China: A Look at the Future of Capitalism

[taks]

That is not the fault of socialism. The fault lies in human weakness, greed, and our overall malignant nature.

yes, it is the fault of socialism because it cannot account for demand, which is a direct result of all of those supposed human "weaknesses."

 

i have a friend that i shoot pool with. he grew up in east berlin (well, just outside of there). i asked if it was a big change when the wall came down. his comment: "i no longer had to wait in line for bananas." period. one sentence highlighted the entire problem of socialism: everyone has the same right to every product, and there is no way to control that. you can't raise prices because everyone is supposedly equal (note that prices are based on cost, since there is no profit). raising prices means nobody gets the product. hence, demand goes unchecked and you end up with discrimination based on who gets in line first.

 

capitalism automatically controls this. demand goes up, prices go up. too bad if you cannot afford them. in the end, the average well-being in a capitalist society is MUCH better than that of a socialist society.

 

re: your comment about pollution... hate to burst your bubble, but socialist societies are actually worse because they are much more inefficient. i.e., it takes more work, more labor, more everything to produce the same amount of goods as a capitalist society.

 

taks

[Xard]

taks: Problem still isn't in socialism. We humans just have failed to make it work right.

[Rosbjerg]

Neither of you (Sand or Roshan) seems to have any grasp of what you are actually talking about - or maybe you just choose to be narrowminded to force an argument through?

 

Maybe you would like to point out where I have gone wrong instead of making pointless blanket statements.

 

I was merely being an ass, problem with these kinds of discussion is that people get very black/white in their views.

 

You were looking at Capitalism from a very strict theoritical angle and sticking to that (just to make it clear though, I was doing the same). Which is unfruitfull in the long run, Sand was doing the same with Socialism (well his warped angle at least) and as such it merely became a discussion wether black was better than white - when the two are opposite sides of a spectre. Reality is rather gray in this matter, I just wanted the discussion to take that into account. Besides it rather hard to compare unless you look at the similarities and span out from there.

 

The western world is a mix of the two ideologies, argueably Capitalism is dominant, but that still doesn't mean that we are pure Capitalistic societies.

[Azarkon]

So you are just parroting their opinion? Is this your opinion, or not?

 

I think I went a bit further than the article (since it made no allusion to the "future of capitalism"), but pertaining to the part you quoted, yeah.

[kirottu]

taks: Problem still isn't in socialism. We humans just have failed to make it work right.

 

If human made goverment form doesn

[Sand]

i have a friend that i shoot pool with. he grew up in east berlin (well, just outside of there). i asked if it was a big change when the wall came down. his comment: "i no longer had to wait in line for bananas." period. one sentence highlighted the entire problem of socialism: everyone has the same right to every product, and there is no way to control that. you can't raise prices because everyone is supposedly equal (note that prices are based on cost, since there is no profit). raising prices means nobody gets the product. hence, demand goes unchecked and you end up with discrimination based on who gets in line first.

 

That is why I am for partial socialism on vital industries such as utilities, medical care, and the like and not total socialism. I agree that total socialism is unfeasible but total capitalism just makes the rich richer and the poor goes without. Just because someone can't afford medical or dental insurance their kid has to go without? Sorry, that is a load of bullcrap. A little socialism and a little capitalism mixed in the right way would benefit the greatest amount of people, where the extremes of either will not.

[Azarkon]

On the topic of socialism - Western societies today have many socialist policies, and they seem to work reasonably well in producing the society we have now. Many would argue that China currently has a more extreme form of capitalism than people in the West, with minimum workers' rights and sweatshops in the name of profit. Where would you rather live?

[Sand]

Sweden, but that is beside the point.

[metadigital]

So you are just parroting their opinion? Is this your opinion, or not?

 

I think I went a bit further than the article (since it made no allusion to the "future of capitalism"), but pertaining to the part you quoted, yeah.

The you are guilty of reductio ad absurdum.

[Azarkon]

To make that argument, you'd have to explain your stance Why is it absurd?

Edited April 6, 2007 by Azarkon

[metadigital]

Because you are exaggerating an aspect capitalism in order to make it appear absurd.

This statement:

if Western democracy and capitalism were in charge, things would be alot better in China

is actually true, despite that you framed it so as to discredit it. Because there aren't any sweatshops in Western democracies: we have minimum wage and Unions (and their political parties, like the Labour Party in Westminster governments), so China would enjoy the same benefits.

[Azarkon]

Fine, you got me A poor attempt to stir up controversy, on my part, and Sand actually pointed it out in his first post: democracy and capitalism are two different things. China could benefit from Western democracy, and it could also benefit from capitalism ASSUMING it adopts policies (some might call them socialist) that prevents rampant capitalist exploitation. The problem is that these aspects of capitalism are not transferring over, because Western capitalists are actively working against them. My rationale for posting this is that "China bashing" (and assigning the blame to foreign governments in general) needs to take into account the role of Western capital in China, and that we need to have a clear perspective of what unchecked capitalism, as in this case, entails. Frankly, my latter posts are probably a better summary of what I see as the real issues than the OP.

 

Essentially - if China is the future of capitalism, then we're in for a rough ride. But it's not about blaming the Chinese government - as the article writes, they tried to reform workers' rights, but failed because of corporate demands. So really, the problem lies with big business and the particularly exploitive form of Western capitalism that they represent. Something needs to be done to curtail the clout of multinational corporations on the global level, as you can't depend on them to police themselves. Failing that, we become proof for the Maoists of why Western capitalism is bad.

Edited April 6, 2007 by Azarkon

[Rosbjerg]

or at least that Neo-imperialism is bad..

[Lyric Suite]

Which is more important, Roshan. Freedom or profit? I choose freedom.

 

You can't have freedom when your economy is bunk, but even then, freedom isn't always completely desirable. Western society it's crumbling at an alarming rate exactly because of the excessive obsession with freedom. Duty, obligation and civil conduct are going down the drain and what does that spell for the future? How much decadence and self indulgence can a society withstanding before you start seeing cracks in the system?

Edited April 7, 2007 by Lyric Suite

[Lyric Suite]

I rather be poor, free, and living in a clean evironment than making just enough over the poverty line to live, while wallowing in filth under a yellow sky.

 

Easy, move to an undeveloped country. Wish granted...

[Lyric Suite]

On the topic of socialism - Western societies today have many socialist policies, and they seem to work reasonably well in producing the society we have now.

 

Explain how Political Correctness, Feminism, Multiculturalism and other socialist atrocities are working 'well' within our current social system...

Edited April 7, 2007 by Lyric Suite

[Calax]

Which is more important, Roshan. Freedom or profit? I choose freedom.

 

You can't have freedom when your economy is bunk, but even then, freedom isn't always completely desirable. Western society it's crumbling at an alarming rate exactly because of the excessive obsession with freedom. Duty, obligation and civil conduct are going down the drain and what does that spell for the future? How much decadence and self indulgence can a society withstanding before you start seeing cracks in the system?

now is this just the US system or most of the european systems as well?

[Azarkon]

On the topic of socialism - Western societies today have many socialist policies, and they seem to work reasonably well in producing the society we have now.

 

Explain how Political Correctness, Feminism, Multiculturalism and other socialist atrocities are working 'well' within our current social system...

 

So you'd prefer racism, sexism, and ethnocentrism?

[Lyric Suite]

So you'd prefer racism, sexism, and ethnocentrism?

 

Ha, so you are a racist, a sexist and an ethnocentric unless you swallow cultural socialism? Fascinating.

 

My scant understanding of history seems to point out to the fact racism, sexism and ethnocentrism were already being eliminated before the socialist reconstruction of western culture. Please, feel free to explain what exactly did we gain from adopting that ****...

Edited April 7, 2007 by Lyric Suite

[Lyric Suite]

now is this just the US system or most of the european systems as well?

 

Europe plunged into decadence long before the US, so i think that system has already crumbled a long time ago.

[Azarkon]

So you'd prefer racism, sexism, and ethnocentrism?

 

Ha, so you are a racist, a sexist and an ethnocentric unless you swallow cultural socialism? Fascinating.

 

My scant understanding of history seems to point out to the fact racism, sexism and ethnocentrism were already being eliminated before the socialist reconstruction of western culture. Please, feel free to explain what exactly did we gain from adopting that ****...

 

My scant understanding of history is that socialism refers to an economic, and not a cultural, construct. Political correctness, feminism, and multiculturalism are cultural movements, and thus at a slant with what I was referring to.

 

Labor rights and fair practice is closer to what I'm talking about.

[Sand]

Duty and obligations, Lyric? Duty to what? Obligated to whom? I have a duty to myself, and only obligated to myself. No more and no less. I don't like political correctness all that much but what is wrong with Feminism and Multiculturism? Are you saying that women shouldn't be equal? That they belong in the kitchen and not as equals?

 

What we gain is different ideas, diversity, people being treated as equals instead of being looked at as inferior. If those are not gains to you then you are a lost cause, Lyric.

Edited April 7, 2007 by Sand

[Skynet]

Duty and obligations, Lyric? Duty to what? Obligated to whom? I have a duty to myself, and only obligated to myself. No more and no less.

You say you are obligated only to yourself, yet you support an economic system in which the strong are forced to carry the weak. Interesting.

[Lyric Suite]

My scant understanding of history is that socialism refers to an economic, and not a cultural, construct. Political correctness, feminism, and multiculturalism are cultural movements, and thus at a slant with what I was referring to.

 

The aim of socialism may refer to economic realities but their means of operation are cultural (hence, cultural socialism), and it's only natural that with time this particular branch of Marxism would develop a life of it's own. George Orwell wasn't trying to predict the future (though so far he's been very good at it), he was sending a warning about the dangers of Stalinism. Apparently, nobody was paying attention, cold war and all.

 

Labor rights and fair practice is closer to what I'm talking about.

 

You are forgetting that the working class movement of the 19th century generated socialism, not the other way around...

[Lyric Suite]

Duty and obligations, Lyric? Duty to what? Obligated to whom? I have a duty to myself, and only obligated to myself.

 

Nonsense. Humans are a social species, and as such, our behavior and the expectations of our existence is directly linked to the community

as a whole. Such artificial feelings of selfish egoism are merely a symptom of the malaise which is deteriorating our culture:

 

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/whatis/chap14.htm

 

No more and no less. I don't like political correctness all that much but what is wrong with Feminism and Multiculturism? Are you saying that women shouldn't be equal? That they belong in the kitchen and not as equals?

 

Feminism has nothing to do with equality (what a notion that is. Men and women aren't equal, therefore, the entire premise is beyond absurd). It's a bull****

and misdirected ideology that has done nothing but harm to the health of the family nucleus and has opened the door for more cultural depravity and moral corruption than anybody could have possibly imagined. At it's inception, it was merely a search for equal rights (curiously enough, it all started with women seeking rights for the blacks, and then thinking 'hey, what about us?', which might spell some light to the current obsession of our female dominate culture for equality and fairness, and ironically the inherent inability to do anything about it, at least where it counts).

 

Today, what we have is a bastardization of the so called 'socialist feminism', which, like it's proletarian counterpart has degenerated into social engineering, the so called 'gender feminism':

 

http://www.friesian.com/feminism.htm

 

Also, before whining about gender oppression and the sacrosanct mission of feminism, remember that not all women are happy with the results:

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../cstillwell.DTL

 

Clearly, something is amiss here...

 

What we gain is different ideas, diversity, people being treated as equals instead of being looked at as inferior. If those are not gains to you then you are a lost cause, Lyric.

 

Please. Issues of equality are so entrenched in the thinking of modern people it seems like nothing else matters. Have you considered, for a moment, the reason why our current culture is so remarkably, well, unremarkable, particularly compared with our past achievements? What happen to our great thinkers? What happen to our arts? What happen to the palpable confidence of our ancestors towards the achievements and ideals of our culture? It seems that everywhere you look things are degrading to the lowest level and nobody seems to care, but hey, let's not forget abut the all important issue of the equality of the apes, a standard examples of the 'virtues' of political correctness.

 

Speaking of which:

 

http://members.aol.com/williefank/pc-essay.htm

Edited April 7, 2007 by Lyric Suite