• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -2
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Linguistics prescriptivism

    I don’t know what that means.

    Shouldn’t we as a society remove the system which enables people to monopolize power, if it’s “human nature” to exploit others?

    The moral judgement is irrelevant here. It makes no difference. “We” cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot. Your assumptions are unfounded.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I don’t know what that means.

      It means claiming that someone “uses a word wrong”, referring to a supposed authority on language, rather than acknowledging that a word’s usage determines its’ meaning

      The moral judgement is irrelevant here.

      I’ve not made any moral judgement. I’ve extrapolated your view of the world and said that I don’t want that.

      “We” cannot stop human beings from gaining power over others so the question is moot.

      That’s simply wrong. There’s a ton of historical and anthropological evidence of societal structures that prevent monopolisation of power. Notice that there are way less kings around than a few hundred years ago?

      Your assumptions are unfounded.

      I’m claiming the same things of yours.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -3
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        means claiming that someone “uses a word wrong”

        I haven’t done that. I’ve pointed out that OP’s use of the word “traitor” in their phrase “class traitor” has a different meaning to the ordinary use of the word “traitor”. I haven’t said their use is wrong.

        monopolisation of power

        We’re talking at cross purposes. You’re talking about “monopolisation” of power but I’m talking about gaining power over others. I don’t know what you mean by “monopolisation” of power. (And I don’t care because whatever you mean, it’s clear that it isn’t important.)

        There’s a ton of historical and anthropological evidence of societal structures that prevent monopolisation of power.

        But not prevent the acquisition of power over others, or prevent exploitation.

        Notice that there are way less kings around than a few hundred years ago?

        No? Only in name. I find it odd when people talk about feudalism in the past tense. To me it seems like feudalism never ended.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          33 months ago

          I haven’t done that

          Yes, you have

          gaining power over others

          That’s what monopolisation of power means.

          But not prevent the acquisition of power over others, or prevent exploitation.

          Yes, exactly that. That’s what democracy’s supposed to handle.

          To me it seems like feudalism never ended.

          There are distinct differences of capitalism and feudalism.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -23 months ago

            Yes, you have

            I disagree.

            Yes, exactly that.

            LOL so you believe there is “a ton of historical and anthropological evidence of societal structures that prevent” people gaining power over others? You believe there have been “a ton” of human societies with no exploitation? You have no idea what you’re talking about.

            That’s what democracy’s supposed to handle.

            LOL

            There are distinct differences of capitalism and feudalism.

            Oh I see! Distinct differences! LOL

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              33 months ago

              I disagree.

              Well, you’re wrong.

              You believe there have been “a ton” of human societies with no exploitation? You have no idea what you’re talking about.

              There have been a ton of societies which limited the amount of power individuals could amass.

              Oh I see! Distinct differences! LOL

              Yeah. Feudal property relations are totally the same as capitalistic property relations. No difference whatsoever. Pretty much everyone is still a subsistence farmer. /s

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -33 months ago

                Well, you’re wrong.

                LOL

                limited

                Ah! So now you’re changing your tune! Not “preventing” but “limiting”. Best of luck, maybe you’ll get to reality in the end.