|
Ernie Muppari posted:This is not the case. Please, elaborate. To be honest I think I'd personally welcome the advent of one such society perhaps my quality of life would improve. I'm not terribly sure though either which way.
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
tbp posted:Regardless of my personal opinions on the matter my initial point was that you will not see a socialist society during any of our lifetimes, and I'd suspect for some vastly significant amount of time afterward. This is wrong. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_society_(Labour_Party)
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:45
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:This is wrong. Heh
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
Tias posted:Also, there is not necessarily basis for claiming that anarchism is coercive when "encountering" people who do not share their views on collectivism. Sure, they would not cooperate with non-collectivists, but after that the only coercion would happen when the individualists attempted to convince them by force, and they retaliate.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
tbp posted:Please, elaborate. Ha
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
MadMattH posted:That's a pretty big means of coercion though. Non-cooperation is a type of force.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
I understand if you are uninterested in discussing the idea. It seems to be a lot of rhetoric and memes rather than discussion around here. Both libertarianism and socialism in their "pure" forms are untenable and unlikely to ever occur.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
tbp posted:I understand if you are uninterested in discussing the idea. It seems to be a lot of rhetoric and memes rather than discussion around here. Are you advocating for some kind of "Third Position" by any chance?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Are you advocating for some kind of "Third Position" by any chance? Critiquing one thing is not advocating for another.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
tbp posted:It seems to be a lot of rhetoric and memes rather than discussion around here.  tbp posted:Heh tbp posted:This is not the case. tbp posted:tbp posted:Both are ridiculous and not suited to the real world. tbp posted:I don't see a lot of contradiction there to be honest. tbp posted:Yes tbp posted:No
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Brevity doesn't indicate rhetoric, and from past experience saying any more than the necessary opens up very long and pedantic avenues.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Oh no not DOMA, Controlled Substances Act, UIGEA, Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. All tyrannical laws, no?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
tbp posted:Brevity doesn't indicate rhetoric, and from past experience saying any more than the necessary opens up very long and pedantic avenues. Couldn't you solve this by simply making your own position clear? You can't argue from a phantom non-position without sounding like an absolute tool.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Augustin Iturbide posted:Couldn't you solve this by simply making your own position clear? You can't argue from a phantom non-position without sounding like an absolute tool. I think it's a folly to rush into a position, and while I admire socially focused policies I am extraordinarily wary of the socialism commonly endorsed in this subforum. I am unsure what the correct answer would be.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
Well. This thread went places fast. We have every other D&D thread to talk about Socialism. ITT let's talk about libertarianism.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Well. This thread went places fast. It seems a bit masturbatory to continuously pose ridiculous theoretical libertarian societies and then have everyone claim how bad they'd be.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
tbp posted:Brevity doesn't indicate rhetoric, and from past experience saying any more than the necessary opens up very long and pedantic avenues. Brevity's great. But what you're doing isn't brevity, it's just fragments of an incoherent whole. The reason you get ripped apart when you elaborate is because you put incoherent ideas right next to each other in the same post instead of spreading them out.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:DOMA, Controlled Substances Act, UIGEA, Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. All tyrannical laws, no? Never meant to imply otherwise.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Brevity's great. But what you're doing isn't brevity, it's just fragments of an incoherent whole. The reason you get ripped apart when you elaborate is because you put incoherent ideas right next to each other in the same post instead of spreading them out. I'd hardly call any response I've ever received "ripped apart", and I think it speaks volumes that you would consider a discussion an arena wherein people need to be "ripped apart".
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
tbp posted:It seems a bit masturbatory to continuously pose ridiculous theoretical libertarian societies and then have everyone claim how bad they'd be. It would at least be variety.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
tbp posted:I think it's a folly to rush into a position, and while I admire socially focused policies I am extraordinarily wary of the socialism commonly endorsed in this subforum. I am unsure what the correct answer would be. It would probably help if you clarified what consider "socialism" to be, because it seems like you're using a different definition from the rest of the thread. Like, when you say tbp posted:Both libertarianism and socialism in their "pure" forms are untenable and unlikely to ever occur. what would you consider to be a "pure" form of socialism?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Well. This thread went places fast. You could go away or contribute more than your own personal circlejerk. I mean I don't think you will but theoretically you could. tbp posted:I'd hardly call any response I've ever received "ripped apart", and I think it speaks volumes that you would consider a discussion an arena wherein people need to be "ripped apart". Personally I don't agree, to be ripped apart you must have a position that is rooted enough to tear.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:You could go away or contribute more than your own personal circlejerk. Have you been contributing to the thread? I don't recall you posting anything other than this. edit: I stand corrected you had a couple of drive byes.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Have you been contributing to the thread? I don't recall you posting anything other than this. Yes, but even if I didn't it would matter, as I am not the one man circlejerk here.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
"Socialism doesn't work" is pretty much a Goldwater libertarian canard so this thread seems like a good place to challenge it.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
tbp posted:I'd hardly call any response I've ever received "ripped apart", and I think it speaks volumes that you would consider a discussion an arena wherein people need to be "ripped apart". Why wouldn't you want to be "ripped apart"? You should be coming here to have your ideas harshly challenged, not coddled like it was babby's first discussion.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
Well I guess this could be easily resolved by tbp stating what he thinks socialism is, as he has apparently rejected everyone's attempts at an explanation. So what is socialism, tbp?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:Well I guess this could be easily resolved by tbp stating what he thinks socialism is, as he has apparently rejected everyone's attempts at an explanation. So what is socialism, tbp? "Some quote from Alexis de Tocqueville that I don't understand."
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
Well we at least made it to page 2 before the one-line poo poo posting and personal attacks started in earnest. I consider that social progress.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Yes, but even if I didn't it would matter, as I am not the one man circlejerk here. B-b-but the hiiiive miiiind  .
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Why wouldn't you want to be "ripped apart"? You should be coming here to have your ideas harshly challenged, not coddled like it was babby's first discussion. Fair enough, I'd be glad to if there were discussion rather than goofball responses and cheerleading. But what is, I suppose a bit frustrating is that there is, at times, wholesale invention of events. For example, in the US Politics thread, I believe the only positions I've stated outright I support are ending the war on drugs, a GMI, and support for gay marriage. I don't think any of those have been debated, never mind "ripped to shreds", but if they have and I have not read the posts I figure I'll be unconvinced afterward because my support for those three mentioned is very strong.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
tbp posted:Fair enough, I'd be glad to if there were discussion rather than goofball responses and cheerleading. But what is, I suppose a bit frustrating is that there is, at times, wholesale invention of events. For example, in the US Politics thread, I believe the only positions I've stated outright I support are ending the war on drugs, a GMI, and support for gay marriage. I don't think any of those have been debated, never mind "ripped to shreds", but if they have and I have not read the posts I figure I'll be unconvinced afterward because my support for those three mentioned is very strong. Then shut the gently caress up and  . If you're not here to state your position and have it evaluated then you're worthless. No one gives a poo poo for you to come in and say "hey guys, I like thing and don't care what anyone else thinks about it."
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Use your words. Quoting somebody else without comment reinforces my impression that you don't have any fully formed ideas of your own. 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Then shut the gently caress up and I'll state my opinion on anything I don't mind.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
tbp posted:I'll state my opinion on anything I don't mind. Yeah that is fine, care to give your opinion on what socialism is?
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
LogisticEarth posted:Well we at least made it to page 2 before the one-line poo poo posting and personal attacks started in earnest. I consider that social progress. Well we where doomed to that since libertarians aren't really a thing here. We are stuck with lovely Devil's advocates.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
tbp posted:I am extraordinarily wary of the socialism commonly endorsed in this subforum. I am unsure what the correct answer would be. How can you be unsure of what the "correct" answer is in a situation where there is no correct answer? You already confused socialism with communism earlier (even despite claiming you knew what they were) so perhaps the issue here is that you're just regular old "unsure". The type of socialism bandied about in D&D is usually democratic socialism, which is a fairly conservative form of socialism and isn't outside the realm of reality; a lot of the OECD member countries have in fact successfully implemented socialist policy, proving that not only does it look good on paper, it looks good in practice too. You're also doing an incredibly good job of avoiding debate and discussion in the debate and discussion forum.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Chalets the Baka posted:How can you be unsure of what the "correct" answer is in a situation where there is no correct answer? You already confused socialism with communism earlier (even despite claiming you knew what they were) so perhaps the issue here is that you're just regular old "unsure". The type of socialism bandied about in D&D is usually democratic socialism, which is a fairly conservative form of socialism and isn't outside the realm of reality; a lot of the OECD member countries have in fact successfully implemented socialist policy, proving that not only does it look good on paper, it looks good in practice too. I didn't confuse it at all.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
tbp posted:I didn't confuse it at all. You know just saying that doesn't make it true.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
tbp posted:I didn't confuse it at all. tbp have you really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? This is a serious question.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 22:02
|
|