Total Posts:368|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A Reply to the Charge that Communism = Theft

charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2014 5:35:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
A Short Rebuttal of the Scurrilous and Cliched Charge that Communism Amounts to Theft

A character who calls himself cheyennebodie (what credibility his choice in screen names inspires!) has offered this trite indictment of communism: "When you take a persons wealth by force, what else can you call it but stealing? And when you give it to someone that did not earn it, that would be called freeloading."

No sir, it's more correctly called expropriating the expropriators, equitably and justly redistributing the economic riches that in fact are created by workingpeople, not by the fat cats sitting on their obese posteriors who grossly and cruelly overaccumulate capital. When a capitalist boss exploitatively employs someone; expropriates most of the value that s/he creates; makes off with and insatiably amasses wealth that has come into existence as a result of the socially interdependent interactions and collective creativity of every member of society and that should therefore be the common property of every member of society, this is truly stealing. In a quite morally criminal and grievous sense, even though a capitalist society socioculturally indoctrinates us to take it for granted.

Yes, it's indeed the case that "property is theft", as Proudhon classically pointed out, because the capitalist's acquisition and ownership of wealth and the means of producing it involves wrongfully depriving his proletarian neighbors of access to their common property; it wantonly flouts the ontological organic connectedness of existence, the existential truth that we organically create together our lives, prosperity, and well-being, and are therefore entitled to share what we create organically, communally. To deny someone what s/he is genuinely and rightfully entitled to is most certainly the essence of theft - property is merely an institutionalized form of theft, a socially-condoned form of selfishness. To take back from capitalists what they've thievingly, grand-larcenously appropriated, to correct an obscenely asymmetrical distribution of material abundance is not stealing at all, it's plain and simple restitution. Capitalism is, to be blunt, systematic theft, and socialism/communism is the restoration of social justice. And no, a working-class alienated from its work by the exploitative nature of work under capitalism, and that dreams of restitution and social justice, does not consist of work-shy wannabe "free riders"; rather, the workingman and woman simply doesn't fancy continuing to be the victim of the free-riding robber barons at the top of capitalist society's hierarchy.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2014 7:01:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/21/2014 6:12:12 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
Socialism is theft.
Communism is Eugenics.

Pithy poo-poo.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2014 7:03:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Hmm, perhaps the conservative champion of the capitalist is actually projecting a bit, projecting onto communism his/her own guilty conscience and consciousness of being a party to a system that's all about theft and parasitism.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2014 8:08:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/21/2014 7:03:04 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, perhaps the conservative champion of the capitalist is actually projecting a bit, projecting onto communism his/her own guilty conscience and consciousness of being a party to a system that's all about theft and parasitism.

Just agreeing with you Charles.
LifeMeansGodIsGood
Posts: 2,744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/21/2014 8:51:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Who was the first socialist in the Bible? Judas Iscariot......read it......after Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, and his sister, Mary, poured very expensive ointment on Jesus' feet and wiped his feet with her hair............Judas complained about it......showing he was the first socialist in the Bible...........socialist, communist, same thing.......socialism is the stepping stone to communism or facism.......Before Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus, he was a socialist..........John chapter 12, verses 1-8. Jesus was not impressed by Judas' socialist complaint about the cost of the ointment.
Ameliamk1
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 12:49:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/21/2014 5:35:50 PM, charleslb wrote:
A Short Rebuttal of the Scurrilous and Cliched Charge that Communism Amounts to Theft


Yes, it's indeed the case that "property is theft", as Proudhon classically pointed out, because the capitalist's acquisition and ownership of wealth and the means of producing it involves wrongfully depriving his proletarian neighbors of access to their common property; it wantonly flouts the ontological organic connectedness of existence, the existential truth that we organically create together our lives, prosperity, and well-being, and are therefore entitled to share what we create organically, communally. To deny someone what s/he is genuinely and rightfully entitled to is most certainly the essence of theft - property is merely an institutionalized form of theft, a socially-condoned form of selfishness. To take back from capitalists what they've thievingly, grand-larcenously appropriated, to correct an obscenely asymmetrical distribution of material abundance is not stealing at all, it's plain and simple restitution. Capitalism is, to be blunt, systematic theft, and socialism/communism is the restoration of social justice. And no, a working-class alienated from its work by the exploitative nature of work under capitalism, and that dreams of restitution and social justice, does not consist of work-shy wannabe "free riders"; rather, the workingman and woman simply doesn't fancy continuing to be the victim of the free-riding robber barons at the top of capitalist society's hierarchy.

Sir, the working men and women have been no wealthier in all of human history then is due to capitalism. Communism, in the sense of prosperity, relies on the outdated and fatuous mercantilist contention that wealth is limited by its physical quantity; shall it be preferred that all of a population is poor rather than most be abundantly rich? The 1 "evil" percent of a population brags 60% of the United State's wealth and still leaves plenty to make the remaining portion of the population reside in luxury. Those not so lucky do, in fact, already gain unwilling support from the rest, more then most could hope for in a Communist state.

I'm glad you think I, not rich by any standard, am entitled to other people's money, but I'm afraid I will not take the wealth of an intimidated businessmen or a lawyer or even a shady wheeler-dealer banker. Fly, sir, under your own damned flag. You want other people's money, you want your fellow Communists to have other people's money, and you want the "proletariat" to have other people's money. But leave me the hell out of it. I will not participate in your robbery, your state terrorism, nor your petty and self-righteous revolution. I will fight in the name of those infinitely wealthier than I, and their right keep what they have, earned or not.

Speak. For. Yourself.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 1:18:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/21/2014 8:08:05 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/21/2014 7:03:04 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, perhaps the conservative champion of the capitalist is actually projecting a bit, projecting onto communism his/her own guilty conscience and consciousness of being a party to a system that's all about theft and parasitism.

Just agreeing with you Charles.

Oh, okay then, thank you.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 1:20:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/21/2014 8:51:45 PM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
Who was the first socialist in the Bible? Judas Iscariot......read it......after Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, and his sister, Mary, poured very expensive ointment on Jesus' feet and wiped his feet with her hair............Judas complained about it......showing he was the first socialist in the Bible...........socialist, communist, same thing.......socialism is the stepping stone to communism or facism.......Before Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus, he was a socialist..........John chapter 12, verses 1-8. Jesus was not impressed by Judas' socialist complaint about the cost of the ointment.

Hmm, I seem to recall that all of the apostles lived together and pooled their resources in a communist fashion.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 1:29:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 12:49:15 AM, Ameliamk1 wrote:

I'm glad you think I, not rich by any standard, am entitled to other people's money, but I'm afraid I will not take the wealth of an intimidated businessmen or a lawyer or even a shady wheeler-dealer banker. Fly, sir, under your own damned flag. You want other people's money, you want your fellow Communists to have other people's money, and you want the "proletariat" to have other people's money. But leave me the hell out of it. I will not participate in your robbery, your state terrorism, nor your petty and self-righteous revolution. I will fight in the name of those infinitely wealthier than I, and their right keep what they have, earned or not.

Speak. For. Yourself.

Spoken like someone who has been quite thoroughly socioculturally brainwashed to pathetically love corporate Big Brother, to sympathetically and stupidly side with his capitalist master.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 1:37:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Yes, the pro-capitalist rather likes to focus on the alleged communist villainy of dispossessing the capitalist fat cat (or pig, as he used to be quaintly called), and to completely and complicitly overlook the capitalist's criminal MO of expropriation; expropriating, gypping the workingperson out of most of the value that her/his labor creates, rather like a parasitical street pimp taking most of the money, the surplus income earned by the girls under his thumb and leaving them with just enough to subsist on so that they can keep enriching him.

Mm-hmm, the pro-capitalist ideologue chooses to see, hear, and speak none of the egregious evil of capitalism. For instance, s/he elevates to iconic status a company such as Apple, and idolizes the likes of Steve Jobs, without ever looking into the dark side of the maker of the iPhone and iPad. FYI, that dark side goes by a different name, Foxconn Technology Group, the Taiwanese tech company that actually manufactures Apple products and that so abusively exploits and dehumanizes (the CEO of Foxconn has publically expressed the mentality that his employees are mere "animals", he even had the director of the Taipei zoo give a talk to his executives and managers about how to more effectively control the "animals" they oversee) its workers that there has been a rash of suicides. Apple is quite aware of conditions in Foxconn factories but really only cares about the bad PR that ensues when they occasionally make the news. Former Foxconn manager Li Mingqi: "Apple never cared about anything other than increasing product quality and decreasing production cost", "Workers welfare has nothing to do with their interests". And a former, anonymous Apple executive: "We've known about labor abuses in some factories for four years, and they're still going on". "Why? Because the system works for us." (Hmm, there was nothing about any of this in Steve Jobs' obituary!)

And this is beautiful, progressive, iconic Apple! The evil, the victimization of workingpeople that it's culpable in, is of course but the tip of a horrendous iceberg. But this is truth inconvenient to the biased belief system of the pro-capitalist and is therefore met with denial and/or ideological rationalizations. The pro-capitalist would much prefer to condemn the communist program of redistributing the capitalist's ill-gotten wealth as theft than muster up the moral courage to face the historical and ongoing crimes of capitalism and its practitioners against working-class humanity.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 1:40:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Another thought or two. Have you ever noticed how conservative & "libertarian" pro-capitalists tend to get quite emotive and vehement about playing apologist for the capitalist system and their capitalist heroes? This is because they don't simply intellectually believe in the "free market", they vicariously identify with their capitalist idols, with their ill-gotten success. Yes, it's the dirty little repressed psychological secret of the pro-capitalist that s/he gets a nice little ego boost as a payoff for taking sides with the rich, his/her ego is indeed heavily invested in being the self-appointed defender of the "success" and nonexistent honor of the capitalist. And as for why his/her defense of capitalist fat cats so often involves accusing their critics of being losers who envy the fat cat's "success", well, the pro-capitalist is simply projecting his/her own preoccupation with success, his/her own pathetic sense of being a loser who envies wealthy capitalists. Mm-hmm, there's a whole lot of psychology going on behind the ideology.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 1:49:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 1:40:53 AM, charleslb wrote:
Another thought or two. Have you ever noticed how conservative & "libertarian" pro-capitalists tend to get quite emotive and vehement about playing apologist for the capitalist system and their capitalist heroes? This is because they don't simply intellectually believe in the "free market", they vicariously identify with their capitalist idols, with their ill-gotten success. Yes, it's the dirty little repressed psychological secret of the pro-capitalist that s/he gets a nice little ego boost as a payoff for taking sides with the rich, his/her ego is indeed heavily invested in being the self-appointed defender of the "success" and nonexistent honor of the capitalist. And as for why his/her defense of capitalist fat cats so often involves accusing their critics of being losers who envy the fat cat's "success", well, the pro-capitalist is simply projecting his/her own preoccupation with success, his/her own pathetic sense of being a loser who envies wealthy capitalists. Mm-hmm, there's a whole lot of psychology going on behind the ideology.

You can attempt to dismiss the above insights as pure psychologism, but turnabout is fair play after all. That is, it's utter amateur psychology when the pro-capitalist speculates that the socialist is merely motivated by "envy" of the capitalist's "success". Yep, as the saying goes, what's good for the socialist goose ...
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 2:51:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Where are all of the "libertarian" wannabe wall-streetski krvopijci who used to dominate the site and come out of the woodwork to apoplectically attack my "commie" point of view?
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 3:25:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 12:49:15 AM, Ameliamk1 wrote:
Sir, the working men and women have been no wealthier in all of human history then is due to capitalism. Communism, in the sense of prosperity, relies on the outdated and fatuous mercantilist contention that wealth is limited by its physical quantity; shall it be preferred that all of a population is poor rather than most be abundantly rich?

Yes because equality is related to social well-being while absolute wealth, unsurprisingly, is not.

http://www.theguardian.com...

Love the prose. :)
fazz
Posts: 1,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 7:23:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 3:25:19 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 9/22/2014 12:49:15 AM, Ameliamk1 wrote:
Sir, the working men and women have been no wealthier in all of human history then is due to capitalism. Communism, in the sense of prosperity, relies on the outdated and fatuous mercantilist contention that wealth is limited by its physical quantity; shall it be preferred that all of a population is poor rather than most be abundantly rich?

Love the prose. :)

Yeah, it almost sounds like he's quoting the Communist Manifesto.
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 11:45:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
.... wealth are in fact, not produce by labour nor intelligent, they are a product of courage and imagination. If you think you can create any wealth without what you so called "fat cat" - if you think, entrepreneur is not important, if you think you can simply live on by your product of labour, try living your life without asking them for a job.

Starting business is very scary, more tiresome than any labour intensive job you can name of, yet when it become clear that what they thought was right, people start to suck on their hard-earned wealth in the name of "social justice" - I called it thief.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 4:07:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 7:25:02 AM, fazz wrote:
...in a british accent, no doubt.

Really? I thought they were Americans because Americans call each other sir. Although in the economist letters it always starts Sir, blah blah.

I just want to be clear that I wasn't sneering. I really do love the way charleslb and ameliamk write. Especially Charles because he does more variety of style that I've seen so far anyway.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 5:17:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 4:07:36 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 9/22/2014 7:25:02 AM, fazz wrote:
...in a british accent, no doubt.

Really? I thought they were Americans because Americans call each other sir. Although in the economist letters it always starts Sir, blah blah.

I just want to be clear that I wasn't sneering. I really do love the way charleslb and ameliamk write. Especially Charles because he does more variety of style that I've seen so far anyway.

Thank you for the compliment.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 5:42:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 11:45:06 AM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
.... wealth are in fact, not produce by labour nor intelligent, they are a product of courage and imagination.

The courage, imagination, and contribution to society's economic productivity of the ordinary workingperson being woefully underestimated and underappreciated by pro-capitalist types. Well, they can't very well acknowledge the workingman & woman without admitting the asymmetries and inequities of the capitalist power structure and distribution of material well-being.

If you think you can create any wealth without what you so called "fat cat" - if you think, entrepreneur is not important, if you think you can simply live on by your product of labour, try living your life without asking them for a job.

But alas the capitalist system is set up so as to make this an impossible option for most, so as to coerce typical working-class individuals to submit themselves to capitalist "job creators" to be objectified into tools who are used to enrich not themselves but rather those who unrighteously and parasitically control their access to employment.

Starting business is very scary, more tiresome than any labour intensive job you can name of, yet when it become clear that what they thought was right, people start to suck on their hard-earned wealth in the name of "social justice" - I called it thief.

I call this typical, trite pro-capitalist tripe and refer you back to my OP and other replies.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 6:01:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Btw, please note how a pro-capitalist such as suttichart.denpruektham completely and conveniently glosses over the abusive labor practices (referred to in an above post in this thread) that are a tried and true part of so many capitalist's MO for getting rich, preferring to stay with singing the praises of the "courageous" and "creative" capitalist. Yes, our friend suttichart.denpruektham is just another voice in the neoliberal chorus droning out the same tired ideological tune.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 6:12:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/21/2014 8:51:45 PM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
Who was the first socialist in the Bible? Judas Iscariot......read it......after Jesus ...

It's a rather bizarre aberration of American culture that the folks on the religious right tend to be staunchly pro-capitalist, even though the consumerism and materialism promoted by capitalism is quite arguably the greatest factor in the world today undermining and militating against spirituality; a powerful and pervasive, aggressive and systemic force working to convert modern man and woman away from any form of godliness and into crassly secular Homo economicus. Yes, irony of ironies, by being boosters of the "free market" conservative Christians shoot faith in the foot; they inadvertently contribute to the decline of Christianity and the rise of a profanely capitalist world order and culture. How does this work?

Naturally the orientation of capitalist culture is economic, commercial, and materialistic and conducive to our indoctrination into a population of wanton materialists. But of course it's the dynamics of the capitalist system that determine this cultural orientation, that necessitate and ordain a materialistic and consumerist ethos. That is, consumption must sustain, must keep up to speed with the capitalist's competitive and driven overaccumulation of capital, lest he and the economy experience a realization crisis, the scenario of devaluation and recession that results when capitalists aren't realizing a healthy profit from their overaccumulated capital and the buying public's consumerism. Well, to stave off dreaded realization crises and crises of underconsumption the system of course spawns a culture that instills us with the spirit of consumerism, with the idea that the meaning of life is acquiring affluence and material possessions (Btw, anti-big government and pro-capitalist "libertarians", the same internal dynamics of capitalism also require the inexorable growth of government into a giant consumer, spender, infuser of money into the system in order to keep the economy chugging along; this isn't merely Keynesian theory, it's a hard truth of actually-existing capitalism that you would recognize if you weren't such ideologues).

Quite simply, the fundamental drive of the capitalist system is the demonic (I'm of course using the word in a nonevangelical sense) drive for accumulation, expansion, and growth, and each of us is therefore profoundly inculcated with materialistic values and attitudes to ensure that we do our part to support economic growth, to maintain the illusion of the viability of capitalism. Well, if we suddenly and en masse culturally veered away from materialism-consumerism-hedonism and toward wholesomeness, toward humanistic and spiritual values such as creative self-actualization and love our capitalist economy would in very short order utterly collapse. The capitalist status quo would at last go onto the ole dustbin of history. Therefore the entire capitalist power structure, not merely individual companies, most certainly has a vested interest in using the advertising industry, the media, and pop culture to condition us to think about life in consumerist terms.

Well, a society full of practicing Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and whatnot, rather than shopaholics pathetically seeking fulfillment from owning stuff, would simply not do. Therefore we must be and are programmed with an economic values orientation that's completely void of ethics and spirituality. Yes, the real and preeminent threat to religion is not "liberalism" stupid, it's capitalism. (But before any secularists out there begin rejoicing at the prospect of capitalism destroying religious faith, give some thought to what capitalism is replacing religion with, it's certainly not ethical humanism my friends.)

Mm-hmm, we're currently quite trapped in a vicious late-capitalist circle in which the driving economics and energies of a capitalist market and our cultural materialism foster and reinforce each other. The capitalism-touting conservative Christian, alas, is very much complicit in perpetuating the viciousness of this sociocultural state of affairs to the detriment of the spirituality and morality that he sanctimoniously professes. Shame on him/her for being such an unwitting but still culpable and hypocritical part of a problem that s/he so piously decries.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
fazz
Posts: 1,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 6:29:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 11:45:06 AM, suttichart.denpruektham wrote:
.... wealth are in fact, not produce by labour nor intelligent, they are a product of courage and imagination. If you think you can create any wealth without what you so called "fat cat" - if you think, entrepreneur is not important, if you think you can simply live on by your product of labour, try living your life without asking them for a job.

Yes, but why should only the rich be able to "afford" courage and imagination. By calling entreprenuers wealth creators you do them injustice...s-s-sir! lol. Entrprenuers should be champions of art, culture and innovate political change.

Starting business is very scary, more tiresome than any labour intensive job you can name of, yet when it become clear that what they thought was right, people start to suck on their hard-earned wealth in the name of "social justice" - I called it thief.

How do you explain bank bonuses? Can you really explain to me statistically that bankers actually create? Do they innovate? Or do they just sit and get fat - and pls don't insult fat-cats my dear fellow. Fat cats have good genes.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 6:30:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Of course the immediately above post doesn't apply to the typical "libertarian" who has no interest in spirituality whatsoever, having been fully and unabashedly converted into Homo economicus, but you might wish to give it a read anyway.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/22/2014 6:46:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
There is truth to both sides, and it boils down to what extreme you'd prefer.

If you want to call capitalists extortionists and abusive because of how they treat their employees, that's one thing. However, you overlook the millions of people who work for themselves and have no employees. Who/what are they exploiting anymore than a commune would? So, you would steal from them to pay for others for the crimes of others still.

On the other side, you have mega-corporations that are damn near impossible to topple, and due to lack of competition, there is abuse and exploitation. So, the argument is you are stealing from those that are stealing from others. I disagree with this sentiment, but I can respect its logic.
My work here is, finally, done.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2014 12:24:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 6:46:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
There is truth to both sides, and it boils down to what extreme you'd prefer.

If you want to call capitalists extortionists and abusive because of how they treat their employees, that's one thing. However, you overlook the millions of people who work for themselves and have no employees. Who/what are they exploiting anymore than a commune would? So, you would steal from them to pay for others for the crimes of others still.

On the other side, you have mega-corporations that are damn near impossible to topple, and due to lack of competition, there is abuse and exploitation. So, the argument is you are stealing from those that are stealing from others. I disagree with this sentiment, but I can respect its logic.

Actually, what it all ultimately boils down to is whether or not one perceives the bigger capitalist picture of the disrespect, disempowerment, and kicked-aroundness of the working class - which affects both wage slaves and the self-employed; and recognizes the moral right of human beings to the dignity and well-being that accrues to them from not being subjected to the domination and exploitation inherent in the lot of the low-on-the-socioeconomic-totem-pole members of capitalist society. Communism is merely the revolutionary project of - by redistributing and sharing economic wealth and power, and by universalizing the ownership of the means of production - creating a form of social and economic life in which no one will any longer be relegated to a low-on-the-totem-pole status. But of course a great many people don't realize any of this and wrongheadedly cling to a preference for capitalism, either because a vicarious identification with rich capitalists biases their view of reality or simply because they've been thoroughly culturally inculcated with pro-capitalist ideology.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2014 12:30:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/22/2014 6:12:39 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 9/21/2014 8:51:45 PM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
Who was the first socialist in the Bible? Judas Iscariot......read it......after Jesus ...


It's a rather bizarre aberration of American culture that the folks on the religious right tend to be staunchly pro-capitalist, even though the consumerism and materialism promoted by capitalism is quite arguably the greatest factor in the world today undermining and militating against spirituality; a powerful and pervasive, aggressive and systemic force working to convert modern man and woman away from any form of godliness and into crassly secular Homo economicus. Yes, irony of ironies, by being boosters of the "free market" conservative Christians shoot faith in the foot; they inadvertently contribute to the decline of Christianity and the rise of a profanely capitalist world order and culture. How does this work?

Naturally the orientation of capitalist culture is economic, commercial, and materialistic and conducive to our indoctrination into a population of wanton materialists. But of course it's the dynamics of the capitalist system that determine this cultural orientation, that necessitate and ordain a materialistic and consumerist ethos. That is, consumption must sustain, must keep up to speed with the capitalist's competitive and driven overaccumulation of capital, lest he and the economy experience a realization crisis, the scenario of devaluation and recession that results when capitalists aren't realizing a healthy profit from their overaccumulated capital and the buying public's consumerism. Well, to stave off dreaded realization crises and crises of underconsumption the system of course spawns a culture that instills us with the spirit of consumerism, with the idea that the meaning of life is acquiring affluence and material possessions (Btw, anti-big government and pro-capitalist "libertarians", the same internal dynamics of capitalism also require the inexorable growth of government into a giant consumer, spender, infuser of money into the system in order to keep the economy chugging along; this isn't merely Keynesian theory, it's a hard truth of actually-existing capitalism that you would recognize if you weren't such ideologues).

Quite simply, the fundamental drive of the capitalist system is the demonic (I'm of course using the word in a nonevangelical sense) drive for accumulation, expansion, and growth, and each of us is therefore profoundly inculcated with materialistic values and attitudes to ensure that we do our part to support economic growth, to maintain the illusion of the viability of capitalism. Well, if we suddenly and en masse culturally veered away from materialism-consumerism-hedonism and toward wholesomeness, toward humanistic and spiritual values such as creative self-actualization and love our capitalist economy would in very short order utterly collapse. The capitalist status quo would at last go onto the ole dustbin of history. Therefore the entire capitalist power structure, not merely individual companies, most certainly has a vested interest in using the advertising industry, the media, and pop culture to condition us to think about life in consumerist terms.

Well, a society full of practicing Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and whatnot, rather than shopaholics pathetically seeking fulfillment from owning stuff, would simply not do. Therefore we must be and are programmed with an economic values orientation that's completely void of ethics and spirituality. Yes, the real and preeminent threat to religion is not "liberalism" stupid, it's capitalism. (But before any secularists out there begin rejoicing at the prospect of capitalism destroying religious faith, give some thought to what capitalism is replacing religion with, it's certainly not ethical humanism my friends.)

Mm-hmm, we're currently quite trapped in a vicious late-capitalist circle in which the driving economics and energies of a capitalist market and our cultural materialism foster and reinforce each other. The capitalism-touting conservative Christian, alas, is very much complicit in perpetuating the viciousness of this sociocultural state of affairs to the detriment of the spirituality and morality that he sanctimoniously professes. Shame on him/her for being such an unwitting but still culpable and hypocritical part of a problem that s/he so piously decries.

I should stress here that in fact many millions of Americans and Westerners today lead lives virtually or totally bereft of spirituality because those lives have been swallowed up by our capitalist culture's materialism, i.e. its economic life-orientation, consumerism, and affluenza; while actually exceedingly few people lead a life barren of spirituality because they've been converted to an atheistic worldview by "communism". And yet conservative Christians, religious rightists are adamantly of the mindset that capitalism should be supported and "godless communism" opposed. Never mind that late capitalist culture, not Marxist-Leninist philosophy is indeed clearly the great atheist maker. Never mind that it's the money-obsession and decadence of our society that's rampantly stripping people of religious faith and that leaves them secularized heathens, the evangelical is still bent on fighting the Cold War against communism, and a culture war against liberalism. Oy vey, such a blind spot to the real danger! Yes, the Bible-thumping sort of Republican has sure picked the wrong horse in the ideological race to back.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2014 7:03:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/23/2014 12:24:50 AM, charleslb wrote:
At 9/22/2014 6:46:17 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
There is truth to both sides, and it boils down to what extreme you'd prefer.

If you want to call capitalists extortionists and abusive because of how they treat their employees, that's one thing. However, you overlook the millions of people who work for themselves and have no employees. Who/what are they exploiting anymore than a commune would? So, you would steal from them to pay for others for the crimes of others still.

On the other side, you have mega-corporations that are damn near impossible to topple, and due to lack of competition, there is abuse and exploitation. So, the argument is you are stealing from those that are stealing from others. I disagree with this sentiment, but I can respect its logic.

Actually, what it all ultimately boils down to is whether or not one perceives the bigger capitalist picture of the disrespect, disempowerment, and kicked-aroundness of the working class - which affects both wage slaves and the self-employed; and recognizes the moral right of human beings to the dignity and well-being that accrues to them from not being subjected to the domination and exploitation inherent in the lot of the low-on-the-socioeconomic-totem-pole members of capitalist society. Communism is merely the revolutionary project of - by redistributing and sharing economic wealth and power, and by universalizing the ownership of the means of production - creating a form of social and economic life in which no one will any longer be relegated to a low-on-the-totem-pole status. But of course a great many people don't realize any of this and wrongheadedly cling to a preference for capitalism, either because a vicarious identification with rich capitalists biases their view of reality or simply because they've been thoroughly culturally inculcated with pro-capitalist ideology.

Would you assert that the self-employed are not the working class?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2014 7:09:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
You talk about "wage-slavery"....isn't "minimum wage" a form of dependency slavery where the ONLY choices a person has from birth is to qualify for the high standards of a minimum-wage job or forever be a drain on society?

Slavery is all about restricting choices and denying freedom.