The Brain's Defense of the Poor

[Jacob]

I am not poor-shaming.

Of course not. You're just saying that they act unjustly by being poor.

No. Those are your words and your reasoning, used to support your "fuck poor people" political stance masquerading as concern for the poor.

I am saying it is unjust that people are not educated. I am not saying that the government is necessarily acting unjustly. It may be that other factors prevent them from providing that education (f. ex. war, lack of ability to enact an agenda due to control of foreign interests, a weak mandate et. al.). Where that is the case, it is still unjust that poor people are being denied education but the blame lies on those responsible for the war or for undermining the ability of the government to act.

Conversely, where a poor country fails to provide adequate education but simultaneously diverts significant portions of the national revenue to the pockets of a small oligarchical elite then yes - the government of that poor country is acting unjustly. That is not "poor shaming" that is "corrupt oligarchy shaming".

[Jacob]

I split this off the US politics thread as it's off topic.

[Jacob]

But I am afraid the original "unjust" definition was meant to be taken as the world being unjust to those poor places for letting them be poor. Which is nonsense.

How so?

[Tonitrus]

To steal from Christopher Hitches' diatribe on Mother Theresa...in this case, is Brain defending the poor, or is he defending poverty? 

[The Brain]

I am not poor-shaming.

Of course not. You're just saying that they act unjustly by being poor.

No. Those are your words and your reasoning, used to support your "fuck poor people" political stance masquerading as concern for the poor.

I am saying it is unjust that people are not educated. I am not saying that the government is necessarily acting unjustly. It may be that other factors prevent them from providing that education (f. ex. war, lack of ability to enact an agenda due to control of foreign interests, a weak mandate et. al.). Where that is the case, it is still unjust that poor people are being denied education but the blame lies on those responsible for the war or for undermining the ability of the government to act.

Conversely, where a poor country fails to provide adequate education but simultaneously diverts significant portions of the national revenue to the pockets of a small oligarchical elite then yes - the government of that poor country is acting unjustly. That is not "poor shaming" that is "corrupt oligarchy shaming".

You would make a great 30 Years War officer: "I know these wily poors! They always have wealth squirreled away somewhere! We may just need to interrogate more enhancedly!"

[Jacob]

You would make a great 30 Years War officer: "I know these wily poors! They always have wealth squirreled away somewhere! We may just need to interrogate more enhancedly!"

[Tamas]

But I am afraid the original "unjust" definition was meant to be taken as the world being unjust to those poor places for letting them be poor. Which is nonsense.

How so?

In almost all cases governments who do not work on making their own poor countries better or work on improving conditions, they rule with the support or at the very least quiet consent of the majority of their people. Rulers of 3rd world shitholes get away with things a 100 times worse than would see European streets aflame in popular rage.
That is not the worlds fault.

[Jacob]

In almost all cases governments who do not work on making their own poor countries better or work on improving conditions, they rule with the support or at the very least quiet consent of the majority of their people. Rulers of 3rd world shitholes get away with things a 100 times worse than would see European streets aflame in popular rage.

That is not the worlds fault.

If the Brain sees your argument he'll say you're poor-shaming.