The abdication of duty to truth in favor of balancing competing ideas is a disease. Sometimes some ideas are just empirically more correct and some are just empirically more incorrect. If some partisans happen to hold the more correct view, and others happen hold the more incorrect view, then to speak the correct view cannot avoid being incidentally partisan. To therefore preclude that speech as "partisan" is ridiculous.
TED and inequality: The real story
201–202 of 202 posts
Re: TED and inequality: The real story
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm guessing you are from a part of the world that is/was recently totalitarian. The community of people is far, far more than the State. Cultural/religious norms shape the State and the rules. If corruption is tolerated, for example, it doesn't matter what the official State rules are. Furthermore, economics are baked in to human nature. Indeed, gender differences are a kind of specialization of labor. Economic acti…
if you think economy lives outside a state, you are not paying attention to the number of laws you have to respect. And, by the way, there is no economy without States. Well, if you think fishing and hunting are economy, go with that.
Your last statement goes against basically all of human history. Economy is the exchange of value (i.e. trade). Trade has always existed, and for nearly all of human history, it existed outside of the state (since there were no states). Even during the age when states began to form, loads of trade took place outside the state's borders (i.e. likely as much trade took place on the silk road as it did at each terminus).
States can certainly make trade easier and safer (though it doesn't always do so), but to say trade cannot exist without the state is simply wrong.