*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[CoccoBill]

All that makes sense, but only if the premise "there's always going to be a powerful numerical minority" is true. One could argue that humans are innately egalitarian, that's how hunter-gatherer societies worked and still do. I'm not convinced we shouldn't even try to achieve that goal, and just aim to maintain some fragile balance, where the majority isn't too badly screwed over to make them revolt.

[spoonitnow]

All that makes sense, but only if the premise "there's always going to be a powerful numerical minority" is true. One could argue that humans are innately egalitarian, that's how hunter-gatherer societies worked and still do. I'm not convinced we shouldn't even try to achieve that goal, and just aim to maintain some fragile balance, where the majority isn't too badly screwed over to make them revolt.

I'm of the opinion that the majority of humans are egalitarian.

[OngBonga]

I'm not so sure.

Most people are authoritarian, since most people want a legal system and sufficient enforcement to ensure behaviour they believe to be immoral is disincentivised.

I am too, reluctantly. I'd be in favour of anarchism if I thought humans were ready for it. We're not, so I support a system of authority that protects people from violence.

Egalitarianism is the belief all humans are equal. Does anyone really think this? We like to think we believe it because we all like to think we're good people, but who here thinks Donald Trump is their equal? How about OJ Simpson? Some guy rotting in prison for murder?

Nobody who passes moral judgement on others is egalitarian.