Hacker News Reader

Comment by somewhereoutth | Hacker News Reader

It never ceases to astonish me how the richest country on the planet is still in 'survival mode' where everyone has to justify their claim to, well, anything at all.

In Europe (even as it was largely laid waste after WW2), it is understood that we are all together, and simply by existing we have a right to at least a basic level of living.

Perhaps part of that is that because communism was so close, for so long, it was realised that without addressing the needs of the whole population, Western Europe would also succumb to communism (or indeed fascism again).

View on HN

Which Europe? Plenty of destitution, poverty, far-right inclinations, ultra-nationalism and anti-migrant racism in Europe. (Often against migrants from other countries in Europe.)

ar-right inclinations, ultra-nationalism is far more spreaded in US than just say Germany.

You know there is much more Europe to the east & south of Germany, yes? It's not just the convenient western countries of Germany, France, the Scandinavian countries, and maybe UK; it's also Italy, Spain, Poland, Hungary, Greece, Serbia, Belarus, Ukraine, and let's not forget, Russia.

Still there was no ultra nationalistic EU commission president (as this might comparable to the US president.) This applies also to Spain, Ukraine and UK from your list. I just have to admit, that I didnt thought about Belarus, Russia and Serbia.

I'm just not sure that is true. Have you been seeing what is happening in German politics recently? And Germany is a fairly moderate country all things considered. There are plenty of European countries where 'alt'-right ultranationalism is very prevalent

I am aware of Germany as I live there. I am not sure what you are referring to.

> where everyone has to justify their claim

but why shouldn't that be the case? There's no natural rights to anything, and it's the law of the jungle.

There's a veneer of civility so as not to cause anarchy with people killing each other for some food.

But just because someone exists, doesn't give them any privileges to own anything, except for what they worked for (or get given from parents).

> There's no natural rights to anything, and it's the law of the jungle.

Except the crowning achievement of our civilisation is the realisation that there are natural rights (see UN Declaration of Human Rights, US Constitution etc). Indeed, the Rule of Law is perhaps a greater achievement than democracy, and from a jungle perspective not self evident. The property rights you allude to are also part of this Rule of Law, otherwise stuff would belong to whoever was strong enough to take it!

That's why i call it a veneer.

Just have a look at the blackout of New York https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_blackout_of_1977... , and how much crime it led to, just because the veneer is torn off. People are only civil because they fear the threat of punishment.

As soon as this threat is removed, or is evident that it's unenforceable, you tell me what "natural rights" exist?

Generally speaking, people become uncivil only when under extreme stress (e.g. of poverty). Most people are inherently civil in their nature, hence we have a civilisation that reflects this fact.

Contrast Portugal, with almost no crime, vs the US, with well documented crime problems. Certainly punishments are no harsher in Portugal than the US, if anything the reverse. However in Portugal people aren't as financially stressed as in the US, not least as everyone has access to healthcare, justice, democracy etc regardless of ability to pay.

See also the concept of 'policing by consent' in the UK.

> "but why shouldn't that be the case? [...] so as not to cause anarchy with people killing each other for some food."

I feel like you answered your own question there. It shouldn't be the case because with anarchy everyone loses. You give your sibling some of your birthday cake because if you don't and they throw the cake on the floor in anger, you don't get any of your cake either, and if you do then later on at their birthday they give you their cake. In one case you both lose, in the other case you both gain.

> except for what they worked for (or get given from parents)

Why should they be entitled to this if it's the law of the jungle?

Beavers building a dam aren't entitled to the fruits of their labor.

Being entitled to what you worked for is not a natural right. It's a right granted to you by the state just like any other.

Without the state, someone stronger/better/faster can just come and take it all away.

It's the richest country because everyone is in survival mode and has a strobg pressure to get their head above the water. In socialist euro countries you can go with the flow created by the welfare state.

It’s the richest country because it has tons of natural resources and wasn’t bombed to pieces in WW2

And didn't lose 10-40% of its adult male population.

However, number of movies made extolling your country's sacrifice during WW2 divided by lives your country actually lost? Well, in that statistic, America is truly #1.

South America is ressource rich, hasn't had a major war for more than a century, and yet isn't so rich. Why?

Americans (myself often included) so easily take our insanely beneficial geography and natural resources for granted!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com