Questions for capitalists.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-10-2013, 01:09 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
Anybody?
[Image: ajma.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2013, 05:11 PM
Questions for capitalists.
(19-10-2013 09:43 AM)frankksj Wrote:  @I and I, I agree with you that it's atrocious how many non-violent people the US locks up. My point was that every time a system really sucks, the people want to flee, and the government is forced to either (a) fix the system, or (b) trap the people as slaves, barring their escape by preventing their emigration.

This happened in the Soviet Union WITHIN TWO MONTHS of the communists coming to power. But I try to be pragmatic and unbiased without hypocrisy, and if you read my exchange in the 'ask a communist' thread, I pointed out that today, Russia is now a free country (Russians can leave unrestricted if they don't like it), and the only non-free countries in the world that don't let their people leave if they find their country too burdensome are Cuba, North Korea, and the United States of America. Chas and many others were furious over this, but after pages of back and forth where I kept pointing to actual US law and case examples where Americans have tried to flee the system (like Bobby Fischer), they all backed down. The fact is that if you use the literal definitions, Russia is a free country, and the US is not.

Quote:Why do you think that communism is only possible on a small scale? Capitalism has shown that communism is possible.

I think ALL systems are best implemented on a small, local scale because of simple human nature: "out of sight, out of mind" and "power corrupts". If the power is transferred to a small group 2,000 miles away, be it in Washington or Moscow, the people have no visibility into what's going on, and so much gets so concentrated that it leads to a corrupt, vile system.

I argue that communism is unworkable when a huge country like Russia transfers all the power to an out-of-site group of leaders in Moscow, for the SAME REASON I argue that the US's capitalist economy is being destroyed by transferring all the power to an out-of-site group of leaders in Washington. I don't want a group of men 2,000 miles away to have absolute dictator power and be able to initiate force at their whim, whether it's capitalist, communist, or anything else.

What you are describing is communism however, where anarchists and communists differ is the question of how to transition from a capitalist economy of today to that society where communism is run on a local level.

Some things need to be established first.

1. If there is a threat of invasion or an actual invasion this makes it more difficult to dissolve away state power because of the need for spending on national defense. The threat of invasion needs to be non existent.

2. The threat of a counter revolution by the capitalist class who as of now owns a lot weapons and weapons factories needs to be non existent.

3. An individualistic capitalist materialistic ideology needs to be non existent. The idea that selfishness is natural, commodities make the person, commodities being a status symbol, which we learn from a consumerist capitalist ideology is not " human nature" and can just as easily be unlearned as it was learned.

The Leninist Marxist model of transition was to create a worker ran state government which would allow capitalism to exist but gradually tax them and create a smooth transition where eventually there will be no classes and then there wouldn't even be a need for a workers "state". Just worker ran locally ran businesses and industries.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2013, 07:00 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
@I and I,

Do you believe people should be forced to live in a communist system against their will? Or should there be communist, capitalist and other types of communities, and the people should be able to exercise their free will and live under whatever system they prefer? Is it acceptable for a country to limit emigration, like all the communist countries (and the US) do? Or should everybody be free to leave at any time, no strings attached, and no ongoing obligations?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2013, 07:37 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(19-10-2013 07:00 PM)frankksj Wrote:  @I and I,

Do you believe people should be forced to live in a communist system against their will? Or should there be communist, capitalist and other types of communities, and the people should be able to exercise their free will and live under whatever system they prefer? Is it acceptable for a country to limit emigration, like all the communist countries (and the US) do? Or should everybody be free to leave at any time, no strings attached, and no ongoing obligations?

ALL countries have many obstacles to expatriate or immigrate to. In a communist system there won't be any national governments. An economic system based on a class structure IS a system that uses force. A revolution is force, democracy is forcing the minority to submit to the majority. Forcing a group to do something to implement change is necessary for communists just as it is necessary for capitalists and and any other economic structure before. Yes, the capitalist class shouldn't get to choose whether or not they should stop ruling over and exploiting the working class, and they should be forced to stop. Using force to implement political and economic change wasn't invented by the communists.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2013, 08:27 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
@I and I,

From my perspective, then, there's no difference between your views and the capitalists you condemn, or the liberals on this forum, or the right-wing conservatives, or the Zionists, or Al-Queda, etc. All of you believe you know the correct way that everybody should live their life, and you all are willing to use violence to force people to do it your way against their will. You guys THINK you are all so different, and that you are right and the others are wrong. But, to a libertarian, you're all on the same side of the issue. Libertarians (classic liberals) are 180 degrees the opposite from all of you. We say “I may THINK I know the best way you should live your life, but I could be wrong. So I will never force you to live your life my way against your will.”

What we libertarians keep trying to tell you, since we look at your fighting and violence from a neutral position, is that you ALL are in a deadlock. Just like religions, where Sunni Muslims are sure they're right and Shiite Muslims are evil, and vice-versa, and they both think they have the right to use force against the others, so they both spend all their time getting guns and bombs to force the other side to give in. You're no different, imo. You THINK your communist system is better, but no more so than Zionists think their system is better. You are NEVER going to convince Zionists that they're evil, just like they are NEVER going to convince you that they are the chosen ones. So, you guys will both spend all your efforts using violence against the other side, blowing each other up, while us libertarians just want you club wielders to leave us alone so we can peacefully study science, invent cool new stuff, cure diseases, etc.

Libertarians say “can't we all just get along and live in peace side-by-side, and put our efforts to better use than blowing other people up?” Personally, I prefer a capitalist society over a communist one, and I am quite convinced that you'll be miserable living under the communist system you advocate. However, I don't feel I have the right to force you to give up communism. But, it doesn't work the other way around. You DO feel you have the right to use guns and violence to force me to give up capitalism. Now, like all libertarians, I am a pacifist and oppose violence. BUT, when you come after me with guns and violence to force me to do something against my will, I DO feel that I have the right to defend myself and use violence to stop you.

So, why can't we just lay down the guns and agree to disagree? Why do you communists, liberals, conservatives, Zionists, Islamists, Christians all resist this concept so much? Can't you see your opponents are just as committed?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 05:51 AM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(19-10-2013 08:27 PM)frankksj Wrote:  @I and I,

From my perspective, then, there's no difference between your views and the capitalists you condemn, or the liberals on this forum, or the right-wing conservatives, or the Zionists, or Al-Queda, etc. All of you believe you know the correct way that everybody should live their life, and you all are willing to use violence to force people to do it your way against their will. You guys THINK you are all so different, and that you are right and the others are wrong. But, to a libertarian, you're all on the same side of the issue. Libertarians (classic liberals) are 180 degrees the opposite from all of you. We say “I may THINK I know the best way you should live your life, but I could be wrong. So I will never force you to live your life my way against your will.”

What we libertarians keep trying to tell you, since we look at your fighting and violence from a neutral position, is that you ALL are in a deadlock. Just like religions, where Sunni Muslims are sure they're right and Shiite Muslims are evil, and vice-versa, and they both think they have the right to use force against the others, so they both spend all their time getting guns and bombs to force the other side to give in. You're no different, imo. You THINK your communist system is better, but no more so than Zionists think their system is better. You are NEVER going to convince Zionists that they're evil, just like they are NEVER going to convince you that they are the chosen ones. So, you guys will both spend all your efforts using violence against the other side, blowing each other up, while us libertarians just want you club wielders to leave us alone so we can peacefully study science, invent cool new stuff, cure diseases, etc.

Libertarians say “can't we all just get along and live in peace side-by-side, and put our efforts to better use than blowing other people up?” Personally, I prefer a capitalist society over a communist one, and I am quite convinced that you'll be miserable living under the communist system you advocate. However, I don't feel I have the right to force you to give up communism. But, it doesn't work the other way around. You DO feel you have the right to use guns and violence to force me to give up capitalism. Now, like all libertarians, I am a pacifist and oppose violence. BUT, when you come after me with guns and violence to force me to do something against my will, I DO feel that I have the right to defend myself and use violence to stop you.

So, why can't we just lay down the guns and agree to disagree? Why do you communists, liberals, conservatives, Zionists, Islamists, Christians all resist this concept so much? Can't you see your opponents are just as committed?

Did you say the dreaded Z word?

Allowing a class system in where one class exploits the majority workers and gets to be the private owner of what the workers produces and gets to profit off of what the worker produces is a violent system. Sitting back and doing nothing about it IS a pro-violent (pro capitalist violence) act.

A persons "will" isn't free in a capitalist system. I asked before what the capitalists definition of free will was since free will seems to be part of their ideology.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 09:36 AM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
That thinking is why you'll never be able to live in the communist society you desire. You advocate “forcing the minority to submit to the majority”, and frankly you're massively outnumbered by pro-capitalists. Since you believe in a winner-takes-all system, where whichever side has the most power (ie the “majority”) gets to pummel, rape and plunder the minority (ie “force them to submit”), you're on the losing side because you ARE a minority. Just look at your reputation rating. Smile

The form of government I favor, like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and others is a constitutionally limited republic, which saves the country FROM democracy, rather than subjects them to it, since, as you just said, democracy is when the majority forces the minority to submit. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. I want a government that DEFENDS the minority FROM the majority. Under this system, you and your fellow communists could form a utopian society the way you want, and if it's successful, you could win over a lot of capitalists. But, since you favor the brutal, violent system, you, as a minority, are always going to be the one on the barrel end of the gun.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 02:40 PM
Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 09:36 AM)frankksj Wrote:  That thinking is why you'll never be able to live in the communist society you desire. You advocate “forcing the minority to submit to the majority”, and frankly you're massively outnumbered by pro-capitalists. Since you believe in a winner-takes-all system, where whichever side has the most power (ie the “majority”) gets to pummel, rape and plunder the minority (ie “force them to submit”), you're on the losing side because you ARE a minority. Just look at your reputation rating. Smile

The form of government I favor, like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and others is a constitutionally limited republic, which saves the country FROM democracy, rather than subjects them to it, since, as you just said, democracy is when the majority forces the minority to submit. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. I want a government that DEFENDS the minority FROM the majority. Under this system, you and your fellow communists could form a utopian society the way you want, and if it's successful, you could win over a lot of capitalists. But, since you favor the brutal, violent system, you, as a minority, are always going to be the one on the barrel end of the gun.

So...... Communist guerrillas overthrowing brutal capitalism and allowing workers to own what they produce is labeled as "pummeling raping and pillaging" the poor billionaires? Wow, the brutal exploiters of billions of people are now the poor innocent victims.

Stopping pillaging, stopping plundering by the rich capitalist class is not the same thing as ACTUAL plundering and pillaging. Workers taking back what is theirs... The wealth they produce is not stealing. Stopping stealing (private ownership of capital) is not the se thing as stealing.

Since when are the billionaires poor victims that deserve sympathy?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 05:31 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
@I and I,

Out of the 6 billion people on the planet, at least 5 billion likely identify as 'capitalist'. Very, very few of those 5 billion 'capitalists' are billionaires. I'm a capitalist, I work hard to save and invest my money and build a business. But I'm far from a billionaire.

I am all for "workers owning what they produce". And I'm all in favor of you setting up a communist system where all the workers can live happily and enjoy the fruits of their labor. The ONLY thing you and I disagree of is you have the right to use guns and violence against capitalists, like myself, and take away from us the fruits of our labor. My proposed solution, which is to peacefully co-exist, is the only viable way to achieve your utopian dream.

If workers are given a CHOICE of living in a communist society, OR of being a "slave" to capitalist billionaires, and they choose the latter, who are you to hold a gun to their head and tell them that's not an acceptable choice.

There's a complete difference between what you and I want. As a libertarian, I just want to be left alone. I want to be able to live in a libertarian community, where we've taken nothing from anybody else, and we build it ourselves. I'm confident that my system works so well that we won't need anything from anybody else. You however seem so unsure of your communist society that you're not willing to unite with workers and build your own system, presumably you fear you'll all starve and die, so you want to invade a capitalist society and take from them what they've built. There's a big difference between building something yourself vs. stealing it from your neighbor.

As far as "Since when are the billionaires poor victims that deserve sympathy?" Jeez, you're callous. You know, billionaires are people too. They're humans, just like you and me. Some are good. Some are bad. Just because Mark Zuckerberg thought of a cool idea (Facebook) and it made him a billionaire, does NOT that he deserves to be beaten to a pulp. Why do you argue that if he was stupid and lazy somehow he'd be a "better" person deserving of our sympathy, but because he was smart and worked hard, he deserves to see the business end of a gun. If I see a man being mugged and beaten in the street, I have sympathy for him regardless of the size of his bank account. If he happens to be rich I'd never say he deserves it, because I think all men are equal. You seem to believe in the same 'caste' system that you condemn, where some men are superior to others, it's just an inverse caste system where the billionaires are slaves and the paupers are royalty.

IMO, you you have no normal code for condemning capitalists for violently enslaving workers, when you're advocating doing the same thing to them! Any moral code starts with a principle of reciprocity. If you feel you have the right to use guns and steal from them, then they are justified in using guns to steal from you (such as stealing your labor).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-10-2013, 05:40 PM
RE: Questions for capitalists.
(20-10-2013 05:31 PM)frankksj Wrote:  @I and I,

Out of the 6 billion people on the planet, at least 5 billion likely identify as 'capitalist'. Very, very few of those 5 billion 'capitalists' are billionaires. I'm a capitalist, I work hard to save and invest my money and build a business. But I'm far from a billionaire.

I am all for "workers owning what they produce". And I'm all in favor of you setting up a communist system where all the workers can live happily and enjoy the fruits of their labor. The ONLY thing you and I disagree of is you have the right to use guns and violence against capitalists, like myself, and take away from us the fruits of our labor. My proposed solution, which is to peacefully co-exist, is the only viable way to achieve your utopian dream.

If workers are given a CHOICE of living in a communist society, OR of being a "slave" to capitalist billionaires, and they choose the latter, who are you to hold a gun to their head and tell them that's not an acceptable choice.

There's a complete difference between what you and I want. As a libertarian, I just want to be left alone. I want to be able to live in a libertarian community, where we've taken nothing from anybody else, and we build it ourselves. I'm confident that my system works so well that we won't need anything from anybody else. You however seem so unsure of your communist society that you're not willing to unite with workers and build your own system, presumably you fear you'll all starve and die, so you want to invade a capitalist society and take from them what they've built. There's a big difference between building something yourself vs. stealing it from your neighbor.

As far as "Since when are the billionaires poor victims that deserve sympathy?" Jeez, you're callous. You know, billionaires are people too. They're humans, just like you and me. Some are good. Some are bad. Just because Mark Zuckerberg thought of a cool idea (Facebook) and it made him a billionaire, does NOT that he deserves to be beaten to a pulp. Why do you argue that if he was stupid and lazy somehow he'd be a "better" person deserving of our sympathy, but because he was smart and worked hard, he deserves to see the business end of a gun. If I see a man being mugged and beaten in the street, I have sympathy for him regardless of the size of his bank account. If he happens to be rich I'd never say he deserves it, because I think all men are equal. You seem to believe in the same 'caste' system that you condemn, where some men are superior to others, it's just an inverse caste system where the billionaires are slaves and the paupers are royalty.

IMO, you you have no normal code for condemning capitalists for violently enslaving workers, when you're advocating doing the same thing to them! Any moral code starts with a principle of reciprocity. If you feel you have the right to use guns and steal from them, then they are justified in using guns to steal from you (such as stealing your labor).

So if you oppose using violence to end oppression by capitalists, how do you suggest to end this? Ask nicely?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: