Inside of me there are two wolves - the personal responsibility neoliberal who is annoyed that people don't read the warnings and kill themselves, and the social responsibility communist that understands that it's ridiculous to expect everyone to make an informed decision before doing seemingly trivial things. The communist wolf is beating the shit out of the neoliberal one, don't worry.
"obligation" - check out this word , its not big in Angloida Culture , but its important.
there are certain "obligations" you have to fullfill .. and when you dont ... you lose "coverage"
only the fullfillment of "obligation" comits the other party to fullfill its "obligation" as well.
A Contract commits both Parties .. Dont break it.
I disagree some obligations you are still bound by whatever the other party does. To give a microcosm argument if your wife cheats on you it's still wrong to beat her up.
Killing the romanovs was for the russians a sad necessity as otherwise they would have been weaponised and it was still a great wrong Nicholas and his wife less so but the kids that was actually wrong. It would have been far better to go the Puyi route or raise the children anonymously or something
"§ 241 Para. 1 BGB describes the performance obligations:
By virtue of the obligation, the creditor is entitled to demand performance from the debtor. The performance can also consist of an omission. "
in this case the Injured Party choose "omission" and you may have noticed , it worked very well , the Tsars have not violated any Obligation ever since.
Inside of me there are two wolves - the personal responsibility neoliberal who is annoyed that people don't read the warnings and kill themselves, and the social responsibility communist that understands that it's ridiculous to expect everyone to make an informed decision before doing seemingly trivial things. The communist wolf is beating the shit out of the neoliberal one, don't worry.
Hey this is not a conflict at all , "Personal responibility" is complettly compatible with communism ,.. have you ever heard of "the Wall " ?
actually the only reason that was justifiable was because the ruling class will only give up power by force
na
"obligation" - check out this word , its not big in Angloida Culture , but its important. there are certain "obligations" you have to fullfill .. and when you dont ... you lose "coverage" only the fullfillment of "obligation" comits the other party to fullfill its "obligation" as well. A Contract commits both Parties .. Dont break it.
I disagree some obligations you are still bound by whatever the other party does. To give a microcosm argument if your wife cheats on you it's still wrong to beat her up.
Killing the romanovs was for the russians a sad necessity as otherwise they would have been weaponised and it was still a great wrong Nicholas and his wife less so but the kids that was actually wrong. It would have been far better to go the Puyi route or raise the children anonymously or something
"§ 241 Para. 1 BGB describes the performance obligations:
By virtue of the obligation, the creditor is entitled to demand performance from the debtor. The performance can also consist of an omission. "
in this case the Injured Party choose "omission" and you may have noticed , it worked very well , the Tsars have not violated any Obligation ever since.
that's the most German argument I've ever seen first off so congrats
German law is not morality. Your obligations are much deeper in truth than that law says
Exactly ! 👇
No! Not that kind of personal responsibility!
wolf punching and kicking