|
Spoiler alert, it's the latter.
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
Since I never responded to the question before, I will admit that I am not a Marxist, but for some reason I still consider privatizing the police and eliminating all food and drug regulations bad ideas 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
Personally I'd peg Tommy Douglas and Clement Attlee as my favorite politicians.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Since I never responded to the question before, I will admit that I am not a Marxist, but for some reason I still consider privatizing the police and eliminating all food and drug regulations bad ideas I am also not a Marxist, but I think me and 300 million of my closest friends should have an equal stake in the energy, utilities, telecom, and banking sectors. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
I think Jrodefeld is banking on the emotional impact of the word Marxist, since most people don't want to be called a Marxist in modern America. It's just such an overwhelming term. I think it also comes from his inability to think in degrees. You either want a stateless society, or you want the state to decide everything for you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
Cemetry Gator posted:I think Jrodefeld is banking on the emotional impact of the word Marxist, since most people don't want to be called a Marxist in modern America. It's just such an overwhelming term. This despite the fact that Marxism is anti statist at its core. Jrod uses Marxist like a Christian uses Satanist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
Political Whores posted:This despite the fact that Marxism is anti statist at its core. Jrod uses Marxist like a Christian uses Satanist. I am a dedicated statist, so I am probably not a Marxist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 06:10
|
|
|
Caros posted:The Non-Aggression Principle in action: Every time I read this I go cross-eyed halfway through and get nauseous. And I don't think the problem lies with me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
If it helps, I consider myself a Marxist, but I'm young enough to be ideologically confused and willing to go with what works. I prefer the term 'socialist' anyway. There was a brief period where I called myself a 'libertarian' because I believed "You should be able to do what you like to yourself without other people being involved", but remember I was 15 at the time. Every teenager's a libertarian, because gently caress you dad. This is the crowd Ron Paul attracts - people who want legal weed and gay sex but are perfectly happy with the government existing as long as it's not loving everything up. I don't remember the source - it might even be a random goon - but there's a quote I like on the subject: "The best government is invisible unless it's needed."
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
I definitively don't consider myself a Marxist, fwiw. Socially progressive but I wouldn't have so much of a problem with local wealth inequality if it weren't for that whole "childhood malnourishment epidemic" thing. Global inequality is a whole other fish to fry, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:I am a dedicated statist, so I am probably not a Marxist. Yeah as a self professed statist I have to agree, I advocate for a state that has the power that has the general ability to keep everyone safe and healthy even if it might occasionally stop people from being ridiculously wealthy and able to ignore others right to exist. I guess I see the state as a system that might eventually get patched enough so people can't exploit the system for their own benefit at the detriment of others?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 06:26
|
|
|
ungulateman posted:I don't remember the source - it might even be a random goon - but there's a quote I like on the subject: "The best government is invisible unless it's needed." God that led to my favorite part of the 2013 government, uh, "slimdown". "  Yeah! The government is shut down, see we don't need the feds, shutter it forever...hey why are all my favorite museums and parks closed, I want free stuff and Obama won't give it to me I don't understand  ""Why isn't the military getting paid now, no one's taking care of our troops who let this happen  "
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:God that led to my favorite part of the 2013 government, uh, "slimdown". Keep the government out of my medicare! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
Cemetry Gator posted:I think Jrodefeld is banking on the emotional impact of the word Marxist, since most people don't want to be called a Marxist in modern America. It's just such an overwhelming term. That makes sense, since he thinks that's the reason people are calling him racist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Speaking of racism in the South, apparently some of the Confederates were so unwilling to accept the end of slavery that they fled to Brazil, which was a slave-owning state at the time of reconstruction. However, by this point in time it was extremely difficult to import new slaves (with the British navy using force to prevent the export of slaves from Africa), and within 20 years Brazil would also see the end of slavery.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:(with the British navy using force to prevent the export of slaves from Africa). When will this immoral aggression against peaceful commerce end?!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 18:46
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:
This is a good impersonation of contemporary
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/...nths-up-sharply About 1 million jobs created in the past 3 months alone. The highest we've seen in more than a decade (since 2000). How is this possible in an oppressive, anti-freedom. job killing regime?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/...nths-up-sharply Yeah 1 million is whatever but i think you'll find if RON PAUL END THE FED we would have added one BILLION jobs 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Yeah 1 million is whatever but i think you'll find if RON PAUL END THE FED we would have added one BILLION jobs We would certainly need them without the minimum wage...
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Yeah 1 million is whatever but i think you'll find if RON PAUL END THE FED we would have added one BILLION jobs This is actually true though, when you consider the fact that after the tyranny of the minimum wage is abolished the working poor will likely take on three or four jobs each, all paying around $2/hr, just to avoid starvation. EDIT: Caros
Wolfsheim fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Feb 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:This is actually true though, when you consider the fact that after the tyranny of the minimum wage is abolished the working poor will likely take on three or four jobs each, all paying around $2/hr, just to avoid starvation. I'd rather literally eat the rich than work that many jobs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:I'd rather literally eat the rich than work that many jobs. well that's not saying much I would rather eat the rich than do most things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
By the simple conceit of believing that the market is a tool, not a god, I've already disqualified myself from libertarianism. What I believe beyond that, however, is wholly immaterial to jrodefeld's arguments, as I've said before. A convincing critique of Marxism is all well and good if you can make one, but that doesn't make anarcho-capitalism any more appealing. There are far more political orders based around the state than just socialism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
See, I'm all for capitalism as our primary market system, provided: A) We have an effective set of social nets (mincome, universal healthcare) that ensures a base standard of living somewhere well north of poverty. B) We ensure equal starting grounds for everyone: 100% estate tax, no private schools C) Strict and independent government regulation of all business activities to ensure that they don't hurt people and behave in moral manners (non-discrimination stuff would fall under here) D) The absolute requirement that someone's profits must be based on improving society, not random chance or that they happened to run Bain Capital Once we've established a baseline that's fair, doesn't put excessive risk on participants, and has systems to ensure that it's predictable and not dangerous, I honestly don't give much of a drat about economic equality. Any inequalities are going to be mostly the result of some people being better at doing stuff, and I honestly don't have much of a problem with that idea so long as it's not an artificial advantage and they're being rewarded according to how much they actually make people's lives better. Someone who gets rich by founding a cult and seriously hurting a lot of people is a monster. Someone who gets rich by creating life-saving devices is a hero and deserves what they got for helping people. And, of course you'll ask, who determines what activities are best for society? Well, my friends, the answer is obvious: Karia for world dictator, 2016. Shiranaihito can be my court jester, he can throw poop at visiting dignitaries I don't like.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
An equal starting point for everyone is society is communism, you Marxist. Capitalism is a meritocracy where some people start life poor, without access to good education or proper nutrition for brain development, while those who come out of one of the blessed Job-Creator-Seeded vaginas get the best prep schools money can buy and guaranteed loans and jobs from daddy's friends. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
My key problem with the libertarian philosophy is that it ignores that rights are there to govern how we interact with each other, while attempting to discuss rights on an individual nature. The idea of society requires that an individual be required to sacrifice some freedom for the overall structure of society. You can't have a society where people choose all the rules they'll follow and you just ensure that nobody is acting aggressive. It's nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
Cemetry Gator posted:My key problem with the libertarian philosophy is that it ignores that rights are there to govern how we interact with each other, while attempting to discuss rights on an individual nature. The idea of society requires that an individual be required to sacrifice some freedom for the overall structure of society. You can't have a society where people choose all the rules they'll follow and you just ensure that nobody is acting aggressive. Mine has always been the reactive nature of a Libertarian society. I mean there are a nearly infinite number of problems with Libertarian societies in general, but the one that gets me every time without fail is this idea that "Well if someone sells you bad food we can just boycott them." because even if we agree that this would work, and I don't loving agree in the slightest that it actually would work, I'm still dead. Or my wife is still dead, or our kids are still dead. Without a doubt my favorite example of this is lawn darts. You've all seen them, that fun children's game where you through sharp tipped metal spikes and try and get them in a ring on the opposite end of your lawn. What the gently caress could ever go wrong with that. Well what actually went wrong was the deaths of roughly twelve children over eight years and hundreds of injuries until someone went to the federal government and eventually got a law passed that banned the sale of lawn darts. The company didn't stop selling them, people didn't boycott the companies involved, the government simply went "You know, we agree, marketing throwing knives as a children's toy is a loving retarded idea." and said you couldn't do it anymore. Done. Problem solved.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Karia posted:See, I'm all for capitalism as our primary market system, provided: The only problem is that capitalism is inherently inimical to all four of these qualifiers. Capitalists will always accrue disproportionate power, by the nature of the system, and then use that to slowly chip away at the limits on their position (by the nature of humanity).
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
Caros posted:Mine has always been the reactive nature of a Libertarian society. I mean there are a nearly infinite number of problems with Libertarian societies in general, but the one that gets me every time without fail is this idea that "Well if someone sells you bad food we can just boycott them." because even if we agree that this would work, and I don't loving agree in the slightest that it actually would work, I'm still dead. Or my wife is still dead, or our kids are still dead. I remember playing these with the whole family. I think you should really come up with a better example than the banning of an obviously hazardous sharp object in a world that still has tons of sharp objects. A key component making many regulations good is information asymytry. Not really a problem here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
Sharp things exist in the world like kitchen knives and shaving razors and you can't ban all sharp things, therefore you should just give your kids throwing knives and send them out into the yard to play, good plan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:I remember playing these with the whole family. I think you should really come up with a better example than the banning of an obviously hazardous sharp object in a world that still has tons of sharp objects. Ehhhh, it's sort of an example of information asymmetry. Parents weren't buying "Box of metal javelins for your kids to throw at each other, The Game", they were buying "Lawn Darts" with fun packaging and happy smiling children on the box. That being said, it's an example where it's very easy to overcome that asymmetry by just opening the package and seeing for yourself. But no one expected a product marketed at children to just be a box of sharp metal javelins, just like nobody expected that a bottle of "medicine" could just be grain alcohol
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:I remember playing these with the whole family. I think you should really come up with a better example than the banning of an obviously hazardous sharp object in a world that still has tons of sharp objects. It's a good example, because they were obviously hazardous and a terrible idea, but people bought them anyway and kids got hurt. If consumers don't even catch stuff like that when there isn't information asymmetry, why would we assume they'll do any better when there is? The market would be flooded with opiate "cancer cures" and ponzi scheme retirement accounts and discount meat wholesalers faster than you can blink. poo poo, the ponzi scheme thing reminds me. How does the Invisible Hand of
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:By the simple conceit of believing that the market is a tool, not a god, I've already disqualified myself from libertarianism. What I believe beyond that, however, is wholly immaterial to jrodefeld's arguments, as I've said before. A convincing critique of Marxism is all well and good if you can make one, but that doesn't make anarcho-capitalism any more appealing. There are far more political orders based around the state than just socialism. Nope. Wrongo. The existence of a state is socialist tyranny, that's all there is to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
Seriously, any halfway honest documentary on colonialism should be enough to give you serious doubts about capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Seriously, any halfway honest documentary on colonialism should be enough to give you serious doubts about capitalism. Or a documentary about the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
Lawn darts are sweet as gently caress, as the Romans knew. But the Romans were also statists and I'll bet they wouldn't let just anybody walk around with a brace of plumbata hanging off their belt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Ehhhh, it's sort of an example of information asymmetry. Parents weren't buying "Box of metal javelins for your kids to throw at each other, The Game", they were buying "Lawn Darts" with fun packaging and happy smiling children on the box. The original box had an accurate depiction of the device and the tag line "missle game". It's an inexplicably poor choice to base an argument on behalf of states and regulation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:The original box had an accurate depiction of the device and the tag line "missle game". What, it took 12 deaths for people to have to be told not to buy them. It's like the quintessential example of why consumer products need to be regulated because people will not rationally assess every good they purchase.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
asdf32 posted:The original box had an accurate depiction of the device and the tag line "missle game". Did the original box have a "hundreds injured, dozen killed" label, or is it possible the people buying it didn't know something the company that marketed it to them did?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 04:00
|
|