The states of Germany and Austria take away a persons purpose because these states are very authoritative and oppressive. Governments shouldn't try to give people a purpose, but they should develop a country via laws that enable or encourage its people to find purpose. Socialism does the opposite, as it's based on the logic of taking away from people who have, and giving to those who don't, which means taking away from those people who found purpose, and giving to those who don't and usually don't seek purpose but instead search for temporarily pleasures like alcohol.
> it's based on the logic of taking away from people who have, and giving to those who don't, which means taking away from those people who found purpose, and giving to those who don't and usually don't seek purpose but instead search for temporarily pleasures like alcohol
I’m with you in your opinion that government shouldn’t try to give people purpose but I think the last part of your argument is an overreach.
You’re conflating purpose with making money. They’re not the same. Counterexample: Vincent van Gogh. His purpose was clearly art but he did not see professional success while alive. If you don’t consider Van Gogh’s purpose to be something like painting or art then I’d suggest you’re not using the word as it is commonly defined.
Also I’d suggest that it’s unfair to paint the poor broadly as not seeking purpose and instead searching for temporary pleasures. I have simultaneously known both an economically struggling person who refrains from drugs and alcohol and a well-to-do person who is a functional alcoholic.
Certainly alcoholism can make people lose money, relationships, etc. But it does not follow that simply abstaining from these things will make one wealthy.
Of course they're not the same, but before people can developer higher spiritual or social purposes they have to develop their material life. For most people, on top of what I just side in the previous sentence, developing their material life itself is a journey that leads them to developing and furthering their social and family life which then leads to a higher spiritual life.
Point being Vincent van Gogh who was "Born into an upper-middle-class family" according to Wiki.
> Also I’d suggest that it’s unfair to paint the poor broadly as not seeking purpose and instead searching for temporary pleasures.
Of course, but I was talking about those poor people who live their lives by becoming dependent on the social states without trying to further their lives. I'm not talking about poor people in general.
