Author Topic: Socialist or immature  (Read 4057 times)

zoolooo

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • Kudos: 0
Socialist or immature
« Reply #15 on: 15 March 2003, 18:41 »
Why don't you move to South Korea or Shanghi?

There you can fight with the other greedy retards and stab each other in the back to you capitalist heart's content.

Capitalism is a fault, what you think of as a capital/social "mix" is only the majority paying to keep capitalism going (See Keynes).

The organisation of society to keep a few in excess while the majority go without is insane.

Capitalism is not the best system, it is not the only system.  It is the system of a primate and quite barbric peoples who respond to greed and reaction rather than reason - if you think capitalism is good or the sole option you are only displaying your own shameful ignorance.

Capitalism 's saving grace is it has the seeds of it's own destruction and the cure is socialism - red or dead is the future.

zooloo

[ March 15, 2003: Message edited by: zoolooo ]


slave

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,136
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com
Socialist or immature
« Reply #16 on: 15 March 2003, 20:02 »
Da, comrade!    :D  

(please note the soviet union was never really socialist either)

[ March 15, 2003: Message edited by: Linux User #5225982375 ]


Fett101

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,581
  • Kudos: 85
    • http://fgmma.com
Socialist or immature
« Reply #17 on: 15 March 2003, 20:37 »
quote:
Originally posted by zoolooo:
It is the system of a primate and quite barbric peoples who respond to greed and reaction rather than reason.


And... it does well thsn.

Siplus

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 522
  • Kudos: 43
    • http://www.siplus.org
Socialist or immature
« Reply #18 on: 15 March 2003, 22:25 »
quote:
There you can fight with the other greedy retards and stab each other in the back to you capitalist heart's content.

why do you think that all capitalists are "greedy retards" ??? I am a capitalist, and i do not stab everyone i see in the back!

 
quote:
Capitalism is not the best system, it is not the only system.

i NEVER said it was the best, nor did i say it was the only system of government

 
quote:
It is the system of a primate and quite barbric peoples who respond to greed and reaction rather than reason - if you think capitalism is good or the sole option you are only displaying your own shameful ignorance.  

"It is the system of a primate"--first of all, we are primates, may i remind you... Capitalism is not exactly barbaric. the only system of government i can think of being barbaric would be tribal or military dictatorships. I DO THINK that capitalism is good, and i do think it is our (not the) best choice. in saying that, tell me where i am showing my ignorance, because i must see the error in my ways before i can learn and improve.

 
quote:
Capitalism 's saving grace is it has the seeds of it's own destruction and the cure is socialism - red or dead is the future.

I am truely sorry, but i fail to see why capitalism bears the 'seeds' of its own destruction, nor can i figure out why socialism is the cure. no, IMHO, it is not. if you were to suddenly change the world to socialism, all would not be well. if we shall ever be socialist, there must be steps taken to prepare the public, because as i (and appearently all capitalists, as was said eariler...) said before, the public is too stupid.

 
quote:
red or dead is the future.

well, we are all going to die, so i guess "dead" is the future


http://www.siplus.org

"Your computer is already fucked up by having Windows
on it, you can only unfuck it up by installing Linux."
-- void main (old school MES member)


Desktop: Athlon 2600/ 768mb DDR266
--Running: Ubuntu 5.10, FC4, Win2k
 (Also, Unbuntu 6-06:5, 5.04; Fedora Core 5, WinXP, but none of these are used much)
12" Powerbook: 1.5 Ghz G4 PowerPC / 1.25 GB DDR333
--Running: Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger

slave

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,136
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com
Socialist or immature
« Reply #19 on: 15 March 2003, 23:44 »
I was reading my Bible (Dilbert) the other day, and there was a cartoon where aliens knocked on Dogbert's door.  It went like this:

**knock knock**

(Dogbert opens door)

Alien: We are aliens from another planet, and we have been watching life on Earth mature for quite some time.

2nd Alien: We'd like to share with you now our knowledge on how to end disease, hunger, and poverty.

Dogbert: Ok, but what's in it for me?

(Aliens look at each other, then get in their ship and fly off)

Dogbert: I wonder if I could've handled that any better.

billy_gates

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 801
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.skinner.com/jeffberg
Socialist or immature
« Reply #20 on: 16 March 2003, 02:45 »
quote:
Why don't you move to South Korea or Shanghi?

There you can fight with the other greedy retards and stab each other in the back to you capitalist heart's content.

Capitalism is a fault, what you think of as a capital/social "mix" is only the majority paying to keep capitalism going (See Keynes).

The organisation of society to keep a few in excess while the majority go without is insane.

Capitalism is not the best system, it is not the only system.  It is the system of a primate and quite barbric peoples who respond to greed and reaction rather than reason - if you think capitalism is good or the sole option you are only displaying your own shameful ignorance.

Capitalism 's saving grace is it has the seeds of it's own destruction and the cure is socialism - red or dead is the future.


Why the hell would I move out of our capitalistic government and into their capitalistic government?

Like Siplus said, we are primates, and I do not stab "everyone" in the back, only the people that deserve it.

I don't see how capitalism seeds its own destruction either, it seems its the opposite, several countries have tried to achieve socialism and have failed, democracy and capitalism have won.

The idea that the minority are rich and the majority are poor, is not because of capitalism.  It is because of people's laziness.  That is why our government should be less socialistic, we give the poor people too much stuff, they don't work for it because we give it to them.

Siplus

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 522
  • Kudos: 43
    • http://www.siplus.org
Socialist or immature
« Reply #21 on: 16 March 2003, 04:51 »
quote:
Like Siplus said, we are primates, and I do not stab "everyone" in the back, only the people that deserve it

uh, one of the things i'm trying to point out here is that not all capitalists enjoy 'stabbing' other people in the back. obviously some do. i thank you for agreeing with me, but we shouldn't double cross everyone just b/c we may not like them... one of the points "they" are making is that socialists won't backstab each other

 
quote:
The idea that the minority are rich and the majority are poor, is not because of capitalism. It is because of people's laziness. That is why our government should be less socialistic, we give the poor people too much stuff, they don't work for it because we give it to them.

i completely agree. that's one reason i don't like the US's welfare program. some people can live their entire lives on the tax dollars of the entire public. i agree that we should have a welfare system, but it should not be that easy to receive government funds


http://www.siplus.org

"Your computer is already fucked up by having Windows
on it, you can only unfuck it up by installing Linux."
-- void main (old school MES member)


Desktop: Athlon 2600/ 768mb DDR266
--Running: Ubuntu 5.10, FC4, Win2k
 (Also, Unbuntu 6-06:5, 5.04; Fedora Core 5, WinXP, but none of these are used much)
12" Powerbook: 1.5 Ghz G4 PowerPC / 1.25 GB DDR333
--Running: Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger

zoolooo

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • Kudos: 0
Socialist or immature
« Reply #22 on: 16 March 2003, 05:57 »
Opps, I meant primative not primate.

Capitalists and stabbing - basically you can't make money without exploitation.

Stop welfare and you'll have a revolution, that's why there is welfare.

Capitalism... seeds... destruction... the price of capital good outpaces the price of consumer goods = recession (depression). That you don't know this shows you do not even know what you are supporting, which is no surprise.

Sudden Socialism would not work.  Russia for example was much the same under the Czar as it was with Stalin and is still a state dictatorship of secret police and censorship.  So it needs evolution not revolution. (Only now the poor are really poor)

As a species we are geting smarter (standing on a giant's shoulders we see further) as we get smarter the present way we conduct our affairs now will become absurd.

Capitalism is not civilised.

zooloo

BTW, Capitalists, how much is your capital and how did you get it?

slave

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,136
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com
Socialist or immature
« Reply #23 on: 16 March 2003, 06:20 »
quote:
The idea that the minority are rich and the majority are poor, is not because of capitalism. It is because of people's laziness. That is why our government should be less socialistic, we give the poor people too much stuff, they don't work for it because we give it to them.


I'm sorry, but there are a *lot* of hard working poor people in the States.  Another thing, why does anyone need to be a billionaire?  Even if you worked harder than anyone else, I can't imagine that you'd ever need that much money.  And don't even get me started on the US businesses that outsource their operations to 3rd world countries so they can get away with paying the people pennies a day...

[ March 15, 2003: Message edited by: Linux User #5225982375 ]


Siplus

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 522
  • Kudos: 43
    • http://www.siplus.org
Socialist or immature
« Reply #24 on: 16 March 2003, 06:37 »
quote:
Stop welfare and you'll have a revolution, that's why there is welfare

i didn't mean to stop welfare, i'm sorry if i mislead you. i mean that welfare should only be for a short period of time. i do NOT want some jackass who doesn't want to work to live off of my tax money. i DO WANT WELFARE for the honest person unemployeed, for a period of time that is reasonable to find a new job, because we all know people lose their jobs for various reasons, and it's not always their fault

 
quote:
As a species we are geting smarter (standing on a giant's shoulders we see further) as we get smarter the present way we conduct our affairs now will become absurd.

i beleive that the amount of knowledge the human race has is always increasing, but (and i feel like i'm repeating myself way too much here) the gap of the populus's intelligence is growing larger then the gap between the "rich minority and poor majority." the majority of our society is by far less intelligent then any of us here.

 
quote:
Capitalism is not civilised.

i do not see how it capitialism is not civilised. as far as i know, we don't have public beheadings. i can not possible understand how you can say capitialism is not civilised!! GIVE me reasons, EXPLAIN yourself!!!!!

 
quote:
I'm sorry, but there are a *lot* of hard working poor people in the States

i agree. but most hard working people are not poor. if you work hard, then *generally* you do well. look in the communist countries, they are far worce off then people in the US or other capitalist states

 
quote:
Another thing, why does anyone need to be a billionaire?

you are right, no one needs to be a billionare. that is a hell of a lot of money, and they will never be able to spend it all. but the great thing about capitalism is: you have the FREEDOM to become one if you can. the hard part is being able to figure out how

[ March 15, 2003: Message edited by: Siplus: linux advocate ]



http://www.siplus.org

"Your computer is already fucked up by having Windows
on it, you can only unfuck it up by installing Linux."
-- void main (old school MES member)


Desktop: Athlon 2600/ 768mb DDR266
--Running: Ubuntu 5.10, FC4, Win2k
 (Also, Unbuntu 6-06:5, 5.04; Fedora Core 5, WinXP, but none of these are used much)
12" Powerbook: 1.5 Ghz G4 PowerPC / 1.25 GB DDR333
--Running: Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger

slave

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,136
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com
Socialist or immature
« Reply #25 on: 16 March 2003, 07:18 »
Bill Gates is a billionaire.  I know he's not the only billionaire--the US has many many more--but I think he makes for a good example, since he IS the richest man alive.  His assets are worth over 40 billion dollars.  It's enough money to feed a 3rd world nation.   Do you think his work deserves him all those billions?  I personally think he has exploited many people in order to make that money.  I'm sure Bill would say "this is a free market, it's my right to make money, blah blah" but the question remains; how much merit does a system really have that allows people to get so obscenely rich through mistreating other people?

I'd like to live in a society where money is irrelevant so we can work on improving the human condition, not form a corporate gang (a business) and go on some profiteering spree.

 
quote:
 but most hard working people are not poor. if you work hard, then *generally* you do well. look in the communist countries, they are far worce off then people in the US or other capitalist states


Yeah, but the funny thing is most people in the US (I speak for the US only because I don't know how it is in other countries) work their asses off not to improve society but to make a profit.  It ends up hurting everyone.  They all have dollar signs in their eyes and work night and day for money since they believe it will make them happy.  (They've been tricked!)  After all, isn't the American Dream to make a bunch of money and live in the suburbs somewhere with your two cars, boat, 3 kids and big house?  The sad thing is they end up being slaves to money, and work so much to get it that they find they don't have any time left to actually drive their cars, relax in their houses, or play with the kids (another reason why families are literally falling apart in this country)  This kind of system results in massive wastefullness because people want to feel justified for working their butts off like that so they spend it all on stupid things.  The US is *the* home of gluttons; I mean, look at how fat we all are!  We are the biggest bunch of porkos on the planet, in fact, I'm surprised we don't cause Earth's orbit to go off balance or something from the uneven distribution of weight.

/rant mode off

slave

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,136
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com
Socialist or immature
« Reply #26 on: 16 March 2003, 10:08 »
Ok I found an excellent website  on socialism with some quotes that may help explain what socialism is really about.

I'll post the move relevant questions/statements.

From the FAQ:

Isn't socialism at odds with human nature?


Isn't socialism contrary to human nature? Aren't people inherently selfish?


To my mind socialism is more in line with human nature than capitalism. Part of our human nature is the possession of needs that can only be met through cooperation and reciprocal relations with others. These include both emotional needs and the need to self-actualise or achieve. So 'enlightened selfishness' requires cooperation and mutual regard.


It is certainly true that socialism would be impossible if people were to continue behaving in the anti-social ways that they do at the moment. However, this behaviour is mainly driven by conditions that are far from permanent and would be eliminated under socialism. These include the following:

Capitalism generates dog eat dog behavior. Your interests are set unnecessarily at odds with others. You have to be a bastard to get ahead in your career or business. Your success is someone else's failure. Because socialism is based on cooperation rather than competition, it removes much of the conflict between our needs and those of others.
Socialism not only removes the incentives to act against the common good, it generates the motivation to actively serve it. Work is transformed into a desirable activity performed for its own sake and people feel part of society rather than alienated from it.
In developed countries it is now possible for everyone to live a reasonably affluent life and be free of long hours of routine toil. As discussed [below] this creates a better basis for cooperation and mutual regard. Historically, where equality would have meant shared misery, scarcity made a necessity out of the plunder, enslavement and exploitation of others. And there was no room for an 'enlightened' attitude. If you were not on the delivering end, you were on the receiving end. Freed slaves felt no compunction about enslaving others.
Any desire to harm others is not part of human nature but rather something neurotic and self-destructive. The same goes for the complementary desire of some people to be treated as door mats. Such disordered behaviour is fostered by capitalism. Firstly there is the direct effect of the dog-eat-dog workings of the system and the alienated nature of labor. Then there is the indirect effect through the impact of other people's neurotic behaviour, particularly that of parents, who have been deformed by the system.

Doesn't socialism suppress individuality and economic freedom?


If socialism suppresses individuality and economic freedom it is only the individuality and freedom of capitalists as they trample on the individuality and freedom of everybody else. They will no longer have the freedom to control and exploit others by monopolising the means of production.


Capitalism is premised on economic freedom being confined to a minority. Everyone else has to follow orders. If workers went to work tomorrow morning determined to show initiative and creativity, they would immediately see how the system gets in their way.


Capitalists want their cake and to eat it too. On the one hand they want workers to accept their subordinate position but at the same time to show a bit more initiative within their cramped area of responsibility. Success is limited because people who accept their subordination tend to lack initiative while those who don't accept their subordination are hard to motivate.


Certainly a worker under capitalism is freer than a serf under feudalism. They are not obliged to stick with one boss. And also, the capitalist is freer than the guild master bound by guild rules. However, you can't keep dining out on that for five hundred years. Being better than feudalism loses its power to impress. It's about as impressive as a middle aged couch potato outpacing an octogenarian with a walking frame.

Socialism in a nutshell


In a socialist society the means of production [1] are owned by the workers rather than by a rich minority of capitalists or functionaries. Such a system of ownership is both collective and individual in nature.


It is collective because society can control production unlike the economic anarchy of capitalism and because production is for the common good rather than for individual profit.


At the same time it is individual because workers are no longer a 'collective' mob of alienated non-owners employed by a minority of owners. Work becomes a free and self-affirming activity for each worker and they receive the full fruits of their labor. The capitalists and their servants no longer control production nor grow rich from other's toil. Everybody is an owner. Socialism is genuine free enterprise.


The personally empowering and cooperative nature of socialist ownership underpins similar changes in other aspects of life. Socialism means far healthier individuals and human relationships. It means full participation by each individual in the intellectual, cultural and political life of society.


Socialism requires a revolution with three main stages: firstly the emergence of a workers' movement committed to socialist revolution, secondly the achievement of political power and the expropriation of the capitalists and thirdly a period during which workers learn how to be owners and rulers and cast off the psychological and ideological dross of the past.


Socialism will not be an utopia simply created in people's minds. It will be the product of economic and social development. In developed countries it is now possible for everyone to live a reasonably affluent life and be free of long hours of routine toil. This creates a better basis for cooperation and mutual regard. Historically, where equality would have meant shared poverty, it was inevitable that a minority would plunder, enslave and exploit the majority. At the same time rank and file workers are progressively acquiring through their experiences, the abilities to do without an elite. Their general level of education and training has advanced significantly over the last couple of generations. The work they do, while still totally oppressive, has an increasingly mental and conceptual content. And they now have extensive access to cultural and intellectual resources and the diverse experiences of living in a modern society. So while socialism was impossible in the past, these emerging conditions make it inevitable in the future.


Footnote [1]. The means of production comprise everything, except labor, that is used in production, namely, factories, plant, equipment, offices, shops, raw materials, fuel and components.

[ March 16, 2003: Message edited by: Linux User #5225982375 ]


zoolooo

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • Kudos: 0
Socialist or immature
« Reply #27 on: 17 March 2003, 03:08 »
quote:
i do NOT want some jackass who doesn't want to work to live off of my tax money.


But you give more of you tax to the very rich to keep them that way than you do on Welfare payments.  Why is your issue with the poor jackass and not the rich jackass?

 
quote:
i do not see how it capitialism is not civilised. as far as i know, we don't have public beheadings. i can not possible understand how you can say capitialism is not civilised!! GIVE me reasons, EXPLAIN yourself!!!!!


Co-operation is more civilised and a higher order of thinking than competition is. QED

Your ignorance is showing.

zooloo

BTW, you didn't say how much your capital is and how did you get it.  Please do, I'd like to know as I am sure I'd be able to use it against you.

[ March 16, 2003: Message edited by: zoolooo ]


slave

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,136
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com
Socialist or immature
« Reply #28 on: 17 March 2003, 03:22 »
Zooloo, there's one thing I'd like to mention in your last post.

Competition isn't--in and of itself--a bad thing; it's when it degenerates into combat that we start to see problems.  Richard Stallman puts it better than I can, so I'll quote what he says in his essay Why Software Should be Free:

Is Competition Inevitable?


 Is it inevitable that people will try to compete, to surpass their rivals in society? Perhaps it is. But competition itself is not harmful; the harmful thing is combat.


There are many ways to compete. Competition can consist of trying to achieve ever more, to outdo what others have done. For example, in the old days, there was competition among programming wizards--competition for who could make the computer do the most amazing thing, or for who could make the shortest or fastest program for a given task. This kind of competition can benefit everyone, as long as the spirit of good sportsmanship is maintained.


Constructive competition is enough competition to motivate people to great efforts. A number of people are competing to be the first to have visited all the countries on Earth; some even spend fortunes trying to do this. But they do not bribe ship captains to strand their rivals on desert islands. They are content to let the best person win.


Competition becomes combat when the competitors begin trying to impede each other instead of advancing themselves--when ``Let the best person win'' gives way to ``Let me win, best or not.'' Proprietary software is harmful, not because it is a form of competition, but because it is a form of combat among the citizens of our society.


Competition in business is not necessarily combat. For example, when two grocery stores compete, their entire effort is to improve their own operations, not to sabotage the rival. But this does not demonstrate a special commitment to business ethics; rather, there is little scope for combat in this line of business short of physical violence. Not all areas of business share this characteristic. Withholding information that could help everyone advance is a form of combat.


Business ideology does not prepare people to resist the temptation to combat the competition. Some forms of combat have been banned with anti-trust laws, truth in advertising laws, and so on, but rather than generalizing this to a principled rejection of combat in general, executives invent other forms of combat which are not specifically prohibited. Society's resources are squandered on the economic equivalent of factional civil war.

zoolooo

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
  • Kudos: 0
Socialist or immature
« Reply #29 on: 17 March 2003, 04:11 »
Yes Linux User #5225982375, I agree.

Thank you for the point, I see now that I was assuming an extreme ideal of competition and I should have been clearer.

I sacrificed too much accuracy for the sake of brevity.  You have corrected that.

zooloo