It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why my mind is closing towards Capitalism

page: 45
92
<< 42  43  44    46  47  48 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Again you fail to realise what you call 'socialism' that you think is spreading is not 'socialism'.

I think we have provided ample evidence that shows that. Whether you like socialism, or think it won't work, is irrelevant, because we are arguing two completely different ideologies. You want to think socialism is the propagandized version, not what it really is. History proves these terms are being misrepresented by the establishment, and their true meanings twisted. It's a classic way to control the population to accept a system that is not in their best interest, as many working class unfortunately do.

You could be of course be doing this on purpose, in order not to have to admit that socialism isn't what the right wing state has taught you it is, because that might mean completely re-thinking your whole life philosophy. We all find ways to justify our beliefs. There is no way I will ever be able to convince a true capitalist of this, Human nature makes you want to maintain what is working for you. I don't think it can ever change without violence, but I'm not prepared to do that myself, so I do not advocate any kind of revolution or insurrection. Capitalism will die naturally, it's already started. But unless the population is educated we will just repeat the same mistake.


As Socialism in general, Anarchism was born among the people; and it will continue to be full of life and creative power only as long as it remains a thing of the people. From 'Modern Science and Anarchism', Peter Kropotkin, 1908.


The Anarchism of Peter Kropotkin

"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." Karl Marx

Marx embraced socialism after reading Proudhon's 'What is property?'.


Not only was Marx influenced by the economic ideas of Proudhon, but he also felt the influence of the great French socialist's anarchist theories, and in one of his works from the period he attacks the state the same way Proudhon did...


libcom.org...

'What is Property', Proudhon, was the work that anarchism was basically formed around. The idea of stateless socialism. But there were different ideas as to how to control labour, from the worker-unions of the syndicalists, to the communism of the collectivists.

The anarchists apposed Marx's state-socialism.

"liberty without socialism is privilege, injustice; and that socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality" Mikhail Bakunin

They wanted liberty (no state, anarchism).


Mikhail Bakunin

Influential Russian collectivist anarchist, revolutionary and major critic of Karl Marx who was eventually expelled from the International Workingmen's Association in the dispute that spelled the end of the First International.


libcom.org...


edit on 2/3/2012 by ANOK because: typo




posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
Again you fail to realise what you call 'socialism' that you think is spreading is not 'socialism'.


ANOK - Give it a rest! Refute the logic or go away!



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimmyNeutron

Originally posted by ANOK
Again you fail to realise what you call 'socialism' that you think is spreading is not 'socialism'.


ANOK - Give it a rest! Refute the logic or go away!


Have you read ANY of my posts, or do you just not get it?

Why are you getting so angry, can't we have a good debate without throwing your toys out of your pram?

You give it a rest lol. I'll post whatever I want as long as it's on topic, you don't like you don't have to read it.

All you are doing is showing your frustration because you fear the truth, and the truth once it's laid out is hard to deny. It's like when you found out Santa is not real last year.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by JimmyNeutron
 


the problem is when these top capitalists own the media, and minds of the population, and the banks, and the corporations, and they have trillions of dollars, and dont have to worry about their means of survival, or the means of others survival, yet can look at the word as a canvass to paint their image of what the world should be from their own genius and perfect imagination... that is the problem,,..because not everyone can keep up,, and thats what they want... they dont want things to work well for everyone.. if they did, their policies, speeches,and systems would dictate and promote that..the last 20 years of history would be spent by the diplomats of the world seeking and reaching peace with all nations .. do you not think that can be done? do you deny that man has the capability of living in peace and harmony, despite what has been layed out by history of past,, do you deny that potential within the spirit of humanity that has been craving to be established since the spirit of humanity was created?



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by JimmyNeutron
 


YOU SAY you follow jesus??!?!?

do you know how hard it would be for jesus to proclaim his message to the people of the world....

he would be using the same arguments we are using... and what would you be doing but hangin him up to dry...

no offense and please deny me this is just a theory of observation and will be quite rude,,, like money, and like the system,,, the doctrine of christianity is another tool you use to survive on this earth... because you believe it is the most realistic way to get what YOU want... heaven... the only reason you believe is because you fear if you did not,, then you would miss out.... when really you are missing out on the true teachings and ideologies, from that son of man..



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Your being a hipocrite. You say:

Originally posted by JimmyNeutron
Revolutionary War was inherently about replacing monarchism with republicanism (I don't find capitalism anywhere in here). In fact, the early United States implemented many of the same economic policies that were already in place. It was a political cleansing if you will... These people were not killed, they were relocated. I'm not saying it was very nice, but to call it capitalism at the point of a gun is ludicrous.


After having posted this.

Capitalism enables me, as an individual, to pursue what motivates me by offering an ideological agnostic medium (money) separate from the collective. i.e. I don't have to drink the Kool Aid!

In other words, the greed inherent in human nature motivates me to subjugate my individual tastes & desires to a larger enterprise. Greed will ALWAYS undermine and destroy your utopian socialist dream and devolve it into either Fascism or Communism. EVERY SINGLE TIME!!!!

You are at best naive to think otherwise.

So did this implementation of republicansim, at gunpoint, also include an element of capitalism and if not how is it that you can say you enjoy capitalism?


I'm pretty sure I didn't say that it was... What's your point?

That the capitalism that you claim to enjoy is in fact part of the system that was implemented at gunpoint.


edit on 3-2-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimmyNeutron
Revolutionary War was inherently about replacing monarchism with republicanism (I don't find capitalism anywhere in here). In fact, the early United States implemented many of the same economic policies that were already in place. It was a political cleansing if you will... These people were not killed, they were relocated. I'm not saying it was very nice, but to call it capitalism at the point of a gun is ludicrous.


There was no mention of the word 'capitalism' because the word was not in use at that time.

First use of the term was 1836 by a socialist (details in other posts in this thread).

But capitalism, as in the 'private ownership of the means of production', was certainly already in place, and had been since the end of feudalism. Capitalism is the system that replaced feudalism.

"Just as capitalism replaced feudalism, socialism will in its turn replace capitalism and lead to a stateless, classless society which will emerge after a transitional period, the "dictatorship of the proletariat". Marx.



edit on 2/3/2012 by ANOK because: typo



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   


The system you propose (enforcing what you deem a "good life" on ALL people) is called Totalitarianism. Its what Hitler and Stalin promised.
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Ok, first of all Totalitarianism is a form of a political system and the system I'm proposing does not have any political system. It is beyond it. From time immemorial we have seen power in the hands of few has been the reason of corruption. It would be unwise to let things continue this way, so how about we try an approach which does not have a political system at all? Absence of political system means anarchy and the first thing that pops up into people's minds is 'chaos'! which I consider to be absurd because it is such a baseless opinion as we have yet to put this idea to test. Political science is a subject like any other which has evolved over many centuries and should be discarded if it no longer holds any true relevance.

The concept of a resource based economy (or RBE for short) could be considered an Anarcho-Technocracy in which the most relevant practical knowledge required to run society are carried out by technicians. It would be an open-sourced society, meaning that anyone could contribute to any aspect of society they wanted, assuming they have the requisite knowledge or skill to do so.
I could go on filling pages elaborating what the idea truly represents but to save myself the time and effort, I would suggest you to research this system more thoroughly.

Talking about being in control of your own destiny, are you sure you are in this system? You do not even have the liberty of pursuing an interest which does not involve some monetary gain. Your outlook is greatly influenced by the media (which represents the propaganda of the government and huge corporations). So the choice of free will right now is just a mere illusion.



posted on Feb, 3 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   
It does nothing but put the means of producing, growing food, building houses, whatever is needed, into the hands of those that actually do the work.

People do not have to be forced to do that, they only have to know they can.

Give a man a fish (frozen from tescos, and charge him an arm and a leg for it) and he will eat for a day, give him a fishing rod, and a plot of land with a nice little river running through it with maybe a nice shrubbery here and ther...sry thanks mister may I have some more please...you know the one lol...

I tip my cloth cap to you...


edit on 2/3/2012 by ANOK because: typo



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by JimmyNeutron

Originally posted by ANOK
Again you fail to realise what you call 'socialism' that you think is spreading is not 'socialism'.


ANOK - Give it a rest! Refute the logic or go away!


Have you read ANY of my posts, or do you just not get it?



Clearly I get it better than you do...



Why are you getting so angry, can't we have a good debate without throwing your toys out of your pram?


No anger involved here - if you were actually participating in the debate that would be another thing entirely.



You give it a rest lol. I'll post whatever I want as long as it's on topic, you don't like you don't have to read it.


You are absolutely correct... It's about the only thing you've been right about in this entire thread.



All you are doing is showing your frustration because you fear the truth, and the truth once it's laid out is hard to deny. It's like when you found out Santa is not real last year.


ROFLMAO -> Enjoy your ignorance...



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by JimmyNeutron
 


YOU SAY you follow jesus??!?!?

do you know how hard it would be for jesus to proclaim his message to the people of the world....

he would be using the same arguments we are using... and what would you be doing but hangin him up to dry...



He wouldn't have to argue - start healing lepers, making the blind see, and lame walk and maybe someone might want to actually listen to you. Since you can't AND aren't even able to put up a coherent argument addressing the actual flaws in your philosophical and ideological underpinnings it's a moot point. And that you would compare your message to His is about as ballsy as it comes.



no offense and please deny me this is just a theory of observation and will be quite rude,,, like money, and like the system,,, the doctrine of christianity is another tool you use to survive on this earth... because you believe it is the most realistic way to get what YOU want... heaven... the only reason you believe is because you fear if you did not,, then you would miss out.... when really you are missing out on the true teachings and ideologies, from that son of man..


Hmmmm.... This is not the thread in which to open up this can of worms. Suffice it to say that you've just shown how ignorant you truly are.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik
Your being a hipocrite.


Besides displaying your atrocious grammar and spelling, you haven't made any sort of case that I'm being hypocritical.



So did this implementation of republicansim, at gunpoint, also include an element of capitalism and if not how is it that you can say you enjoy capitalism?


I'm pretty sure I didn't say that it was... What's your point?

That the capitalism that you claim to enjoy is in fact part of the system that was implemented at gunpoint.


You make no sense...



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by JimmyNeutron
Revolutionary War was inherently about replacing monarchism with republicanism (I don't find capitalism anywhere in here). In fact, the early United States implemented many of the same economic policies that were already in place. It was a political cleansing if you will... These people were not killed, they were relocated. I'm not saying it was very nice, but to call it capitalism at the point of a gun is ludicrous.


There was no mention of the word 'capitalism' because the word was not in use at that time.


Do you really want to argue semantics? That's what people do when they have lost an argument and are trying to save face...

I could really care less if the word/label existed at that time. Capitalism was not an inherent underpinning of the Revolutionary War and perpetuation of capitalism was not forced at the point of a gun. It is ludicrous for you to even try to make that as an argument.


First use of the term was 1836 by a socialist (details in other posts in this thread).


Yawn!



"Just as capitalism replaced feudalism, socialism will in its turn replace capitalism and lead to a stateless, classless society which will emerge after a transitional period, the "dictatorship of the proletariat". Marx.


Let me know how that works for ya... The Eurozone is a great start on that - not!



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 01:07 AM
link   
reply to post by JimmyNeutron
 


Of course you wouldn't see it. Atrocious spelling and grammar aside, the point is still the same. You claim that you are content living in a capitalist system that was put in place at gun point then say that capitalism isn't implemented that way. It's rather simple but you will probably never see it or admit it.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by User8911
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 


I love that analogy on beer since it makes money seem like the main thing that matters in life, well for you at least. Happiness is much better then money, rest assured.


This is yet another element of where Awake's argument was flawed. Capitalist advocates accuse other people of being victims of mind control; when in reality, that works both ways. Mao brainwashed people, for sure; but again, mind control in general is an element of psychopathic politics, regardless of the economic theory being discussed.

The other thing I'm having to try to come to terms with, is the idea that people who disagree with me are going to accuse me of being disingenuous, dishonest, or whatever else regardless of what I try and say or do. I'd prefer it if they simply stuck to attempting to refute my argument, but that is sadly too much to expect from some people.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by aravoth
You are lost. Keynes saved western countries? Government cannot spend anything, it has no profit margin, it produces nothing. Everything it has it takes from it's people. So if it borrows a ton of money to stimulate an economy who has to pay it back? Do you not understand that debt matters, did the last 4 years teach you nothing at all? Do you even understand that the real estate bubble was caused by government stimulation of the housing sector? Thats what caused the imbalance, and the eventual burst of that bubble,

Your system creates bubbles, and encourages reckless consumption, and you don't even realize it. Jesus....
edit on 2-2-2012 by aravoth because: (no reason given)


You call me lost? I learn these facts in this thing called university, by professionals who have either held positions in government or trained those who have. My instructors train leaders of society. You're telling me that their instruction is wrong? I am not a fool and if I did not agree with their logic, then I would not be under their guidence. I think you are the one who is lost within your ideology of competition.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
This is where your thinking is wrong. The guy running the business is not any more valuable than the guys driving the trucks. If the pay was determined by the desirability of the job, the less desirable job = the most pay, then the guy running the operation, sitting in the AC when he's not sneaking off to the golf course, would make less money than the driver. It is time to stop valuing people on their ability to extract money from other people and actually start weighing their actual contribution to society.


The amount of money a person gets, actually does depend on merit; it's just that said merit is the psychopathic (and hence morally inverted) kind. Under a psychopathic economic system, individuals are rewarded in proportion to their practically applied narcissism; that is, their ability to build and then manipulatively dominate a social network.

The current economy is based on a very specific set of values, as mentioned. It is simply that said values are psychopathic. Anyone who wants to accuse me of simply being a Socialist, because they need labels in order to excuse them from needing to think, need to understand that if we had a Socialist OR pure Capitalist system under our current leadership, stratification, elitism, and the psychopathic value system would remain constant regardless.

We need to figure out a way to prevent psychopathic rule. Before we decide which economic paradigm we use, that has to come first. Capitalism does, however, make psychopathic rule easier, because under a Capitalist system, the psychopaths don't have to lie as much, because baseline Capitalist theory is a lot closer to their real nature. What happened in Russia ended up being the exact opposite of what they claimed it was.


The world really sucks under buyer beware.


This is an extension of the psychopathic value system, as mentioned.


I don't think that anyone who advocates socialism believes that merit shouldn't be a consideration in people's pay.


We need to stop using currency by itself, as the sole unit of measure. Currency gets used as the sole unit of measure primarily because non-psychopaths tend to be lazy, and prefer to have easy metrics which don't require them to think; psychopaths very actively encourage non-psychopathic inertia. Psychopaths usually being much more highly motivated than non-psychopaths, is another major element of our current problem.


Thus the beer glass crap is just bs propaganda.


Yes, but it is what he believes, which is why he quoted it.

With 5 glasses it would be more like 40,45,50,55,60 weighting. They believe that people who give the most value to society should earn more. They believe those that put in the effort should be able to live confortable lives. They believe that everyone is expected to contribute in whatever way they can. Thus you wouldn't be supporting a bunch of deadbeats like is always insinuated. For example: Inventors would get a base pay and bonuses based on their discoveries. Factory workers would have still incentive to produce. Bill Gates would still be a multi-multi-millionaire, but not a billionaire. they believe any changeover would give credit where past credit is due, meaning Bill Gates would still enjoy his grand lifestyle, albeit with a few less homes, etc. I do not think it wise to let anyone dominate so many of the resources we all fight over.


Bottom line is that we have to legislate against greed so we can start moving forward as a society.


Legislation won't help at all. The Law is only effective against non-psychopaths. Psychopaths don't care about it at all.


If you are not with society, then you are against it.


This is a form of thinking that is promoted by psychopaths. Absolutism encourages and promotes conflict and violence, which feeds them and is what they want. We do not need to be violent towards them. All we need to do is become vigilant and aware of their tactics, and stop being willing to accept their appeals to laziness and abdication of personal responsibility.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
If that sounds good to you, I guess you support abortions at the expense of tax payers. I guess you support Feminism and you support labor unions in prisons.
edit on 1-2-2012 by thehoneycomb because: (no reason given)


I support feminism, to the extent of such being defined as women having the same right to vote, and the same educational and economic opportunities as men.

What I do not support, are seperatist lesbians and/or misandrists who insist on referring to my gender as disposable, and believing that men do not have the right to exist. I also do not condone the behaviour of any woman who uses her vagina as a legal or economic bear trap, and there are some (not all) who do. I also do not support the concept of additional legal protections against violence towards women or minorities of any kind, (whether religious, sexual, ethnic, or whatever else) and this is because I believe in legal equality.

I will also support the existence of labour unions in prisons, if corporations are going to insist on attempting to use prisoners as cheap labour; and especially if the share price of prison corporations, is dependent on the number of people they have incarcerated, as a cheap labour pool for said corporations.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
I think it WON'T work. I KNOW it won't. Look at the power concentrated in Washington and Wall Street right NOW. Do you actually think that politicians and bankers and heads of industry are going to suddenly step aside and turn over their power to the people under socialism?

I don't know what you're smoking, but I don't want any of it.


The concentration of power that you and many others are complaining about, Awake, is not due to either Capitalism or Socialism as economic ideologies. It is due to the fact that said individuals who concentrate power are psychopaths. As a result, you could have whatever your own economic ideal is, and said concentration of power would still occur, for as long as you had psychopathic governance.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by 1curious1
reply to post by petrus4
 
These people cannot be helped unless they are willing to do for themselves. How can you offer support, but not ENABLE them into continuing their demise. I don't have the answers. I can't even figure out how to convince my own family member she is an Enabler, of the worst kind. She thinks she's doing a loving, caring thing... But she's really just creating another useless blood sucker on our system.


It might surprise you to learn, that I actually agree with this.

I have emphatically tried to state that, as much as possible, I want to put everything on the table, and try to examine all possible solutions. I don't necessarily advocate universal health care at all, if said health care is centralised. You cannot have any universal system which is centralised, and maintain accountability. It simply is not possible, because no single human mind is capable of keeping track of that many different people at once.

I have not once consciously self-identified as a socialist, or said that I necessarily want a centrally planned system. People believe in projected dualities, because it saves them the trouble of having to think, which is one of the things that they crave avoiding at all costs.

A profound lack of personal and individual responsibility among non-psychopaths, is the single main reason why psychopaths are able to maintain their power. People being willing to exercise their own sovereignty is one of the main things we need, in order to get away from psychopathic rule.



new topics

top topics



 
92
<< 42  43  44    46  47  48 >>

log in

join