So let’s break this down.
By arguing and associating a series of criticisms about capitalism with a world history of genocide, you create the following framework for the discussion:
- You skirt the issue of specificity as outlined in the posts you reference, and offer no substantive rebuttal- at all.
- You create an argument where ANY disagreement with capitalism is assigned a pejorative term, e.g. if you disagree you must be a Communist, a Socialist, Fascist, etc. (This phenomena was one of the main reasons I wrote the post you quoted in the first place)
- You further create a negative association with ANY objection to capitalism with the destructive forces of genocide.
- In doing so, you effectively SHUT DOWN any possibility of having a critical discussion in dissent of capitalism.
- And let’s not forget (although not suggested in your post) that also means that you must hate America.
So here you complain that that safewrite is being unfair by framing the debate in this way.
What we have now is most certainly capitalism, pure and straight from the bottle. The conservative tactic (advanced with full participation of the Fox News crowd as well as most mainstream media) is that somehow what we can OBSERVE is an artifact of obtrusive government intervention, failed monetary policy, et. al. and this allows us to give Capitalism a free pass and get back to the good old days of accumulation and consumption. This notion, and your statement are patently false. This centralization and consolidation of capital is axiomatic and demonstrable with copious amount of historical data, and has little to do with state control or financial manipulation. Capitalism morphs, and changes form, mostly in the domain of consolidation, but this morphing is part and parcel of what capitalism is and how it works- and you simply cannot separate out the parts you don’t like from the parts that you do like.
In addition, the argument that consumerism is somehow different than capitalism is also false. About 70% of our economy is consumer driven, what would you call this then? (With the rest military spending!). This is not a distortion of a once noble concept by evil and unjust forces, it is what happens EVERY TIME when you put such a system in place.
Then you take you opinion and state it as fact and say that those that come to a different conclusion than you, have been duped by some "conservative tactic". How exactly is this much different than what you accuse safewrite of doing?
Here is the deal. Most of us don't disagree with your criticisms of our so-called "capitalist" system. Where we differ is in the belief that capitalism MUST function as the current system does. I don't think you have proven that is the case, but if you ever do and we find a better system, many of the current proponents of capitalism will join you in your condemation of it.
What kind of system would we have if the following did not occur?
If these things did not happen, many of those you call capitalists/libertarians would be far happier with ths system. Is it really impossible to imagine a system without these occuring? I am asking because these 5 items are straight from the 10 planks of the communism.
Please understand I am not saying that we live in a communist system. What I am pointing out is that if you think we live in a capitalist system, we probably are using different definitions of capitalism.
XrayMike - I agree with your comments wholeheartedly.
Capitalism left unchecked will use any and all of its resources to manipulate and dominate the marketplace. If public sentiment begins to run contrary to its best interests, then by all means control the media by buying and manipulating as many forms of communication as possible. Setup a news system such as Fox and get as many hate mongering talkshows to stir up the uninformed and turn them in favor of destroying everything in the way of the Banksters and Wall Street having the right of way. Payoff and own as many politicians/bureaucrats as possible thereby ensuring that the way forward has clear sailing - that and much more IS Capitalism left to its own devices.
The idea that our system has been somehow perverted into its current mess as a result of average people doing such things as scamming the mortgage industry and and taking welfare (which may contribute in a miniscule fashion), but when compared to the outright fraud of Wall Street, Bankers and the military industrial complex stealing from not only the government public purse, but from every small pension holder and investor in the world, one must point to systemic failure in our capitalistic/free market system run amok.
I'm all in favor of the system proposed by Adam Smith, but what we have now bears little resemblance given the freewheeling insanity we have embarked upon. Nothing like haveing to meet a payroll on payday to sharpen the mind and clean the budget, so real competition is the engine of success, however in the case of the "Big Boys" that is no longer the case - they just manipulate and steal with efficiency and what s good for our future takes a back seat. Many said that government handouts to average citizens would bring us down. Now we are proving that Corporate manipulation has managed to divert our eyes from the reality of their schemes to completely own us and drive in the last coffin nails for the benefit of the few.
Anyway, that's how I see it.
This is kinda funny.... the threadjack has been threadjacked
Great post. What we have is unchecked, no-holds-barred "free market" Capitalism. It's simply a more extreme manifestation of Capitalism which isn't "free" in any sense of the word for the vast majority. It's what the Koch Brothers, Bankers, and Corporate Capitalists openly promote.
Watch how the corporate bigwigs create their own TV channel. It's hilarious how they through the label "socialist" at anyone or anything that runs contrary to their agenda:
And this video is long, but informative about the so-called "Free Market":
I've asked an intelligent someone I know to make a video on this stumbling block we seem to have about what the current system is versus what many hope it to be. Hopefully he'll take me up on this request.
Yes, I do think Safewrite was being unfair associating those that comment on capitalisms’ intrinsic contradictions with a historical accounting of genocide. This is not the same magnitude of claim that I discussed.
And I don’t necessarily think that stating that our current economy is “70% consumer driven” is an opinion- this comment is easily verified. Yes, I do think the transition from the agrarian based model that Adam Smith envisioned to the current corporatist model is intrinsic, and that many of the effects (but not all) you note are inexorably driven by the fundamentals of capital. As for me proving or disproving it, this work has been done much more adequately by others, and done 150 years ago.
Also, I think it is reasonably simple to recreate this proof yourself with just a few concepts such as the consolidation of capital, envisioned in an environment with no government regulation.
You're all being unfair. You're scapegoating ideologies for the actions of human beings.While Capitalism as an ethos may lend itself to monetary deception, Socialisms have historically been human rights disasters because of their latent and implicit assumption that the state is all powerful.
If your problem is with people, why are you discussing an ethos which allocates all social power to a state entity?Is this option really going to be more "civil"? Is the "disparity" gone?I think anyone who lived through The Khamer Rouge, Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Franco's Spain, Mussolini's Italy or... coming soon, America's entitlement socialism will disagree that "capitalism" creates disparity.
Capitalism creates the opportunity for disparity. If you don't like it, work harder.Socialism is the inverse.
JPitre, great post - you agreed with XRM.Freewheeling insanity? Really?The Government's endless list of tax write-offs, subsidies and pet programs has less to do with corporate corruption than "capitalism"?
This state sponsored favoritism is no more "crony capitalism" than it is "corporate socialism". Corruption is the bottom line, so rather than infighting and bickering over pedantics, perhaps we should focus on the realities.
The rhetoric here is demonstrating a profound lack of understanding.
This whole thing is absurd, and threadjacked as a mofo.
Capitalism creates the opportunity for disparity. If you don't like it, work harder.
Thanks for the laugh. Perhaps the dispossessed can find work in a prison labor camp.
Which, Ironically, were the hallmark of Soviet Socialism smartass.
Look before you leap.
...And here is why Capitalism is preferential.
Because we can pick up the assist if the .gov drops the ball, or gets bogged duwn in a bureaucratic catastrophe that effectively neuters its ability to accomplish anything meaningful.
Don't get me wrong - I don't love corporatism, but that's who will get us out of this place.
So what you're saying is : -
"As long as something is taking care of me, it doesn't matter who is boss".
That's great ... ... !!!
What happens when things don't work out so great for you personally?
What - might I add - happens to your "greater good" if its " 'you' getting 'your' head blown off " on behalf of a corporation as a gun for hire, shoring up a blowback from before your father was born, with its hands deeply embedded in the pockets of your elect?
I'd better make this post short though. Not only have you already made up your mind to the answer before I've even written the question, your penchant for not opening links within posts is historic ...
~ VF ~
Oh I do, just not yours. I recognize hyperbole for what it is, and this thread is overfilled with it.
The reason is as follows:
This couldn't be further from what I said. You know that this is going to put me on the defensive and I refuse to play games.The discussion at hand is about governmental mismanagement. What I'm saying is that "Governments" aren't some sort of phantom entity run by shadowy figures - they're run by people. The propensity for corruption swells dramatically when more power is shifted to the state, as more humans are given more authority. Simple enough, right?
The Greater Good for me isn't relevant, and you know this is another rabbit hole to detract from the topic being discussed.If you're asking me if the "greater good" means treating people decent, leading by example and helping those in need, I could agree. If you're asking me if the "greater good" means involving myself in the affairs of others in order to impart my will, I would disagree.
Again, this is a philosophical differentiation that has no bearing on reality. In reality, all ethos' will attempt to impart their will.
To me, the "Greater Good" could be achieved if we simply followed the words of Thessalonians, 5:3:14:
I keep that with me every day, though my patience wears out first.
Funny, I used the exact same word with Jason the moderator not the other day! How did you get that word in your vocabulary?
As for hyperbole, since this is only my second post to this thread, I guess Xray and DK are already on a similar "Blanked Link" status along with me, which is hellishly funny with the amount of time you spend under all three of us, without actually understanding what any of what we write is about.
I note you can't even watch You Tube films in Afghanistan. Why not contact one of the flock here so they can translate them for you. You know, an attack poodle - your eyes and ears ...
1. Hyperbole, really??? Funny, I used the exact same word with Jason the moderator not the other day! How did you get that word in your vocabulary?
2. As for hyperbole, since this is only my second post to this thread, I guess Xray and DK are already on a similar "Blanked Link" status along with me, which is hellishly funny with the amount of time you spend under all three of us, without actually understanding what any of what we write is about.
3. I note you can't even watch You Tube films in Afghanistan. Why not contact one of the flock here so they can translate them for you. You know, an attack poodle - your eyes and ears ...
1. What's the point of this statement? Are you trying to subtly tell me that you've discussed anyone who doesn't agree with you citing "hyperbole"? If so, I'd suggest that you look into its meaning further, as you're the one continually defending your ideology through attacks and ridicule, citing the works of others rather than your own thoughts. Amazingly, I learned the word the same way most people do. By pursuing an education and expanding my knowledge base. Surprise!
2. Well, you're certainly correct about one thing. I have no F***ing idea what you're talking about here. If only I were smarter!
3. One of the "flock"? Are you trying to assault the humanatarian efforts being made here subtly enough to maintain plausible deniability? I'm sure you're happy with your smug, uninformed and disgraceful comment here. You're a troll who has simply been allowed to fester around here like a gangrenous limb. So you know, you can't make me mad, Paul. You have no power over me, no influence.
Your low-blow here is your crowning achievement, too. To suggest that I'm somehow using people here, especially injured or impoverished children, is pretty sick man. I have long been hoping that people here just see you for what you are and ignore you. Other than the few who patronize you based on ideological continuity, I think if people read this kind of thing and aren't disgusted, they deserve your company.
...and I can watch YouTube.
Good day, sir.
Read this book : -
PDF Book Link - Brainwashing ~ by Kathleen Taylor [Link]
Then get back to me ...
LOL.LOL...Thanks for the Laugh(and I mean that in a good way versus when I had this laugh.)
It was, dare I say it, almost sublime ... ...
I really can't help but wonder how you guys don't see that you're the only ones laughing, here.
...at insults that really... aren't all that clever.At all. Pretty worthless votive from some absurd false idols.
Is there really nothing better for you to do than rag on people online? Serious question. I know it beats real conversation because it's harder to condescend to people when you don't have Wikipedia and absurd, random YouTube videos to cite as if it were something other than esoteric nonsense, but really, some interaction might do you two good.
All you're doing is ruining Ernest's thread.
If Ernest has a beef with the way the thread has been treated, he can take it up with whomever it was that tactically railroaded it best ...
Yet another attempt to call people out too good natured to put a stop to your nonsense.
No more time for you, amigo. Got important stuff to do, that doesn't include pointless internet pontification.No sir, I'll be taking action as a part of the "evil" empire you so despise. Sleep on that, and keep our perspective influences in mind.
Moderator action has been taken.
All of this without invasive surgical
soon as it involves skincare nonetheless the phrase “the exceptional offense is an effective look
mentality of human beings