The Robin Hood Complex

[tkubic46]

...............................................

[antaeus]

what happens when the rich self made company types are actually crooks as well..

eg. enron.

[Kiljan Arslan]

I think someone is reading too much ayn rand.

[Georgy Zhukov]

But Robin Hood gave the money to people who were starving. Sure there are many self-made many, but their are also many hungry mouths. Some people work 3 jobs and they can barely afford groceries.

[Kiljan Arslan]

robin hood was returning money to the peope that had been taken by force from them by the private idividuals he was attacking if anything he was dong what one should do.

[Thorn777]

I hear the Social-Darwinists comming at: 1, 2.... Bye

[The Devil's Sergeant]

The Sheriff of Nottingham was a government employee. The rich he was stealing were government tax collectors.

Robin Hood was a tax cutter.

[Manji]

The biggest issue in the story of Robin Hood that is never addressed is how the rich acquired their wealth in the days of Robin Hood. In those days wealth was acquired by force and fraud, and also by divine right. So the entire origin of the wealth that was being stolen by Robin Hood and redistributed to the poor was immoral.

Funny how some things never change. The "rich" as a social caste are still acquiring their wealth either by birthright or force and fraud. That´s not to say some rich people aren't hard working citizens, simply that "being rich" can´t be correlated with being morally good or bad.

If we take a deontological ethic approach to it, then it´s never right to steal, be it from the rich or the poor, good or bad, because stealing is bad in itself from the start.

[veteran hawkeye]

I was born into a rich family, in fact my family has hadwsalth for over 700 years. And you know what? It just means I can contribute more, and give more to people in poverty or starvation. Redistribution of wealth is a good thing IMO. (I wouldn't have to write as many cheques ). Obviously I wouldn't want to lose too much, but I'd happily give away half of what I have at least. I'd much rather save lives than buy a ridiculous car or something.

[Gelgoog]

Forcing people to be charitable kind of defeats the point.

[Zephyrus]

Forcing people to be charitable kind of defeats the point.

The more wealth you have, as long as you can provide the standard of living that allows financial comfort for you and your family, equals the more responsibility for the starving citizens that need to get by. No one is advocating giving a hobo an HDTV with a Wall Street Analyst's earnings. But the rich in society need to contribute their wealth to a pool that will guarantee everyone in their society a place to live in and food to eat. The rest is up to the hobos to procure. Working their way out of that environment should be easy.

[removeduser_487563287433]

In America, for the first time in history, men created wealth with ability, intelligence, and perserverance.

When faced with the history of Plato's Academy, Chaucer and the printing press, Shakespeare, the Silk Road, colonisers and milennia of artisans and merchants, only an American could be so blinded by their national mythology to seriously believe this.

[Ahlerich]

"The Robin Hood Complex"
By Jeremy Vice

It is a story that we learn from a very early age. The story of Robin Hood, the noble thief , who steals from the rich and gives to the poor. As children this story is presented to us a moral ideal. So, as a natural consequence, children grow up to think that the idea of Robin Hood in today's society is, in fact, a moral ideal. There is a fatal flaw in this belief that could go a long way towards shattering "The Robin Hood Complex."
The biggest issue in the story of Robin Hood that is never addressed is how the rich acquired their wealth in the days of Robin Hood. In those days wealth was acquired by force and fraud, and also by divine right. So the entire origin of the wealth that was being stolen by Robin Hood and redistributed to the poor was immoral. So the argument could be made that Robin Hood was actually acting on moral grounds (although that is still questionable). The problem is there is no distinction made in today's society between the origin of wealth in Feudal Europe and the origin of wealth in America.. In America, for the first time in history, men created wealth with ability, intelligence, and perserverance. These businessmen did not violate anyone's rights in order to become wealthy, and all of society benefitted from their achievements. But, our children are never given this distinction and grow up thinking that wealth is a static entity that has always existed, and that modern day Robin Hoods are moral in their actions of "redistributing" wealth.
We need to stand up and clearly denounce "The Robin Hood Complex", because it does not apply to a country of self-made men that earned their wealth by right, not force. In this context, Robin Hood is immoral, and we need to clearly make that distinction. Otherwise, our country will have leaders that consider it a moral imperative to "redistribute" wealth, because they never broke free from that childhood story that created "The Robin Hood Complex."

there is no flaw at all with the general idea of taking from the rich unlawful greedy and giving it to the poor that are getting exploited from the rich. coz thats what the story is about and how children understand it.

simpel as that. of course some rockefellas would like to corrupt this little storys that teach morals and get rid of them so they wont be judged and condemned and it would make it easier for them to exploit the masses.

the nobles in the story where "bad". they did not live up to their duty of providing for their fiefdoms - they just sucked them dry. in the end richard lionheart comes back who is loved by the crowed because he is as noble as his title. if robin hood would rob him to or spent the raised ransom money on hoockers the op would have a point.

I was born into a rich family, in fact my family has hadwsalth for over 700 years. And you know what? It just means I can contribute more, and give more to people in poverty or starvation. Redistribution of wealth is a good thing IMo.

now this is the meaning of noble. the corruption of morals that started in amercia last century and finally arrived in the whole western world is the source of many evils and to a certain degree also the root cause of our global crisis right now.

i often discuss with friends how morals and responsibility are down the drain nowadays. elbow society, greed, take what you can get. this is why there is no politician i d like to vote this year.
willy brandt was a chancelor of germany a couple decades ago. at that time there where morals honorable and therefore still around. he lived his whole life in a small house in hamburg. when asked why he didnt get a big nice mansion he said that would be wrong. he considerd himself as the first employee of the country. he didnt want to take it all and live in luxury. he wanted to live honorable. i hope this mindset grows back in the majority of peoples mind one day.

[Admiral Piett]

Too bad Robin Hood was all B.S.

[Ahlerich]

Too bad Robin Hood was all B.S.

please dont tell your children when they watch it. they wouldnt enjoy it to the same degree anymore i fear

[Admiral Piett]

please dont tell your children when they watch it. they wouldnt enjoy it to the same degree anymore i fear

LOL. I still rather like the cartoon.

As far as where my viewpoint is concerned. I usually take the position of leaving everyone alone. Leave the upper class alone, leave the middle class alone, leave the poor alone. Let them rise and fall due to their own circumstances.

If the gap between rich and middle class is growing, find out what's causing it. Fix the problem. Don't punish a class of people needlessly.

[Ragabash]

Moved to Political Academy.

[Ahlerich]

now i dont wanna smart ass around here but i think this belongs to the ethos and morals mudpit

[Dunecat]

"The Robin Hood Complex"
By Jeremy Vice

It is a story that we learn from a very early age. The story of Robin Hood, the noble thief , who steals from the rich and gives to the poor. As children this story is presented to us a moral ideal. So, as a natural consequence, children grow up to think that the idea of Robin Hood in today's society is, in fact, a moral ideal. There is a fatal flaw in this belief that could go a long way towards shattering "The Robin Hood Complex."
The biggest issue in the story of Robin Hood that is never addressed is how the rich acquired their wealth in the days of Robin Hood. In those days wealth was acquired by force and fraud, and also by divine right. So the entire origin of the wealth that was being stolen by Robin Hood and redistributed to the poor was immoral. So the argument could be made that Robin Hood was actually acting on moral grounds (although that is still questionable). The problem is there is no distinction made in today's society between the origin of wealth in Feudal Europe and the origin of wealth in America.. In America, for the first time in history, men created wealth with ability, intelligence, and perserverance. These businessmen did not violate anyone's rights in order to become wealthy, and all of society benefitted from their achievements. But, our children are never given this distinction and grow up thinking that wealth is a static entity that has always existed, and that modern day Robin Hoods are moral in their actions of "redistributing" wealth.
We need to stand up and clearly denounce "The Robin Hood Complex", because it does not apply to a country of self-made men that earned their wealth by right, not force. In this context, Robin Hood is immoral, and we need to clearly make that distinction. Otherwise, our country will have leaders that consider it a moral imperative to "redistribute" wealth, because they never broke free from that childhood story that created "The Robin Hood Complex."

I hope you never end up in the way of the law and elites; you will be utterly broken.

I cannot believe you have ever been the receiver of elitist injustice and are still able to praise them. It's not a matter of "left" or "right"; it's a matter of naivete to make saints of the wealthy.

Any person who holds money as their God should have their ownership of said wealth called into question. Do they rightly deserve such prosperity? Do the poor deserve access to what is selfishly denied them?

[IrishHitman]

In America, for the first time in history, men created wealth with ability, intelligence, and perserverance.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

May I refer you to European history:
The Roman Empire, urbanised, highly advanced trade system.
The Renaissance, invention of the bourse (stock exchange), the eve of modern banking, the rebirth of large scale interdependent trade.

Take your head out of that massive hole you're sporting at the bottom of your back.

I hope you never end up in the way of the law and elites; you will be utterly broken.

I hope he does, what a revelation that would be for him...