bring to their family.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.