More on the evils of capitalism.

[SlaveNoMore]

Someone will have to set parameters to what is considered bad behavior too. That leads to another problem of me possibly having to live by somebody's standards of behavior or code of ethics other than my own. Not utopia.



We'll need somebody delegated to decide who is banished to crazy land. This gives one man power over another, which also leads to hierarchies, which is the antithesis of our utopia.

I think we've seen the problem with anarchy as a rule. Even if the Jehova's are right and we've only been around 6000 years, I can't see us breeding ourselves into perfection any time soon. If we believe the scientists and we've been around (a little) longer, we can deduce the odds of ever doing so is astronomical.

Yeah this is a tough one. This is why I believe in smaller tribal groups that handle their own business. This is where your shaman or spiritual leader plays an important role.

Yes, I know then there is the chance that tribes will war with eachother like they do now. It's a hard subject guys but what we are doing RIGHT NOW is looking at possibilities and I think that is the first step.

This type of shit can drive you crazy if you dwell on it too long!!! LOL

 

[skunkd0c]

[video=youtube;jGxbOVscHPs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGxbOVscHPs&feature=player_embedded[/video]

 

[SlaveNoMore]

^^^I don't have an hour and a half to watch this right now but I will later^^^^

 

[learning05]

Someone will have to set parameters to what is considered bad behavior too. That leads to another problem of me possibly having to live by somebody's standards of behavior or code of ethics other than my own. Not utopia.

The collective can decide and yes their will be someone with power but it will not be centralized. Transparency + democracy is possible.

We'll need somebody delegated to decide who is banished to crazy land. This gives one man power over another, which also leads to hierarchies, which is the antithesis of our utopia.

Let me ask you this? If one is born with a genetic issue that leads to a psycho tendency for bad behavior, do you not think science will eventually reach a point as to ensure these mutations don't happen? Also again, centralization of power can be managed via transparency of process. The collective can vote for change and the individuals who have been appointed the responsibility will have to accept no incentive for their work. They get payed but not enough to make them want to turn policy it profit making...

Not breed into perfection per say but we can evolve to a more collective model and less individualistic. I agree there can not be an absolute or perfect anything but there can always be a "better" or "lesser of evils" so that is why I think it is a environmental-societal issue that can be changed.

 

[ginwilly]

Yeah this is a tough one. This is why I believe in smaller tribal groups that handle their own business. This is where your shaman or spiritual leader plays an important role.

Yes, I know then there is the chance that tribes will war with eachother like they do now. It's a hard subject guys but what we are doing RIGHT NOW is looking at possibilities and I think that is the first step.

This type of shit can drive you crazy if you dwell on it too long!!! LOL

We should all ascribe to better ourselves no doubt.

Social scientists generally agree with smaller tribes as being the most successful societal structures. The hippy communes had it exactly how they wanted in small numbers. Once you get past the amount of people we are capable of having an emotional connection to, tribal life breaks down. I believe a lot depends on the people but you can drop 10 people off on 1000 different but identical deserted islands and you might see 1000 different ways of life.

I'm with you on the small tribes thing. I believe that now, even WITH government, the hierarchy of power should be my home, my community, my state, my country. My side is in a fight with the nanny staters and central planners who believe the opposite.

Both of our ideas of utopia involve self rule. I would rather take my chances with anarchy than Marshall Law (he's a dick). I don't see either as feasible however.

 

[abandonconflict]

We should all ascribe to better ourselves no doubt.

Social scientists generally agree with smaller tribes as being the most successful societal structures. The hippy communes had it exactly how they wanted in small numbers. Once you get past the amount of people we are capable of having an emotional connection to, tribal life breaks down. I believe a lot depends on the people but you can drop 10 people off on 1000 different but identical deserted islands and you might see 1000 different ways of life.

I'm with you on the small tribes thing. I believe that now, even WITH government, the hierarchy of power should be my home, my community, my state, my country. My side is in a fight with the nanny staters and central planners who believe the opposite.

Both of our ideas of utopia involve self rule. I would rather take my chances with anarchy than Marshall Law. I don't see either as feasible however.

If anything you are now arguing against private property and I agree. Remember your fallacy yesterday, the assumption that this can only work through central planning. Anarchism is very compatible with decentralization.

 

[ginwilly]

The collective can decide and yes their will be someone with power but it will not be centralized. Transparency + democracy is possible.

I can get on board with this, but we are still abdicating power, at least your way is voluntary (except for the bad apple).

Let me ask you this? If one is born with a genetic issue that leads to a psycho tendency for bad behavior, do you not think science will eventually reach a point as to ensure these mutations don't happen? Also again, centralization of power can be managed via transparency of process. The collective can vote for change and the individuals who have been appointed the responsibility will have to accept no incentive for their work. They get payed but not enough to make them want to turn policy it profit making...

Not breed into perfection per say but we can evolve to a more collective model and less individualistic. I agree there can not be an absolute or perfect anything but there can always be a "better" or "lesser of evils" so that is why I think it is a environmental-societal issue that can be changed.

I believe technology could get there faster than we think in "identifying" the genetic trait, but actually fixing this trait may never be possible. It may, but first society would have to allow some very ethically sketchy experimental procedures in the name of education. We have not been able to fix Down's Syndrome by extracting that pesky extra chromosome, nor have we been able to force sex. We will either have to maintain some sort of segregation or extermination of those we identify.

I don't want no damn prisons in my utopia, but I'm against Euthanasia. I may have to accept anarchy as a pipe dream.

 

[pizzapuffer]

fuck capitalism, im an anarchist! well, micro-anarchist. i liked this guy http://www.greens.org/s-r/17/17-02.html

gotta vote for ron paul or gary johnson though. obama is a wanna be rock star circus clown. mitt is a piece of shit. fuck the government!

one thing i really like about the usa though is the guns!!! i love how is someone breaks into my house and is threatening i can shoot them dead with my springfield or raging judge and tell their family im not sorry. at least in the state im in. wtf the cops gonna do if someones already in your house? and fuck them too, they're too lenient on the needle junkies in town. pisses me the fuck off when i go on a jog or bike ride to the park and find syringes on the ground. fucking little kids play in the areas! these junkies are out of control here and everywhere! we seriously need a methadone clinic or and island to put these people on. i even have a few relatives (hate to even call them that)that are into it and i totally despise them all! they dont even want help. i wouldnt even give them a dollar if they were freezing on the streets.

if we eliminated all the shit bags, anarchy wouldnt be so bad. i think people should be able to do what they want for the most part, as long as they dont infringe upon others rights. i also believe we should always help thy neighbor when in need. there are a lot of good people out there that have tough times, it's sad. it makes you feel good to help people who deserve it.

 

[abandonconflict]

^^We have a long way to go...

le sigh

 

[ginwilly]

If anything you are now arguing against private property and I agree. Remember your fallacy yesterday, the assumption that this can only work through central planning. Anarchism is very compatible with decentralization.

All right man, I'm losing patience with you. I will never argue against property rights. My version of utopia involves my own expansion of land that you would need permission from me to be on. I'll respect your rights too.

Our conversation about central planning obviously went right over your head. I said anarchy is NOT possible WITH central planning. You said you were against austerity and I said there is no way an anarchist can argue for a well funded central planner and say you are an anarchist. Central planning and anarchy are not symbiotic. They can not co-exist, ducy?

You should be arguing for the abolishment of central government in it's entirety if you want to stay consistent. Instead, you argued that cutting their funding is bad.

Today you are saying it's very compatible with decentralization, which congrats, that's consistent. Yesterday you were bitching about austerity cuts to that central government as a bad thing, boo, that's inconsistent.

My work here is done. You are a nutjob.

 

[SlaveNoMore]

^^We have a long way to go...

le sigh

LMAO! They still haven't found a cure for Tourette's Syndrome?

 

[abandonconflict]

All right man, I'm losing patience with you. I will never argue against property rights. My version of utopia involves my own expansion of land that you would need permission from me to be on. I'll respect your rights too.

Our conversation about central planning obviously went right over your head. I said anarchy is NOT possible WITH central planning. You said you were against austerity and I said there is no way an anarchist can argue for a well funded central planner and say you are an anarchist. Central planning and anarchy are not symbiotic. They can not co-exist, ducy?

You should be arguing for the abolishment of central government in it's entirety if you want to stay consistent. Instead, you argued that cutting their funding is bad.

Today you are saying it's very compatible with decentralization, which congrats, that's consistent. Yesterday you were bitching about austerity cuts to that central government as a bad thing, boo, that's inconsistent.

My work here is done. You are a nutjob.

And you're an idiot.

You are mistaking my criticism of austerity for praise of stimulus. Look back at the thread bonehead. I'm knocking all of capitalism. You are insisting that this means I like central planning because you have never read a book written by an anarchist. Yet you think you know what anarchy means. Much worse, you think it is compatible with ANY form of capitalism. Capitalism and anarchism are mutually exclusive terms brosky.

I even told you to look up syndicalism so that you can learn how anarchy works (in other words an economy that is neither capitalist nor centralized)

Furthermore, ask a native anarchist if they believe in private property and they will call you a neocolonial right wing turd.

 

[ginwilly]

To slave and learning thanks for the debate. It makes me see how many of the same things anarchists want that I do. Our major difference is I want to own my property with the right to defend it and do with as I please. I might even put up a windmill and paint it camo.

I believe we can co-exist. If you can make anarchy a reality, we'll agree to leave each other alone.

 

[SlaveNoMore]

fuck capitalism, im an anarchist! well, micro-anarchist. i liked this guy http://www.greens.org/s-r/17/17-02.html

gotta vote for ron paul or gary johnson though. obama is a wanna be rock star circus clown. mitt is a piece of shit. fuck the government!

one thing i really like about the usa though is the guns!!! i love how is someone breaks into my house and is threatening i can shoot them dead with my springfield or raging judge and tell their family im not sorry. at least in the state im in. wtf the cops gonna do if someones already in your house? and fuck them too, they're too lenient on the needle junkies in town. pisses me the fuck off when i go on a jog or bike ride to the park and find syringes on the ground. fucking little kids play in the areas! these junkies are out of control here and everywhere! we seriously need a methadone clinic or and island to put these people on. i even have a few relatives (hate to even call them that)that are into it and i totally despise them all! they dont even want help. i wouldnt even give them a dollar if they were freezing on the streets.

if we eliminated all the shit bags, anarchy wouldnt be so bad. i think people should be able to do what they want for the most part, as long as they dont infringe upon others rights. i also believe we should always help thy neighbor when in need. there are a lot of good people out there that have tough times, it's sad. it makes you feel good to help people who deserve it.

See in a utopia somebody would have to talk sense into this guy. I think he would easily follow a good example though.

 

[Doer]

There is no 4 option. Cooperators working with cooperators get 3 each time. Cooperators poleaxed by a defector get zip-a-rino.
Defectors get 1 when in their own company. The big payout comes when they screw the trusting.

I consider this as a basic feature of human nature, the one that moots your exhortations to extend trust, trust, trust. that is the losing gambit. Stalin got this one on the nose:
trust but verify. cn

Or maybe, in afairs of State, screw trusting, only verify.

 

[SlaveNoMore]

To slave and learning thanks for the debate. It makes me see how many of the same things anarchists want that I do. Our major difference is I want to own my property with the right to defend it and do with as I please. I might even put up a windmill and paint it camo.

I believe we can co-exist. If you can make anarchy a reality, we'll agree to leave each other alone.

Hey, I'll even help you paint your windmill.

The pleasure was all mine......

 

[abandonconflict]

Our major difference is I want to own my property with the right to defend it and do with as I please.

 

[ginwilly]

And you're an idiot.

You are mistaking my criticism of austerity for praise of stimulus. Look back at the thread bonehead. I'm knocking all of capitalism. You are insisting that this means I like central planning because you have never read a book written by an anarchist. Yet you think you know what anarchy means. Much worse, you think it is compatible with ANY form of capitalism. Capitalism and anarchism are mutually exclusive terms brosky.

I even told you to look up syndicalism so that you can learn how anarchy works (in other words an economy that is neither capitalist nor centralized)

Furthermore, ask a native anarchist if they believe in private property and they will call you a neocolonial right wing turd.

Your entire first paragraph is full of shit. I challenge you to prove this vomit of lies.

The second paragraph underscores how idiotic your stance is against austerity for the central planners. I don't think you get it. Believing austerity is bad, central planning bad doesn't go together.

Your third paragraph... wow.... I know how you guys feel about private property. We disagree on this issue but even some non neocolonial right wing turds disagree with you. I refuse to believe all anarchists are that dickish as to call me hateful names like that simply for asking about property ownership. That's harsh. I mean, what kind of fuckhead does that? Are you saying all anarchists are dickish fuckheads? I disagree and think you owe them an apology for that statement.

 

[abandonconflict]

Believing austerity is bad, central planning bad doesn't go together.

Your arguments are so simplistic. You really have only an assumption.

This is what I said:

I just realized the righties actually are into a form of collectivism. Collective misery. They want to make sure everyone suffers toil, drudgery and surveillance equally. That's why they love austerity too.

You're not an anarchist. You're a capitalist.

Laissez faire can't exist with out a state to protect private property. If you're pushing "voluntaryism", well that isn't anarchy either, that's feudalism, the private state.

I'm not just bashing austerity, I'm bashing capitalism altogether.

I mentioned austerity not to criticize or support it, but to point out that you're a collectivist. Austerity is collective misery. Well, I guess I am criticizing it.

That is when you started with your strawman that I was pushing central funded planning and soviet communism.

I know it is hard to accept it, but you're a twatwaffle and I know why.

 

[ginwilly]

Last time I try to explain this one. You are fine when you say you are an anarchist and believe in self rule. It's still all good when you say transactions will be voluntary and mutually beneficial. You are still cooking with gasoline when you point out how this utopia can not be possible with central planning and I want to spike the football with you. So far we can co-exist with our different ideologies with respect for each others.

Then you go on to say you are against austerity which can be cuts to taxes collected by CENTRAL PLANNERS, with the threat of Force, that is most definitely not voluntary and doesn't always resort in equal benefits. At the very least austerity diminishes the resources of central planners and any anarchist should be in favor of this.

You never come out and say "I want my central planners well funded" but you say "I'm against austerity, it's harmful to the economy" so you don't have to for it to be out there. It's only two dots, easy to connect.