Ask me about Communism.

[Zoraptor]

Nice try, but no. Market economy countries aren't the only ones to embark in imperialist military ventures. Do read up on the Soviet Union's interventions in Eastern Europe. I always get a laugh when ideologues write off every single death or instance of human suffering as "the consequences of capitalism". As if somehow such things didn't happen under socialist regimes or even before capitalism existed!

Oh come on, that was clearly aimed at taks' blanket claim that no one has died due to capitalism- clue being that it's the part explicitly quoted in Yuusha's reply. I don't think anyone would argue that history is not replete with examples of countries trying to "save" other ones from "evils" where the cure is as bad as the disease, whether the justification is religion, economic system or whatever, and whether capitalist or not. "We had to destroy the village to save it" springs to mind immediately and exactly as much as the Prague Spring or Afghanistan Pt1, or the Inquisition/ 30 Years War etc for that matter.

 

And when you're done fapping to Chavez' latest anti-imperialist speech, remember to look up his stance regarding military action against Colombia. That peace-loving Bolivarian messiah...

The US made the rod for its own back on that one by screwing up their coup attempt, and Uribe is big enough to know exactly what the consequences would be of jumping into bed with them in a region where they are cordially loathed by most countries for their attempts to save them from the evils of leftists. Everyone knows that if you're going to try and coup a country at least make a decent go of it (see Honduras) and don't do something from amateur hour, 'cos if you do and fail you're just going to convince all the anti US types they were right all along without gaining anything.

 

In any case Chavez is just following established "Cuban Missile" doctrine, with the difference being that no one thinks he's actually going to do anything militarily apart from some clandestine 3rd party support for Uribe's opponents (just make sure that the "proof" he's been doing so isn't some missiles that disappeared during the last US backed military government, because if one does that one ends up looking silly) and a whole lot of political posturing which is, after all, what Chavez is best at.

Edited December 23, 2009 by Zoraptor

[Oblarg]

"Rights" are just a fiction created to justify certain social institutions which are considered valuable. I'm sure that in some other world, people would find drug prohibition (for example) to be absurd and tyrannical, because they consider consumption of drugs a "basic individual right." Yet, curiously, people do not call the United States government a tyranny for its involvement in the drug war.

Always one step behind, aren't you? I'm perfectly aware of your stance on human rights. What I was asking is how modern democracy, an institution grounded on those rights is compatible with a political "philosophy" that necessitates the abolition of said rights. Because, you see, unlike those "other worlds" and alternate historical scenarios you are so fond of, in the real world people don't want socialism. Otherwise, we would have it.

 

 

is about returning your property to the community which created you, facilitated your economic victories, and has provided every single object that you needed to get where you are today.

Heh, I wish I had some "economic victories" to boast of. But the community has only done those things very indirectly. And so, we have taxes, to pay for things nobody can afford individually, like aircraft carriers and nuclear power plants. Another perspective from which socialism is superfluous...

 

 

Lol. Don

[taks]

hahahahahahahahaha....ahem.

what, you don't believe in supply and demand? even socialists understand that one, they just think they can thwart it.

 

never did figure you as a bright one, however.

 

taks

[taks]

Nice strawmanning there, bud. Not enough sweeping generalizations, though. Add a few more in your next post.

so many you couldn't even point them out. hint: simply making claims about someone's logical failures does not make it so. you don't get any points just for using the terms in a sentence.

 

taks

[Lare Kikkeli]

hahahahahahahahaha....ahem.

what, you don't believe in supply and demand? even socialists understand that one, they just think they can thwart it.

 

never did figure you as a bright one, however.

 

taks

 

 

yeah, big business never mistreats its workers...supply and demand.

[Yuusha]

Lol. Don

[Killian Kalthorne]

Without capitalism there is no motivation to better oneself and one's family. If the government takes all that you accomplish why accomplish anything?

[Humodour]

hahahahahahahahaha....ahem.

what, you don't believe in supply and demand? even socialists understand that one, they just think they can thwart it.

 

never did figure you as a bright one, however.

 

taks

 

 

yeah, big business never mistreats its workers...supply and demand.

 

hahahhaha

[I want teh kotor 3]

Capitalism might lead to some people being screwed over, sure, but Communism involves a whole crap-ton of people getting ****ed because of politicians' decisions (Great Leap Foward, anyone?). Also, like Killian said, in any socialist/Communist/whatever system there's no motivation to succeed, because the government will provide everything for you.

 

never did figure you as a bright one, however.

 

taks

 

 

:lol:

[taks]

yeah, big business never mistreats its workers...supply and demand.

and workers can't sue? in a communist society they cannot.

 

the whole point is that companies do NOT intentionally "mistreat" their workers since that would ultimately lead to a lack of workers. you think they do, but cannot offer up any proof of widespread mistreatment. it fits your ideology, therefore it must be true?

 

taks

Edited December 25, 2009 by Tigranes
Basic manners restored

[Lare Kikkeli]

yeah, big business never mistreats its workers...supply and demand.

and workers can't sue? in a communist society they cannot.

 

the whole point is that companies do NOT intentionally "mistreat" their workers since that would ultimately lead to a lack of workers. you think they do, but cannot offer up any proof of widespread mistreatment. it fits your ideology, therefore it must be true?

 

taks

 

heh, i could link you to a ton of articles (nestle, finnish paper companies, shell, diamonds in africa, banana companies etc. etc.) about big business intentionally mistreating their workers, who by the way cannot sue because the countries they live in don't have a working justice system, because they can make more profits by treating their sweat shop workers like poo and because the price of a human life in the 3rd world is less than what you spend a week for groceries.

 

also big business often mistreats its workers in countries that have a working justice system when they think they can get away with it (firing people for joining a union, paying less than the minimum wage, hiring illegals so they dont have to pay extra costs and less wages etc.). there has been many big scandals in finland lately, and i'm sure this is even more widespread in the us. often the workers do sue, but only if they get enough people to sue. a single person cannot sue a big company because the company can to spend millions on on the trial and often just get the case to get postponed so many times that the claimant just gives up due to lack of funds.

 

this thread is honestly hilarious, not once have i said anything positive about communism on these boards yet you people spout all this nonsense about me being a commie. also your view of communism (or moderate socialism, or even centrism) is woefully inaccurate, based on the propaganda i'm sure your head gets filled with since childhood. you're life LoF, only the other side of the coin.

 

i realise that you feel anger towards me taks, since i've pointed out the many inaccurasies and outright stupidities you've posted, but could you please refrain from childish namecalling? i'm sure it's against the board rules anyway.

[Gromnir]

yeah, big business never mistreats its workers...supply and demand.

and workers can't sue? in a communist society they cannot.

 

the whole point is that companies do NOT intentionally "mistreat" their workers since that would ultimately lead to a lack of workers. you think they do, but cannot offer up any proof of widespread mistreatment. it fits your ideology, therefore it must be true?

 

taks

 

 

to be fair, there were widespread mistreatment o' U.S. workers during the depression era. supply and demand, which lof wishes to pretend doesn't exist, did result in some horrendous working conditions for laborers during the depression era. is not that big business were consciously trying to mistreat employees, but if there is a surplus o' labor the motivation for employers to treat their employees well decreases. folks working on Hoover damn wanna complain 'bout the hazardous working conditions? solution: fire anybody that complains. deaths, crippling injuries and disease? so what. nobody is forcing you to work, is they? before work even began on the Hoover an enormous and unsanitary tent city sprang up in the nevada desert as the mere rumor o' jobs led folks to travel hundreds and thousands of miles in hopes of possibly finding employment. it don't make good business sense to invest in the well-being of employees if you can replace current employees at a moment's notice. complete free market, w/o any government intervention, eventual results in conditions that give rise to the marx spectre o' revolution. power corrupts. powerlessness corrupts absolutely. folks who got nothing to lose can, and will, do anything.

 

'course, the communist jargon 'bout workers getting what they deserve is also rubbish for the reasons discussed by many other folks earlier in this thread. the communist paradise is a fantasy that appeals to intellectuals and morons alike, but given the history o' most o' the 20th century, am not sure if any rational person would still embrace such nonsense.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[213374U]

@Zoraptor: fair enough.

 

 

I am, however, saying that capitalism is killing our planet. Why? Because it’s intrinsically and irreparably greed-driven, capitalism works at vicious cross-purposes with public welfare and the common good. Not only does its cruelly exploitative nature inflict great harm on multitudes around the planet, its private-profit obsession undeniably takes lives.

Less rhetoric and more arguments, if you please. Greed is not necessarily bad. From that premise, the rest of the discourse crumbles under its own weight. There's also a lot to be said for and against the "common good", even if we could agree on what that is.

 

And let's not keep recycling the same guilt-inducing trite clich

Edited December 25, 2009 by 213374U

[Oblarg]

If you are so concerned, why don't you trade places with some poor starving African child?

 

Oh boy, out of all the things wrong with that post, this one stood out the most. Do you even think before you type?

 

What does trading places with a starving African child have anything to do with the flaws of capitalism? Hell, it's even irrelevant in the context of attempting to solve world poverty, as it would accomplish absolutely nothing. You still end up with one starving person and one well-off person. It's painfully ironic that you said this directly following a call for an end to appeals to guilt.

Edited December 25, 2009 by Tigranes
Basic Manners II

[213374U]

Again you have missed the point. It's getting ridiculous.

 

Okay, nobody said capitalism is flawless, and I even point that out in my post. But we aren't discussing capitalism, as this is the "Ask me about Communism" thread. But even if we were, communism isn't more justified or less of an unattainable utopy because capitalism is flawed. Two wrongs don't make one right and stuff.

 

"Attempting to solve world poverty"... that's a good one, only you weren't joking. Did you ask Santa for that too, or just world peace?

[Tigranes]

Nobody likes repetitive sequels that beat a dead horse, so I wouldn't like to have Basic Manners IV. Less clobbering each other with clubs, please.

[I want teh kotor 3]

I am, however, saying that capitalism is killing our planet. Why? Because it’s intrinsically and irreparably greed-driven, capitalism works at vicious cross-purposes with public welfare and the common good. Not only does its cruelly exploitative nature inflict great harm on multitudes around the planet, its private-profit obsession undeniably takes lives.

Greed isn't inherently bad. In fact, one could argue, much as I am doing now, that it is the natural result of millenia of Darwinian evolution. The "public welfare and common good" are, much like everything else, relative: at least factory workers have jobs, and are making more money than they would be if not for the influence of capitalism.

 

Capitalists simply refuse to acknowledge the environmentally hazardous impact of its unchecked productive processes and its loyalty to lucrative fossil fuels. Capitalism has become a lethal, worldwide generator of greenhouse gasses. While global warming is very real and tremendously deadly, anti-scientific factions of the capitalist elite refuse to concede its very existence, or that their profiteering priorities are its evident cause while polar bears drown, forests are being destroyed, the sea is being polluted etc…

Global temperatures are cyclical, dammit. Also, where were you a week ago? Inconvenient truth, huh?

 

To those who say, capitalism is the answer, I say look into the faces of the earth’s poor peasants, striving to grow (in an increasingly barren soil) commodities which are not food for themselves but luxuries for the rich, and only if they have grown enough of these, have they some hope of buying something to eat.

 

If you study the expressions of such people, locked in endless, fruitless toil, you will understand that slavery is not an evil that Western civilization has eradicated, rather one which Western civilization has ably disguised and distanced from itself.

Much as it has been for centuries, far before Adam Smith came around.

 

In short: Kill capitalism before it kills you.

No. Capitalism isn't killing me in any way, shape, or form.

Edited December 25, 2009 by I want teh kotor 3

[Killian Kalthorne]

No. Capitalism isn't killing me in any way, shape, or form.

 

It did deny you KotOR 3 and giving you a MMO instead.

[Yuusha]

Less rhetoric and more arguments, if you please. Greed is not necessarily bad. From that premise, the rest of the discourse crumbles under its own weight. There's also a lot to be said for and against the "common good", even if we could agree on what that is.

Well unlike you, we have to live in your so-called

[I want teh kotor 3]

No. Capitalism isn't killing me in any way, shape, or form.

 

It did deny you KotOR 3 and giving you a MMO instead.

 

*cries*

[GreasyDogMeat]

Ah, irony. All this global warming scare is going to bring about tougher regulations on businesses which will = more third world slave labor.

[Killian Kalthorne]

Without Capitalism, Yuusha, and putting in a fully socialistic system why would there be any further advancement in our technology? One of the driving goals for humans is greed, the accumulation of stuff. Without it all we do is just sit like lumps on a log. If the government gives us all that we need, and takes all what we want, then there is no reason to do anything and our civilization and species will stagnant. Yes, capitalism brings conflict, brings out our most cruel and darkest emotions, but it also brings progress and advancement. That alone makes it worthwhile and necessary.

Edited December 25, 2009 by Killian Kalthorne

[Hurlshort]

No. Capitalism isn't killing me in any way, shape, or form.

 

It did deny you KotOR 3 and giving you a MMO instead.

 

*cries*

 

This is awesome

[Zoraptor]

Greed isn't inherently bad. In fact, one could argue, much as I am doing now, that it is the natural result of millenia of Darwinian evolution.

You could argue that, but you would be wrong, at least if you are talking in more than the most basic instinctual level (hoarding/ stealing). "Greed" in the capitalist form is a socially evolved construct related to the development of money and advanced social structures, almost all evidence is that 'default' human behaviour is hieracho-cooperative and based on a "tribal" structure of mutual help and protection rather than a dog-eat-dog struggle of individuals against the world. Greed needs a bunch of socially evolved constructs (typically money, individual ownership, laws to protect said ownership) and a level of economic development above subsistence in order to function. Social evolution does not obey Darwinian rules- "culture" is not coded genetically and like other aspects of "extelligence" is passed on and "mutates" by strictly social means.

 

Ironically, the idea that culture was effectively genetic (~Lamark-ism) was especially popular amongst communists because it meant that if you had good communist parents they would, ipso facto, have good communist children- fortunately people don't really work that way.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Inconvenient truth, huh?

 

Give it a break. The e-mails are not that damning. Although it is true that Gore sometimes distorts data and uses scare tactics.