Ugh there is a sense of dread hearing this while knowing that oscar lost most of his private property in his lifetime. Truly he had many precognitions of his demise.
Nothing really shows this to be a truth. In fact it shows to be quite the opposite often. The more lax you are, and the more understanding you treat the offenders the less crime sickened a society will be. Crime in the capitalist sense is a bourgeois's way of reenforcing their power on any note, most of it doesn't need to be crime, or wouldn't be under a more equitable system. Most crimes wouldn't be such an issue if society was just more free, equal, and equitable to all people of all lives. We see that most with our crime rates. It skyrockets when class inequality increases. Why would you try to rob your fellow man if he has nothing worth stealing? Aswell capitalism inspires greed and hatred for your fellow man more then anything due to your inherent competition, obviously this will lead to higher crime. In what Wilde puts forward here there would be little need to be harsh on crime if not simply because the cause of most of these crimes will be entirely eliminated. Most crime doesn't go down when it's enforced heavily, it goes down from people not having a reason to. If someone has to steal to live then they will commit crime to live; that's better then dying, right? And if this person is introduced to crime they are exponentially more likely to get more deep into it. Solution? Give the people what they need and not force people to compete with their fellow man.
I respect Wilde for his work and his person but this must be taken as a thought written by someone who at the time probably lacked the careful revision of an equally bright mind with an opposite perspective. In modern times we have accepted that there is no possible individualism in Socialism but specially there is no morality in abolishing someone’s earnestly gained property but rather brutality and, above all, scientific ignorance.
Earned property? If that property was passed down then he didn’t earn it or if he inherited money then used the money to property then that property he didn’t earn. Let’s say someone saved up money to buy property then yes that property they did earn. But what if they use that property to exploit people what should happen to the property. If I buy a dog that dog is my property what if I abuse the dog? Then the dog is taken away even tho it’s my dog that’s theft is it not? Taking my property is theft. By your logic we should let the owner who abuses his down keep his dog because it’s his property. If u use property to exploit prolongation property should be taken away. But who to give it to? What happens when we take a dog away from an abusive owner? We put them up for sale to by sold to another person who gets the money from the dog? The business the vet we can’t do that either property we can’t put the property up for auction so what do we do with it? We give it to the workers. Same way if u abuse your dog child etc this are given to your relatives. But as I stated giving things to people is wrong as they didn’t earn it so we give it to the workers who workers for the guy and were exploited.
Important to remember that the Socialism that Wilde was fond of was the more anarchist, or Libertarian Socialist, type of Prince Propitkin. That type was against the tyranny of Capital AND State. It's largely forgotten as the Leninist type became dominant and crushed rivals
Juan, why don't you consider asking questions instead of asserting answers? What is property? th-cam.com/video/43Y4Nd0AJcE/w-d-xo.html What is scientific/capitalist ignorance? "Noam Chomsky - Government in the future 1970"
An invaluable read. Way ahead of his time.
This should be widely listened to
A great reading style. You should do more audiobooks. Fingers crossed 🤞
Just as relevant today as it was then...
Are you still active? If so, I'd love for you to read _Why Socialism?_ by Albert Einstein. It's a great essay.
Such a shame this is the only video you posted! I really love your quick reading style!!
Ugh there is a sense of dread hearing this while knowing that oscar lost most of his private property in his lifetime. Truly he had many precognitions of his demise.
based
based
@@Slouch1234 based
Definitely the most elegant theory I’ve come across. Wilde was super based.
Love this! One of my favourite texts, and this reading really does it justice
I love you
This is good but it didn't age well lol his art criticism is brilliant tho
definitely wrong about crime. Crime ramps when you stop enforcing the laws
you're terribly listened.
@@swagtasticpanda make an argument then
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal loaves of bread”.
@@farzadfazeliani3958 cute quote but no substance
Nothing really shows this to be a truth. In fact it shows to be quite the opposite often. The more lax you are, and the more understanding you treat the offenders the less crime sickened a society will be. Crime in the capitalist sense is a bourgeois's way of reenforcing their power on any note, most of it doesn't need to be crime, or wouldn't be under a more equitable system. Most crimes wouldn't be such an issue if society was just more free, equal, and equitable to all people of all lives. We see that most with our crime rates. It skyrockets when class inequality increases. Why would you try to rob your fellow man if he has nothing worth stealing? Aswell capitalism inspires greed and hatred for your fellow man more then anything due to your inherent competition, obviously this will lead to higher crime. In what Wilde puts forward here there would be little need to be harsh on crime if not simply because the cause of most of these crimes will be entirely eliminated. Most crime doesn't go down when it's enforced heavily, it goes down from people not having a reason to. If someone has to steal to live then they will commit crime to live; that's better then dying, right? And if this person is introduced to crime they are exponentially more likely to get more deep into it. Solution? Give the people what they need and not force people to compete with their fellow man.
Quite wrong
I respect Wilde for his work and his person but this must be taken as a thought written by someone who at the time probably lacked the careful revision of an equally bright mind with an opposite perspective. In modern times we have accepted that there is no possible individualism in Socialism but specially there is no morality in abolishing someone’s earnestly gained property but rather brutality and, above all, scientific ignorance.
Earned property? If that property was passed down then he didn’t earn it or if he inherited money then used the money to property then that property he didn’t earn. Let’s say someone saved up money to buy property then yes that property they did earn. But what if they use that property to exploit people what should happen to the property. If I buy a dog that dog is my property what if I abuse the dog? Then the dog is taken away even tho it’s my dog that’s theft is it not? Taking my property is theft. By your logic we should let the owner who abuses his down keep his dog because it’s his property. If u use property to exploit prolongation property should be taken away. But who to give it to? What happens when we take a dog away from an abusive owner? We put them up for sale to by sold to another person who gets the money from the dog? The business the vet we can’t do that either property we can’t put the property up for auction so what do we do with it? We give it to the workers. Same way if u abuse your dog child etc this are given to your relatives. But as I stated giving things to people is wrong as they didn’t earn it so we give it to the workers who workers for the guy and were exploited.
Important to remember that the Socialism that Wilde was fond of was the more anarchist, or Libertarian Socialist, type of Prince Propitkin. That type was against the tyranny of Capital AND State. It's largely forgotten as the Leninist type became dominant and crushed rivals
Juan, why don't you consider asking questions instead of asserting answers?
What is property?
th-cam.com/video/43Y4Nd0AJcE/w-d-xo.html
What is scientific/capitalist ignorance?
"Noam Chomsky - Government in the future 1970"