Why my mind is closing towards Capitalism

reply to post by BBalazs


Can I ask what drives you to keep spewing out these extremely insidious and insulting posts? You are very much like electricuniverse, who has that exact same tendency. Haven't you noticed with how much respect we treat you? You are being ungrateful.

reply to post by dadgad


Thank you. What you posted in your quote from the Wiki sounded nice. I really did like it.

Originally posted by syrinx2112
reply to post by dadgad

 

Thank you. What you posted in your quote from the Wiki sounded nice. I really did like it.

Your welcome. It was a very special period. Unique in every way. You see they, the workers, the anarchists and libertarian socialists, were doing really well given the circumstances. They were implementing real socialism. And they had everyone against them. The fascists of course, but even Stalin betrayed them.

Originally posted by syrinx2112
reply to post by petrus4

 

Funny you say this: It happened to me some months back:
There is this other sports bar who "was" adamant on taking my customers...
This went on for about 2 months. I headed over to his bar one eve, purchased a beer and talked with the owner. He didn't know who I was. I introduced myself, he looked at me and said "What are you doing here?" I stated, I wanted to meet you and talk with you. He then says, "you here to take some ideas?" I said no, I then said, I was thinking of starting up a pool (billiards) league tournament.. Your house against my house. We swap weeks and share the customers... He looked at me, smiled and didn't think more about it, he said, YES. He then apologized. Now we are actually a team, his house against my house in Volleyball, Pool, Darts, Singing, Poker…. Our workers seem to be happy, wages are great and their tips are awesome, profits are great for the owners… It’s a win-win…. We share ideas and even at times when he is short on staff, we share.... My point is, I could either have become this other guy who is being mean in stealing my customers and do the same back to him (fueled by fear of losing business). But I totally saw it as an opportunity for ALL to enjoy.. You may say “nice and all” but what about others who are not fortunate to find a good situation. I created my situation, go create yours!

what is interesting about this is that this is pretty much a perfect example of a staple of socialism called "mutual aid":

In the animal world we have seen that the vast majority of species live in societies, and that they find in association the best arms for the struggle for life: understood, of course, in its wide Darwinian sense—not as a struggle for the sheer means of existence, but as a struggle against all natural conditions unfavourable to the species. The animal species, in which individual struggle has been reduced to its narrowest limits, and the practice of mutual aid has attained the greatest development, are invariably the most numerous, the most prosperous, and the most open to further progress. The mutual protection which is obtained in this case, the possibility of attaining old age and of accumulating experience, the higher intellectual development, and the further growth of sociable habits, secure the maintenance of the species, its extension, and its further progressive evolution. The unsociable species, on the contrary, are doomed to decay.

here Pyotr Kropotkin is speaking specifically of mutual aid as it applies to the evolution and sustainability of a species, but the same can be extrapolated, and has been time and again, to business relations and the economy. the same could be said within a business, however. some of the most successful business owners -- and i am sure you will agree and probably run your business as such -- are those that ask for and often trust the opinions of their workers when making certain business decisions. that is why the worker cooperative model is so successful. this mechanism is already in place, because the workers, of necessity, have a say in the business as they are all equal owners.

Originally posted by BBalazs
reply to post by ANOK

 

if your pay check is directly related to profit, i.e. merit, it is called capitalism...
ff course none of you would know.
you are as they say "useful idiots", and that is not an insult, but who your commie comrades view those naive enough tot actually believe.

how are we defining capitalism here?? because i think you have a pretty atrocious misconception of what that term actually means. and i'm not just talking out of my ass. when i refer to capitalism i refer to the textbook definition, being that i have studied economics at the college level and could actually tell you the textbook definition.

and please quite throwing in the anarchist with the commies!
the 2 are NOT the same.

here's a quote from Murray Rothbard, the father of "anarcho"-capitalism:

"One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy . . . ‘Libertarians’ . . . had long been simply a polite word for left-wing [sic!] anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over, and more properly from the view of etymology; since we were proponents of individual liberty and therefore of the individual’s right to his property.” (Murray N. Rothbard, The Betrayal of the American Right, Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, 2007, p. 83)"

anarchism.pageabode.com...

so here, not only does Rothbard acknowledge the prior existence of communist and syndicalist (unionist) strains of anarchism, but he even acknowledges that the right-wing actually appropriated the term "libertarian" from left-wing anarchism.

Anarchist propose extreme private property, NO STATE!

you are referencing individualist anarchists here, probably particularly the "anarcho"-capitalists. there is a LONG lineage of anarchists that pre-date any notion of "anarcho"-capitalism by over 100 years. the funny think, however, is that even the original individualist anarchists opposed capitalism:

"Yes. The individualist anarchists desired a society in which there would no longer be capitalists and workers, only workers. The worker would receive the full product of his/her labour, so ending the exploitation of labour by capital. Moreover, such an aim logically implies a society based upon artisan, not wage, labour and workers would, therefore, not be separated from control of the means of production and so sell the product of their labour, not the labour power itself. As such, while it would be a market system, it would not be a capitalist one."

www.spunk.org...

Off course none of you studied political philosophy so have no idea.

who said we haven't??? have you ever considered the possibility that we HAVE studied political philosophy is the reason we have come to the conclusions we have??

Keep smoking the commie pipe, but leave anarchist out of this.

edit on 9-2-2012 by BBalazs because: (no reason given)

and also, all your naive ideas have been debunked in previous pages, its just entertaining to read how blind you people are...or are you all shills?

edit on 9-2-2012 by BBalazs because: (no reason given)

the ad hominem attacks and unmerited assertions that our ideas have been "debunked" without any corroboration of facts whatsoever were a nice touch. keep it up!

reply to post by eboyd


Mutual aid, I like that sound... But to be fare, my business wasn't in any duress. It was his business. But the person who I am by nature did not want to see this person go out of business. I kept telling myself, if he would only focus on his business rather than on me, or the possible threat I could be, he could turn his bar around quickly... So I just basically wanted to snap him out of the fear that was for sure going to take him down... I really didn't do this for my $$ benefit, truly I did not, but as I was concerned (yes, I don't know why, but I was concerned for him) ideas started to flash through my head. So that is what I presented to him, the ideas a possible solution to his worries.

I think he and I were able to use mutual aid in a non political (using political loosely) way, I just saw it as plain good business sense... I really did. I realize people like to eat, drink and be merry and that is what "we" will deliver together. We are not business partners at all, nor do we care to be, but, I think we know how to stimulate our little economy in our own little corner of our little city, I call this my own little “social” experiment...

No animal here nor a greedy $$ money hungry basta-d...
I will not steal your money.
I will not lie to you for your money.
I will not be pitied nor will I receive tossed money at me.
I will earn your money on my terms, living my dreams...
I will always help the ill...

If money wasn't in the picture.
I will not steal your food or raid your garden.
I will not lie to you for your food.
I will not be pitied nor will I receive tossed scraps of food.
I will earn my food with, by, umm, well I will garden right next to you I guess. Well whatever I do in a such a society, I guess that’s how I will earn it.
I will always help the ill.

Originally posted by syrinx2112
reply to post by eboyd

 

Mutual aid, I like that sound... But to be fare, my business wasn't in any duress. It was his business. But the person who I am by nature did not want to see this person go out of business. I kept telling myself, if he would only focus on his business rather than on me, or the possible threat I could be, he could turn his bar around quickly... So I just basically wanted to snap him out of the fear that was for sure going to take him down... I really didn't do this for my $$ benefit, truly I did not, but as I was concerned (yes, I don't know why, but I was concerned for him) ideas started to flash through my head. So that is what I presented to him, the ideas a possible solution to his worries.

I think he and I were able to use mutual aid in a non political (using political loosely) way, I just saw it as plain good business sense... I really did. I realize people like to eat, drink and be merry and that is what "we" will deliver together. We are not business partners at all, nor do we care to be, but, I think we know how to stimulate our little economy in our own little corner of our little city, I call this my own little “social” experiment...

No animal here nor a greedy $$ money hungry basta-d...
I will not steal your money.
I will not lie to you for your money.
I will not be pitied nor will I receive tossed money at me.
I will earn your money on my terms, living my dreams...
I will always help the ill...

If money wasn't in the picture.
I will not steal your food or raid your garden.
I will not lie to you for your food.
I will not be pitied nor will I receive tossed scraps of food.
I will earn my food with, by, umm, well I will garden right next to you I guess. Well whatever I do in a such a society, I guess that’s how I will earn it.
I will always help the ill.

that is absolutely admirable. as for mutual aid, it isn't really a political concept so much as it is a natural mode of the animal world. Pyotr Kropotkin, a Russian Prince who denounced his crown to become a strong voice within the anarchist communist movement and also to become a social scientist and evolutionary biologist, adopted the concept of mutual aid from Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and debated back and forth with Thomas Huxley about whether or not mutual aid was a factor of evolution. the culmination of these debates was Kropotkin's book, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, which you may find interesting. here's the ebook:

www.gutenberg.org...

allow me to share my experience with socialism if I may. I lived off the grid for 3 years at Rainbow Farm in Oregon...you know, the Rainbow family thing...nice people, really...

Anyway, there was the remnant of a commune there. I say remnant because, since the "leaders" left to educate their hippy children in Public School, there was no common goal. so , there were 17 individuals, 5 of them children, living there throughout my time there.

Of the 12 adults living there, 5 of them had a paying job. only one of them worked more than 20 hrs a week.One of those five worked for himself, but admitted that he could live on 5,000.00usd PER YEAR. I love these people dearly, but ---well look. THEY WERE ALL LIVING ON GOVT PAYCHECKS! It is my opinion that, these people just got comfortable with the social welfare system--and had no reason to do anything, for themselves, or their kids.

You can bet, I left that place in a hurry--it was a failure.

The reason it failed? Lack of common goals, and a desire to not only survive, but thrive. they are living in consensual poorness. See, a man can make work, and profit, in a depression, but it takes SAND! this place is the example of what will happen under Socialism.

I know this, because America is already socialist--take from those who have(even your neighbor) and share! Well im here to tell you, Socialism isnt fair--its opposite of fair. And it leads to a disempowerd state of mind.

Everytime I wanted to cut a tree to sell some firewood, it was a big group thing , where some people thought they deserved to be involved, even if they didnt do the work to make it happen. This is a very dangerous mindset. Not everyone wants to contribute. You cant force them too. Its better to seek out a common place with aligned minds....

anyway, to the OP. please please please research the history of property rights in america, and limiting federal jurisdiction. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel, just look at the ORIGINAL Constitution for the united States.

I have to admit--after this experience at the Farm, and reading the few posts on what Socialism is, and is not--Im very concerned for my freedom and my ability to make my life as good as i can.

thanks, i look forward to the dialog.

Originally posted by rainbowbearAmerica is already socialist--take from those who have(even your neighbor) and share!

That isn't socialism. America is capitalist, albeit not laissez-faire/free market capitalism but it's capitalism nonetheless. Socialism is the workers ownership of production, no workers in America own the means of production. The world has never seen a socialist nation, only small implementations in cities.

Originally posted by syrinx2112
reply to post by petrus4

 

Hello Petrus,

Please share with me “your” experience with starting a business and competing with another owner/CEO and you ended up at the bottom.

I haven't had an experience exactly like that, as such; however, I will tell you what I have had happen.

I once applied for a telemarketing job, not long after having left high school. It was the only job I have ever applied for, and this was nearly 20 years ago, now. Not long before that, I had finished reading Bill Gates' ghostwritten autobiography, The Road Ahead. Although I can't remember the exact specifics of what I wrote, I got that job on the basis of quoting The Road Ahead on that job application form, almost verbatim. I don't think I quoted any of Gates' actual life experiences, but I did quote his philosophy.

I did not do that in order to be purposely amoral as such; it was actually a conscious experiment, where I wanted to find out whether or not practically engaging in sociopathic behaviour would result in my advancement or not, as I had read. I left the job the next day, feeling nauseated with myself, and also ashamed of the fact that two other applicants had been prevented from getting the job, due to my use of dishonesty.

Since that time, I have also read Machiavelli's The Prince, Sun Tzu's The Art of War, and Robert Greene's 48 Laws of Power, and his second book, The Art of Seduction. I will admit to having used several of the principles within that last book in order to obtain the relationship I had with my last ex-girlfriend.

In other words, I have a sufficient knowledge, both theoretically and applied, of how the game is played, that I could become an extremely successful secondary psychopath, if I so chose. I choose not to, partly because, beginning in 2007, I have had active and very real contact with Kali Ma, an aspect of the Goddess within the context of what most would refer to as Hinduism. She demands a particular ethical stance.

The main reason, however, is that I am also capable of empathy, to the point where I have at times been plagued by such. I have learned from real experience that there is a direct relationship between the amount of money that a person can accumulate, and their degree of willingness to engage in psychopathic, socially and environmentally lethal behaviour; and as a result, beyond the bare minimum that I need for physical survival, I have resolved to very consciously and deliberately keep myself in as advanced a state of poverty as possible, while remaining alive.

Funny you say this: It happened to me some months back:
There is this other sports bar who "was" adamant on taking my customers...
This went on for about 2 months. I headed over to his bar one eve, purchased a beer and talked with the owner. He didn't know who I was. I introduced myself, he looked at me and said "What are you doing here?" I stated, I wanted to meet you and talk with you. He then says, "you here to take some ideas?" I said no, I then said, I was thinking of starting up a pool (billiards) league tournament.. Your house against my house. We swap weeks and share the customers... He looked at me, smiled and didn't think more about it, he said, YES. He then apologized. Now we are actually a team, his house against my house in Volleyball, Pool, Darts, Singing, Poker…. Our workers seem to be happy, wages are great and their tips are awesome, profits are great for the owners… It’s a win-win…. We share ideas and even at times when he is short on staff, we share.... My point is, I could either have become this other guy who is being mean in stealing my customers and do the same back to him (fueled by fear of losing business). But I totally saw it as an opportunity for ALL to enjoy.. You may say “nice and all” but what about others who are not fortunate to find a good situation. I created my situation, go create yours!

This is a genuinely inspiring story. I may have to reconsider my own position, at least to a degree.

Originally posted by eboyd
what is interesting about this is that this is pretty much a perfect example of a staple of socialism called "mutual aid":

This is true as well, Eboyd.

If there is one thing I have learned, it is that the definition of positive morality is both universal and timeless. Perhaps it is simply a failing of my own, that I have not sought to figure out how I could make an income, while also bringing real benefit to others.

Originally posted by rainbowbear
allow me to share my experience with socialism if I may. I lived off the grid for 3 years at Rainbow Farm in Oregon...you know, the Rainbow family thing...nice people, really...

Anyway, there was the remnant of a commune there. I say remnant because, since the "leaders" left to educate their hippy children in Public School, there was no common goal. so , there were 17 individuals, 5 of them children, living there throughout my time there.

If not all Capitalists are psychopaths, then I think it's also fair to say that not all Socialist advocates are malingering, idolent parasites.

The reason it failed? Lack of common goals, and a desire to not only survive, but thrive. they are living in consensual poorness. See, a man can make work, and profit, in a depression, but it takes SAND! this place is the example of what will happen under Socialism.

It's an example of what might happen in some places with socialist systems; just as equivalents of Gordon Gekko exist in places which adhere to Capitalist economics. People are human, on both sides.

Everytime I wanted to cut a tree to sell some firewood, it was a big group thing , where some people thought they deserved to be involved, even if they didnt do the work to make it happen. This is a very dangerous mindset. Not everyone wants to contribute. You cant force them too. Its better to seek out a common place with aligned minds....

In a scenario like that, I would be looking at what each individual was doing to spend their time. I am extremely skeptical of the idea that all, or even most of them, were literally spending every waking minute of every day, sitting on their backsides and smoking marijuana. The descriptions people often make of the level of indolence of so-called "hippies," are almost always highly exaggerated.

More commonly, there is a lack of imagination about how these individuals could still be providing benefit to their communities. Granted, if they are primarily musical or visual artists, then that is not the same as raising food; but it is entirely possible that they could barter whatever art they produce, even if they didn't want money to be involved.

The point is that literally everyone does work of some sort. You would need to literally be in a coma not to. Being semi comatose from smoking ganj for hours on end does get seriously boring, after a while; and yes, I speak from experience.

Even though I spend a lot of my time playing Minecraft, that often still involves a need for mathematical skill, among other things. People online have also made real money from creating documentation about how to do certain things in that and other games, as well. Said documentation is considered to have value for other people, so they buy it. So the claim that people literally sit around doing nothing, is generally garbage.

If they know how to draw, they can very possibly become an architect. If they know how to prepare food, let them cook for the group they are living in. If they have an interest in herbalism, then maybe they can also learn how to set bones, so if someone on the property injures themselves, they can patch that person up.

Hopefully you will get my point. There is no such thing as a lazy person; simply someone who hasn't discovered what they like to do. If they figure that out, they won't be lazy.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Apart from Zeitgeist, OWS and Protocols-of-Zion

The way you write about the Protocols, strongly implies that you don't really know anything about them, and are simply dismissing them out of hand. I would ask you to read them, if you haven't; because your dismissal of them will then have more credibility.

Originally posted by petrus4
The way you write about the Protocols, strongly implies that you don't really know anything about them,

Im familiar with the protocols since decades. Here's a thread about them I wrote years ago.

Marx and Hitler believed that jewish capitalists were responsible for all the worlds ills. They used to "protocols" to justify their views.

With what right do you dismiss what thousands of Historians with credentials, hundreds of thousands of studied journalists, scholars, reporters, politicians who know that the Protocols are a malicious hoax that socialists wrote up to denigrate the rich?

Check this one out too: Tyrants who love conspiracy-theories.

Socalists want workers to own the means of production. We on the other hand want the creators of the tools to own the means of production. Creatorship should equal ownership.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
With what right do you dismiss what thousands of Historians with credentials, hundreds of thousands of studied journalists, scholars, reporters, politicians who know that the Protocols are a malicious hoax that socialists wrote up to denigrate the rich?

I'm fairly certain that I've written before, that whether the Protocols actually are a hoax or not, is irrelevant. The point is that, for me at least, they have insightful things to say about the way the world is run, irrespective of whether or not they are authentic, or who wrote them. Call it a case of the truth being stranger than fiction, if you like.

Also, your specific mention of historians being credentialed, is irrelevant. That is known as an appeal to authority, and is a logical fallacy.

Originally posted by petrus4
I'm fairly certain that I've written before, that whether the Protocols actually are a hoax or not, is irrelevant.

Truth is not relevant? Go figure.

they have insightful things to say about the way the world is run, irrespective of whether or not they are authentic, or who wrote them

What the protocols describe is nothing like the world is run. There is no hidden committee that "controls the media" and cooperates with banks, the movie industry, the music industry and whatever else "they" supposedly control.

Not to look into the many different cultures and competing agendas in the world is a sign of research-laziness.

Also, your specific mention of historians being credentialed, is irrelevant. That is known as an appeal to authority, and is a logical fallacy

So what you are saying is that 99% of all historians, scholars, journalists, scientists, philosophers, theologians are wrong about how the world works, and you are right? OK, if you say so.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by petrus4
I'm fairly certain that I've written before, that whether the Protocols actually are a hoax or not, is irrelevant.

Truth is not relevant? Go figure.

What I meant was that the authenticity (or the identity) of the authorship is irrelevant, if the material it contains is valuable. One of the ways in which I differ from the majority of conventional thinkers on the Internet, is that I judge ideas on what I am able to discover about their merit, and generally disregard either the identity or the credentials of an idea's author in the process.

In other words, I don't give a flying Continental whether the Queen, the Pope, or Richard Dawkins is the author of a particular statement. The ideas themselves are either correct, or they're not. It's fairly simple.

What the protocols describe is nothing like the world is run. There is no hidden committee that "controls the media" and cooperates with banks, the movie industry, the music industry and whatever else "they" supposedly control.

Obviously, I disagree.

So what you are saying is that 99% of all historians, scholars, journalists, scientists, philosophers, theologians are wrong about how the world works, and you are right? OK, if you say so.

I have not said that that is definitely the case; but given various other things that I have encountered in my travels, I would certainly not be as willing to dismiss the possibility.

reply to post by eboyd


I love Anarchism, and I love the Anarchists that took over Barcelona. It is so amazing, they were doing so well. For a few years Barcelona was anarchist. They kicked out the church, kicked out the landowners, the monarchs, the bourgeoisie and the capitalists, there was no state and no higher authority. They implemented economic equality, legalized abortion, abolished church marriage and increased production. They where very feminist. Feminism as we know has many roots in anarchism.

reply to post by petrus4


If you like, name a few "Protocols" ideas that have "merit".

Originally posted by Skyfloating


Marx and Hitler believed that jewish capitalists were responsible for all the worlds ills. They used to "protocols" to justify their views.

Uh, no. Not right to lump Marx in that. Marx was a Jew and the fact that the Capitalist were Jewish didn't matter to him. He argues for Jewish autonomy and rights in his work.

en.wikipedia.org...

He used crude language but He argued for Jewish emancipation in Germany.