Capitalism Is Collapsing -- and Nothing Is Rising to Replace It

[Theinquisition]

That's some grade A projection
I suggest you reread how this conversation started and witness the irony of your post

Also, "ad homonyms"... yeah i guess you really are an easy target

Posting from a phone results in predictable mistakes.

I won't be responding to you anymore

- - - Updated - - -

I think it's more likely that he simply has a different view of what Capitalism is while also having different values. The problem with any discussion surrounding socialism and capitalism is that both are abstract terms that mean different things to different people who rarely do their homework on how both concepts have evolved over time.

The truth of the matter is that economic systems don't exist in a vacuum. You're never going to get anywhere with someone who thinks USSR under Stalin is a true example of socialism. Likewise, you'll never get anywhere with a person who believes Chile under Pinochet is the definition of capitalism.

I think politics is in such a depressing state partly because people are unwilling to consider the perspectives of others and refuse to come to terms with what the other person is saying regardless of the subject. It's easier to throw out surface level criticism and then label others of being degenerates or heartless exploiters rather than to reflect on what they may or may not know about the world.

Well put good sir. You put more effort forth than I was willing to for exactly the reasons you stated in your last paragraph.

- - - Updated - - -

Fair enough. But you could keep doing your part in real life and on the web as well.

- - - Updated - - -



Mocking is always counter productive because it's a singal for you opponent that you cannot convince him otherwise. Walking off is always better.

What people that don't realize is that by acting like that they push people further into the other camp. Folks like that are exactly why trump won

[Raskayz]

I think it's more likely that he simply has a different view of what Capitalism is while also having different values. The problem with any discussion surrounding socialism and capitalism is that both are abstract terms that mean different things to different people who rarely do their homework on how both concepts have evolved over time.

The truth of the matter is that economic systems don't exist in a vacuum. You're never going to get anywhere with someone who thinks USSR under Stalin is a true example of socialism. Likewise, you'll never get anywhere with a person who believes Chile under Pinochet is the definition of capitalism.

I think politics is in such a depressing state partly because people are unwilling to consider the perspectives of others and refuse to come to terms with what the other person is saying regardless of the subject. It's easier to throw out surface level criticism and then label others of being degenerates or heartless exploiters rather than to reflect on what they may or may not know about the world.

You know i was on an electronics related forum yesterday and there was a massive flame war over the performances of integrated circuits from manufacturer x from manufacturer y.
People (most of them being top tier electrical engineers) were calling each other morons and stupid over how group 1 didn't take internal resistance into account while group 2 were the utter imbeciles that overlooked clock speed and boot time.

I think you greatly underestimate the taste humans have for conflict on the internet. It really has nothing to do with politics nor lack of knowledge about it.
I'd probably get along just fine with supertony IRL
I just see really few reasons to be gentle here

What people that don't realize is that by acting like that they push people further into the other camp. Folks like that are exactly why trump won

Nice way to deflect the blame on the people who didn't support torture,calling mexicans rapists, and practicing genocide of entire families

[Glorious Leader]

You know i was on an electronics related forum yesterday and there was a massive flame war over the performances of integrated circuits from manufacturer x from manufacturer y.
People (most of them being top tier electrical engineers) were calling each other morons and stupid over how group 1 didn't take internal resistance into account while group 2 were the utter imbeciles that overlooked clock speed and boot time.

I think you greatly underestimate the taste humans have for conflict on the internet. It really has nothing to do with politics nor lack of knowledge about it.
I'd probably get along just fine with supertony IRL
I just see really few reasons to be gentle here



Nice way to deflect the blame on the people who didn't support torture,calling mexicans rapists, and practicing genocide of entire families

The argument that challenging their bullshit in fact rubbing their faces in it just pushes them to be more obnoxious is a non argument. In fact its really just the right wings call for safe spaces.

[downnola]

I think you greatly underestimate the taste humans have for conflict on the internet. It really has nothing to do with politics nor lack of knowledge about it.
I'd probably get along just fine with supertony IRL
I just see really few reasons to be gentle here

I wouldn't say I'm underestimating the nature of flame wars. I'm just fortunate enough to remember how obtuse people were before the internet. Cognitive bias is part of the human condition and if anything, the internet has amplified it.

[Deleted]

Fair enough. But you could keep doing your part in real life and on the web as well.

- - - Updated - - -



Mocking is always counter productive because it's a singal for you opponent that you cannot convince him otherwise. Walking off is always better.

So you did not see the other poster mocking the contributing post? If you really felt this way you would tell this to the guy who started the mocking.

[Raskayz]

So you did not see the other poster mocking the contributing post? If you really felt this way you would tell this to the guy who started the mocking.

"
Boo fucking hoo

suck it up buttercup

life is tough and owes you nuffin !

better stand up for yourselves you crybabies SJW safe spacers !
"

thats what you get when anyone else do it

[Deleted]

I think it's more likely that he simply has a different view of what Capitalism is while also having different values. The problem with any discussion surrounding socialism and capitalism is that both are abstract terms that mean different things to different people who rarely do their homework on how both concepts have evolved over time.

Yea, no. They do not "mean different things to different people who rarely do their homework", but rather, "some people are absolutely clueless about what these terms mean". If these people would be willing to learn they would ask questions and not put up some "intelligent" remark about how socialism means something else.

The truth of the matter is that economic systems don't exist in a vacuum. You're never going to get anywhere with someone who thinks USSR under Stalin is a true example of socialism. Likewise, you'll never get anywhere with a person who believes Chile under Pinochet is the definition of capitalism.

Exactly, you won't come anywhere if you can't be arsed to used the proper definitions.

I think politics is in such a depressing state partly because people are unwilling to consider the perspectives of others and refuse to come to terms with what the other person is saying regardless of the subject. It's easier to throw out surface level criticism and then label others of being degenerates or heartless exploiters rather than to reflect on what they may or may not know about the world.

I wish this was politics, but it is not, it is stupidity, nothing less.

[downnola]

Yea, no. They do not "mean different things to different people who rarely do their homework", but rather, "some people are absolutely clueless about what these terms mean". If these people would be willing to learn they would ask questions and not put up some "intelligent" remark about how socialism means something else.

We're in agreement and said the same thing, only I did it with less vitriol.

[Deleted]

We're in agreement and said the same thing, only I did it with less vitriol.

The problem is that with any less vitriol you will get "the guy in question" believing that it is okay not to do their home work, just look at the response he gave..

[Glorious Leader]

The chile isnt capitalism argument is particularly rich given that many of the leading ideologue right wing clowns (hayek and friedman and their disciples) ran the fucking place and hailed it as a miracle of free market capitalism. Even when the god fails it cant be understood to have failed. On the other hand i can think of plenty of socialist and anarchist thinkers who pointed out how awful and unsocialist the party was. Bakunin died fucking centuries before but was prescient enough to warn about the dangers of red menace. Hell the party itself was deeply divided until it was purged. Short of von mises having a fit and walking out of mt pelerin (calling hayek a socialist lmao) i cant think of any such intellectual divide among supporters of free markets. Its lock step really. If chile wasnt capitalism then where were the intellectual giants on the right to criticize it??? All fucking silent

[Theinquisition]

The problem is that with any less vitriol you will get "the guy in question" believing that it is okay not to do their home work, just look at the response he gave..

What response was That?

I understand quite well the differences between socialism, communism and capitalism, both as forms of government and economic systems.

I also have a pretty good grasp of human nature. So what exactly are you in such disagreement with me on? I thought I've taken a pretty moderate stance here.

[downnola]

The chile isnt capitalism argument is particularly rich given that many of the leading ideologue right wing clowns (hayek and friedman and their disciples) ran the fucking place and hailed it as a miracle of free market capitalism.

[citation needed]

People always throw that bullshit at Friedman hoping it will stick, but the man only gave Pinochet counsel on how to address Chile's inflation while also advocating open markets. That's not exactly "running the fucking place," is it?

[Glorious Leader]

[citation needed]

You must be joking. Seriously. How ignorant of history can you be?

http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionC11

It is when the same fucking chicago school.boys (HIS.FUCKING DISCIPLES) are setting up shop

[Deleted]

What response was That?

I understand quite well the differences between socialism, communism and capitalism, both as forms of government and economic systems.

I also have a pretty good grasp of human nature. So what exactly are you in such disagreement with me on? I thought I've taken a pretty moderate stance here.

And this is how you start out "moderately"?

Capitalism has done more to bring people out of poverty than any other economic system in human history. Furthermore it's laughable to suggest that socialism or communism doesn't produce pollution or corruption.

- - - Updated - - -




Why don't you show us the way?

Throw away that computer that you're using to post. Throw away your phone and car as well.

If this is moderate then i hate to see you try something else.

If you really believe that capitalism brought people out of poverty then you are sadly mistaken. What did get most people out off poverty is technological advancements, capitalism had very little to do with this. Most research is done by Universities that are sponsored by governments, the research most companies do is how to best profit from this research.

The rest of this moderate post im not even going to comment on as it had even less to do with the poor guy you quoted.

[Glorious Leader]

And this is how you start out "moderately"?



If this is moderate then i hate to see you try something else.

If you really believe that capitalism brought people out of poverty then you are sadly mistaken. What did get most people out off poverty is technological advancements, capitalism had very little to do with this. Most research is done by Universities that are sponsored by governments, the research most companies do is how to best profit from this research.

The rest of this moderate post im not even going to comment on as it had even less to do with the poor guy you quoted.

Research is expensive and often leads to failure. The public has typically subsidized the losses and privatized the gains.

[Theinquisition]

You must be joking. Seriously. How ignorant of history can you be?

http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionC11

It is when the same fucking chicago school.boys (HIS.FUCKING DISCIPLES) are setting up shop

Lol

Here we go.

My views are infallable and opinions are fact, if you don't agree with me you are ignorant, and if you ask me for evidence you're stupid.

I'll listen to the lectures of Milton Friedman over the rantings of a internet poster with a Picard avatar

[Glorious Leader]

Lol

Here we go.

My views are infallable and opinions are fact, if you don't agree with me you are ignorant, and if you ask me for evidence you're stupid.

I'll listen to the lectures of Milton Friedman over the rantings of a internet poster with a Picard avatar

That good old uncle milt was supportive of chiles pinochet is fact and yes you are ignorant if you deny this. That the chicago school boys who were his intellectual disciples ran the show is also fact. You can run to daddy small hands as a safe space but it doesnt change the fact. The harsh truth is that chile was a feee market dream and it turned into a nightmare exactly as predicted by left intellectuals amd economists. Again

http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionC11

Do a page search for kaldor

[Theinquisition]

And this is how you start out "moderately"?



If this is moderate then i hate to see you try something else.

If you really believe that capitalism brought people out of poverty then you are sadly mistaken. What did get most people out off poverty is technological advancements, capitalism had very little to do with this. Most research is done by Universities that are sponsored by governments, the research most companies do is how to best profit from this research.

The rest of this moderate post im not even going to comment on as it had even less to do with the poor guy you quoted.

Capitalism with light regulations and a system of law that protects property rights has done more to raise the standard of living of people than any other system of economics. Its in part reason that west Germany flourished while eastern Germany stagnated. Hell look at post soviet Poland and how better off they now than before.

China figured it out and has progressively moved more and more toward did capitialism.

Notice that I haven't said that capitalism is perfect, it's not. I would however live under a capitialistic economic system than any other.

[Deleted]

Research is expensive and often leads to failure. The public has typically subsidized the losses and privatized the gains.

The public doesn't see very much off these gains other then new consumer technology, it is the companies that exploit the new technologies for the true gains. Point is, there is very little capitalism involved in this.

[Glorious Leader]

The public doesn't see very much off these gains other then new consumer technology, it is the companies that exploit the new technologies for the true gains. Point is, there is very little capitalism involved in this.

Thats the point i was trying to make really. The internet is a good example. The internet was developed largely at public expense through the DoD. It should.be a public asset but instead it was almost immediately privatized by major telecoms. The public subsidized the research including all the failure but instead of low or no cost public domain internet you pay at and t or verizon.