He's just making an assumption.
*shakes head* Dude, just shut up. You really don't understand capitalism short of what your Party Mob told you. If that's what you think lassiez-faire capitalism is, you should check. Hell, check Wikipedia. Read von Mises or Adam Smith. Do something - you really, really have no clue what you're talking about.
Somewhere, a bridge is missing its troll.
I always study something before i support or go against it. If you dont mind me asking since you claim what i said was not true what is pure Capitalism? How do people live under pure capitalism?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hachifusa
That's because a society based on anarchy would very quickly crash and burn.Quote:
I"m talking about actual Anarchism, which has never been attempted.
Exactly. Communism is great with small groups.Quote:
A capitalist society quite happily permits communist behaviour. Say you live on a street of 100 people (For ease of numbers.). You could without any trouble (Well, assuming everyone was agreeable to the idea of course. Nice that, opting out, isn't it?) get together and arrange to pool your incomes, to ensure everyone on the street gets funding for their rent, food, heating, electricity, and so forth. It also means you could acquire the resources to buy a plot of land and some tools and farm your own foods. You could buy solar panels and suchlike and produce your own electricity.
Which would explain why the so-called communist regeims were death on individuality.Quote:
The masses don't exist. People are people, not to be numbered, but want to put in their honest, individualistic effort to help themselves, and are easily expolited (as your Party is big on exploitation, you'd have to agree).
Now, that's just insulting.Quote:
And this is coming from someone who was educated by a right-winged school system. Your thinking the way your state wants you to think, and you dont even realize it.
They don't. It doesn't work very well.Quote:
How do people live under pure capitalism?
I agree with you there- in fact, that's what communism originally meant, people who lived in communes, such as the English quakers and diggers, or the American Amish. Of course, they all differed in their veiws, but their ideas eventually lead to the sort of stuff like Marx.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLadyNyara
Really, no societey works outside a small group, even democracy- for true democaracy, everyone must be able to voice their own opinion, but over a nation that would mean constant refferenedums. Hence the system of representational democracy. The trick is to find the sytem which is least broken.
I think it's unfair that people still use Marx and Hardie and the like as examples of 'Why socialism sucks'. These guys were writing years ago, what the say is obviosuly outdated! While Smith, on the other hand, is just about as relevant as ever (greed has always come naturally).
Unfortuanately, modern socialists tend to be political commentators, rather than creating political systems. Michael Moore, for instance. He keeps (rightfully) criticising the capitalist regime, but, strangely, hasn't really ofered any real alternative.
EDIT: Ussually I thrive on this kind of crap, but to me it seems the same old argument that's lasted centuries. I mean, Jesus was doing socialism 2000 years ago, and it didn't sink in. Some people always try to justify their greed. So, I'm either going to ignore this, or start an E0FF revolution. First ten members get to be Commisars.
\Quote:
hasn't really ofered any real alternative.
That's because Roger Moore is a provocator - his goal is to incite debate, argument, and recieve lots of flak in the process. In conclusion, the man's an arse. A fat one, too.
You see, Capitalism is an economical method, which works best under democracy. Communism is more than that - it engulfs a lot of areas, and it talks a lot about how a government should work, how it shouldn't, the values, etc... Socialism, on the other hand, is the equivelant (yet rival) of Capitalism. It doesn't talk much about the goverment system itself - but rather, economic resolutions and stuff like that. Many of those conclusions make sense, at least to me.Quote:
The trick is to find the sytem which is least broken.
Communism, however, is extremely faulty, especially when attempted on very large groups in the format of country-ruling. Time and again it has proven itself to be impossible. The largest group you could have Communism work with is a few hundreds at the most, and they'd have to be very devoted to a certain cause, be willing to sacrifice much for things to work, and most importantly - to know one another. That's ים' the Kibbutzim worked here for a lengthy period of time, untill even they evolved and grew up, their members yearning for more, more money, more freedom, to advance beyond what the Communist system allowed them. To have their own private posssesion (the old 'it's my car - no it's ours' atgument, etc), to have a bigger house, to give their children better or different education, and generally to be independant and not always depend on one another.
Solidarity is very impoprtant. Even in a Capitalistic country, people shouldn't forget about one another. A powerful man can help many others, change the way the country runs, the way the world works. I still believe the strength of humanity is personal quality, not mob-mentallity.
War Angel made some good points- odd, cos some of the capitalists here seem to be talking hypocritical nonsense.
Communism doesn't really work in a modern western nation, that's true. But neither does capitalism. The best solution is a sort of blend, like Sweedish 'free-karket socialism' or Keynesism (is that right?). Personally, I think both these systems are a little too capitalist-freindly, but they give the equality and fairness of a socialist one, while retaining the personal freedom of a capitalist one.
That is, a good capitalist one. Nations like the USA are pretty prone to propaganda. Not just in the traditional style, but as advertising. Have you seen that stuff? it's all 'BuyBuyBuy! You need more stuff!' or 'You're ugly and old and fat and smelly! Buy our crap!' and of course 'Spent all your money on crap? then take out a big loan, and become deeper in debt!'. Capiatlsim seems to force people into a cycle of greed, self-loathing and fear, so that they never stand up for themselves.
Look at the amount of advertising youy see throughout a day. Now, imagine that it wasn't from a hundred different sources, but from one source. Wouldn't that look just like the USSR or Third Reich or something? Bloody creepy!
"Pure" capitalism is ideal if the proper government is put into place (one based on individual liberties). Don't be mistaken for the idea that the middle road is the best. That's what America is based on today. We have all of the problems of socialism and all of the problems of capitalism mixed into one grabbag. We have a constitutionally-limited dictator, our money is taken away but isn't put to any use, and we can't burn our own flag.
In short, we're starting to suck. I can go in-depth as to why I think pure capitlaism is good, but like I said, I am not for hearing supposed "objective" viewpoints as to how extremism is "bad", no matter what.