[Aeon135]

Liberalism

Revolutionary: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Those are unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: As a general rule, if we want to get rid of an effect, then we have to get rid of the cause of that effect.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary. Then we need to get rid of capitalism.
Liberal: Hold on there, you were fine up until that last step. Let's not get ridiculous. There's no need to become extremists. We don't want to topple all of civilization. We don't want to call for the utter destruction of all that is decent.

[Chet Ruminski]

Aeon135, on 30 July 2010 - 01:48 AM, said:

Liberalism

Revolutionary: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Those are unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: As a general rule, if we want to get rid of an effect, then we have to get rid of the cause of that effect.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary. Then we need to get rid of capitalism.
Liberal: Hold on there, you were fine up until that last step. Let's not get ridiculous. There's no need to become extremists. We don't want to topple all of civilization. We don't want to call for the utter destruction of all that is decent.

Bystander: Tax capitalism to pay for its right to exist and make money. It is possible to repair a broken car instead of junking it. It would be easier to tax capitalism than to eradicate it.

But in collective bargaining you have a point. At the threat of extinction concessions can be gained.

Capitalism is efficient. Getting rid of capitalism would cause deaths, destruction and mayhem.
Capitalism may not be fair or equitable or humanitarian but it is efficient. It juts needs to be taxed into a human rights provider.

Get the money out of the steel fisted grip of the rich and make them spend it. Then there would be jobs and unions and equity.


Money has to be spent to do any good.

This post has been edited by Chet Ruminski: 30 July 2010 - 11:12 AM

[Chet Ruminski]

But you have to have a base, support, longterm plan and charismatic leaders. Being right means nothing in this world.

And the big one HUNGER

If they keep piling taxes on the poor like the current trend here in the USA that is not far off.

Keep this in mind. Every young revolutionary thinks they are the first revolutionary.

This post has been edited by Chet Ruminski: 30 July 2010 - 11:38 AM

[Doppelganger]

Main problem, Aeon, is that capitalism literally runs the world right now.

If all of humanity was on a boat (with no land in sight) that caused mass mayhem, destruction, pollution, and misery - call it Pandora's Boat, I suppose - everyone on the boat would probably be able to agree that the effects of the boat would be bad.

And very few of them would want to sink the boat.

This post has been edited by Doppelganger: 30 July 2010 - 11:28 AM

[Chet Ruminski]

Doppelganger, on 30 July 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:

Main problem, Aeon, is that capitalism literally runs the world right now.

If all of humanity was on a boat (with no land in sight) that caused mass mayhem, destruction, pollution, and misery - call it Pandora's Boat, I suppose - everyone on the boat would probably be able to agree that the effects of the boat would be bad.

And very few of them would want to sink the boat.

And of the small group that would agree with you there is even a smaller group in the group that you want to help that would support you.

[Theravenseldon]

Aeon135, on 30 July 2010 - 02:48 AM, said:

Liberalism

Revolutionary: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Those are unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: As a general rule, if we want to get rid of an effect, then we have to get rid of the cause of that effect.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary. Then we need to get rid of capitalism.
Liberal: Hold on there, you were fine up until that last step. Let's not get ridiculous. There's no need to become extremists. We don't want to topple all of civilization. We don't want to call for the utter destruction of all that is decent.

Let's change this around a teeny bit:

Nutjob: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Intelligent Person: No,causes of poverty are myriad and it is a continual problem in human societies.
NutJob: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Intelligent Person: Yes a recession is caused when the actual market and the current capital distribution are not aligned-i.e. when there is a huge glut of expensive houses being sold to people who can't afford them in the long term. While problematic, it's the most efficient method of capital distribution known so far.
NutJob: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Intelligent Person: No that's caused by humanity's nature. It's observable in every human society in history.
NutJob: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Intelligent Person: No, the causes of racism are many and while economic factors do sometimes exist, this is more a symptom then a cause
NutJob: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Intelligent Person: No that is industry-that which enables us to live in a way that kings 500 years ago couldn't have dreamed of.
NutJob: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Intelligent Person: Nope-that's people-their corrupted regardless of the situation.
NutJob: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Intelligent Person: Not so far no
Nut Job: Those are unpleasant effects.
Intelligent Person: Those are unpleasent parts of life.
NutJob: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Intelligent Person: It would be nice. We've made a lot of progress in doing so in the last 400 years-most of them in the last 200 years..
NutJob: As a general rule, if we want to get rid of an effect, then we have to get rid of the cause of that effect.
Intelligent Person: Well yes-but you've identifeid a lot of problems with a lot of effects
NutJob:. Then we need to get rid of capitalism.
Intelligent Person: That isn't the cause for most of the problems you just listed-why would we get rid of something that has so dramatically helped improve the human condition?
NutJob: Because I'm angry and I don't things through?
Intelligent Person: Glad you know that-I'm going to work now.

This post has been edited by Theravenseldon: 30 July 2010 - 12:28 PM

[Doppelganger]

Chet Ruminski, on 30 July 2010 - 12:57 PM, said:

Doppelganger, on 30 July 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:

Main problem, Aeon, is that capitalism literally runs the world right now.

If all of humanity was on a boat (with no land in sight) that caused mass mayhem, destruction, pollution, and misery - call it Pandora's Boat, I suppose - everyone on the boat would probably be able to agree that the effects of the boat would be bad.

And very few of them would want to sink the boat.

And of the small group that would agree with you there is even a smaller group in the group that you want to help that would support you.

You're making a number of assumptions here, Chet.

First off, what would they be helping me to do? Did I ever say I support capitalism or believe it's a good thing?

Getting rid of the 'boat' requires out of the box thinking and being able to convince people that there are working solutions to the problem. It doesn't matter how much you acknowledge that something is a problem if people believe that the alternative is mass mayhem and chaos - because you'll never be able to convince them to try anything else if whatever you're proposing isn't intuitive enough to seem like a sensible solution to the problem.

Second, how in the world are you going to pretend that the number of people who believe our society is dependent on the tenets of capitalism is 'small'? This seems like a pretty obvious fact to me, and one which most reasonable people would agree upon.

This post has been edited by Doppelganger: 30 July 2010 - 12:10 PM

[Theravenseldon]

Doppelganger, on 30 July 2010 - 01:07 PM, said:

Chet Ruminski, on 30 July 2010 - 12:57 PM, said:

Doppelganger, on 30 July 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:

Main problem, Aeon, is that capitalism literally runs the world right now.

If all of humanity was on a boat (with no land in sight) that caused mass mayhem, destruction, pollution, and misery - call it Pandora's Boat, I suppose - everyone on the boat would probably be able to agree that the effects of the boat would be bad.

And very few of them would want to sink the boat.

And of the small group that would agree with you there is even a smaller group in the group that you want to help that would support you.

You're making a number of assumptions here, Chet.

First off, what would they be helping me to do? Did I ever say I support capitalism or believe it's a good thing?

Getting rid of the 'boat' requires out of the box thinking and being able to convince people that there are working solutions to the problem. It doesn't matter how much you acknowledge that something is a problem if people believe that the alternative is mass mayhem and chaos - because you'll never be able to convince them to try anything else if whatever you're proposing isn't intuitive enough to seem like a sensible solution to the problem.

Second, how in the world are you going to pretend that the number of people who believe our society is dependent on the tenets of capitalism is 'small'? This seems like a pretty obvious fact to me, and one which most reasonable people would agree upon.

I suspect Chet was aiming his post at Aeon.

[Doppelganger]

Theravenseldon, on 30 July 2010 - 01:29 PM, said:

Doppelganger, on 30 July 2010 - 01:07 PM, said:

Chet Ruminski, on 30 July 2010 - 12:57 PM, said:

Doppelganger, on 30 July 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:

Main problem, Aeon, is that capitalism literally runs the world right now.

If all of humanity was on a boat (with no land in sight) that caused mass mayhem, destruction, pollution, and misery - call it Pandora's Boat, I suppose - everyone on the boat would probably be able to agree that the effects of the boat would be bad.

And very few of them would want to sink the boat.

And of the small group that would agree with you there is even a smaller group in the group that you want to help that would support you.

You're making a number of assumptions here, Chet.

First off, what would they be helping me to do? Did I ever say I support capitalism or believe it's a good thing?

Getting rid of the 'boat' requires out of the box thinking and being able to convince people that there are working solutions to the problem. It doesn't matter how much you acknowledge that something is a problem if people believe that the alternative is mass mayhem and chaos - because you'll never be able to convince them to try anything else if whatever you're proposing isn't intuitive enough to seem like a sensible solution to the problem.

Second, how in the world are you going to pretend that the number of people who believe our society is dependent on the tenets of capitalism is 'small'? This seems like a pretty obvious fact to me, and one which most reasonable people would agree upon.

I suspect Chet was aiming his post at Aeon.

Whoops! Thanks for pointing that out, raven. Makes more sense now.

[hi_]

Revolutionary: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Those are unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Liberal: No.

[Theravenseldon]

hi_, on 30 July 2010 - 03:51 PM, said:

Revolutionary: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Those are unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Liberal: No.

That's just silly. If we were able to we would eliminate those unpleasant effects. We can't because we are unable or are able to at a cost that we cannot bear.

[hi_]

I wouldn't want to eliminate social inequality raven, just keep it within certain limits.

[Chet Ruminski]

Doppelganger, on 30 July 2010 - 12:07 PM, said:

Chet Ruminski, on 30 July 2010 - 12:57 PM, said:

Doppelganger, on 30 July 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:

Main problem, Aeon, is that capitalism literally runs the world right now.

If all of humanity was on a boat (with no land in sight) that caused mass mayhem, destruction, pollution, and misery - call it Pandora's Boat, I suppose - everyone on the boat would probably be able to agree that the effects of the boat would be bad.

And very few of them would want to sink the boat.

And of the small group that would agree with you there is even a smaller group in the group that you want to help that would support you.

You're making a number of assumptions here, Chet.

First off, what would they be helping me to do? Did I ever say I support capitalism or believe it's a good thing?

Getting rid of the 'boat' requires out of the box thinking and being able to convince people that there are working solutions to the problem. It doesn't matter how much you acknowledge that something is a problem if people believe that the alternative is mass mayhem and chaos - because you'll never be able to convince them to try anything else if whatever you're proposing isn't intuitive enough to seem like a sensible solution to the problem.

Second, how in the world are you going to pretend that the number of people who believe our society is dependent on the tenets of capitalism is 'small'? This seems like a pretty obvious fact to me, and one which most reasonable people would agree upon.

My mistake, I was answering Aeon and clicked on your post instead of his. I am in total agreement with what you said. I usually am working on two computers so that I can see what the continuity or the conversation is and I lost track and put my post in response to yours instead of Aeon's. Sorry. Capitalism is a workable system in need of a new board of directors.

[Theravenseldon]

hi_, on 30 July 2010 - 04:33 PM, said:

I wouldn't want to eliminate social inequality raven, just keep it within certain limits.

If it were possible you would .

[Mark]

Theravenseldon, on 30 July 2010 - 12:03 PM, said:

Aeon135, on 30 July 2010 - 02:48 AM, said:

Liberalism

Revolutionary: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Those are unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: As a general rule, if we want to get rid of an effect, then we have to get rid of the cause of that effect.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary. Then we need to get rid of capitalism.
Liberal: Hold on there, you were fine up until that last step. Let's not get ridiculous. There's no need to become extremists. We don't want to topple all of civilization. We don't want to call for the utter destruction of all that is decent.

Let's change this around a teeny bit:

Nutjob: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Intelligent Person: No,causes of poverty are myriad and it is a continual problem in human societies.
NutJob: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Intelligent Person: Yes a recession is caused when the actual market and the current capital distribution are not aligned-i.e. when there is a huge glut of expensive houses being sold to people who can't afford them in the long term. While problematic, it's the most efficient method of capital distribution known so far.
NutJob: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Intelligent Person: No that's caused by humanity's nature. It's observable in every human society in history.
NutJob: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Intelligent Person: No, the causes of racism are many and while economic factors do sometimes exist, this is more a symptom then a cause
NutJob: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Intelligent Person: No that is industry-that which enables us to live in a way that kings 500 years ago couldn't have dreamed of.
NutJob: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Intelligent Person: Nope-that's people-their corrupted regardless of the situation.
NutJob: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Intelligent Person: Not so far no
Nut Job: Those are unpleasant effects.
Intelligent Person: Those are unpleasent parts of life.
NutJob: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Intelligent Person: It would be nice. We've made a lot of progress in doing so in the last 400 years-most of them in the last 200 years..
NutJob: As a general rule, if we want to get rid of an effect, then we have to get rid of the cause of that effect.
Intelligent Person: Well yes-but you've identifeid a lot of problems with a lot of effects
NutJob:. Then we need to get rid of capitalism.
Intelligent Person: That isn't the cause for most of the problems you just listed-why would we get rid of something that has so dramatically helped improve the human condition?
NutJob: Because I'm angry and I don't things through?
Intelligent Person: Glad you know that-I'm going to work now.

Raven, I have known you a good long time now. And I have been very impressed with the way you have "grown" over the years. You ain't a rookie anymore.

Kudo's to you.

Mark

[chronosfirex2000]

Aeon135, on 29 July 2010 - 11:48 PM, said:

Liberalism

Revolutionary: Then you agree that the capitalism causes poverty?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And you agree that capitalism causes economic cycles and recessions?
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And that capitalism causes wars and militarism.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes racial discrimination.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism also causes air and water pollution.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Capitalism causes many cases of fraud and corruption.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: And many other social problems that we have considered.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: Those are unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: We want to eliminate unpleasant effects.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary: As a general rule, if we want to get rid of an effect, then we have to get rid of the cause of that effect.
Liberal: Yes.
Revolutionary. Then we need to get rid of capitalism.
Liberal: Hold on there, you were fine up until that last step. Let's not get ridiculous. There's no need to become extremists. We don't want to topple all of civilization. We don't want to call for the utter destruction of all that is decent.

Most Liberals, whether American or European believe that capitalism is the best of all possible crappy options concerning the basis for economic activity. So your example doesn't really make any sense.

I am a strong support of the free markets, I also believe in capitalism (if it's not of the fascist persuasion) and I admit that capitalism won't solve all the worlds problems, produce economic equality and has a host of undesired side effects.

You always speak of some type of Utopian society totally based on a theoretical idea you have in your head. The problem is that what you have proposed is totally unrealistic anytime soon and advocates a revolution which can easily be manipulated by tyrants with power. I believe anarcho-communism and relative ideas can work on a very small scale where all of the members consent but what you advocate is some kind of syndicalism where your ideas are by and large put in place across the globe...six billion people consenting to try your system. Ain't gonna happen bud.

[Second_AoJ]

According to Raven's logic, we should praise feudalism since the average living standard of the peasant is higher in 1400 A.D. than it was in 700 A.D.

How is neoliberalism working out for workers in Nigeria?

[Aeon135]

you all took this way to seriously.

[Aeon135]

chronosfirex2000, on 31 July 2010 - 01:48 AM, said:

Most Liberals, whether American or European believe that capitalism is the best of all possible crappy options concerning the basis for economic activity.

yes, I know, don't take it seriously.

I am a strong support of the free markets, I also believe in capitalism (if it's not of the fascist persuasion) and I admit that capitalism won't solve all the worlds problems, produce economic equality and has a host of undesired side effects.

Quote

You always speak of some type of Utopian society totally based on a theoretical idea you have in your head. The problem is that what you have proposed is totally unrealistic anytime soon

yes, I know, because people don't want it, when it's wanted then it is reasonable.

Quote

and advocates a revolution which can easily be manipulated by tyrants with power.

That's never been the case in the past, because anarchist revolutions are leaderless, making it difficult to take it over. They have never had a leader and the problem never came true in the 5 revolutions of anarchism.
3 if you want to be more purist.

Quote

I believe anarcho-communism and relative ideas can work on a very small scale where all of the members consent but what you advocate is some kind of syndicalism where your ideas are by and large put in place across the globe

No, again, chrono, all your critcisms really don't seem to apply to me. It is only meant for those who consent, the idea is to have as many people as possible to consent, in spain it was 3 million or so, in Italy in 1920 is was up to 5 million, that no so small scale, yet all those people supported anarchism.
The whole planet would be ideal, but people should be able to choose tyranny.

We find it hard to look at anarchism today and say people will ever care about it, but anarchism once had the support and consent of millions.
Chaos, leaders propping up, tyranny of the majority, inefficiency, none of these problems affected those Italians, it was outside states and war which did, the same applies to the Shinmin anarchists (who were also the millions) the Ukranians, the Zapatistas (though they survived there war).

Quote

You always speak of some type of Utopian society totally based on a theoretical idea you have in your head

Tell those millions it was only a theoretical idea in there heads, not something they actualy got to live in.

I'd also point out that when you say you support "capitalism" and "Capitalism" is the only workable system, you don't actually mean "the free market" do you?

why do all my threads immidiatly become something to do with anarhcism?
I have other beliefs

This post has been edited by Aeon135: 30 July 2010 - 10:28 PM

[Theravenseldon]

Second_AoJ, on 30 July 2010 - 10:19 PM, said:

According to Raven's logic, we should praise feudalism since the average living standard of the peasant is higher in 1400 A.D. than it was in 700 A.D.

How is neoliberalism working out for workers in Nigeria?

1) Because that's an idioitic comparison.

2) You mean the people who are no longer substinance farmers? Pretty well.