Total Posts:31|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Socialism debunked:

NestorTheZizek
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 2:41:32 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 4:53:36 PM, harrytruman wrote:
http://commonsenseeconomics2.blogspot.com...

How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 2:54:13 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit

Where do you get this nonsense? Capitalism is the system where you manage your own finance,
NestorTheZizek
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 2:58:34 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 2:54:13 PM, harrytruman wrote:
How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit

Where do you get this nonsense? Capitalism is the system where you manage your own finance,

Sorry, no. Not true. Capitalism as a word was first used to refer to a system based on profit. Etymology my friend. It's also in the same root of cattle and chattel
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 2:59:11 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 2:41:32 PM, NestorTheZizek wrote:
At 9/24/2016 4:53:36 PM, harrytruman wrote:
http://commonsenseeconomics2.blogspot.com...

How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit

If capitalism is a theory based upon Darwinism (which isn't entirely true: Adam Smith was long dead before Darwin was even born) - then that means it is based upon a theory which is largely regarded as undeniable fact by the majority of experts in the field - much more than can be said of Marxism in the context of economics. It is based, not upon the subjugation of any class, but upon the philosophical recognition of social realities in the form of private property, along with a rigorous mathematical analysis of the necessarily interplay of those properties via economics. Marxism, on the other hand, is literally based upon class subjugation: it leaves all classes other than the proletariat out of analysis, biasing it to only take its narrow concept of "labour" into consideration, with the explicit aim of establishing a dictatorship run by that class.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
NestorTheZizek
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 3:01:36 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
If capitalism is a theory based upon Darwinism (which isn't entirely true: Adam Smith was long dead before Darwin was even born) - then that means it is based upon a theory which is largely regarded as undeniable fact by the majority of experts in the field - much more than can be said of Marxism in the context of economics. It is based, not upon the subjugation of any class, but upon the philosophical recognition of social realities in the form of private property, along with a rigorous mathematical analysis of the necessarily interplay of those properties via economics. Marxism, on the other hand, is literally based upon class subjugation: it leaves all classes other than the proletariat out of analysis, biasing it to only take its narrow concept of "labour" into consideration, with the explicit aim of establishing a dictatorship run by that class.

Social Darwinism however, is edgy teen rubbish. It's not a formula for an equitable society to have a model in which people can be subjugated (employed), stolen from (wage slavery), and have their labour stolen
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 3:09:08 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 3:01:36 PM, NestorTheZizek wrote:
If capitalism is a theory based upon Darwinism (which isn't entirely true: Adam Smith was long dead before Darwin was even born) - then that means it is based upon a theory which is largely regarded as undeniable fact by the majority of experts in the field - much more than can be said of Marxism in the context of economics. It is based, not upon the subjugation of any class, but upon the philosophical recognition of social realities in the form of private property, along with a rigorous mathematical analysis of the necessarily interplay of those properties via economics. Marxism, on the other hand, is literally based upon class subjugation: it leaves all classes other than the proletariat out of analysis, biasing it to only take its narrow concept of "labour" into consideration, with the explicit aim of establishing a dictatorship run by that class.

Social Darwinism however, is edgy teen rubbish. It's not a formula for an equitable society to have a model in which people can be subjugated (employed), stolen from (wage slavery), and have their labour stolen

In fact, I would consider it a prerequisite for a reasonable society that people are allowed to gain employment, and that they can ask for payment for that employment if they wish. At least, this is the case until scarcity has been entirely eliminated, in which case people would have the means to entirely provide for their own needs without asking for help from others. However, in a capitalist society, if someone doesn't wish to work at the same job on a regular basis (especially if they feel their skills are more suited to something less repetitive) then they will be free to do so, and their return will reflect the amount of utility they provide. This possibility will actually be freed up by eliminating regulations and minimum wages, in order to maximize the scope of possible engagements.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 3:16:42 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 3:01:36 PM, NestorTheZizek wrote:
If capitalism is a theory based upon Darwinism (which isn't entirely true: Adam Smith was long dead before Darwin was even born) - then that means it is based upon a theory which is largely regarded as undeniable fact by the majority of experts in the field - much more than can be said of Marxism in the context of economics. It is based, not upon the subjugation of any class, but upon the philosophical recognition of social realities in the form of private property, along with a rigorous mathematical analysis of the necessarily interplay of those properties via economics. Marxism, on the other hand, is literally based upon class subjugation: it leaves all classes other than the proletariat out of analysis, biasing it to only take its narrow concept of "labour" into consideration, with the explicit aim of establishing a dictatorship run by that class.

Social Darwinism however, is edgy teen rubbish. It's not a formula for an equitable society to have a model in which people can be subjugated (employed), stolen from (wage slavery), and have their labour stolen

In what sense could a society be considered "equitable" in which one group has enough accumulated power to stop anyone else from engaging in trades where one party executes some form of regularized labour in return for a reward from the other? If that class has enough force to stop others from engaging in this kind of trade, then I think by definition the society has become unequal enough not to be considered "equitable."
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 3:21:35 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Where do you get this nonsense? Capitalism is the system where you manage your own finance,

Sorry, no. Not true. Capitalism as a word was first used to refer to a system based on profit. Etymology my friend. It's also in the same root of cattle and chattel

That's the root word, it's because the idea was for everyone to produce stuff for profit, it'd just the idea that the people are capable of choosing the prices for their own goods.
n7
Posts: 1,360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 8:46:25 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 2:54:13 PM, harrytruman wrote:
How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit

Where do you get this nonsense? Capitalism is the system where you manage your own finance,

Manage your own finance? What do you mean?
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.


Uphold Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Sargonist-n7ism.
n7
Posts: 1,360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 8:55:25 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/24/2016 4:53:36 PM, harrytruman wrote:
http://commonsenseeconomics2.blogspot.com...

Omg this critique is horrible. It doesn't understand what communism or anarchism is and couldn't be more wrong when it comes to history. Not to mention it has no sources at all.

There are MUCH better critiques of socialism out there. No matter which side of the issue you stand on, don't waste your time with this.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.


Uphold Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Sargonist-n7ism.
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 10:17:26 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 8:46:25 PM, n7 wrote:
At 9/25/2016 2:54:13 PM, harrytruman wrote:
How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit

Where do you get this nonsense? Capitalism is the system where you manage your own finance,

Manage your own finance? What do you mean?

In capitalism I chose what brands I buy what my job is where I work and manage my own money, in socialism these are chosen for me
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2016 10:17:45 PM
Posted: 2 months ago

Manage your own finance? What do you mean?

In capitalism I chose what brands I buy what my job is where I work and manage my own money, in socialism these are chosen for me
n7
Posts: 1,360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 12:38:26 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 10:17:45 PM, harrytruman wrote:

Manage your own finance? What do you mean?

In capitalism I chose what brands I buy what my job is where I work and manage my own money, in socialism these are chosen for me

Why does it have to be chosen for you? Especially since all of these are compatible with free market socialism. The only difference is you get to have a say in your workplace instead of having people above you make all the decisions.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.


Uphold Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Sargonist-n7ism.
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 6:56:55 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Why does it have to be chosen for you? Especially since all of these are compatible with free market socialism. The only difference is you get to have a say in your workplace instead of having people above you make all the decisions.

Say in this scenario the factory would be stolen from the owner, which is morally wrong. Look, hey get to make the decisions since they own the factory, you could just go and be self employed.
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 6:59:22 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
There are MUCH better critiques of socialism out there. No matter which side of the issue you stand on, don't waste your time with this.

This is just a roughdraft OF a rough draft.
n7
Posts: 1,360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 9:21:07 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/26/2016 6:56:55 PM, harrytruman wrote:
Why does it have to be chosen for you? Especially since all of these are compatible with free market socialism. The only difference is you get to have a say in your workplace instead of having people above you make all the decisions.

Say in this scenario the factory would be stolen from the owner, which is morally wrong. Look, hey get to make the decisions since they own the factory, you could just go and be self employed.

Some say exploiting labor is morally wrong. That if you're not using or working in the factory yourself, you have no claim to it. Being self employed can't always pay bills or give constant work. Nonetheless, it's impossible for everyone to be self employed, there necessarily has to be people who work for private business owners.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.


Uphold Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Sargonist-n7ism.
n7
Posts: 1,360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 9:22:40 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/26/2016 6:56:55 PM, harrytruman wrote:
Why does it have to be chosen for you? Especially since all of these are compatible with free market socialism. The only difference is you get to have a say in your workplace instead of having people above you make all the decisions.

Say in this scenario the factory would be stolen from the owner, which is morally wrong. Look, hey get to make the decisions since they own the factory, you could just go and be self employed.

This is also an entirely different attack on socialism. It has nothing to do with deciding what to do with your money, ect.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.


Uphold Marxist-Leninist-Maoist-Sargonist-n7ism.
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2016 12:02:37 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
Some say exploiting labor is morally wrong. That if you're not using or working in the factory yourself, you have no claim to it. Being self employed can't always pay bills or give constant work. Nonetheless, it's impossible for everyone to be self employed, there necessarily has to be people who work for private business owners.

If you want to be self employed, in a free market, you can, besides, back in the day almost everyone was self employed. Also, they aren't exploiting labor, they are providing the ability for labor to increase productivity, and hence ask for a portion of that aditional production.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2016 7:03:25 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
"These claims are obviously absurd, how is inflation, which raises the prices of goods, supposed to make them cheaper?"

When a currency is inflated all goods priced in terms of that currency become cheaper to buy with foreign currency, because the exchange rate changes. I'm not sure how this offsets the domestic effects of inflation though.
ptarkington
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2016 12:32:50 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/25/2016 2:54:13 PM, harrytruman wrote:
How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit

Where do you get this nonsense? Capitalism is the system where you manage your own finance,

Managing your own finance is not what capitalism is. It may come as a result of capitalism, but it does not at all encompass the doctrine of capitalism.
"Capitalism is the belief the wickedest of men, will engage in the wickedest of dealings, for the greater good of all of us." -Keynes
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2016 2:57:22 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 9/25/2016 2:41:32 PM, NestorTheZizek wrote:
At 9/24/2016 4:53:36 PM, harrytruman wrote:
http://commonsenseeconomics2.blogspot.com...

How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit

The class you are talking about, which I assume is the working class, is far better off in a Capitalist society with free enterprise than in a society founded upon the principles of state management of the economy. Capital is best managed by a self-serving functional body that is meant to accumulate profit, rather than a self serving dysfunctional body that is meant to act on the behest of popular demand - meaning everything, including basic economic parables, becomes politicized.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2016 3:12:35 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/7/2016 2:57:22 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 9/25/2016 2:41:32 PM, NestorTheZizek wrote:
At 9/24/2016 4:53:36 PM, harrytruman wrote:
http://commonsenseeconomics2.blogspot.com...

How can capitalism be indicative of a free society, or even involved in one, when it is an ideology based around Darwinism and subjugation of a whole class to accumulate profit

The class you are talking about, which I assume is the working class, is far better off in a Capitalist society with free enterprise than in a society founded upon the principles of state management of the economy. Capital is best managed by a self-serving functional body that is meant to accumulate profit, rather than a self serving dysfunctional body that is meant to act on the behest of popular demand - meaning everything, including basic economic parables, becomes politicized.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Javier-Riefkohl
Posts: 11
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2016 5:06:11 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
Interesting. It is unfortunate to see how our economic positions and our current economic system could have been better if implemented properly from the very begging.
JavierRiefkohl
NestorTheZizek
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2016 7:18:38 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
The class you are talking about, which I assume is the working class, is far better off in a Capitalist society with free enterprise than in a society founded upon the principles of state management of the economy. Capital is best managed by a self-serving functional body that is meant to accumulate profit, rather than a self serving dysfunctional body that is meant to act on the behest of popular demand - meaning everything, including basic economic parables, becomes politicized.

How little you understand. Capitalism is all about subjugating the working class. The workers do not matter in the overall society of capitalism
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2016 10:34:28 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/7/2016 7:18:38 PM, NestorTheZizek wrote:
The class you are talking about, which I assume is the working class, is far better off in a Capitalist society with free enterprise than in a society founded upon the principles of state management of the economy. Capital is best managed by a self-serving functional body that is meant to accumulate profit, rather than a self serving dysfunctional body that is meant to act on the behest of popular demand - meaning everything, including basic economic parables, becomes politicized.

How little you understand. Capitalism is all about subjugating the working class. The workers do not matter in the overall society of capitalism

That's entirely opposite from the truth. The workers drive production, and the better equipped and more efficient the workers, hence, the production are, the better off the economy is, as consumption will be able to rise while prices will be able to fall.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
ptarkington
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 7:05:59 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/7/2016 7:18:38 PM, NestorTheZizek wrote:
The class you are talking about, which I assume is the working class, is far better off in a Capitalist society with free enterprise than in a society founded upon the principles of state management of the economy. Capital is best managed by a self-serving functional body that is meant to accumulate profit, rather than a self serving dysfunctional body that is meant to act on the behest of popular demand - meaning everything, including basic economic parables, becomes politicized.

How little you understand. Capitalism is all about subjugating the working class. The workers do not matter in the overall society of capitalism

You're right... but if this is left to be true for too long, it won't matter what the capitalist wants to produce because the workers are going to come and take what is theirs. You can only deny them their rights for so long before they decide what their rights are.
"Capitalism is the belief the wickedest of men, will engage in the wickedest of dealings, for the greater good of all of us." -Keynes
ptarkington
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 7:09:38 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/7/2016 10:34:28 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 10/7/2016 7:18:38 PM, NestorTheZizek wrote:
The class you are talking about, which I assume is the working class, is far better off in a Capitalist society with free enterprise than in a society founded upon the principles of state management of the economy. Capital is best managed by a self-serving functional body that is meant to accumulate profit, rather than a self serving dysfunctional body that is meant to act on the behest of popular demand - meaning everything, including basic economic parables, becomes politicized.

How little you understand. Capitalism is all about subjugating the working class. The workers do not matter in the overall society of capitalism


That's entirely opposite from the truth. The workers drive production, and the better equipped and more efficient the workers, hence, the production are, the better off the economy is, as consumption will be able to rise while prices will be able to fall.

While you're right in that consumption drives production, the fallacy is that if incomes are to rise, people will go on consuming the same and saving the residual. The paradox of thrift tells us saving is bad and thus will have a negative effect on the economy.
"Capitalism is the belief the wickedest of men, will engage in the wickedest of dealings, for the greater good of all of us." -Keynes
NestorTheZizek
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 2:32:19 PM
Posted: 1 month ago

How little you understand. Capitalism is all about subjugating the working class. The workers do not matter in the overall society of capitalism

That's entirely opposite from the truth. The workers drive production, and the better equipped and more efficient the workers, hence, the production are, the better off the economy is, as consumption will be able to rise while prices will be able to fall.

Yet the 3.6 billion people in the world in poverty, are mainly the workers. If they drove production and capitalism actually worked to improve their lives then they would be in better living standards. Capitalism just perpetuates a cycle of prosperity and collapse and the victims and sufferers? Always the workers