Non-consequentialist ethics

1493879667700

(what that particular headline means is “the jews need 6 million people without debt, to whom they can float loans at high interest for stupid things, so they can float their ponzi scheme for another 10 years”)

I visited a friend of mine recently, and we ended up discussing the way Sweden is committing suicide. He claims that their ethical framework is non-consequentialist, and then proceeded to explain what that was. I’m usually not the smartest man in any room, but from what I gathered that means that they have a cop-out set of morals that allow them to disregard the ramifications of actions and policies if those actions go against certain self-defined non-negotiable imperatives.

This seems to me to be the essence of SJW ideology.
>”You must save the refugees, even if it means destroying your own way of life.”
>”You must fulfill racial and sexual quotas in contradiction to merit basis, because to do other wise would leave women and certain minorities behind.”

I did a little bit of research on non-consequentialism and from what I understand it has roots in Kantianism.

just posting a couple articles from national review that touch on this topic

No one wishes to discuss candidly that universities are no longer free bastions of inquiry but are descending into would-be boot camps to train progressive shock troops. Careers, reputations, and lots of money are invested in stifling free expression, a project predicated on changing the nature of students, the curricula, and the very atmosphere of the traditional university. The predicable result is again linguistic subterfuge. If unprepared students are frustrated that special admittance does not de facto equate to college success or graduation, the university must make the necessary Animal Farm–like adjustments. Segregation by race and gender becomes “safe spaces.” Ancient stress, the stuff of cramming for finals and paper deadlines, gets embedded into politics, as snowflakes are “traumatized” by a culturally appropriated earring or a gendered pronoun. Free speech that can be challenging and liberate young minds becomes “hate speech” and is banned. Odious censorship is redefined as mere “trigger warnings.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447231/why-progressives-lie-leftist-agenda-requires-deception

Non-consequentialist ethics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s