Accountant's Utopia Philosophy

[Accountant]

If you consider that the actions of a monster,

None of this is action. It's all talk.

Advocating for certain things is considered an action.

[Accountant]

I think Accountant's opinion would change very quickly if he was subjected to anything even close to what the slaves were subjected to

I disagree. You are misguided if you think what is right changes based on something as useless as personal circumstances.

[Accountant]

Breaking laws that turn a person into property is good. Calling you a monster for thinking otherwise is wrong, because monsters are intimidating. You're just gross.

Gross, monster, whatever. You can call me whatever you like. I know I am correct.

Breaking laws that turn a person into property is bad. Slavery is evil, but anarchy is worse.

[Accountant]

It is unacceptable for a person to value their own wants above that of society's, no matter how justified those wants are. If their want is to be free of slavery, and society's want is to protect the sanctity of the law the only choice, is thus to fight for their freedom in a way that does not violate the sanctity of law.

Shaziro: Here is a counter question for you. Why do you think a slave has the right to oppose the good of society by legitimizing the breaking of laws?

[Shaziro]

You aren't correct. You're a child who can't accept when they're wrong and wants to live in their own fantasy world while expecting everyone else to feed into the delusions. It is never going to happen. Grow up.

[Accountant]

Don't change the subject. Even if you think the utopia is a fantasy, the problem of slaves escaping is one that is very real and rooted in a "real" issue. It is not a hypothetical; it is a legitimate moral question. Thus, the question remains. Why do you think that the good of society should be trumped by the good of the few?

[Shaziro]

I'm not changing the subject. I'm saying that you're wrong. Grow up.

[Accountant]

It is unacceptable for a person to value their own wants above that of society's, no matter how justified those wants are. If their want is to be free of slavery, and society's want is to protect the sanctity of the law the only choice, is thus to fight for their freedom in a way that does not violate the sanctity of law.

Shaziro: Here is a counter question for you. Why do you think a slave has the right to oppose the good of society by legitimizing the breaking of laws?

Don't run away, now~

[Accountant]

Come on, Shaziro. Plant your feet, look me in the eye, and give me a 500 word post about why you're absolutely right, a slave running away is the height of righteousness, and I am absolutely and completely wrong. Act like a real human being with real ideals.

[MarioManiac4]

i state allegiance to the ideal path

[Not_Mafia]

Accountant, no one believes that if you were enslaved, raped, tortured and mutilated that you would just accept it

[Accountant]

Accountant, no one believes that if you were enslaved, raped, tortured and mutilated that you would just accept it

If you do not believe it, I can't make you believe it. But I can definitely say that I would accept it and pursue only legitimate avenues for freeing slaves, such as legal appeals.

I don't feel a need to prove anything to you. Inside my heart, I know for sure that I would. And that is all I need. I would never sabotage all of society due to my own selfish needs.

[Shaziro]

I've said, several times, that a slave escaping slavery helps society rather than detriments it. Slavery is a detrimental-to-society system. Killing its legitimacy is good for society. This should be obvious. Drop your smugness and your superiority act. Get over yourself. Go outside. Grow up.

[Annadog40]

So the utopia is a selfish need?

[Not_Mafia]

Okay let me indulge this bullshit for a moment

Slave owners were violating the constitution, which is the document that sets out people's rights and the laws that can or cannot be enacted, it's the document that sets out the order of the United States. The slave owners were promoting disorderliness by acting unconstitutionally, just like the correct path imposes itself on logic as it is above logic, the constitution imposes itself on any laws passed as it is above laws, so the slaves were imposing order and combating the disorderliness brought about by the slave owners.

[Accountant]

I've said, several times, that a slave escaping slavery helps society rather than detriments it. Slavery is a detrimental-to-society system. Killing its legitimacy is good for society. This should be obvious. Drop your smugness and your superiority act. Get over yourself. Go outside. Grow up.

I agree that killing the legitimacy of slavery is great. But the slave also kills the legitimacy of following the law in general. A law that is not followed to the absolute letter in all respects is worthless. It is known as the "law", not the "suggestions" or the "general guidelines".

In this case, I would take a society with a strong rule of law and slavery over a society with a weakened rule of law and no slavery. That is why I am always quite upset every time someone criticized the police. If you want to criticize the police, file a complaint. Venting your anger in public delegitimizes the authority of the police force.

So you see, Shaziro, this slave escapee thinks they are helping society by fighting slavery. I cannot say their intentions are bad. But if they bothered to look beyond the short term consequences, they'd see that the sort of culture and attitude and stance towards the law that they are developing is actually bad and horrifying. Your view is only such due to extreme short-sightedness - in the long term, it's better for slaves to end slavery while preserving the moral high ground. They can't do that if they are a bunch of criminals.

Now, let's address your other statements. You ask me to drop my smug and superior act. Oh, but that is impossible, Shaziro. I assure you, my smugness and superiority are very, very real. They stem from the absolute knowledge that I am the most morally righteous person in the world. It is most certainly not an act. It is not as though I think inside "I am not righteous", but only pretend to be righteous.

You ask me to get over myself. That means to stop being conceited or pretentious. Well, that, again, is impossible. My views and attitude stem not from vanity but from the sheer unassailable knowledge that I am completely correct.

You tell me to go outside. I decline. I find the inside far more appealing. Specifically, the inside of my mind. As we speak, I am sitting on a cloud in the utopia, observing the land that I rule below. I suppose, then, this should count as outside, since I am outdoors! Haha. Well, if that is what you mean, I have no objection to being told to go outside.

Finally, you tell me to grow up. Regrettably, I have no wish to commit suicide. Therefore, I must decline your request.

[MarioManiac4]

why is anarchy worse than people being abused
tell me why the "correct path" says this

[Accountant]

Okay let me indulge this bullshit for a moment

Slave owners were violating the constitution, which is the document that sets out people's rights and the laws that can or cannot be enacted, it's the document that sets out the order of the United States. The slave owners were promoting disorderliness by acting unconstitutionally, just like the correct path imposes itself on logic as it is above logic, the constitution imposes itself on any laws passed as it is above laws, so the slaves were imposing order and combating the disorderliness brought about by the slave owners.

I agree completely about the constitution. I am no expert on constitutional law, but it is clear to me that as flawed as it is, if it bans slavery, then the slave owners were nothing but rebel curs. There is a need to get rid of them.

However... what makes a slave better than a slave owner? It's due to the fact that the owner is the sinner and the slave is innocent. But if the slave escapes, suddenly the slave becomes a sinner as well. That is no good. The slave will have stooped to the level of the owner. They will have, in an attempt to stop the slave owners, accidentally become monsters themselves. Why, it is for the slaves' own good that I assert that they must not escape. I wish to prevent them from turning into monsters and criminals. Remember, the laws were passed by the United States Congress, and are therefore legitimate. Of course, if it directly goes against the constitution, it may be ignored, but the constitution does not say "you must escape". The slave has a chance to follow both sets of laws(constitution and law), and must do so rather than ignoring one.

So! Who will bring the rogue masters to task? Who will perform the duty of enforcing the constitution and executing the disgusting monsters who take slaves? It is none other than the people who are granted authority on the level of the law and act as the enforcers of the law. This is none other than the government, which enforces its rule through military might. Indeed, this was what happened, with the Union, righteous defenders of justice that they were, striking down the villainous confederation and freeing the slaves, who remained all the more righteous for their ability to respect the law, even if it is an evil one. These slaves are the most respectful and morally pure of all, and therefore, them being saved was definitely inevitable.

[Shaziro]

I've said, several times, that a slave escaping slavery helps society rather than detriments it. Slavery is a detrimental-to-society system. Killing its legitimacy is good for society. This should be obvious. Drop your smugness and your superiority act. Get over yourself. Go outside. Grow up.

I agree that killing the legitimacy of slavery is great. But the slave also kills the legitimacy of following the law in general. A law that is not followed to the absolute letter in all respects is worthless. It is known as the "law", not the "suggestions" or the "general guidelines".

Wrong. Drop your smugness and your superiority act. Get over yourself. Go outside. Grow up.

[MarioManiac4]

being a criminal is better than being subjected to torture because escaping hurts nobody. one person escaping does not mean law and order will fall.
law is the flawed assertions of humans. we must protest against laws we feel are incorrect because if the movement gains enough traction it means people will generally agree on this and therefore it should be the enforced law.

[Accountant]

I just worded it a little confusingly, so it boils down to this. You should follow as many laws as you can, without thinking of your own desires. The slaves could follow the law of "constitution" and the law of "congress", and so had to adhere to both. The governors could not - they cannot follow the law of the constitution saying not to enslave and also the law of the congress saying that they must. That is why I assert that the governors are the evil ones. Indeed, it is

them

who were obliged to break the law and allow slaves to escape. I tell you this: any governor who tried to enforce the law about slaves escaping, who did not free those who were enslaved and allow them to escape in direct violation of the law, is evil. However, any slave who tried to escape is also evil.

[Accountant]

why is anarchy worse than people being abused
tell me why the "correct path" says this

The correct path holds that order is more important than ephemeral human "wellbeing".

[MarioManiac4]

why is anarchy worse than people being abused
tell me why the "correct path" says this

I hold that order is more important than ephemeral human "wellbeing".

So why is this a moral truth?

I think that slavery in all of its forms is morally wrong because it subjects many humans to pain and suffering for another's enjoyment. Something written on a piece of paper could never outdo that.

[Accountant]

being a criminal is better than being subjected to torture because escaping hurts nobody. one person escaping does not mean law and order will fall.
law is the flawed assertions of humans. we must protest against laws we feel are incorrect because if the movement gains enough traction it means people will generally agree on this and therefore it should be the enforced law.

I am not saying that one person escaping means law and order will fall. I am saying that that person clearly values their own self over the law. That is morally wrong, and that attitude is a detriment to society.

The law is indeed flawed in many ways, and you are right that we must destroy laws that are wrong. But there are right ways of destroying a law and wrong ways of destroying a law. Destroy it by striking the laws from the books, by convincing congress that slavery is wrong. These are the right ways of stopping slavery. Don't you agree?

[Accountant]

why is anarchy worse than people being abused
tell me why the "correct path" says this

I hold that order is more important than ephemeral human "wellbeing".

So why is this a moral truth?

I think that slavery in all of its forms is morally wrong because it subjects many humans to pain and suffering for another's enjoyment. Something written on a piece of paper could never outdo that.

Why is it a moral truth? I am quite confused by the question. It's said by the correct path, so it necessarily must br a moral truth.

I agree that slavery is morally wrong. I disagree that something written on a piece of paper cannot outdo that. How do I know? Well, because the correct path tells me: things written on certain pieces of paper in certain ways are called laws, and laws outdo many things, including the calculation of wellbeing.