Total Posts:48|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Capitalism is mob rule, not Democracy

PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:23:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Obvious. But you'd hear it stated otherwise. It was actually the first argument I ever heard against democracy on here.

Money is a type of vote people, only it can work faster and less conspicuously. And also abolishing the state isn't to abolish stupid people, if your of the camp who oppose democracy on the grounds of uninformed voters, your delusion, etc.

What you'd very possibly actually be doing would be empowering the stupid people granting them leave from providing rationale.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:30:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Yea, in capitalism it causes stupid ppl to buy a ton of drugs, excessively binge on them, cause them to become brain dead, which then causes them to buy more drugs.

But oh wait, drugs are already illegal. It's like capitalism occurs naturally, and ppl naturally trade even w/out laws.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:33:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Cody Franklin will soon die of a drug overdose and you'll all realize how stupid you've been
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:36:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?

Because drugs are bad.
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:37:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:36:03 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?

Because drugs are bad.

Therefore, people who want to do drugs shouldn't be allowed to?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:39:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:36:03 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?

Because drugs are bad.

I know right! They should just directly move on to McDonalds after they win the war on drugs.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:42:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:39:16 PM, Cermank wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:36:03 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?

Because drugs are bad.

I know right! They should just directly move on to McDonalds after they win the war on drugs.

I agree!
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 1:50:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:37:08 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:36:03 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?

Because drugs are bad.

Therefore, people who want to do drugs shouldn't be allowed to?

It should be hugely disincentivized. Most people who want to do drugs are retard kids.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 2:04:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

China and Signapore give the death penalty for drug dealers. Now there's a way to win the war on drugs. Pretty sure drug usage is incredibly low there.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 2:05:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 2:04:04 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

China and Signapore give the death penalty for drug dealers. Now there's a way to win the war on drugs. Pretty sure drug usage is incredibly low there.

It ruins lives. You're being a hypocrite no doubt.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 2:06:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Not that I'm saying we should kill drug dealers or drug takers though, just that society needs a major reworking really.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 2:07:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 2:05:25 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
At 6/13/2013 2:04:04 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

China and Signapore give the death penalty for drug dealers. Now there's a way to win the war on drugs. Pretty sure drug usage is incredibly low there.

It ruins lives. You're being a hypocrite no doubt

Drugs or the death penalty? Death penalty obviously ruins lives. That's the point.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
RyuuKyuzo
Posts: 3,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 2:14:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:36:03 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?

Because drugs are bad.

M'kay?
If you're reading this, you're awesome and you should feel awesome.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 2:17:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 2:14:03 PM, RyuuKyuzo wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:36:03 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?

Because drugs are bad.

M'kay?

Ever walked through a heroin-addled neighbourhood?
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 5:01:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:34:43 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:33:12 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
What GWL proposes would probably win the war on drugs.

Why should there even be a War on Drugs anyway?
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 5:24:26 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 1:23:53 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
(Capitalism is mob rule, not Democracy) Obvious. But you'd hear it stated otherwise. It was actually the first argument I ever heard against democracy on here.
Man, that is terribly written. Anyways, it's Democracy that is known as "mob rule" or "tyranny of the majority", not Capitalism. However, Democracy is a political system and Capitalism an economic one so one can have both at the same time.

Money is a type of vote people, only it can work faster and less conspicuously. And also abolishing the state isn't to abolish stupid people, if your of the camp who oppose democracy on the grounds of uninformed voters, your delusion, etc.
Are you on drugs right now? Not judging, just saying because this all looks like "stream-of-consciousness" stuff. "Vote by money" isn't very democratic because not everyone has it and some have a lot more than others.

What you'd very possibly actually be doing would be empowering the stupid people granting them leave from providing rationale.
In which case would that be so? You seem to be rambling.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 5:26:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 5:04:46 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
Wnope cigarettes do kill people dude, the world would be a better place without them

But it's a man's own choice to smoke if he wants. We provide the medical information about the product and allow people to make choices on their own.

I don't want a Nanny State.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 5:38:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 5:24:26 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 6/13/2013 1:23:53 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
(Capitalism is mob rule, not Democracy) Obvious. But you'd hear it stated otherwise. It was actually the first argument I ever heard against democracy on here.
Man, that is terribly written. Anyways, it's Democracy that is known as "mob rule" or "tyranny of the majority", not Capitalism. However, Democracy is a political system and Capitalism an economic one so one can have both at the same time.

I'm Irish we have an aversion to English grammar. And yes i know that's what's said, i'm saying it's dumb.

Money is a type of vote people, only it can work faster and less conspicuously. And also abolishing the state isn't to abolish stupid people, if your of the camp who oppose democracy on the grounds of uninformed voters, your delusion, etc.
Are you on drugs right now? Not judging, just saying because this all looks like "stream-of-consciousness" stuff. "Vote by money" isn't very democratic because not everyone has it and some have a lot more than others.

it is stream-of-conscious stuff, not on drugs though and you're missing the point

What you'd very possibly actually be doing would be empowering the stupid people granting them leave from providing rationale.
In which case would that be so? You seem to be rambling.

money controls completely in the absence of government. this was an offshoot of danielle's thread about anarchism. the money is then the mob, what else is it? the mob didn't just disappear.....and then it might make for a much more fluid and unreasonable mob don't you think?
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 5:39:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 5:26:21 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 6/13/2013 5:04:46 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
Wnope cigarettes do kill people dude, the world would be a better place without them

But it's a man's own choice to smoke if he wants. We provide the medical information about the product and allow people to make choices on their own.

I don't want a Nanny State.

Nor do I. I'd prefer everyone just had sense and didn't ruin their lives with drugs, but that's not the case, so... And it's not just their own lives they're ruining
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 5:40:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
people and their opinions do not cease to exist because money does, this is incredibly warped thinking
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2013 5:41:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/13/2013 5:40:31 PM, PrivateEye wrote:
people and their opinions do not cease to exist because money exists, this is incredibly warped thinking

fix'd possibly, I'm Irish