this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2023
336 points (93.3% liked)
Greentext
4437 readers
874 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The full quote is
Surely there was no reason to hide the argument that servants and masters are a necessity in advancement of the point you're outsourcing to someone that died over 300 years ago in defence today's economic structure?
We still heed the advices of Adam Smith, Henry George, Karl Marx, etc. What’s so different about an Enlightenment writer?
We don't heed the works of Karl Marx though do we? Even if you are that way politically inclined it's called Postmarxist now. Because Karl Marks was frankly insane.
It's the same reason we don't really pay much attention to anything that Sigmund Freud came up with. All of it has either being subsequently discredited, or was never really taken seriously to begin with.
Noone was citing those figures, but Marx saw the industrial revolution, at least. We take what's relevant, and dismiss what isn't - implying Voltaire was smart, so we should uncritically agree with everything he wrote is unhinged.
Would you rather defend the necessity of the master/servant model, or concede that the argument you outsourced is irrelevant pre-industrial nonsense?