Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why Capitalism Is Doomed: The Contradictions at Its Core

page: 6
39
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 04:49 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


This board has terms and conditions that prevent people from "subverting" it in the sense of acting on behalf of a group, proselytizing, spamming. I am fully aware of that, and I aim to obey every rule here in both spirit and letter. That means I am, now and always, only acting on behalf of myself. I do not lie about what I am: I am a professional revolutionary and a vanguardist. That's my life mission, and it doesn't change because I happen to be online or offline. However, I come here merely as a private person representing nothing and nobody besides myself, with no ulterior motive. I'm not trying to "convert" anyone, get anyone to join anything, or anything like that. Do I want to convince people of my views? Of course! Will I be disruptive? Of course not! It is not my policy to lie at all, whatsoever: I am what I say I am, I am here in a private capacity to interact with other people in a community based on respect and mutual learning. There are not now and never will be any "ulterior motives" to my presence here, and as you can see, I am completely, 110% up-front about myself, my vocation, and my beliefs.

For a long time, this board was considered "enemy territory" and not worth it for somebody to be openly communist. We recognized that there have always been a few communists here, but we felt the time was simply not ripe for people to be able to openly accept a communist. With that in mind, I could not in good conscience post here, as my policy is 110% total honesty about who I am and my life. But over the last half-years or so, a number of things happened, conditions have changed, and it is my own personal call (and nobody else's) that this board is ready to accept a member who is openly communist. As noted I have no ulterior motive but to present myself as any other member does, completely within the letter and spirit of the terms and conditions here. Which I have carefully studied.

So far so good, everyone has been very thoughtful, I enjoy associating with you all, even those who are absolutely hostile to communism. I'm not here to bang my head against the wall or debate endlessly against my ideological foes. Rather, I hope to reach even a small number that might simply be openminded, curious, or sympathetic in some way, even if not totally. I also hope to learn from all of you! Peace on earth, now and always.

edit on 21-3-2012 by Leftist because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
I will have to say though, that as a Christian, true communism at least supports the idea that you are equal with your fellow man, and you should love your brother as yourself. Where Capitalism is all about greed, worldliness, and feeling superior to your fellow man.


I agree with this. We just need to get to the point where being altruistic or compassionate towards each other, can't be used by psychopaths, in order to further an agenda of theirs which is detrimental to us. That is the difficult thing.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leftist
reply to post by petrus4
 



For a long time, this board was considered "enemy territory" and not worth it for somebody to be openly communist. We recognized that there have always been a few communists here, but we felt the time was simply not ripe for people to be able to openly accept a communist.


ATS has traditionally been a sanctuary for the Right. That was actually one of the main reasons why I initially came here myself, in order to try to learn about conservatism.

Six months ago, I also went to a town in northern New South Wales, in Australia, called Nimbin; which I've already mentioned in this thread. That town self-identifies as a sister city to Woodstock; the population there were overwhelmingly in support of Leftist ideology in varying (although usually entirely non-militant) forms. During that period I also read Edward Bellamy's two books, Looking Backward and Equality. If you're not aware of those two, you might find them interesting.

You and I probably have a lot more in common, in truth, than I've made it appear...but something else which I'm somewhat reluctant to admit, is that because of some residual indoctrination that I have, that actually scares me. The Political Compass has consistently assessed me, for the last 12 years, as being politically almost entirely identical to Gandhi; but that does not sit easily with me. So you can really consider me in the closet, to an extent.



Communism has had a massive taboo and stigma associated with it in Western society. As you yourself say, there hasn't been a terribly long period of time, since the period in which it was sometimes even literally illegal for a person in many countries, to even begin to try to analyse its' ideas themselves, at all.

My major hurdle with it is a similarly large degree of cognitive dissonance. I am aware that the basis of the ideology, is or can be encouragement towards the practice of compassion; what I am deeply and perhaps incurably suspicious of, however, is said compassion being used in the support of a psychopathic agenda.

I want to try and find a way to isolate those elements of Communist thought which are consistent with my own emotional nature and desire to be altruistic on the one hand, without said altruism becoming the means for me to become the slave of someone else, on the other. There's a fine line, and I haven't figured out how to achieve that balance, yet. Nimbin suggested to me, that the only way in which collectivism can really work without becoming unhealthy, is if it is done within the context of small groups. A single, universal Communist organisation isn't going to work; but smaller, individual and decentralised ones can, and I have a small degree of direct practical experience with such.


But over the last half-years or so, a number of things happened, conditions have changed, and it is my own personal call (and nobodyu else's) that this board is ready to accept a member who is openly communist.


You're not the only one who is currently tilling the soil around here. You should probably look up ANOK and eboyd sometime, and compare notes. ANOK, however, identifies as a socialist; I think she generally tries to avoid using the C word.


We also have Kali74, who is a representative of Occupy. I mention that, because Kali and I have actually had several arguments over the idea of Occupy being fundamentally Communist, (which truthfully, I continue to believe they are) but not wanting to openly admit such, in order to avoid alienating Americans in particular; and also because I think a number of them are in the closet themselves as well.


One pivotal, personal thing that happened here was I noticed a true left-Anarchist from Europe with street action experience started posting.


That is one other area where I have some issues, truthfully. I've never considered protesting to be terribly useful.



The above video describes what I believe is ultimately going to be a far more effective approach than street protest.


I enjoy associating with you all, even those who are absolutely hostile to communism.


You will still find some of those. ATS to an extent is still a Right stronghold, although that is definitely softening over time, as I'm sure you've noticed. You don't want to go anywhere near the American military on here though, believe me. They'll tear your head off.
edit on 21-3-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 05:51 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


That was a great and really revealing post (in a good way); it is always good when people take a chance with things. thank you.

Well...the stuff on alienation back on pg. 4 I think I wrote seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle. Anyone want to talk about alienation? It is considered by my many non-Marxists to be the part of his theory with the most enduring value, even after the end of the cold war.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   
This was a good post, very informative.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leftist
reply to post by petrus4
 


Well...the stuff on alienation back on pg. 4 I think I wrote seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle. Anyone want to talk about alienation? It is considered by my many non-Marxists to be the part of his theory with the most enduring value, even after the end of the cold war.


This is one of those areas where I don't think it's much of a theory, so much as it's simply an observation of the way things are. We've probably all heard about scenarios where some person in an urban environment is being bashed, and other people will cross to the other side of the road and walk past, in order to avoid becoming involved. I've also seen news reports of the elderly collapsing by the side of a highway before, and it's generally only about the tenth car that will stop in order to help them.

Indifference is a chronic problem. My own theory on why it happens, goes back to the observation that society is generally ruled by a 4-7% demographic of psychopaths. They are evangelical, and they like to remake people in their own image.

"Self-servers are as diverse as any random group of people. They work in many different professions, but are particularly drawn to ones involving power. Much of the corruption in business and government is perpetrated by self-servers, many of whom are highly intelligent. They are never found in service professions, except as impostors or con men who prey off those in need. They have no sympathy for the needy, because they believe everyone should be self-sufficient. They believe that those who can't take care themselves will learn to take care of themselves by being taken advantage of. Consequently, they feel a spiritual duty to take advantage of the weak."

-- Gina Lake, The Extraterrestrial Vision

As I've stated before, the degree of emphasis on compassion and altruism are the two things which do cause me to largely identify as a leftist emotionally, if not academically. I really feel that the degree to which compassion does or does not exist, is the central, defining difference between the political/economic Left and Right. Ebenezer Scrooge, to me, is the archetypical conservative; and that has always really been true.



One of the major criticisms that a lot of people have, in terms of Communism as it has been practically interpreted and implemented so far, has been the degree to which we've ended up seeing psychopaths subvert what the populations of those countries wanted, and then implement a system which was still stratified and centralised, and ended up being the complete opposite of what said populations both wanted, and originally thought that they were going to get.

That is the main reason why I have tended to be so deeply suspicious of anything which self-identifies as Communism, myself. The psychopaths play a three card monte. They know that egalitarianism and a predisposition towards compassionate behaviour, are things which the non-psychopathic majority want and have, respectively; it's a case of taking our most positive characteristics, and paradoxically using those against us. It's an exceptionally cruel thing.

I personally view a practical implementation of positive, legitimate Communism as looking something like this. What the psychopaths do, is identify the fact that we want that; lie to us that they will give it to us if we follow them, and then in the end, still give us something which is the exact opposite. It is what was done to the Russians by the Bolsheviki, as ANOK pointed out.

So we absolutely need to redesign society to be built around empathy, compassion, altruism, and love, and I do think that that is what a lot of Communist advocates, want their scenario to be...but we also have to somehow do it in such a way, that the psychopaths aren't able to always get back in control of it. I'm not sure how we can do that.
edit on 21-3-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-3-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
I apologise if it seems like I'm dominating the conversation, here; but there is one more thing I want to add.

When I said earlier that I do still suffer from cognitive dissonance, the main thing which causes me to want to perservere through it, is the realisation that humanity really does need a change right now. I'm not going to necessarily claim that that is pure Marxism as such; it can't be, because that is what the cabal engineered, for their own reasons.

But as it says at the end of that video, the Empathic Civilisation, I think it is true that if we don't start to work past alienation, indifference, and self-interest as a species, we aren't going to make it. That means extinction; and we don't necessarily have a large amount of time left.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leftist
reply to post by petrus4
 

I'm not here to bang my head against the wall or debate endlessly against my ideological foes.


Fair enough.


I'm outta here then.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tsurugi

Originally posted by Leftist
reply to post by petrus4
 

I'm not here to bang my head against the wall or debate endlessly against my ideological foes.


Fair enough.

I'm outta here then.


LOL. Aw...*I* don't see you as a foe, Tsurugi. I've had a couple of interesting exchanges with seabag, before as well. Some of the conservatives here can make some really interesting statements at times, which can really make us think.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by paganini

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
What is interesting here is that people are quick to point out the disasters of Communism (murders, imprisonment, brainwashing etc..), but when confronted with those same scenarios in relation to capitalism people shrug their shoulders. Why is that? Capitalism imprisons, murders, assassinates, brainwashes and is doing everything that is attributed to Communism on a every day basis yet continues to remain unquestioned for the most part.


yes but with capitalism we managed to have that AND long periods of prosperity
That the difference between the two. Communism never managed to achieve the latter


Long periods of prosperity for who, and at what cost? And speaking about Communism, I do not advocate that system either. I am surely radical (apparently when compared to others) but I am also strictly anti-authoritarian. My point was that people are saying these things about system A yet aren't seeing that system B (their own system) has just as bad of a record if not worse. If you live in a Communist system then you are bombarded by Communist propaganda, but on the flip coin if you live in a Capitalist system you are bombarded with it's propaganda. It's hard to notice because we are all hardwired from birth to believe it the best and only "real" system out there, so in essence we become the fish unaware of the water that surrounds it.

The OP, no offense to her has fallen victim to the two sides approach IMO. On one hand she sees the monster that is capitalism, but on the other hand embraces "counter" system that is authoritarian by necessity. One thing the OP and I agree on is that this idea that Capitalism is God and cannot be questioned is just plain ol conditioning.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
The OP, no offense to her has fallen victim to the two sides approach IMO. On one hand she sees the monster that is capitalism, but on the other hand embraces "counter" system that is authoritarian by necessity. One thing the OP and I agree on is that this idea that Capitalism is God and cannot be questioned is just plain ol conditioning.


I brought that up as well.

I've also made clear, that I am not interested in accepting the proverbial Hegelian dialectic, or three card monte. Go back and read the entire thread, Chewing; and my posts here. I describe that.

At the same time, however, once I got that established, I also acknowledged that the very element of Communist ideology which the cabal introduced in order to manipulate people, was a mirroring or acknowledgement of the fact that non-psychopaths do primarily want to live in a state of mutual empathy, social belonging, and an absence of indifference. Said element is no less legitimate because of the fact that the cabal have tried to use it for their own ends.

As such, we can acknowledge that irrespective of its' source; whether Marx or whoever else says it, it doesn't make it any less true.

The West doesn't have closure with Communism. We never had it. The Cold War ended, and the immediate reaction was to try and put it behind us, to put it under the rug, out of sight, and to get rid of it and move on as quickly as possible. Communism needs analysis and integration, and if we don't do that, it is going to be hanging over our heads until we do.

So that means, we isolate the elements of it which do contain truth, and we decide what to do with them. We then discard whatever material there we find to be erroneous; and most importantly, we get to the point where Communism is no longer a source of emotional aversion, or a taboo for us. Things which are considered taboo and stigmatised, and kept in the shadows, only fester and grow bigger and worse as psychological and social problems.

I am not suggesting for one moment that we all become card-carrying Communists ourselves, to the extent that Leftist is; but one way or another, Communism does have to be brought out of the closet.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by petrus4

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
The OP, no offense to her has fallen victim to the two sides approach IMO. On one hand she sees the monster that is capitalism, but on the other hand embraces "counter" system that is authoritarian by necessity. One thing the OP and I agree on is that this idea that Capitalism is God and cannot be questioned is just plain ol conditioning.


I brought that up as well.

I've also made clear, that I am not interested in accepting the proverbial Hegelian dialectic, or three card monte. Go back and read the entire thread, Chewing; and my posts here. I describe that.

At the same time, however, once I got that established, I also acknowledged that the very element of Communist ideology which the cabal introduced in order to manipulate people, was a mirroring or acknowledgement of the fact that non-psychopaths do primarily want to live in a state of mutual empathy, social belonging, and an absence of indifference. Said element is no less legitimate because of the fact that the cabal have tried to use it for their own ends.

As such, we can acknowledge that irrespective of its' source; whether Marx or whoever else says it, it doesn't make it any less true.

The West doesn't have closure with Communism. We never had it. The Cold War ended, and the immediate reaction was to try and put it behind us, to put it under the rug, out of sight, and to get rid of it and move on as quickly as possible. Communism needs analysis and integration, and if we don't do that, it is going to be hanging over our heads until we do.

So that means, we isolate the elements of it which do contain truth, and we decide what to do with them. We then discard whatever material there we find to be erroneous; and most importantly, we get to the point where Communism is no longer a source of emotional aversion, or a taboo for us. Things which are considered taboo and stigmatised, and kept in the shadows, only fester and grow bigger and worse as psychological and social problems.

I am not suggesting for one moment that we all become card-carrying Communists ourselves, to the extent that Leftist is; but one way or another, Communism does have to be brought out of the closet.


How can you possibly figure communism has to be brought out of the closet? You gave no basis for such a statement.. The only thing wrong with capitalism is the non capitalists that infiltrate and subvert free markets into a failure which they can blame on the current system. The only guarantee from the other "ism" forms of government is a stagnant economy and hampered human progress. In fact I argue it is the direct actions of those anti capitalists who have allowed monopoly corporations, who've given special deals to international companies to plunder our resources, and have legislated the small business owner out of any chance at competing with the large corporations. A true capitalist society like we had before would break up super companies, it wouldn't hinder small business opportunity, and it wouldn't pick and choose through the federal government who wins and loses. We currently have moved closer to the communist or fascist model where a few mega companies control our lives. And you want more of this? Please give me back capitalism because what we have now is not it!
edit on 21-3-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-3-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-3-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 




I will have to say though, that as a Christian, true communism at least supports the idea that you are equal with your fellow man,


Yeah equal slaves! And where do you get this love your brother crap? Tell that to the Lennons, Stalins, Maos, Pol pots, and the many other mass murdering communist leaders who have killed hundreds of millions...


Where Capitalism is all about greed, worldliness, and feeling superior to your fellow man.


Seriously? That statement is complete nonsense and you know better... Sigh

edit on 21-3-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 01:10 AM
link   
To Leftist:

I have not even finished reading your opening post of this thread yet but I intend on reading through the whole thing. You started off by talking about what Marx termed Human Labor. I immediately said to myself well that might have held true a century ago but does that concept still hold up now with robotics and all the advances in technology.

Then I scroll down and you immediately addressed what I was asking myself in the next paragraph.

Excellent!

Well, I haven't read any further yet but this looks like it is going to be an interesting thread (like the use of your graphics as well), I hope it does not disappoint.

So far it is 6 pages long. Ive got some catching up to do.



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Leftist
 


putin is a capitalist.Income tax in russia is 13%. Communism contributed heavily to scientific and technological development ,but not to consumer prosperity.

Neither capitalism or communism are useful as they both are corrupt.

The only best system is libertarianism,whether capitalist libertarian or socialist libertarianism



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
Neither capitalism or communism are useful as they both are corrupt.
The only best system is libertarianism,whether capitalist libertarian or socialist libertarianism


But 'capitalist-libertarian' [sic] would be 'capitalist', and 'socialist libertarianism' could be communist because communism is a form of socialism.


There are three basic major socialist ideologies: Socialism, Anarchism, and Communism. These are all regarded as forms of socialism.

rationalrevolution.net...

(Socialism being 'the workers ownership of the means of production')

Libertarian socialism is stateless socialism, anarchism with workers control and ownership of the means of production.

"Anarchism is stateless socialism" Mikhail Bakunin

'Libertarianism' was originally a term used to mean the same as Anarchism, stateless socialism. First used by French anarchist Joseph Déjacque in his publication 'La Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social' (The Libertarian Journal of the Socialist Movement).

Libertarianism and capitalism really don't fit together because capitalism is 'the private ownership of the means of production', or in it's first use by French socialist Louis Blanc means 'the appropriation of capital by some to the exclusion of others'. This can not be libertarian as capitalists control of the means of production creates a hierarchical system, with the capitalists becoming the ruling class through economic power. If this was anarchist it would be chaos as there would be no state to protect capital, and workers, interests. The state is inherently a part of the capitalist system, if nothing else the capitalists are the state.

If it's free markets you want, the only way that can happen is through the workers ownership of the means of production. In a true free market labour would have to be treated like any capital and be paid it's full worth. Under capitalism the worker is not paid the full value of what they produce, if they were the private owner would not make profit. The worker is also paying for the capitalists profit when they consume. Capitalism is free-market only for capitalists, we want free-market for all.

edit on 3/22/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


libertarianism can be both.you should read the works of ludwig von mises.The ultimate problem of both capitalism and communism is centralization and wealth(even in communist system,check the reign of suslov,brezhnev and shelepin) .


Libertarianism is the solution to it.



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
reply to post by ANOK
 


libertarianism can be both.you should read the works of ludwig von mises.The ultimate problem of both capitalism and communism is centralization and wealth(even in communist system,check the reign of suslov,brezhnev and shelepin) .

Libertarianism is the solution to it.


How can it be when the private ownership of the means of production causes a hierarchical system? How could it ever be libertarian when it is based on exploitation, by those whom own capital, of those who only have their labour to sell? Anarchism was always an answer to the problem of capitalism, based on the works of Proudhon...

Proudhon and Anarchism

What keeps capitalists from exploiting people due to their ownership of capitalism like they do right now? The only thing that keeps capitalists from treating workers in the US like they do in China is government, through lobbying of unions. Take that away what keeps capitalist owners of industry mistreating workers? What keeps capitalists from doing what they've always done to the 'serfs' and the 'commoners' throughout history?

It is an extremely naive notion, and a lack of understanding of history, that capitalism could ever work without government oversight. The only way the economy could work without government is through socialism.

edit on 3/22/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leftist


The irony is that with state control of industry, the governments of the "free world" are actually achieving a form of centralization that resembles a key cornerstone goal of Communism: the collectivization and centralization of the means of production. Except they are doing it in fascist rather than communist mode.


I have been waiting for the word Fascism to come up because that is what we have here in America, a Fascist state, albeit a soft fascism.



posted on Mar, 22 2012 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by libertytoall
How can you possibly figure communism has to be brought out of the closet? You gave no basis for such a statement..


OK. Answer this, then. What do you call the system that Obama is currently in the process of trying to implement?

Leftist might say that she doesn't consider that Communism at all, but that is not my point. My point is that there are definitely very much socialist/Communist elements at least; and also that it is being imposed on Americans without their apparent consent. This goes back to something that Bill Maher has said; that a lot of Americans are in the closet where socialism is concerned, and actually want it to a much greater degree than they consciously realise.

That statement isn't an advocacy of Communism. What it is, is an acknowledgement that people need to become clear both on what Communism is and isn't, and also on what they do and do not want. You've got people talking about wanting universal healthcare, and others who don't. You've got people talking about the usual Marxist political correctness towards minorities, where gays and Muslims are concerned, and some who don't.

I don't think Communism is something that we necessarily should have, at all. A lot of people would say that that would be disastrous. My point is that where Communism is concerned, Americans in particular either need to defecate or get off the toilet, to quote a crude Texan analogy.

Do you want it, or don't you? If you don't, then understand what it is, and get rid of it entirely; and be vigilant against people re-introducing it. If you do, then that is another question...but we need to resolve the paradox that exists between Americans saying that they don't want socialism, while more and more of it appears in the country every day; and that being the authoritarian variety.

That is the service which I think people like Leftist and ANOK are here to render to us. It is not about us unquestioningly and slavishly taking on board everything they say. It is about us putting this issue on the table once and for all, looking at it, and dealing with it. That has been done in fringe terms, yes; but AFAIK at least, not in the mainstream.





new topics




 
39
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join