Sorry, I probably didn't make myself clear.
What I meant was improve the quality of life for our own community, not improve the quality of life for everyone including people from enemy states.
So in practice this would imply that our community (Britain)  should see extra funding for hospitals and schools and pensions etc. in order to increase health, education, and welfare although whilst losing an adequate nuclear defence system.
If then in 50 years time a rogue state wished to terminate the existence of our community, so be it. At least we lived a happier life than they did because they had focussed their efforts in destroying another community rather than on improving their own.
Isn’t this the most moral line of thinking? Of course it’s a radical theory. Nonetheless, is it not credible? Perhaps not, but then please point out how. I can probably already see a flaw in this, though I think it could still be rebutted.
__________________
Neither Nationalist or Socialist: Rationalist Meritocrat
Last edited by Casper : 03-15-2007 at 12:45 AM.
|