Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

The Convergence.

Zerosmelt
Posts: 287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 9:44:39 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
In the not so distant future (won't say when) three political doctrines are going to converge, Communism, Capitalism, and Anarchy. It will be beautiful. mark my words. we have alot to learn from ants.

you will believe me in less than 15 years i guarantee it. :D
Robert_Santurri
Posts: 106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 9:49:55 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/26/2008 9:48:23 PM, JBlake wrote:
You have piqued my interest - please go on.

Agreed.
"We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."
-- Edward R. Murrow

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference."
-- Robert Frost
scissorhands7
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 10:19:05 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
The planets will align and suddenly people will care about each other.
I rock peas on my head, but don't call me a peahead, bees on my head but dont call me a beehead, bruce lees on my head but dont call me a lee head...
I hang out with an apple who loves self loathing....
Its my show I'm andy milonakis.
Zerosmelt
Posts: 287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 10:22:23 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
well yeah, close. I was thinking communication. the gov't might linger awhile for sh!tz and giggles.

our very long history... but to understand why you'd have to read a number of books. I could explain the basics but since its so late im afraid i don't have time now. ill be back in a few days tho
Zerosmelt
Posts: 287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 10:23:19 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/26/2008 10:19:05 PM, scissorhands7 wrote:
The planets will align and suddenly people will care about each other.

lol.. no its more like people's pocketbooks will be so mixed together and suddenly people will care about eachother.
scissorhands7
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 10:26:10 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/26/2008 10:23:19 PM, Zerosmelt wrote:
At 10/26/2008 10:19:05 PM, scissorhands7 wrote:
The planets will align and suddenly people will care about each other.

lol.. no its more like people's pocketbooks will be so mixed together and suddenly people will care about eachother.

Ah the global economy?
I rock peas on my head, but don't call me a peahead, bees on my head but dont call me a beehead, bruce lees on my head but dont call me a lee head...
I hang out with an apple who loves self loathing....
Its my show I'm andy milonakis.
JBlake
Posts: 4,634
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2008 10:26:47 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/26/2008 10:22:23 PM, Zerosmelt wrote:
well yeah, close. I was thinking communication. the gov't might linger awhile for sh!tz and giggles.


our very long history... but to understand why you'd have to read a number of books. I could explain the basics but since its so late im afraid i don't have time now. ill be back in a few days tho

Do come back and explain it if you find the time. As I have said, you have piqued my interest.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2008 12:50:11 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/26/2008 9:59:26 PM, Zerosmelt wrote:
well here is the riddle;

What is the one thing that currently prevents these three systems from operating in unison?

The fact that capitalism requires the prohibition of the intiation force and fraud, anarchy requires that there be nothing to prohibit it, and communism requires a state to initiate force and fraud against everyone everywhere, in other words, none of the systems are compatible with each other.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Zerosmelt
Posts: 287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:05:20 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/27/2008 12:50:11 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 10/26/2008 9:59:26 PM, Zerosmelt wrote:
well here is the riddle;

What is the one thing that currently prevents these three systems from operating in unison?

The fact that capitalism requires the prohibition of the initiation force and fraud, anarchy requires that there be nothing to prohibit it, and communism requires a state to initiate force and fraud against everyone everywhere, in other words, none of the systems are compatible with each other.

You lack a thorough understanding of what i mean. You are using today's common (mis)conception of what communism is. Not the original-marxist ideal. The version of communism you are referring to has been the only possible one humans have been able to implement in our history. (It also isn't actually true communism.) But in the not so distant future humans will acquire the ability to institute communism in an entirely different way without the use of force and fraud. In fact capitalism itself will be the very thing that institutes communism. (What an irony.) :P

This ability i speak of has been acquired millenia ago by insects and cellular automata.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:23:44 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Yet again, disputing my definitions without providing yours. Is this usual Zerosmelt?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:40:55 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Especially since nearly ALL communists claim theirs is Marx's original intent, and his writings tend to lend themselves to this interpretation.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Zerosmelt
Posts: 287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:46:27 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
R_R you didn't provide a definition... all you said was that communism required certain circumstances to occurr, which in fact, it does not - that-is-necessarily.
Zerosmelt
Posts: 287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:47:46 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/28/2008 9:28:08 PM, knick-knack wrote:
Did you say Anarchy? And Communism? And Capitalism?

Wow dude...

I think that's called Armageddon. :D

lol some might think so... but really its just the next step, and it certainly won't be a utopia either. We'll just have a different set of problems.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:50:02 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/28/2008 9:46:27 PM, Zerosmelt wrote:
R_R you didn't provide a definition... all you said was that communism required certain circumstances to occurr, which in fact, it does not - that-is-necessarily.

Communism: A political ideology based upon the abolition of private property...

Please explain how to do so without initiating force against everyone, since everyone owns themself, the most important private property there is :D.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 9:51:50 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Least that's the best I can think of... Communism really does not lend itself to definition, since communists contradict themselves so frequently :D.

But empirically, everything which has claimed to be communist has certainly initiated force against absolutely everyone within it's borders :D
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Zerosmelt
Posts: 287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 10:05:21 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/28/2008 9:50:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 10/28/2008 9:46:27 PM, Zerosmelt wrote:
R_R you didn't provide a definition... all you said was that communism required certain circumstances to occurr, which in fact, it does not - that-is-necessarily.

Communism: A political ideology based upon the abolition of private property...

Please explain how to do so without initiating force against everyone, since everyone owns themself, the most important private property there is :D.

you're too easy...
as long as we make sure "abolition" lacks equivocation. "Abolition" referring to the act of destroying the attribute of privacy not to the actual physical things themselves.
case and point i give you an example:
everyone i-mean-everyone willingly chooses to abolition the quality of their property that makes it private. (ie that makes it theirs.)
Zerosmelt
Posts: 287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 10:10:08 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
you may think this will never happen... but consider that G. Orwell certainly never would have believed that everyone would willingly give Big Brother all of their info. and knowledge of their status at everyone moment.

but... today, to a dead orwell's amazement. We do.. but Big brother goes by another name.... Facebook.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 11:02:55 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/28/2008 10:05:21 PM, Zerosmelt wrote:
At 10/28/2008 9:50:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 10/28/2008 9:46:27 PM, Zerosmelt wrote:
R_R you didn't provide a definition... all you said was that communism required certain circumstances to occurr, which in fact, it does not - that-is-necessarily.

Communism: A political ideology based upon the abolition of private property...

Please explain how to do so without initiating force against everyone, since everyone owns themself, the most important private property there is :D.

you're too easy...
as long as we make sure "abolition" lacks equivocation. "Abolition" referring to the act of destroying the attribute of privacy not to the actual physical things themselves.
case and point i give you an example:
everyone i-mean-everyone willingly chooses to abolition the quality of their property that makes it private. (ie that makes it theirs.)

I do not choose it.

Therefore you have to kill me to achieve this, initiating force.

A political ideal which can be shot to pieces by the existence of one person isn't very complete, nor is it really ideal :D

you may think this will never happen... but consider that G. Orwell certainly never would have believed that everyone would willingly give Big Brother all of their info. and knowledge of their status at everyone moment.

but... today, to a dead orwell's amazement. We do.. but Big brother goes by another name.... Facebook.

I don't use facebook.

And Big Brother was a political oppressor. Facebook is a voluntary networking device. The two cannot be compared.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2008 11:05:10 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
By the way, the quality that makes it theirs is their mind having created it. So the people you speak of are going to abolish their mind. It's possible, but what a dim, dreary future.

Even if you give it away, the fact of it's current status is only valid because of the recognition of the nature of it's past status.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.