Boy oh boy, I heard on not all things considered, but that other one with a similar broad brush name that Karl Marks is in with bankers and financial types for his piercing analysis of capitalism which the article quotes them (finance people) as saying is more accurate and descriptive of the modern world than it was when he wrote. I just hate that. The Soviet Union collapses, things start looking up, we relax a smigeon, and bam, all of a sudden the prohibited, the taboo, the banned suddenly starts to make sense. What the hell is with people. Should I put my money in a matress?
Communism is in.
- Thread starter Moonbeam
- Start date
Marxism != Communism, 'nuff said.
Marxism isn't so crazy, actually, if you've ever read 'Das Kapital', you'll know how refreshing the author's view on economics is.
BTW, it's spelled Marx, not Marks =)
Marxism isn't so crazy, actually, if you've ever read 'Das Kapital', you'll know how refreshing the author's view on economics is.
BTW, it's spelled Marx, not Marks =)
"...the banned suddenly starts to make sense."
Now we have the benefit of hindsight. We can see what is wrought by Communism. We see what Capitalism can accomplish. Do these "bankers and financial types" have their heads up their asses or what? Bottom line is that all the positives of Capitalism FAR outweigh the negatives. All of our "Great Society" efforts have turned into bottomless money pits and dependancy. I think the right path is obvious:
Now we have the benefit of hindsight. We can see what is wrought by Communism. We see what Capitalism can accomplish. Do these "bankers and financial types" have their heads up their asses or what? Bottom line is that all the positives of Capitalism FAR outweigh the negatives. All of our "Great Society" efforts have turned into bottomless money pits and dependancy. I think the right path is obvious:
- "Free enterprise and the encouragement of individual initiative and incentive
have given this nation an economic system second to none."
<< Communism= the suck. >>
Capitalism= the suck
Communism is the ideal system, but it's incompatible with Human nature. Capitalism is compatible, which is why it forms a threat. Any idea what Britain looked like during the Industrial Revolution? That's Capitalism in its purest form.
Communism is the ideal system, but it's incompatible with Human nature. Capitalism is compatible, which is why it forms a threat. Any idea what Britain looked like during the Industrial Revolution? That's Capitalism in its purest form.
While I diagree with almost everything Elledan writes on this board, I have to agree with that 100%.
While I diagree with almost everything Elledan writes on this board, I have to agree with that 100%.
If there are enough businesses and jobs to go around, nobody gets hurt by Capitalism. What the world needs most right now is more industry not more workers. We ought to do everything possible to pave the way for more jobs, not cripple business at every turn, which seems to be the norm these days. :frown:
Yeah, you're right Elledan, that's why all first world countries are communist:disgust:
It's not a perfect world by the way. In this one communism= the suck.
It's not a perfect world by the way. In this one communism= the suck.
<< Communism is the ideal system, but it's incompatible with Human nature. >>
this is why it is not the ideal system; it completely disregards human nature.
<< If there are enough businesses and jobs to go around, nobody gets hurt by Capitalism. What the world needs most right now is more industry not more workers. We ought to do everything possible to pave the way for more jobs, not cripple business at every turn, which seems to be the norm these days. :frown: >>
A free market is good till a certain extent. It is the duty of the Government to ensure that no businesses become too large, too powerful or use 'dirty tricks'. That's the way how things are done in Europe and many other countries. This ensures that everyone gets a chance and that competition remains a factor.
I've to fully disagree with your first sentence, by the way. Everyone gets hurt by Capitalism, except for a small minority, an elite group, consisting out of mainly the owners of businesses, and the middle class. The majority is poor and will never get a chance to become anything more than a simple worker. Since Capitalism means that there are no laws regarding safety, wages and other rights and duties of workers and their bosses, the majority will live in miserable conditions (again, England during the IR. Also the US when large groups of immigrants started to enter it). Many will work (and die) in hazardous environments and their bosses won't care, because labor is cheap and plentiful.
<<
<< Communism is the ideal system, but it's incompatible with Human nature. >>
this is why it is not the ideal system; it completely disregards human nature. >>
I disagree. Communism is the ideal system for equal individuals, not necessarily the same skills etc, but with no real leaders and followers (groups), individuals who are incapable of greed and are willing to work together with the rest of the nation for a better future.
Humans are not like that. Communism is not flawed, Human nature is.
<< Yeah, you're right Elledan, that's why all first world countries are communist:disgust: >>
And I assume that therefore all first world countries are Capitalistic? Not a chance. Even the system used in the US has many traces of Socialism, even Communism.
The most widely used system (e.g., in Europe), is a combination of Capitalism, Socialism, Communism and many, many more systems.
<< It's not a perfect world by the way. In this one communism= the suck. >>
What's not a 'perfect world'?
It lends itself too easily to corruption. Heck on "paper" Hitler's regime was often an efficient one.
A check of history for anyone who takes off their blinders....should quickly reveal that any society brought up around any pure philosophical idea....lends itself to eventual destruction or at least severe stagnation.
Actually this applies to any society where the balance of power between the 1)the people 2)the corporates/rich and 3)the government becomes too uneven.
The USA has had an overall good balance between these three since the 1930's. But there have stretches where the balance has become too uneven, and when any of these three become too powerful the other two tend to suffer.
A check of history for anyone who takes off their blinders....should quickly reveal that any society brought up around any pure philosophical idea....lends itself to eventual destruction or at least severe stagnation.
Actually this applies to any society where the balance of power between the 1)the people 2)the corporates/rich and 3)the government becomes too uneven.
The USA has had an overall good balance between these three since the 1930's. But there have stretches where the balance has become too uneven, and when any of these three become too powerful the other two tend to suffer.
FelixDeCat
Lifer
- Aug 4, 2000
- 31,052
- 2,691
- 126
Todays enlightenment for the followers of buddy:
Communism is a proven failure. At their height, the worlds most murderous regimes were communist. Why? Because the mental masturbation of intellectuals bent on utopian persuits always leads to failure.
Believe in yourself and God - not the state.
Communism is a proven failure. At their height, the worlds most murderous regimes were communist. Why? Because the mental masturbation of intellectuals bent on utopian persuits always leads to failure.
Believe in yourself and God - not the state.
A free market is good till a certain extent. It is the duty of the Government to ensure that no businesses become too large, too powerful or use 'dirty tricks'. That's the way how things are done in Europe and many other countries. This ensures that everyone gets a chance and that competition remains a factor.
haha
Yeah, tell me about Deutsche Telekom. It was part of the Bundespost. The only telephone company in Germany for many years. In other words, no competition. The poor citizens were at it's mercy. Waiting weeks and months for a damn telephone connection. What a joke. Analog, at that. We had already been digital in the USA for many years.
Finally the German government privatizes DT. Guess what? Prices went down for the consumer. OMG!!!!!! Then they implemented digital circuits so they could keep up with the incoming competition. OMG!!!!!!
Your thinking is flawed.
haha
Yeah, tell me about Deutsche Telekom. It was part of the Bundespost. The only telephone company in Germany for many years. In other words, no competition. The poor citizens were at it's mercy. Waiting weeks and months for a damn telephone connection. What a joke. Analog, at that. We had already been digital in the USA for many years.
Finally the German government privatizes DT. Guess what? Prices went down for the consumer. OMG!!!!!! Then they implemented digital circuits so they could keep up with the incoming competition. OMG!!!!!!
Your thinking is flawed.
<< Todays enlightenment for the followers of buddy:
Communism is a proven failure. At their height, the worlds most murderous regimes were communist. Why? Because the mental masturbation of intellectuals bent on utopian persuits always leads to failure.
Believe in yourself and God - not the state. >>
There have been a lot of right-wing, capitalist dictatorships around, of which Nazi-Germany may have been one of the better known ones. Let's all bash the current US government for being right-wing capitalists too! (Hell, they're worse than Nazis anyway)
<< A free market is good till a certain extent. It is the duty of the Government to ensure that no businesses become too large, too powerful or use 'dirty tricks'. That's the way how things are done in Europe and many other countries. This ensures that everyone gets a chance and that competition remains a factor.
haha
Yeah, tell me about Deutsche Telekom. It was part of the Bundespost. The only telephone company in Germany for many years. In other words, no competition. The poor citizens were at it's mercy. Waiting weeks and months for a damn telephone connection. What a joke. Analog, at that. We had already been digital in the USA for many years.
Finally the German government privatizes DT. Guess what? Prices went down for the consumer. OMG!!!!!! Then they implemented digital circuits so they could keep up with the incoming competition. OMG!!!!!!
Your thinking is flawed. >>
Actually, it are your reading skills which are flawed.
I said that competition is good, then you gave an example of a state-owned company in Germany which was a failure because of a lack of competition, after which you state that for this reason competition is good.
BTW, privatizing a company can also become a huge failure. Look at British Rail; The British people can thank Thatcher et al. for the worthless POS of a company it's now.
Then look at the other side of the English Channel: France. The France railroad company is owned by the state and it's among the fastest, most efficient and cheapest railroads of the world.
Now, my own country, The Netherlands, where the railroad company was privatized some time ago as well. Worst mistake ever. Right now the government has taken back a large part of the control over this company, because the situation became intolerable.
read the book "Eat the Rich" by M. O'Rourke. It's hillariously and illuminating all at the same time (he use to write for the National Lampoon it think).
as to whether communism is "in" or not, just look at the international news of the past 10 years - captialism, nationalism, even tribalism is on the upsurge, while communism is becoming a historical curiosity.
as to whether communism is "in" or not, just look at the international news of the past 10 years - captialism, nationalism, even tribalism is on the upsurge, while communism is becoming a historical curiosity.
It is the United States that can lay claim to the most efficient transportation system in the world. Not France! LOL!
It is not France, or anyother European nation for that matter that, that has relatively open markets and a great percentage of the world's population risking life and limb to gain access to.
Nazi Germany was completely Socialists and had more in common with Communisim than Capatolism by any comparison.
Compare the average wealth of it's Citizens and the advancement of them up the chain of wealth and the US wins hands down again!
It is not France, or anyother European nation for that matter that, that has relatively open markets and a great percentage of the world's population risking life and limb to gain access to.
Nazi Germany was completely Socialists and had more in common with Communisim than Capatolism by any comparison.
Compare the average wealth of it's Citizens and the advancement of them up the chain of wealth and the US wins hands down again!
<< I disagree. Communism is the ideal system for equal individuals, not necessarily the same skills etc, but with no real leaders and followers (groups), individuals who are incapable of greed and are willing to work together with the rest of the nation for a better future.
Humans are not like that. Communism is not flawed, Human nature is.
>>
that's the whole point. there is no such thing as "equal individuals"; there never will be. this is exactly part of the ideological flaws about communism. it does not take into account real life. human nature may be flawed but it is human nature and that is what we are talking about. communism is flawed because it does not take into account the flaws of human kind. therefore it is not a good ideology to pursue if it does not address basic human nature.
you can hope all you want to make a square peg fit in a round hole but the peg is still square and the hole is still round and it won't fit.
Actually, it are your reading skills which are flawed.
I said that competition is good, then you gave an example of a state-owned company in Germany which was a failure because of a lack of competition, after which you state that for this reason competition is good.
BTW, privatizing a company can also become a huge failure. Look at British Rail; The British people can thank Thatcher et al. for the worthless POS of a company it's now.
Then look at the other side of the English Channel: France. The France railroad company is owned by the state and it's among the fastest, most efficient and cheapest railroads of the world.
Now, my own country, The Netherlands, where the railroad company was privatized some time ago as well. Worst mistake ever. Right now the government has taken back a large part of the control over this company, because the situation became intolerable.
The reason governments privatize railroads is because they are perpetual money losers. Government subsidized transportation for the masses. We are guilty of it too with Amtrak.
Telekom, by the way, was not a failure even under German government control. Obviously your knowledge of European economics is flawed. Telekom was part of Bundespost which also included Deutsche Bahn. At any rate, Telekom and Bundespost were the money makers while Deutsche Bahn was the money loser. Because Telekom was the only telephone company around, the citizens were forced to endure it's BS with phone service. Give me a break. Up until a few years ago, this was a case of good old European socialism at work. Haha. Finally they woke up.
Then, earlier, you go on to spout: I've to fully disagree with your first sentence, by the way. Everyone gets hurt by Capitalism, except for a small minority, an elite group, consisting out of mainly the owners of businesses, and the middle class.
And I gave you a prime example of capitalism in motion. Improved phone service at lower costs. No more direct government involvement. Government involvement entails bureaucarcy and stifles innovation. Capitalism cuts right through that by encouraging competition. Had it not been for capitalism, the poor Germans would still be hosed with their early 20th century phone system.
And furthermore, your thoughts about The majority is poor and will never get a chance to become anything more than a simple worker. Since Capitalism means that there are no laws regarding safety, wages and other rights and duties of workers and their bosses, the majority will live in miserable conditions (again, England during the IR. Also the US when large groups of immigrants started to enter it). Many will work (and die) in hazardous environments and their bosses won't care, because labor is cheap and plentiful. seem primarily centered upon developing nations.
Poor by what standard? That's a matter of perspective. If one considers a third world country, yes. And yes, capitalist governments entertain laws regarding safety, wages. It's called labor unions and labor departments.
I said that competition is good, then you gave an example of a state-owned company in Germany which was a failure because of a lack of competition, after which you state that for this reason competition is good.
BTW, privatizing a company can also become a huge failure. Look at British Rail; The British people can thank Thatcher et al. for the worthless POS of a company it's now.
Then look at the other side of the English Channel: France. The France railroad company is owned by the state and it's among the fastest, most efficient and cheapest railroads of the world.
Now, my own country, The Netherlands, where the railroad company was privatized some time ago as well. Worst mistake ever. Right now the government has taken back a large part of the control over this company, because the situation became intolerable.
The reason governments privatize railroads is because they are perpetual money losers. Government subsidized transportation for the masses. We are guilty of it too with Amtrak.
Telekom, by the way, was not a failure even under German government control. Obviously your knowledge of European economics is flawed. Telekom was part of Bundespost which also included Deutsche Bahn. At any rate, Telekom and Bundespost were the money makers while Deutsche Bahn was the money loser. Because Telekom was the only telephone company around, the citizens were forced to endure it's BS with phone service. Give me a break. Up until a few years ago, this was a case of good old European socialism at work. Haha. Finally they woke up.
Then, earlier, you go on to spout: I've to fully disagree with your first sentence, by the way. Everyone gets hurt by Capitalism, except for a small minority, an elite group, consisting out of mainly the owners of businesses, and the middle class.
And I gave you a prime example of capitalism in motion. Improved phone service at lower costs. No more direct government involvement. Government involvement entails bureaucarcy and stifles innovation. Capitalism cuts right through that by encouraging competition. Had it not been for capitalism, the poor Germans would still be hosed with their early 20th century phone system.
And furthermore, your thoughts about The majority is poor and will never get a chance to become anything more than a simple worker. Since Capitalism means that there are no laws regarding safety, wages and other rights and duties of workers and their bosses, the majority will live in miserable conditions (again, England during the IR. Also the US when large groups of immigrants started to enter it). Many will work (and die) in hazardous environments and their bosses won't care, because labor is cheap and plentiful. seem primarily centered upon developing nations.
Poor by what standard? That's a matter of perspective. If one considers a third world country, yes. And yes, capitalist governments entertain laws regarding safety, wages. It's called labor unions and labor departments.
<< Actually, it are your reading skills which are flawed.
I said that competition is good, then you gave an example of a state-owned company in Germany which was a failure because of a lack of competition, after which you state that for this reason competition is good.
BTW, privatizing a company can also become a huge failure. Look at British Rail; The British people can thank Thatcher et al. for the worthless POS of a company it's now.
Then look at the other side of the English Channel: France. The France railroad company is owned by the state and it's among the fastest, most efficient and cheapest railroads of the world.
Now, my own country, The Netherlands, where the railroad company was privatized some time ago as well. Worst mistake ever. Right now the government has taken back a large part of the control over this company, because the situation became intolerable.
The reason governments privatize railroads is because they are perpetual money losers. Government subsidized transportation for the masses. We are guilty of it too with Amtrak.
Telekom, by the way, was not a failure even under German government control. >>
I meant a 'failure' in the sense that it was overpriced and equiped with outdated technology.
<< Obviously your knowledge of European economics is flawed. >>
As is yours.
<< Telekom was part of Bundespost which also included Deutsche Bahn. At any rate, Telekom and Bundespost were the money makers while Deutsche Bahn was the money loser. Because Telekom was the only telephone company around, the citizens were forced to endure it's BS with phone service. Give me a break. Up until a few years ago, this was a case of good old European socialism at work. Haha. Finally they woke up. >>
You're feeling better now?
<< Then, earlier, you go on to spout: I've to fully disagree with your first sentence, by the way. Everyone gets hurt by Capitalism, except for a small minority, an elite group, consisting out of mainly the owners of businesses, and the middle class.
And I gave you a prime example of capitalism in motion. Improved phone service at lower costs. No more direct government involvement. Government involvement entails bureaucarcy and stifles innovation. Capitalism cuts right through that by encouraging competition. Had it not been for capitalism, the poor Germans would still be hosed with their early 20th century phone system. >>
Give me break. You're trying to tell me how wonderful pure Capitalism is after I've given some excellent examples of why Capitalism alone is a mere curse?
<< And furthermore, your thoughts about The majority is poor and will never get a chance to become anything more than a simple worker. Since Capitalism means that there are no laws regarding safety, wages and other rights and duties of workers and their bosses, the majority will live in miserable conditions (again, England during the IR. Also the US when large groups of immigrants started to enter it). Many will work (and die) in hazardous environments and their bosses won't care, because labor is cheap and plentiful. seem primarily centered upon developing nations. >>
So... you refuse to believe that once the government pulls back any laws made to ensure that everyone is treated in an acceptable way, is payed at least a certain amount of money, that monopolies are unacceptable etc. etc., then you think that Utopia is close at hand?
Give me a friggin' break.
<< Poor by what standard? That's a matter of perspective. If one considers a third world country, yes. And yes, capitalist governments entertain laws regarding safety, wages. It's called labor unions and labor departments. >>
Ah, but these elements belong in a Socialistic or Communistic system, not a Capitalistic one. In a Capitalistic system, there are no laws to 'protect the weak'. It's all about a 'free market'. Every man and woman for themselves. No central control, watching over the rights of individuals.
Closest one can get to organized Anarchy.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter