Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Sign in to follow this  
Raavi

Capitalism: Past, Present, Future

Recommended Posts

Aquilus

There is always someone in class who espouses the opinion that Brave New World "is really a utopia, when you think about it." The thing is that the dystopia as a concept is a reaction from utopian idealism: in every iconic portrayal of dystopia there is an inversion of utopic attributes. In Brave New World, Huxley was specifically criticizing the nature of a utopia itself: his point was that no matter how much of a utopia our society can progress towards, there are still fundamentally repugnant characteristics of how our current civilization is organized. It doesn't matter if everyone can have free sex and be happy forever, because they must be re-wired and bred specifically to do so from birth. It's the turning around of those traits that a capitalist society says we should value. That's why no matter how nice it seems for people who are in the system, the system itself (and especially our understanding of it) is dystopic. But then that's not even going into account of the fact that there are clearly people who are unhappy in the system (ie all of the main characters). The problem for many of them is that by that point, the tools of dissent are removed: they have no language with which to express their opposition, and thus deal with intangible emotions that lead them through trouble and in some cases death. To say that it is not a dystopia is disingenuous and loose reading.

Makes sense. Dystopia it is!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquilus

Because someone put a limit on quote's on Black_Mid- Yes, yes there is. You need someone in charge of the country and they're in charge of that country's economy, central government, military, and whatever else that country may use as a service or sector. And as for the proletariat, the working class running the country might as well be the elite of the country since someone needs to manage it, the other working class, and the non working class. And how about addressing that if no one's the elite than there is no elite either in that situation. In both situations you say there is no elite, but what if no one is the elite to begin with and they still aren't the elite? However way you put it there's still class division, the working class and the non working class. The working class forms as the people in charge hence political elite so what about the people not in charge? There's elite regardless and class division.

I've read about it, I don't need to clarify myself on this, inequality exists regardless of systems. You want equality? Join a colony of ants or become a robot.

If you have a disadvantage at the beginning then you're either fueling that disadvantage and using it as an excuse to be lazy and get paid for nothing, using it to just be an all around ass for rights you already have and not respecting the freedom you do have like access to free education. Or if you have a disadvantage then get over it and not let that disadvantage make you the reason why you don't succeed. You aren't screwed from the beginning, you screw everything up mid way and blame all the issues on the system because some people can't take the blame for their actions and use those 4 things you said as an excuse. Here in America, not sure how they do it in Portugal. But as for other disadvantages, people can always change that like suffrage movement or the NAACP or damned workers unions because 100 years ago such movements were needed.. But you want a modern disadvantage? Basically everything I said above because now these days, people will use such remarks on race, sex, homophobia, or inequality as an excuse to be a corrupt 2 faced bastard to use the system to their advantage. Eventually you can only pull the card for so long before people get tired ot them

But the gap is small enough for one to make a connection between the two. What? It's working for Cuba, I'd go there specifically to start a business. And we already have all of that here in the U.S. What are you on about dude? Is things different up in Portugal? You can keep going on that socialism will make us all free and equal but just like you willing to shun capitalism I can keep shunning communism. We'll never be equal class wise, we'll never let the state control all of our businesses and means of production for those who are willing to resist, and we'll never live like a utopia. You can continue using false examples of communism working for everyone apart from ants, but debating capitalism with you is hard if you don't understand the means of your situation, how you got there, why you're there, how you can fix it, how life isn't fair, how the state isn't going to pay for everything you do, how people want something in life that's truly theirs, how things can work faster without the government there to control its means of productions, and how you can't use your background as an excuse for why you don't succeed in life. It's all on you. I care enough to look at communism with an eye and observe and see some good things about it, but I don't care to see your point of view or believe communism will destroy classes and everyone can be happy and benefit from not legally owning their businesses or means of production.

Edited by Aquilus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fonz

Because someone put a limit on quote's on Black_Mid- Yes, yes there is. You need someone in charge of the country and they're in charge of that country's economy, central government, military, and whatever else that country may use as a service or sector.

Right, and you'd have someone in charge—the collective, which, funnily enough, is what democracy is supposed to be, collective decision making, literally "power to the people" and so on. Do try to keep up. Why would you need bureaucratic managing under a collective ownership? Are you even reading my posts?

 

"And as for the proletariat, the working class running the country might as well be the elite of the country since someone needs to manage it, the other working class, and the non working class"

 

And you still say you have actually read Marx. Hilarious. There's no such thing as a non-working class (seriously?). There's unemployed people—they're still proletarians, just unemployed at the moment. Please do some reading, seriously.

There's no such thing as people in charge. Has it occurred to you that communism requires common ownership and workers' self-management? The clue is in the title.

 

 

 

I've read about it

No, you haven't. That much is absolutely clear to anyone reading your posts... laughably so.

 

"inequality exists regardless of systems"

 

Right. At this point I think you're just being intentionally dense. I've provided a FULL LIST of successful socialism being implemented more than once, but you still chose to ignore it because it doesn't corroborate your propagandist bullsh*t.

 

 

 

Or if you have a disadvantage then get over it and not let that disadvantage make you the reason why you don't succeed.

"Hey, handicapped people, stop being handicapped! Hey, starving people, stop starving! Hey, black people, stop taking issue with being discriminated against by a system of institutionalized racism! Hey (...)"

Your analysis is ridiculous. I don't think I've ever met anyone who denied the marginalization of ethnic minorities, institutionalized racism and sexism or the disadvantage of being born into poverty.

 

 

 

You aren't screwed from the beginning, you screw everything up mid way and blame all the issues on the system because some people can't take the blame for their actions and use those 4 things you said as an excuse

"An excuse"... too good. Please, get a grip. You're so deep in the capitalist mindset, thinking "anyone can ascend, sure!", when I have pointed out numerous times why that is against the structure of capitalism you so vehemently defend, despite knowing absolutely nothing about it. And please, try to actually read what I write and respond to that, rather than inane ramblings you hallucinate and try to attribute to me.

 

"just like you willing to shun capitalism I can keep shunning communism"

 

Yeah, except my critique of capitalism is based on actually understanding it and having studied it, while your critique of communism stems from sh*tty propaganda and misinformation as exhibited by the fact that you couldn't even define it at first. And apparently still can't:

 

 

We'll never be equal class wise, we'll never let the state control all of our businesses and means of production for those who are willing to resist

I'm sorry, but to write this sort of crap and then claim you've read any communist theory is just a knee-slapper. I've described in depth what state capitalism is and why it isn't communism, but you still cling to your ridiculous misconceptions and keep going on about a state (when it doesn't even exist in communism).

 

 

 

ou can continue using false examples of communism working for everyone apart from ants

That's f*cking rich. "False examples"? You mean examples that in every way correspond to the actual definition of socialism, rather than the ones you wish to believe are socialist? Yes, very false indeed. Please, matey, do some reading on agrarian societies, primitive communism, self-management and the historical presence of communism.

 

 

 

I care enough to look at communism with an eye

No, you don't. You don't even know what it is, as corroborated by the fact that you keep rambling on about the government owning this and that or paying for whatever... I mean, a few posts ago you said socialism and communism were different sides! How am I supposed to argue seriously with you? If you weren't so densely dogmatic, you'd open your eyes and see that the definition of communism is a STATELESS, CLASSLESS, MONEYLESS society. All of your points have to do with one of these three items, so they're easily refutable. But, by all means, keep hammering out paragraphs about how ignorant you are about it.

 

 

 

how people want something in life that's truly theirs

Wow, you mean sort of like they can in communism? Fantastic! All kidding aside, this is some middle-school level indoctrination. You've been force fed the bullsh*t that "under communism you can't own clothes/a house/a dog/ a car" and are unable to wake up and actually challenge it. It's ridiculous. Go learn the definition of personal property and private property in socialism and then come back. Of course, don't think I haven't noticed that this is just a slightly more verbose appeal to nature and that it is dismissed right from the start. You can try to intellectualize it all you want; it still boils down to "muh human nature!".

 

 

 

I don't care to see your point of view or believe communism will destroy classes and everyone can be happy and benefit from not legally owning their businesses or means of production.

You don't see how workers being allotted the proper value of their labor will benefit them? You truly believe it's more beneficial for the community if the means of productions, which rightfully belong to the workers, are controlled by an exploitative, wealthy elite, instead of by a collective that will produce according to their needs and usefulness and reap the fruits of their work? Is this some very elaborate trolling or just an indirect way of confessing to not knowing what the hell you're talking about? The point of view that capitalism is somehow the peak of all economic evolution is so preposterous and unlettered that I don't think it even deserves a retort. It might help to look at economic evolution throughout history—hell, try Marx's analysis and you might just learn about history and communism. I'm afraid Marxism doesn't quite boil down to "the state owns everything" or "the state's oppressing muh freedom!", though, do you'll have to put some thought into it.

Edited by Black_MiD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquilus

 

Because someone put a limit on quote's on Black_Mid- Yes, yes there is. You need someone in charge of the country and they're in charge of that country's economy, central government, military, and whatever else that country may use as a service or sector.

Right, and you'd have someone in charge—the collective, which, funnily enough, is what democracy is supposed to be, collective decision making, literally "power to the people" and so on. Do try to keep up. Why would you need bureaucratic managing under a collective ownership? Are you even reading my posts?

 

"And as for the proletariat, the working class running the country might as well be the elite of the country since someone needs to manage it, the other working class, and the non working class"

 

And you still say you have actually read Marx. Hilarious. There's no such thing as a non-working class (seriously?). There's unemployed people—they're still proletarians, just unemployed at the moment. Please do some reading, seriously.

There's no such thing as people in charge. Has it occurred to you that communism requires common ownership and workers' self-management? The clue is in the title.

 

 

 

I've read about it

No, you haven't. That much is absolutely clear to anyone reading your posts... laughably so.

 

"inequality exists regardless of systems"

 

Right. At this point I think you're just being intentionally dense. I've provided a FULL LIST of successful socialism being implemented more than once, but you still chose to ignore it because it doesn't corroborate your propagandist bullsh*t.

 

 

 

Or if you have a disadvantage then get over it and not let that disadvantage make you the reason why you don't succeed.

"Hey, handicapped people, stop being handicapped! Hey, starving people, stop starving! Hey, black people, stop taking issue with being discriminated against by a system of institutionalized racism! Hey (...)"

Your analysis is ridiculous. I don't think I've ever met anyone who denied the marginalization of ethnic minorities, institutionalized racism and sexism or the disadvantage of being born into poverty.

 

 

 

You aren't screwed from the beginning, you screw everything up mid way and blame all the issues on the system because some people can't take the blame for their actions and use those 4 things you said as an excuse

"An excuse"... too good. Please, get a grip. You're so deep in the capitalist mindset, thinking "anyone can ascend, sure!", when I have pointed out numerous times why that is against the structure of capitalism you so vehemently defend, despite knowing absolutely nothing about it. And please, try to actually read what I write and respond to that, rather than inane ramblings you hallucinate and try to attribute to me.

 

"just like you willing to shun capitalism I can keep shunning communism"

 

Yeah, except my critique of capitalism is based on actually understanding it and having studied it, while your critique of communism stems from sh*tty propaganda and misinformation as exhibited by the fact that you couldn't even define it at first. And apparently still can't:

 

 

We'll never be equal class wise, we'll never let the state control all of our businesses and means of production for those who are willing to resist

I'm sorry, but to write this sort of crap and then claim you've read any communist theory is just a knee-slapper. I've described in depth what state capitalism is and why it isn't communism, but you still cling to your ridiculous misconceptions and keep going on about a state (when it doesn't even exist in communism).

 

 

 

ou can continue using false examples of communism working for everyone apart from ants

That's f*cking rich. "False examples"? You mean examples that in every way correspond to the actual definition of socialism, rather than the ones you wish to believe are socialist? Yes, very false indeed. Please, matey, do some reading on agrarian societies, primitive communism, self-management and the historical presence of communism.

 

 

 

I care enough to look at communism with an eye

No, you don't. You don't even know what it is, as corroborated by the fact that you keep rambling on about the government owning this and that or paying for whatever... I mean, a few posts ago you said socialism and communism were different sides! How am I supposed to argue seriously with you? If you weren't so densely dogmatic, you'd open your eyes and see that the definition of communism is a STATELESS, CLASSLESS, MONEYLESS society. All of your points have to do with one of these three items, so they're easily refutable. But, by all means, keep hammering out paragraphs about how ignorant you are about it.

 

 

 

how people want something in life that's truly theirs

Wow, you mean sort of like they can in communism? Fantastic! All kidding aside, this is some middle-school level indoctrination. You've been force fed the bullsh*t that "under communism you can't own clothes/a house/a dog/ a car" and are unable to wake up and actually challenge it. It's ridiculous. Go learn the definition of personal property and private property in socialism and then come back. Of course, don't think I haven't noticed that this is just a slightly more verbose appeal to nature and that it is dismissed right from the start. You can try to intellectualize it all you want; it still boils down to "muh human nature!".

 

 

 

I don't care to see your point of view or believe communism will destroy classes and everyone can be happy and benefit from not legally owning their businesses or means of production.

You don't see how workers being allotted the proper value of their labor will benefit them? You truly believe it's more beneficial for the community if the means of productions, which rightfully belong to the workers, are controlled by an exploitative, wealthy elite, instead of by a collective that will produce according to their needs and usefulness and reap the fruits of their work? Is this some very elaborate trolling or just an indirect way of confessing to not knowing what the hell you're talking about? The point of view that capitalism is somehow the peak of all economic evolution is so preposterous and unlettered that I don't think it even deserves a retort. It might help to look at economic evolution throughout history—hell, try Marx's analysis and you might just learn about history and communism. I'm afraid Marxism doesn't quite boil down to "the state owns everything" or "the state's oppressing muh freedom!", though, do you'll have to put some thought into it.

 

And you know that the U.S is a representative democracy? Not a true democracy. Call me a propagandist all you want. You can go spread the Marxist propaganda elsewhere. At least my critique of communism is based on substantial human needs and wants and not the idea that everything should be ruled by the workers knowing damn well they don't own the business or run the country and decide that every business should be a state asset. And dude "Sort of like they can in communism is not enough" Either they can or they can't make up your mind. And I don't you've heard me too well. I said businesses "BUSINESSES!" Not personal belongings. If I want to start a farm and have people working on it then I'll pay them close to the minimum wage for a certain x of hours. I don't want the state coming in telling me what we produce, how much, on what basis, how many workers, and much they earn. And yeah, this is all damn human nature. You can't control it, so stop trying to. You can only appeal to it and satisfy it. And you know what's so sad about this? You insist that the wealthy elite are manipulative and no one, not even the authorities or regulations will come to stop them and make sure they abide by laws and regulations set in place. You insist that the wealthy will only manipulate, control, or destroy the people that work under them which is suicide because who's going to produce for the company? Who's going to labor? As far as I'm concerned you can say marxism won't take away your freedom but have you experienced a communist society for yourself or lived in one? Some of us can look and say we like our lifestyle the way it is and you can take your marxist ways and go start a revolution in a country that needs it and try communism there and then come back and tell me if everything is fine and things worked out the way you wanted it to. Communism is stateless, classless, and moneyless? Sounds like communism mixed in with Anarchy. Are you sure you know what communism is anymore? Because last I checked it it's social ownership of the means of production with a classless society, not moneyless or stateless. :? Do you know what you're talking about anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fonz
And you know that the U.S is a representative democracy? Not a true democracy. Call me a propagandist all you want. You can go spread the Marxist propaganda elsewhere.

 

"Marxist propaganda", love it! Let's see: you elect someone for a set number of years to make decisions for you that you could make yourself (and, indeed, pure democracy is direct democracy), all with an uncertain outcome, which is often against your best interests.

 

At least my critique of communism is based on substantial human needs and wants and not the idea that everything should be ruled by the workers knowing damn well they don't own the business or run the country and decide that every business should be a state asset.

 

 

Your critique of communism is based on not knowing what communism is. What better way to satisfy human needs than to actually provide workers with the proper value of their labor and giving them access to what they produce? Once again, there is no state in communism. Who has the rightful ownership of a firm, the people who work and actually keep it running, the powerhouse behind it, or the boss who exploits them, pays them much less than they produce and collects the profits of their labor? Doesn't seem like a very tricky question.

 

And yeah, this is all damn human nature. You can't control it, so stop trying to. You can only appeal to it and satisfy it.

Hahah, funny, anthropologically, humans are known to be social, communal beings and, in fact, isolated humans gravitate towards socialism, primitive communism is pretty well documented and we kind of have things like agrarian societies to look back at. On the other hand, there's absolutely zero evidence for your "inherent greed of mankind" shtick... funny how that works out, huh.

You insist that the wealthy will only manipulate, control, or destroy the people that work under them which is suicide because who's going to produce for the company? Who's going to labor?

THE WORKERS. That's the whole point of socialism, for f*ck's sake. Are you mildly illiterate?

 

As far as I'm concerned you can say marxism won't take away your freedom but have you experienced a communist society for yourself or lived in one?

Nah, but we do have this thing called recorded history, which I know you're not terribly familiar with, but at least try. It's a pretty handy tool.

 

Communism is stateless, classless, and moneyless? Sounds like communism mixed in with Anarchy. Are you sure you know what communism is anymore? Because last I checked it it's social ownership of the means of production with a classless society, not moneyless or stateless. :? Do you know what you're talking about anymore?

Holy sh*t, my sides! Last time you checked? When, never? At this point, I should just tell you to go look it up yourself, but I'll spare you the Google search. Anarchists are communists, they're just not Marxists. Marx and Bakunin broke up ideologically on the basis of what constituted socialism—Marx considered the state useful in the stage of socialism, while Bakunin rejected the prospect of a state in any stage as a form of authoritarianism, which anarchists reject fiercely. They have the same goal; full communism is anarchical regardless of which school of thought you're following, the difference is how to get there. Please learn the difference between socialism and full communism, otherwise don't bother dumping a clusterf*ck of myths and misunderstandings. And learn to punctuate your bullsh*t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquilus

 

And you know that the U.S is a representative democracy? Not a true democracy. Call me a propagandist all you want. You can go spread the Marxist propaganda elsewhere.

 

"Marxist propaganda", love it! Let's see: you elect someone for a set number of years to make decisions for you that you could make yourself (and, indeed, pure democracy is direct democracy), all with an uncertain outcome, which is often against your best interests.

 

At least my critique of communism is based on substantial human needs and wants and not the idea that everything should be ruled by the workers knowing damn well they don't own the business or run the country and decide that every business should be a state asset.

 

 

Your critique of communism is based on not knowing what communism is. What better way to satisfy human needs than to actually provide workers with the proper value of their labor and giving them access to what they produce? Once again, there is no state in communism. Who has the rightful ownership of a firm, the people who work and actually keep it running, the powerhouse behind it, or the boss who exploits them, pays them much less than they produce and collects the profits of their labor? Doesn't seem like a very tricky question.

 

And yeah, this is all damn human nature. You can't control it, so stop trying to. You can only appeal to it and satisfy it.

Hahah, funny, anthropologically, humans are known to be social, communal beings and, in fact, isolated humans gravitate towards socialism, primitive communism is pretty well documented and we kind of have things like agrarian societies to look back at. On the other hand, there's absolutely zero evidence for your "inherent greed of mankind" shtick... funny how that works out, huh.

You insist that the wealthy will only manipulate, control, or destroy the people that work under them which is suicide because who's going to produce for the company? Who's going to labor?

THE WORKERS. That's the whole point of socialism, for f*ck's sake. Are you mildly illiterate?

 

As far as I'm concerned you can say marxism won't take away your freedom but have you experienced a communist society for yourself or lived in one?

Nah, but we do have this thing called recorded history, which I know you're not terribly familiar with, but at least try. It's a pretty handy tool.

 

Communism is stateless, classless, and moneyless? Sounds like communism mixed in with Anarchy. Are you sure you know what communism is anymore? Because last I checked it it's social ownership of the means of production with a classless society, not moneyless or stateless. :? Do you know what you're talking about anymore?

Holy sh*t, my sides! Last time you checked? When, never? At this point, I should just tell you to go look it up yourself, but I'll spare you the Google search. Anarchists are communists, they're just not Marxists. Marx and Bakunin broke up ideologically on the basis of what constituted socialism—Marx considered the state useful in the stage of socialism, while Bakunin rejected the prospect of a state in any stage as a form of authoritarianism, which anarchists reject fiercely. They have the same goal; full communism is anarchical regardless of which school of thought you're following, the difference is how to get there. Please learn the difference between socialism and full communism, otherwise don't bother dumping a clusterf*ck of myths and misunderstandings. And learn to punctuate your bullsh*t.

 

Doesn't matter. Don't care. I have open ears, but a closed mind. as I said, go take the communism or whatever the hell you decide to call it elsewhere. Don't tell me about recorded history go out and actually experience communism for yourself and then come talk to me. Proof? Dude it's all around you. Check yourself and I check myself. The greed's there, the urge to kill, reproduce, eat, sh*t, piss, scratch your head for whatever reason is all there and it always has been. Eventually basically human nature will over do what you like to call communism. Just stop, I'm starting to think you insist on trying to shove a hand grenade up someone's ass to make them believe communism is more right than capitalism. And I insist I'll stick with my system and you can stick with yours. Regardless of how flawed you think mine's is and how flawed I think yours is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fonz
The greed's there

 

Of course it is: you live in a culture that glorifies and encourages it.

 

Don't tell me about recorded history go out and actually experience communism for yourself and then come talk to me.

I'll use relevant historical data as I see fit, thank you very much. It won't change just because you decide to be a petulant little dunce.

 

the urge to kill

Really? You should probably seek professional help, then.

 

. Just stop, I'm starting to think you insist on trying to shove a hand grenade up someone's ass to make them believe communism is more right than capitalism. And I insist I'll stick with my system and you can stick with yours. Regardless of how flawed you think mine's is and how flawed I think yours is.

Translation: "I'm a dogmatic idiot who's impervious to logic and refuses to actually accept facts for what they are. I'll just plug my ears and pretend I'm still right. Checkmate, filthy commie!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquilus

 

The greed's there

 

Of course it is: you live in a culture that glorifies and encourages it.

 

Don't tell me about recorded history go out and actually experience communism for yourself and then come talk to me.

I'll use relevant historical data as I see fit, thank you very much. It won't change just because you decide to be a petulant little dunce.

 

the urge to kill

Really? You should probably seek professional help, then.

 

. Just stop, I'm starting to think you insist on trying to shove a hand grenade up someone's ass to make them believe communism is more right than capitalism. And I insist I'll stick with my system and you can stick with yours. Regardless of how flawed you think mine's is and how flawed I think yours is.

Translation: "I'm a dogmatic idiot who's impervious to logic and refuses to actually accept facts for what they are. I'll just plug my ears and pretend I'm still right. Checkmate, filthy commie!"

 

Translation: "I'm a stupid ass communist who can't tell the difference between his head and his ass, though both actually look alike. I insist that we can stop violence, war, poverty, and classed society and we can all live in a utopia with our heads stuck so far up our asses that we're picking daises. I insist my idea is better than yours because I have nothing else better to do than debate with someone 3000 miles away in the U.S regarding a system and people he doesn't really know nor should I try to act like I do because I myself am not a wage slave in Portugal which actually has one of the highest standards of living in Europe. I refuse accept logic and treat humanity and nature like a bunch of machines or ants that are meant to be herded like cattle into a pen and expected to cooperate with a system that ain't paying me, letting me get my own food, or own my own business because they say it belongs to the people." Yeah, no thanks Jethro. I'll stick with Capitalism

Edited by Aquilus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fonz
Translation: "I'm a stupid ass communist who can't tell the difference between his head and his ass, though both actually look alike. I insist that we can stop violence, war, poverty, and classed society and we can all live in a utopia with our heads stuck so far up our asses that we're picking daises. I insist my idea is better than yours because I have nothing else better to do than debate with someone 3000 miles away in the U.S regarding a system and people he doesn't really know nor should I try to act like I do because I myself am not a wage slave in Portugal which actually has one of the highest standards of living in Europe. I refuse accept logic and treat humanity and nature like a bunch of machines or ants that are meant to be herded like cattle into a pen and expected to cooperate with a system that ain't paying me, letting me get my own food, or own my own business because they say it belongs to the people." Yeah, no thanks Jethro. I'll stick with Capitalism

 

 

If you weren't expecting an argument, I struggle to understand what you're doing in a section called Debates & Discussion. The fact is that every single point you've made has been repeatedly refuted, but you keep hammering on it for whatever reason. I mean, I've corrected you on the definition of communism many times now, but you just decided to throw a tantrum and reuse previously refuted arguments. If you're ignorant and incapable of critical thinking (and apparently think communism denies you food?), it's no wonder you're so opposed to learning about different ideologies. Try opening a f*cking book sometime. And please try to cut back on the supposedly witty, 7th grade-level quips. Anyway, there's no point trying to argue with you, so I'll just leave this here.

t9jmkj.jpg

Have a good one.

Edited by Black_MiD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedDagger

regarding a system and people he doesn't really know

See, the problem here is that you seem to be trying your damnedest to hate communism without actually knowing what it is. You seem to want to hate communism because it's "dirty communists", not because of what communism actually is because you've demonstrated time and again that you have absolutely no idea what communism is - not even the basics. If you haven't done any research and aren't willing to do discussion beyond "capitalism is best because it's capitalism" I'm not sure what the point in joining a discussion on it is.

 

 

I refuse accept logic and treat humanity and nature like a bunch of machines or ants that are meant to be herded like cattle into a pen and expected to cooperate with a system that ain't paying me

funny, that smells awfully like something that happens in a capitalist society over anything else tbh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquilus

 

Translation: "I'm a stupid ass communist who can't tell the difference between his head and his ass, though both actually look alike. I insist that we can stop violence, war, poverty, and classed society and we can all live in a utopia with our heads stuck so far up our asses that we're picking daises. I insist my idea is better than yours because I have nothing else better to do than debate with someone 3000 miles away in the U.S regarding a system and people he doesn't really know nor should I try to act like I do because I myself am not a wage slave in Portugal which actually has one of the highest standards of living in Europe. I refuse accept logic and treat humanity and nature like a bunch of machines or ants that are meant to be herded like cattle into a pen and expected to cooperate with a system that ain't paying me, letting me get my own food, or own my own business because they say it belongs to the people." Yeah, no thanks Jethro. I'll stick with Capitalism

 

 

If you weren't expecting an argument, I struggle to understand what you're doing in a section called Debates & Discussion. The fact is that every single point you've made has been repeatedly refuted, but you keep hammering on it for whatever reason. I mean, I've corrected you on the definition of communism many times now, but you just decided to throw a tantrum and reuse previously refuted arguments. If you're ignorant and incapable of critical thinking (and apparently think communism denies you food?), it's no wonder you're so opposed to learning about different ideologies. Try opening a f*cking book sometime. And please try to cut back on the supposedly witty, 7th grade-level quips. Anyway, there's no point trying to argue with you, so I'll just leave this here.

t9jmkj.jpg

Have a good one.

I'm throwing a temper tantrum? I wasn't the one who called someone a dogmatic idiot, jackass because I don't agree with communism and I want leave it at that. Fly away home and go sh*t on your own car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBH

Who is anyone to dictate whom gives money to whom or feel entitled to what other people have worked for?

This is interesting, because all capitalists feel entitled to what other people work for. The practice of capitalism is to get other people to create things for you, but to keep most of the money for yourself. This is true both in the provision of services and commodity production.

Edited by CBH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tchuck

Thank you for finally providing an answer that isn't simply condescending and actually creates some discourse.

 

 

 

I am Brazilian. I lived in a third world country for the better part of my life, under a system that is far more representative of the failings of capitalism than any of you have ever experienced. I've seen corruption first hand, I've felt the abuse first hand, all of those things you decry which I highly doubt any of you have any real experience with.

 

 

Anyone that has ever held a job has real experience with the 'failings'* of capitalism. Sure, folks in the third-world are more thoroughly exploited, are more subject to sh*tty living and working conditions, and are generally not as privileged as those living in the first world. As a white person living in America, I realize I'm afforded social privileges others are not, and that, generally speaking, my standard of living is much more comfortable than the majority of the world's population. I can't deny this, but it doesn't mean I can't criticize capitalism, or express my solidarity with working people all over the world. In fact, the conditions others are forced to live in as a result of this absurd, unethical, exploitative, wasteful, and inefficient system are a large part of my motivation to banish capitalism from the planet with fire and shrapnel.

 

*These aren't the failings of capitalism, this is capitalism functioning exactly as it's supposed to.

 

Not at all, I'm not saying you can't criticize capitalism, which is something people should do and I do it as well as I recognize it's not a perfect system. My main point is that simply advocating 'let's get rid of it once and for all by killing the rich' isn't going to do any better.

 

 

 


I've also travelled around South America and seen what the "anarchist", or a least extremely left, ideals can bring, in their current implementations, and it's garbage.

Okay? I mean, you could at least point to specific examples of what anarchists and leftists are doing in South America that you think is 'garbage'. In Brazil anarchists led the demonstrations against FIFA. Was this action 'garbage'?

 

Also, why do you feel the need to put anarchist in quotes?

 

Venezuela, with their increasing isolating policies that only benefit the friends of the regime, at the expense of the entire population who lacks in pretty much all of the basic necessity goods, and uses extreme violence to silence any dissidents.

 

In Brazil, the anarchists were the voice of the frustration of the people at the time, and it was a great thing for a while. Until the frustration they were voicing gave way to simple violence that didn't solve any problem, specially with some of them becoming buddy buddy with the government in place just to get their own benefits, which was a shame. The case with Brazil is sad because it's a people that is not used to fight for anything, is not used to trying for something better, and is a highly corrupt society, on all levels.

 

I put it in quotes because many of them seem to be anarchist in name only, and instead of working for the common good, end up having their own goals that take priority over them.

 

 


But that is all beside the point. It's all fine and nice to advocate a violent revolution and that the current system is broken. None of us is defending capitalism saying it's fine, because it isn't. What most of us say is that the only way to move forward is to slowly change it something better. If you ever dream of achieving your anarchist utopia, that's the only way it will happen. No amount of violence will bring about the future you all dream of. It will only bring anger and resentment from those who are being persecuted, and unfortunately they tend to be far more powerful than you could dream of being.

I'm not sure you're getting the point here. We do not want to reform the current system. Even if we wanted to, it can not be reformed to align with our interests. Capitalism has to be overthrown, period. Capitalism itself didn't peacefully emerge from feudalism, but from violent revolution. I mean, It's very easy to dismiss revolution when you ignore that it is the driving force of history, and that is directly responsible for the world we live in today.

 

Besides, a revolution doesn't necessarily need to be a violent affair, but I sincerely doubt those in power will ever go peacefully. Violent revolution is, unfortunately, an inevitably if we ever wish to build an alternative to the existing state of things.

 

Because I'd like to see this happen, and there has to be a way other than simply revolution, and a violent one at that. Look at the entire world, look at how all the economies are connected, look at the number of companies that exist in each and every country. From what I gather, anyone that owns a company and employs people is part of the problem, and would have to be either executed or removed from their position of power. How would you achieve that, how discriminatory would you be, would you simply take up arms and tell people this is the way it is and stop what they're doing? It's not going to achieve anything. You'll have millions and millions of business owners, big and small, millions and millions of land owners and millions and millions of people working for the government, not to mention the armies. Simply taking up arms and going against them will only result in senseless death, and a maintenance of the status quo.

 

That is why I say there must be a way to go from where we are to where we should be that doesn't involve a revolution, because simply resorting to a bloody revolution won't achieve anything. Thinking of the logistics of it, unless the revolution starts in every single country and is extremely well organized, it will be quelled by any other larger power that hasn't fallen to it, coming to aid of the people who will be caught in the crossfire.

 

 

The moment you start advocating mass assassination of a group of people depending on arbitrary status, is then moment you lose any legitimacy as a movement. Oh, and where I come from, all of us in this forum would be considered the wealthy elite, so we would all have to be assassinated to achieve your revolution.

There is nothing arbitrary about class, it is based on your relationship to the means of production. Those who own the means of production and wield political power are the enemy. It is as simple as that. I don't own the means of production, I do not wield political power, so I am not part of the 'wealthy elite', I'm a f*cking low-down prole.

 

There is when you have people from so many different backgrounds involved in an ideology that is not nearly as clear cut as anarchism. Here in this thread alone, we have some people advocating mass murder while others advocate a transition. How would it be agreed upon what classes are?

 

So, then, what precisely do you mean about the means of production? Is it only related to factory owners or business owners? I am an independent worker at times, contracting my labor to develop code and art to other companies. I own my means of production, which would be my skill, would I also be counted for it? Means of production can be a pretty large definition as well.

 

And trust me, to people where I come from, you would be part of the wealthy elite regardless of not owning the means of production or political power. People in my country kill people because they come from a different city, because they entered the wrong street. You're an outsider, you are deemed elite and wealthy where I come from. We'd all be murdered.

 

 

 

Since according to anarchists, 80% of the world lives in extreme poverty with less than 10 dollars a month, anyone living above that standard is considered wealthy.

I literally never said anyone that makes more than $10 a day is 'wealthy', but okay. Keep strawmaning our position.

 

I'm not strawmaning. You didn't say they are wealthy, I added that others will think so. Wealth to many people does not mean owning the means of production, owning land or having political power. To many people around the world, wealth simply means having money. We would all be considered wealthy.

 

 

Most of all, my main gripe with the whole deal is the violent revolution aspect of it. You have to be sneakier, you have to be smarter. You can't use force against a system that owns force. You can't use force against a system that, because is highly founded on abuse and exploitation, has all the resources in the world to fight against you, and it will. My vision for something like this to come about is akin to Thomas More's Utopia. You start with a commune, a city, build its power inside the corrupt system while espousing the values you wish to implant, and using the shadows and manipulation, expand your sphere of influence slowly, leading by example, for others to follow. Because it should be a much better system than what people are used to under capitalism, it should be easy to get others to follow you by example, rather than simply rhetoric and revolution advocation. At one point it will achieve critical mass, and everything else will fall into place. The resistance will be met by slow burning and increasing the pressure until they simply can't resist. That would achieve the goals much more effectively than simple bloody revolution. Similar to Jacques Fresco's Project Venus, or even to the Amish communities.

Edited by Tchuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CBH

Reform socialism is not a new idea nor is it untested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • 2 Users Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 2 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.