It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
You must be ready to abandon tired orthodoxies of the left and right and forage for good ideas across the political spectrum
Originally posted by NavyDoc
Originally posted by Druscilla
reply to post by NavyDoc
Certainly every society will have its misfits.
The definition of ownership itself is only defined by the willingness of those more powerful and capable of taking something by force to not do so.
Private ownership of anything, including a such things as a mate through marriage, is just an illusion allowed by all those with the power to take it, whatever "it" might be, away by force.
No solution is perfect. There will always be criminals, malcontents, maladjusted, greedy, selfish, warped, and unstable people waiting on the sidelines and fringes to take advantage.
This is where any and every society enacts laws, just as we adhere to right now, enforced by a police and judicial system, just as is done now, all to facilitate social cohesion as a measure against those who care not for anything like playing nice.
Which comes full circle to the concept that socialism leads to coercion. If someone does not want to share or work for the benefit of others, you would empower the state to force him to share. See what a nice utopia we get.
Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by Zngland
Both socialism and capitalism do exist together right now.
America has lots of worker owned companies.
But the original idea of socialism was ultimately anti-state, yes even Marx. Socialism doesn't require government, whereas capitalism does.
I always thought the American dream was ownership, so why are so many against worker ownership?
The majority of people are workers.
Originally posted by Zngland
reply to post by ANOK
Socialism may originally be anti State like Anarcho Capitalism but to me the repulsive thing most is
the forcing of people to follow 'your' system, the abuse of the the 'sovereign self'
The system i want is not implemented anywhere in the world it's a society where socialists and capitalists
co exist respecting each others paths.
Originally posted by bmullini
reply to post by ANOK
You cannot have any type of economy without the state in a civilized society.
The free market allows you to buy/sell/produce by agreement with others. The free market allows you to negotiate with an employer. If you don't like conditions or pay, then you don't have to work there. The employer has to follow certain regulations in order to provide a safe work environment. How is this slavery?? If don't like working there, then go some place else.
Socialism has ALWAYS forced the "haves" to give up something to the "have nots". Show me an example where it doesn't.
Well it depends on what you call the state. To me the state is any system that allows one class to have control over another, and that is not something that is required in an economic system.
What free market?
There is no free market when the means to produce for the market are monopolized by a minority class.
Capitalism is not free-market, that is a complete myth.
I never said it was slavery
The worker does not receive the full fruits of their labour.
The worker has no choice but to work for a private owner.