Tea baggers love feudalism.

Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
I created a thread where you could call me a Marxist. You have insisted on doing it here. Then you altar-quote and yet you are not arguing the theme of the thread or the OP. This is akin to if I refuted your claims that I'm kind of Marxist but not really by saying you're racist. Actually it doesn't fucking matter what you think about Marx, that isn't what the thread is about dumb ass.
Click to expand...
ohh my.

youre all butthurt because nobody is accepting your fake definitions of words which are NOT AT ALL MYSTERIOUS. and can be easliy found in any dictionary.

so now it's all about the thread topic, since you cannot win via your sidetracking.

you still cannot successfully identify feudalism when it is presented to you, nor do you have even the slightest inkling of what "teabaggers" actually believe sinmce you cannot grasp the simplest idea in all of political theory.

What's Mine Is Mine, and What's Yours is Yours

without accepting this simple idea you cannot begin to explore the more complicated economic theories which encompass socialism, communism and capitalism, much less the highy complex systems of social organization found in feudalism, democracy or despotism.

thats why you simplify everything to vague generealizations like your Faux-Anarchy dreamworld, or your kinda-sorta socialism which is in fact merely the version of communism you find among selfish third graders.

"everybody has to share. cept me!!"

Protip: youre not the birthday boy, and thus you cannot insist everybody else give you their toys just because you want them.

Bonus Protip: when a capitalist buys something it is HIS, and the cat he bought it from cannot come back later and demand re-negotiation just because he thinks he deserves more.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
words are hard. time for some fail images.
Click to expand...
how illustrative.

you can google some images, but you still dont know what the first one means, and dont recognize that marie antionette lived well after the end of feudalism.

pre-revolutionary france was a modern monarchical state, which had abolished serfdom in the 14th century
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
abandonconflict said:
Indeed, society lacks opportunities for economic upward mobility.
Click to expand...
There are many actually. However it appears to be a law of human nature that the number of opportunities will be only a small percentage of the number of applicants/aspirants. Could this be your real beef?

If so, I fear you're in for a disappointment. Look at the fiscal contortions going on in the USA now. I see this as a consequence of socialism ... the idea that there is enough to make everyone reasonably happy. The result: massive consumer and government debt as both people and governments simply refuse to accept that the standard of living into which they were born is not a right. An undeclared inflation as the acolytes of Keynes try to cover a king-sized bed of demand with the twin-sized sheets of the nominal increase in the money supply. This will end badly. My opinion. cn

<edit> A thought just struck me. Perhaps this is what you mean by your metaphoric appropriation of the term "feudal". A feudal society has some winners atop many losers. Societal efforts to eliminate the loser class haven't worked in 3000 years of recorded history. In fact, the efforts have impoverished the entire societies that hosted them.

We need to abandon losing strategies to eliminate losers.
 
GOD HERE

GOD HERE

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
There are many actually. However it appears to be a law of human nature that the number of opportunities will be only a small percentage of the number of applicants/aspirants. Could this be your real beef?

If so, I fear you're in for a disappointment. Look at the fiscal contortions going on in the USA now. I see this as a consequence of socialism ... the idea that there is enough to make everyone reasonably happy. The result: massive consumer and government debt as both people and governments simply refuse to accept that the standard of living into which they were born is not a right. An undeclared inflation as the acolytes of Keynes try to cover a king-sized bed of demand with the twin-sized sheets of the nominal increase in the money supply. This will end badly. My opinion. cn

<edit> A thought just struck me. Perhaps this is what you mean by your metaphoric appropriation of the term "feudal". A feudal society has some winners atop many losers. Societal efforts to eliminate the loser class haven't worked in 3000 years of recorded history. In fact, the efforts have impoverished the entire societies that hosted them.

We need to abandon losing strategies to eliminate losers.
Click to expand...
If you're attributing the US's financial woes to "socialism" you need check back in to reality. There are no socialists here. There are corporate socialists, but there are no actual socialists. Before you use the word, it helps to know what it means.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
GOD HERE said:
If you're attributing the US's financial woes to "socialism" you need check back in to reality. There are no socialists here. There are corporate socialists, but there are no actual socialists. Before you use the word, it helps to know what it means.
Click to expand...
"System of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control; also, the political movements aimed at putting that system into practice."

I don't see how that disqualifies my argument. Taxation and redistribution are definitively socialistic. cn
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
However it appears to be a law of human nature that the number of opportunities will be only a small percentage of the number of applicants/aspirants. Could this be your real beef?
Click to expand...
Yes. In a way it is.

Excuse me for reducing your argument, but I feel this snip is the point of your thrust and you hit the bull's eye. This is the philosophical core that I am attacking. This argument, that you are now solidly supporting is apparently that competition is natural and cooperation is explicitly not. You may think on it for a moment, then retort that you do not see the two ideas as mutually exclusive and that both are natural to an extent. I believe both are possible but that one can be chosen. That is why I attack the idea that competition is natural. It tends to lead to the adoption of the idea that cooperation is not.

As premise, I point to the phrase Survival of the Fittest. This phrase was not coined by Darwin, but by right wing British economist Herbert Spencer. Darwin did write extensively in The Descent of Man many ideas which seem to be premised upon this view of evolution but ultimately he found that it was an inapt description of natural selection.

I find at the core of right wing economics the view that cooperation is not natural. I worry that our species will not survive continued rampant competition and that above all, cooperation must be seen as not only natural, but essential to continued survival of our species.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I would offer an intermediate view myself. Both competition and cooperation are natural. I see socialism however as ultimately needing a strictly cooperative society. the same complaint can be made of the societies espoused by our hard-libertarian contingent, such as Rob Roy.
Highly hierarchic societies otoh tend to select the competitors-at-all-costs, the assholes among us. If assholery wins, assholes will be selected.

Imo the trouble with the phrase "survival of the fittest" is that it simply shifts the definitive burden. Now we're excused from defining natural selection but are left with the imprecise semantics of fitness. cn
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I would offer an intermediate view myself. Both competition and cooperation are natural. I see socialism however as ultimately needing a strictly cooperative society. the same complaint can be made of the societies espoused by our hard-libertarian contingent, such as Rob Roy.
Highly hierarchic societies otoh tend to select the competitors-at-all-costs, the assholes among us. If assholery wins, assholes will be selected.

Imo the trouble with the phrase "survival of the fittest" is that it simply shifts the definitive burden. Now we're excused from defining natural selection but are left with the imprecise semantics of fitness. cn
Click to expand...
You must choose. As we all must.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Choose what? I am wary of forced dichotomies. cn
Click to expand...
Despite your pessimism, I think cooperation comes naturally for you. You would fit right into an egalitarian community. That doesn't mean you're unready for competitive society (rat race) but I do think at some level, it is a choice, everyday.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Indeed, society lacks opportunities for economic upward mobility.
Click to expand...
society has plenty of hope, YOU however are beyond help.

your juvenile antics, pathetic semantic games, creative re-editing, and constant re-definition of terms to suit your narrative make any discussion into an exercise in futility. you dont understand any of the ideas you so vigorously deride, and have no clue about the ideas you celebrate as the solution.


you have no interest in learning anything, and have no knowledge to offer, only specious opinions and deeply flawed misunderstandings of every subject you touch.

YOU are trapped in a fantasyworld of your own creation. you will likely never escape.

usally this would be a bad thing, but since your delusion saves the rest of the world from your troublesome halfassed ideas, it's most likely for the best.

if you started making any sense at all you might convince some muttonheaded kid to follow you, and thats how cults get started.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
society has plenty of hope, YOU however are beyond help.

your juvenile antics, pathetic semantic games, creative re-editing, and constant re-definition of terms to suit your narrative make any discussion into an exercise in futility. you dont understand any of the ideas you so vigorously deride, and have no clue about the ideas you celebrate as the solution.


you have no interest in learning anything, and have no knowledge to offer, only specious opinions and deeply flawed misunderstandings of every subject you touch.

YOU are trapped in a fantasyworld of your own creation. you will likely never escape.

usally this would be a bad thing, but since your delusion saves the rest of the world from your troublesome halfassed ideas, it's most likely for the best.

if you started making any sense at all you might convince some muttonheaded kid to follow you, and thats how cults get started.
Click to expand...
Didn't you vote for Romney?
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Didn't you vote for Romney?
Click to expand...
nope.
i voted gary johnson.

didnt you vote for Jill stein, the marxist from the green party?

wait, let me finish the restm of this exchange in one post to save space:

You: She's not a marxist you fascist!!!

Me: <posted copy of official Green Party Platform>

You: Nuhh Uhhh!! cuz in europe socialism means..... <fifteen linear feet of blather and re-definition of a word clearly spelled out in any dictionary>

Me: thats just retarded. <posted 3 line definition from webster's dictionary on socialism>

You: Nuuuhhhh Uhhhh!! your just twisting the words around!!

Me: <pasting another definition of socialism from the Oxford Unabridged Dictionary>

You: all you do is copy and paste!!! whahhhh!!! <posts 12 image macros and cartoons each bearing the logo of a marxist organization or featuring karl Marx himself, or quotations from one of his contemporaries>

Me: but you said youre not a marxist...

You: Im not <more marxist propaganda> see!!

Me: Thats retarded.

You: thats a mean No No Word!! <complaint to the mods that im "harassing you">

Me: Thats still retarded.

You: youre a feudalist!!

Me: Thats not feudalism, thats plutocracy.

You: "anarcho-_______ism"...

Me: thats even more retarded.

Loop: return to top, repeat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top