Have you started to worry about your parents?

[Andres]

Progress is progress.
If you people do not agree with HoreTore's point that old people getting replaced by new people is a good thing, would you prefer:
a. Just one eternal generation of humans with no reproduction
b. Babies! But old people don't die

and why do you think these options would be preferable over death and replacement and what would be the implications?

But, that is not HoreTore's point. HT's point is that humanity constantly improves itself and that the new generation always does better than the previous one(s). Which isn't true. It goes with ups and downs which implies that sometimes, the new generation doesn't do better.

It also depends on the criteria you use. What is "better" for one person, isn't necessarily an improvement for another person. And no matter which criteria you use, it will always be arbitrary and subjective.

Which makes such statements without value whatsoever.

[Husar]

But, that is not HoreTore's point. HT's point is that humanity constantly improves itself and that the new generation always does better than the previous one(s). Which isn't true. It goes with ups and downs which implies that sometimes, the new generation doesn't do better.

It also depends on the criteria you use. What is "better" for one person, isn't necessarily an improvement for another person. And no matter which criteria you use, it will always be arbitrary and subjective.

Which makes such statements without value whatsoever.

Yes, it is his opinion, why are you so intolerant of other peoples' opinions?
It makes no sense to discuss it in an attempt to prove him wrong.
Accept his opinion and embrace the difference and variety.
Multiopinionism.

[Rhyfelwyr]

'ol Smithy had hunter/gatherer->pastoralism->agriculture->commerce, didn't he?

Yes, it's pretty similar isn't it?

[Andres]

Yes, it is his opinion, why are you so intolerant of other peoples' opinions?
It makes no sense to discuss it in an attempt to prove him wrong.
Accept his opinion and embrace the difference and variety.
Multiopinionism.

Pure laziness of course.

Now that I have proven that his statement is worthless, I no longer have to type posts.

[Fragony]

Pure laziness of course.

Now that I have proven that his statement is worthless, I no longer have to type posts.

His knowledge of historical terms is kinda lacking, but Horrie's statement isn't wrong, I know The Bell Curve is controversial but their research does support his claim.

[HoreTore]

A quick Google search about 'slavery historical' gives a result where 8 out of 11 links lead to pages about transatlantic slavery. You need to reassess that historical sense.

I suggest you read some scientific works instead of relying on google searches.

You could start with the Communist Manifesto, the book I took the slavery/feudal/limited democracy/democracy-order from.

[Fragony]

I suggest you read some scientific works instead of relying on google searches.

You could start with the Communist Manifesto, the book I took the slavery/feudal/limited democracy/democracy-order from.

No surprise there, let me make it easier for you, citizenship, feudal, no democracy at all, nationalism, democracy. But now the EU I guess.

[HoreTore]

No surprise there, let me make it easier for you, citizenship, feudal, no democracy at all, nationalism, democracy. But now the EU I guess.

That would be an alternative view, just as debatable as the one I(well, Marx did) proposed.

[Fragony]

That would be an alternative view, just as debatable as the one I(well, Marx did) proposed.

Marxism is inevitably of events, certainly not an alternative view. You would do better reading 'the road to Serfdom' by Hayek he does it much better

[HoreTore]

Marxism is inevitably of events, certainly not an alternative view. You would do better reading 'the road to Serfdom' by Hayek he does it much better

Yeah.... Let's not pretend Hayek is a less extreme view than Marx, eh?

[Fragony]

Yeah.... Let's not pretend Hayek is a less extreme view than Marx, eh?

He is a Marxist historian really, he assumes the momentum of history. It's worth reading.

[rajpoot]

I suggest you read some scientific works instead of relying on google searches.

You could start with the Communist Manifesto, the book I took the slavery/feudal/limited democracy/democracy-order from.

A term as vague as historical sense does not merit deeper research. The Google search is proof enough that for the general populace slavery in historical sense refers to African slavery.

[Kralizec]

Uhm, what?

Roman Empire - slavery
Medieval Europe - feudalism
Industrial Europe - limited democracy
Modern Europe - democracy

I fail to see where I got things wrong?

Here's where you got things wrong:

Serdom is for practical purposes a form of slavery. The word is derived from servii, a word which (if I recall correctly) the Romans used for both slaves (property) and actual serfs (men who were supposedly free, but tied to their "employer" by various legal barriers). Even they knew that in practice the two didn't differ much in practice.

Besides, even though the middle ages was not quite as bad as is sometimes thought, it certainly was a step down from the Roman empire during its golden age. To be fair; it could be argued that Europe was already slipping into the dark ages when the western Roman empire still existed in name.

[HoreTore]

Serdom is for practical purposes a form of slavery. The word is derived from servii, a word which (if I recall correctly) the Romans used for both slaves (property) and actual serfs (men who were supposedly free, but tied to their "employer" by various legal barriers). Even they knew that in practice the two didn't differ much in practice.

I have few problems with equaling serfdom and slavery.

[Fragony]

I have few problems with equaling serfdom and slavery.

How about to them being different things in different periods, periods overlapse of course as Krazilec correctly points out.

Serfdom is not slavery, it's a different way of looking at classes, serfdom means that you are a free man, but in principle (and practice) still bound to a lord. It's a grey line between slavery (being a possesion) and being exploited in practice of course; the reality would probably be the same.

[Hax]

Yes, the world only gets better.

Exhibit A: The Arab world.

[CrossLOPER]

I didn't touch on colonialism at all, because the world outside Europe doesn't matter.

"Slavery" in a historical sense refers to the time when the European states included a slave class, ie. the Romans, not the later african slave trade.

Your arguments are worse than Total Realism's.

You are attributing progress to individual rather than the collective effort of societies, which disseminate beliefs and ideas. Your impression that Europe is incapable of sliding into another Dark Age is naive. Things tend to go in cycles and fundamental characteristics of human societies tend not to change. You would probably know this first hand if you were older than 27.

I agree with the suggestion that you may be afraid of aging.

[Fragony]

Yes, the world only gets better.

Exhibit A: The Arab world.

Arab world should just not be a part of the eqation, it is what it is, a savage place with savage people. It's true for all europea nations though.

[HoreTore]

You are attributing progress to individual rather than the collective effort of societies

Uhm, what?

[CrossLOPER]

Uhm, what?

That's what I said when I read your posts.