Total Posts:46|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Left Wing and Right Wing

Foodiesoul
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is? What's the difference between these two wings? And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 6:48:01 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is? What's the difference between these two wings? And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?

This site is a great resource for answering your question: http://www.diffen.com...
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,630
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 6:49:01 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

Then WHY are you on this website?
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,020
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 6:50:38 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is? What's the difference between these two wings? And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?

As for the final question pertaining to the history and usage of those terms:

The French Revolutionary era was where the terms Left-wing politics and Right-wing politics first originated. http://english.stackexchange.com...
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 7:51:23 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is?

Left wing = PRO government intervention in Economic issues..... ANTI government intervention in Personal issues

Right wing = AGAINST Government intervention in Economic issues...... PRO government intervention in Personal issues

What's the difference between these two wings?

See above

And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?

Just kind of happened that way :P
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
NinaZarechnaya
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 8:35:03 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is? What's the difference between these two wings? And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?

Left- and right-wing are not specific political parties; they are regions - literally wings - of the spectrum of political ideology. As someone said earlier, the difference originated in early French democracy, and since then the loose definitions of left- and right-wing, in keeping with the seating arrangements in France, have been respectively "those who advocate change" and "those who advocate preservation."

The specifics have developed quite a bit since then, and no one can really agree on them. Here in Europe, people who advocate freer markets are further to the right (with the exception of fascists, who are usually categorised as far-right despite advocating economic regulation) and apart from a few rhetorical differences, that's basically all there is to it. In the States there is the additional dimension of social liberalism vs. social conservatism, where right-wingers are people who oppose gay marriage, abortion and other such things, but this distinction is almost non-existent in Europe. Additionally, people have their own systems of classification. I tend to pay homage to the French tradition and categorise more revolutionary/progressive ideas as left-wing while more reactionary or conservative ones are more right-wing. This allows "oddball" ideologies like communism, fascism and primitivism to be somewhat accurately categorised; although the whole thing is a simplification, might I add.
slo1
Posts: 4,308
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 9:50:48 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 6:49:01 PM, triangle.128k wrote:
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

Then WHY are you on this website?

Why ask why?
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,630
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 11:30:51 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 9:50:48 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/28/2016 6:49:01 PM, triangle.128k wrote:
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

Then WHY are you on this website?

Why ask why?

Why ask why i'm asking why?
Bob13
Posts: 706
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2016 11:45:09 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 7:51:23 PM, imabench wrote:
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is?

Left wing = PRO government intervention in Economic issues..... ANTI government intervention in Personal issues

Right wing = AGAINST Government intervention in Economic issues...... PRO government intervention in Personal issues
That's not actually accurate. Which issues are considered "personal" depend on your opinion. Both wings disagree on which issues are "personal".
What's the difference between these two wings?

See above

And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?

Just kind of happened that way :P
I don't have a signature. :-)
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,630
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2016 1:49:38 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 7:51:23 PM, imabench wrote:
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is?

Left wing = PRO government intervention in Economic issues..... ANTI government intervention in Personal issues

Right wing = AGAINST Government intervention in Economic issues...... PRO government intervention in Personal issues

That's an oversimplification, it's too broad to actually help someone decide whether they're left or right winged.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2016 2:45:32 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/28/2016 7:51:23 PM, imabench wrote:
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is?

Left wing = PRO government intervention in Economic issues..... ANTI government intervention in Personal issues

Right wing = AGAINST Government intervention in Economic issues...... PRO government intervention in Personal issues

What's the difference between these two wings?

See above

And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?

Just kind of happened that way :P

I don't want the goverent involved in anything other than defending this country.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2016 2:47:34 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
Obama's government can't even get that part right
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
ThePostMarxist
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2016 4:57:15 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is? What's the difference between these two wings? And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?

The left is anti-authority and very forward-thinking whilst the right has always fought to preserve tradition and structure. It comes from the French parliament which had two side, the Left (progressives, revolutionaries, classic liberals and forward-thinkers, feminists and Marxists (such as myself) are also probably included), the Right was the conservatives and the traditionalists
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2016 5:54:58 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
There is a reference scale it goes...

communist, fascist, marxist, monarch (is the far left)

<democrat---republican---centrist/independent (The middle)---conservative--Libertarian>

Anarchist (is the far right)
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
ThePostMarxist
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2016 7:49:38 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/10/2016 5:54:58 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
There is a reference scale it goes...

communist, fascist, marxist, monarch (is the far left)

<democrat---republican---centrist/independent (The middle)---conservative--Libertarian>

Anarchist (is the far right)

That's incorrect. Fascism, in definition, is a far-right ideology. Monarchy is as well. Anarchism is neither left nor right as there are both left-wing and right-wing forms of anarchy, though the legitimacy of "anarcho"-capitalism is questionable. The far-right is Fascism, Capitalism, Traditionalism and Conservatism in reverse order
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2016 8:14:44 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/10/2016 7:49:38 PM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
At 9/10/2016 5:54:58 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
There is a reference scale it goes...

communist, fascist, marxist, monarch (is the far left)

<democrat---republican---centrist/independent (The middle)---conservative--Libertarian>

Anarchist (is the far right)

That's incorrect. Fascism, in definition, is a far-right ideology. Monarchy is as well. Anarchism is neither left nor right as there are both left-wing and right-wing forms of anarchy, though the legitimacy of "anarcho"-capitalism is questionable. The far-right is Fascism, Capitalism, Traditionalism and Conservatism in reverse order

Capitalism is not a political ideology. It is an economic system which is comfortable in all political strategies if warranted, the opposite to capitalism is not communism, but corporatism.

I've never explored traditionalism.

And, you are correct in that by ideological definition, fascism's unifying force is nationalism which is a right wing ideology.

However, I should have been more specific as the spectrum I've presented is in the order of total government (Left) to no government(right) in which fascism falls on the left of the spectrum. I hope this clarify's the spectrum positions.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
ThePostMarxist
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2016 8:19:22 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
However, I should have been more specific as the spectrum I've presented is in the order of total government (Left) to no government(right) in which fascism falls on the left of the spectrum. I hope this clarify's the spectrum positions.

In that case, if you want to base it on the tradition of the left-to-right then the left is lack of government and the right is total government. The system of left-to-right comes from the French parliament after the revolution (I believe) in which the left side of the parliament was the progressives, revolutionaries, anarchists, liberals, socialists (they weren't call that at the time of course), and the Marxists probably, and on the right were conservatives, monarchists, and more authoritarian stances, though left-to-right has come to mean large to no government

But I think of it as more of a compass than a spectrum. Libertarian to authoritarian, and left to right
Grizzly-Jones
Posts: 90
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2016 8:38:29 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 6/28/2016 6:43:43 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
I'm really not that smart when it comes to politics so I don't know that much about politics.

I know there are two political wings known as Left Wing and Right Wing but I really don't know what these two wings are.

Do any of you know what exactly Left Wing is and what exactly Right Wing is? What's the difference between these two wings? And also, why are these called wings and not just parties or something like that?

Just ignore what that Marxist guy is saying. He's an idiot.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2016 11:26:35 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/10/2016 7:49:38 PM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
At 9/10/2016 5:54:58 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
There is a reference scale it goes...

communist, fascist, marxist, monarch (is the far left)

<democrat---republican---centrist/independent (The middle)---conservative--Libertarian>

Anarchist (is the far right)

That's incorrect. Fascism, in definition, is a far-right ideology. Monarchy is as well. Anarchism is neither left nor right as there are both left-wing and right-wing forms of anarchy, though the legitimacy of "anarcho"-capitalism is questionable. The far-right is Fascism, Capitalism, Traditionalism and Conservatism in reverse order

Capitalism is not an ideology, it's a system.
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.
ThePostMarxist
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 9:29:07 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
Capitalism is not an ideology, it's a system.

A system that relies on structural violence of the state and wage slavery. The ideology comes in the form of Statism, conservatism and any other right-wing belief
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 3:37:40 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/11/2016 9:29:07 AM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
Capitalism is not an ideology, it's a system.

A system that relies on structural violence of the state and wage slavery. The ideology comes in the form of Statism, conservatism and any other right-wing belief

Let's leave the ideological stances behind and focus on what I was stating, which is something you are trying desperately to draw away from.

Capitalism is the ownership of private property and the ability to conduct yourself freely in exchange - nothing more, nothing less. It is not, by any definition, the usage of the state to get your personal goals accomplished - that would be corporatism, Socialism, and historically Communism.

The only interference that the state has in a free market system is the backing up of property rights, meaning theft, extortion, destruction of property, etc. are illegal in those nations, and is in most nations, regardless of the system.

Now, you've failed to provide me evidence for the existence of wage slavery in a Capitalist system, nor have you provided me evidence as to why this "wage slavery" is inherently good or bad. I would suggest you get on that.
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.
ThePostMarxist
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 3:55:05 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Let's leave the ideological stances behind and focus on what I was stating, which is something you are trying desperately to draw away from.
Okay. I admit, a lot of my aggression towards capitalism simply comes from the fact that I am a communist and Marxist. But that doesn't distract from the fact that most capitalist societies have been upheld by a state and have required socialist reforms to actually sustain the rights of the workers

Capitalism is the ownership of private property and the ability to conduct yourself freely in exchange - nothing more, nothing less
That completely ignores the historical and traditional definition of capitalism, which is a system based on the accumulation of capital and often leads to class divisions and wage slavery

It is not, by any definition, the usage of the state to get your personal goals accomplished - that would be... Socialism
Wrong, the definition of socialism is a system of worker's control, and historically has always meant collectivisation of agriculture, industry and other areas that involve the working class, as well as redistribution of wealth

The only interference that the state has in a free market system is the backing up of property rights
So it does require a state. Private property cannot be maintained without a state, so it follows on logically that the abolition of private property leads to no need for a state

Now, you've failed to provide me evidence for the existence of wage slavery in a Capitalist system,
Wage slavery is a system in which people rely on the existence of a wage or salary system to survive especially, to quote the definition, "the need is immediate". We live in a system where you cannot live a life without living off a wage, thus forced work, thus slavery. It's also a system in which your labour is exploited because you are paid less than what you produce

nor have you provided me evidence as to why this "wage slavery" is inherently good or bad. I would suggest you get on that.
How is it ethical? How is it good that workers are forced into menial and minimum wage jobs, with a wage that they cannot live on and have their labour exploited?
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 5:01:25 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/11/2016 3:55:05 PM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
Let's leave the ideological stances behind and focus on what I was stating, which is something you are trying desperately to draw away from.
Okay. I admit, a lot of my aggression towards capitalism simply comes from the fact that I am a communist and Marxist. But that doesn't distract from the fact that most capitalist societies have been upheld by a state and have required socialist reforms to actually sustain the rights of the workers

Please explain to me if there exists a single society without a state.

Once you're finished with that, I would like you to consider the following. The well-being of workers is not quantified by a simple understanding of social reforms that aid workers - no, as that has unintended consequences, such as rising prices and low employment rates. Mathematical quantification of these facts requires that you look at not just the primary and secondary effects, but the tertiary effects as well. Worker reforms that give more power to unions, for example, harm the customer as it drives up the cost of doing business, and focuses on the creation of more labor instead of focusing on rising productivity and efficiency.


Capitalism is the ownership of private property and the ability to conduct yourself freely in exchange - nothing more, nothing less
That completely ignores the historical and traditional definition of capitalism, which is a system based on the accumulation of capital and often leads to class divisions and wage slavery

Class divisions are a natural phenomenon, and these divisions exist in every single society. You need those that create and accumulate wealth and are able to invest, and you need those that are able to provide labor as to create the necessary products for human consumption. The societies, however, that have had the largest state involvement in fiscal and monetary matters paired with low respect for property rights have often times created the worst condition for the average worker. I've asked you, also, multiple times, to describe what wage slavery is, and you still refuse to do that.


It is not, by any definition, the usage of the state to get your personal goals accomplished - that would be... Socialism
Wrong, the definition of socialism is a system of worker's control, and historically has always meant collectivisation of agriculture, industry and other areas that involve the working class, as well as redistribution of wealth

Correct, it has meant the removal of property and placement of such into the hands of the public, being the government. Of course, upon the doing of such, it has not led to a public control of these products, rather governmental control and quenching of all opposition to such. You can always quote Venezuela as an example, as it's a nation with the opportunity to become extremely rich, since it holds so much oil, but their system has gone to hell, and for the right reasons.


The only interference that the state has in a free market system is the backing up of property rights
So it does require a state. Private property cannot be maintained without a state, so it follows on logically that the abolition of private property leads to no need for a state

Since when did I say that Capitalism doesn't require a state? Any and all systems require a state to uphold it, otherwise it will be anarchy. Capitalism, though, requires the smallest state as a minimum to uphold 3 simple things - enforcement of contracts between individuals or groups, protection of property rights, and the defense of the nation through some form of military.

Systems such as Socialism, which is a socially and economically illiterate system that fails to understand basic facts, requires a much, much larger state.


Now, you've failed to provide me evidence for the existence of wage slavery in a Capitalist system,
Wage slavery is a system in which people rely on the existence of a wage or salary system to survive especially, to quote the definition, "the need is immediate". We live in a system where you cannot live a life without living off a wage, thus forced work, thus slavery. It's also a system in which your labour is exploited because you are paid less than what you produce

Firstly, let's step away from the Labor Theory of Value, and if you so happen to mention it again, I will have to make a brand new post just to explain to you why the LTV is the most idiotic and bunk economic theory in existence - as it's one that has been disproved to be complete sophistry countless times.

To reference your other point, I would like you to show me a system in which you can have the populous not work, and still be able to keep the system running. For any system to function, those that produce must heavily outnumber those that consume, meaning you cannot forge a system where "wage slavery" doesn't exist. Such a ludicrous argument is equatable to stating that we are biological slaves, as we must eat and breathe in order to survive. This simply isn't the case here - there are necessities for human survival, but this doesn't make us a slave to any entity. We are not shackled by a system that gives us more choice and opportunity than any other in human existence.


nor have you provided me evidence as to why this "wage slavery" is inherently good or bad. I would suggest you get on that.
How is it ethical? How is it good that workers are forced into menial and minimum wage jobs, with a wage that they cannot live on and have their labour exploited?

Firstly, their labor is not exploited, nor are they forced into these jobs. It is in their best interest to work, as there isn't a way to create a system in which people don't work and are still provided for. It's childish to hearken back to this nonsensical statement that Capitalism lacks choice as people have to work, since this is the FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF ANY FUNCTIONAL AND STRUCTURAL SYSTEM - THOSE WHO WORK MUST OUTNUMBER SIGNIFICANTLY THOSE THAT DON'T.
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.
ThePostMarxist
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 5:32:06 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
It seems to me you have some main queries. I'm not gonna reply I'm just going to indiscriminately describe the definitions of a few terms and name some of my issues with your reasoning

1) Wage Slavery and the Labour Theory of Value

Wage slavery, when workers are forced to work in a wage system, in which they are paid less than the value of their labour. This is unethical and exploitative. Yes, they are forced to take these jobs. Answer me this, can you live in our modern society without working? No, the pressure of the economy forces you to get a job

The LTV is a theory I do not wholly subscribe to. I think it factors in because, surprise, there is no end product without labour so it must somehow be a factor in determining the value of a product. I am inclined to incorporate both LTV and use value into what makes something value

<b>2) What socialism is, and what it isn't.<b>

Socialism IS a form of economy based around worker's control of the means of production.
Socialism IS factoring the quality of life and the humanity of a system into the efficiency of an economy
Socialism IS structuring the economy around use value, and labour theory, rather than exchange value which is one of 17 contradictions within capitalism (a great book, I highly recommend you read it, 17 contradictions and the end of capitalism, by David Harvey)

Socialism ISN'T using the government to get what you want. This is called liberalism and is something despised by any consistent socialist
Socialism ISN'T when the means of production are owned by the state (USSR, Mao's China, DPRK, Venezuela), this is called State Capitalism as all the functions of a private owner are handed over to the State
Socialism ISN'T 'illiterate' or 'SJW-ism'. Socialism is very simply applying Marxist analysis of class to the economy, and politics of a nation

See the difference between what you call socialism, and what socialists advocate and what socialism IS? Good. I personally believe that, in our current system, a higher minimum wage should be fought for and, as someone who incorporates syndicalism into my ideas, that unions need to be more influential to make the working environment better for the workers
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 5:46:47 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/11/2016 5:32:06 PM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
It seems to me you have some main queries. I'm not gonna reply I'm just going to indiscriminately describe the definitions of a few terms and name some of my issues with your reasoning

This should be good.


1) Wage Slavery and the Labour Theory of Value

Of course, hearkening back to the Labor Theory of Value. Let me link you to a post I made in the economics forum about the Labor Theory of Value, and just how idiotic it is. http://www.debate.org...


Wage slavery, when workers are forced to work in a wage system, in which they are paid less than the value of their labour. This is unethical and exploitative. Yes, they are forced to take these jobs. Answer me this, can you live in our modern society without working? No, the pressure of the economy forces you to get a job

Can you tell me of any economy that can function where people are free to not pursue a job and are still provided for?

Also, can you tell me how it's unethical to have a system where people need to work? It's correct that the underlying premise for a productive system is that people must produce, and there should be more producers than consumers in some way or another, but it's perfectly ethical to have a system that gives you the most "reward" for doing something that is needed, and might I say, required, in any structured system that one would like to maintain for years to come.


The LTV is a theory I do not wholly subscribe to. I think it factors in because, surprise, there is no end product without labour so it must somehow be a factor in determining the value of a product. I am inclined to incorporate both LTV and use value into what makes something value

The LTV is a theory that you subcribe to fully, as evidenced by your usage of such in a few posts. The whole point of that idiotic "theory", if you can call it that, is to somehow prove that people are exploited. Of course, it's so far been unable to provide such proof, but we can all wish and wonder if some Marxist will be able to surpass the levels of worthlessness and prove the theory as being truthfull.


<b>2) What socialism is, and what it isn't.<b>

I do not need anyone to explain to me what the system is. I am more than aware about Socialism and have been acquainted with it for quite some time.


Socialism IS a form of economy based around worker's control of the means of production.

Yes, which is terrible. Worker control of the means of production is both an unnatural phenomenon and one that leads to mismanagement, inefficiency, and the valuing of labor over productivity, which stops the expansion of economics and puts them in secular stagnation.

Socialism IS factoring the quality of life and the humanity of a system into the efficiency of an economy

Yes, which is why Socialist nations have had the worst quality of life and have often times used force, lethal force, against their citizens.

Socialism IS structuring the economy around use value, and labour theory, rather than exchange value which is one of 17 contradictions within capitalism (a great book, I highly recommend you read it, 17 contradictions and the end of capitalism, by David Harvey)

David Harvey is one of the WORST economists that I have ever come across, other than Richard Wolff. Labor Theory of Value is a long debunked theory, and one that is still used by Marxist illiterates today to refer to their unfounded and unsubstantiated ideas.


Socialism ISN'T using the government to get what you want. This is called liberalism and is something despised by any consistent socialist

Oh, so using the government to redistribute income and wealth, provide for welfare systems and place itself into every facet of human life somehow is not using the government's power to get what you want? Alright, I'll write that one down.

Socialism ISN'T when the means of production are owned by the state (USSR, Mao's China, DPRK, Venezuela), this is called State Capitalism as all the functions of a private owner are handed over to the State

And how exactly does a society go about removing property rights and then giving it to workers, when the government now has the right to this property? How exactly can you form a society, and can you show me proof of this, where the most efficient system is worker ownership?

Socialism ISN'T 'illiterate' or 'SJW-ism'. Socialism is very simply applying Marxist analysis of class to the economy, and politics of a nation

So, it's economically illiterate, as they lack any mathematical synthesis and foundations for monetary and fiscal policy. On top of that, it's a system often times filled with or revered by SJWs, so I wouldn't use that argument if I were you.


See the difference between what you call socialism, and what socialists advocate and what socialism IS? Good. I personally believe that, in our current system, a higher minimum wage should be fought for and, as someone who incorporates syndicalism into my ideas, that unions need to be more influential to make the working environment better for the workers

You've solidified, thus far, my initial hypothesis that you are economically illiterate. Reading social analytics and sociological synthesis does not translate into knowledge of economics and fiscal matters - insofar as it translates into knowing, very vaguely, social action. Instead, I would suggest that you look at the mathematical and empirical reasoning for these arguments, and it will soon show you how stupid the idea of a minimum wage is, and how antithetical it is to any Marxian ideal system, as a minimum wage requires government to set and force upon the employer.
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.
NHN
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 6:11:02 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/11/2016 5:32:06 PM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
It seems to me you have some main queries.
That's quite a reception you're getting.

Someone should have warned you that DDO has a core group of white nationalists/supremacists (bbbballs is especially touchy and s/he self-identifies as a "race realist" and a "neo-reactionary") and will attack anything that doesn't conform with Austrian economics.

As far as the topic is concerned, however, you seem to be the only one who actually understands that the concept (left v. right) has a history with a particular significance.

Today, however, I would argue that it has lived out its usefulness. The distinction is rather between economic and institutional nationalism v. internationalism as well as organic communities (Kultur) v. technocracy. Both the traditional center-left and center-right parties support internationalism and technocracy to varying degrees, while a growing group of nativist parties oppose them.

Podemos in Spain, Corbyn's Labour, and Tsipras' Syriza could be seen as attempts to short-circuit that binary field, placating to economic and institutional nationalism, but otherwise this is pretty much it.
ThePostMarxist
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 6:30:20 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Someone should have warned you that DDO has a core group of white nationalists/supremacists (bbbballs is especially touchy and s/he self-identifies as a "race realist" and a "neo-reactionary") and will attack anything that doesn't conform with Austrian economics.

I've noticed. It's scary. Verging on the dogmatic devotion to an incredibly reactionary, neoliberalism
NHN
Posts: 624
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 6:45:50 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/11/2016 6:30:20 PM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
Someone should have warned you that DDO has a core group of white nationalists/supremacists (bbbballs is especially touchy and s/he self-identifies as a "race realist" and a "neo-reactionary") and will attack anything that doesn't conform with Austrian economics.
I've noticed. It's scary. Verging on the dogmatic devotion to an incredibly reactionary, neoliberalism
Neoliberalism is pure ideology, though, in the Zizekian sense. It was once an economic consensus established during the Cold War. Now it lives on as a default narrative of deregulation and privatization, which no one really believes in.

White supremacy is still alive and well, however, and it has taken on a variety of new hipster memes to cover its ugly face.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2016 7:04:57 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/11/2016 6:30:20 PM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
Someone should have warned you that DDO has a core group of white nationalists/supremacists (bbbballs is especially touchy and s/he self-identifies as a "race realist" and a "neo-reactionary") and will attack anything that doesn't conform with Austrian economics.

I've noticed. It's scary. Verging on the dogmatic devotion to an incredibly reactionary, neoliberalism

Coming from a Marxist, no less.
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.
ThePostMarxist
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2016 8:22:56 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/11/2016 7:04:57 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 9/11/2016 6:30:20 PM, ThePostMarxist wrote:
Someone should have warned you that DDO has a core group of white nationalists/supremacists (bbbballs is especially touchy and s/he self-identifies as a "race realist" and a "neo-reactionary") and will attack anything that doesn't conform with Austrian economics.

I've noticed. It's scary. Verging on the dogmatic devotion to an incredibly reactionary, neoliberalism

Coming from a Marxist, no less.

Marxist revisionist. I believe that Marxist analytics is okay, but other concepts he discussed are flawed and need to be revised