|
|
Post by Mikhael Nadyezhda (Mischa) on Nov 9, 2004 22:15:31 GMT -5
Oh and, that is how capitalism works. It's an international system, so you can look at it from any point and get the same conclusions.
Look at Europe or Scandanavia for example. They have great social services to offer their people, which they achieved out of struggle, and not because some politicans are nicer there (another aside that I could write pages on, but don't want to get into), capitalism is in such a hugely competitive arena right now, that all of their benefits are being slashed and burned. France's 30 hours work for 40 hours pay can't compete with America, so their benefits are currently being slashed.
Capitalism has periods of ups and downs, and when it's at an up, it's usually after a period of war, where they can profit from the reconstruction.
(*cough* Iraq *cough*)
And when capitalism is in an upsurge, it can grant these concessions, like universal health care, but when it's at a low, like it is right now, they get slashed, and workers get the shaft.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen on Nov 9, 2004 22:25:47 GMT -5
lol, i like your first little description of capitalism there mike ^_^...; its very true, but the value of paper money is dropping so much that a dollar could be worth less then fifty cents in the near future... which i dont see how it already isnt since the US is in debt by so much money.... look at how cuba wont except the dollar anymore and are using their own money,
|
|
|
|
Post by Mikhael Nadyezhda (Mischa) on Nov 9, 2004 22:27:43 GMT -5
Why thank you John :oP
|
|
|
|
Post by Void on Nov 9, 2004 22:29:40 GMT -5
Please don't. I'm being respectful of your political stance and not making such a generalization (even though I could quite easily do so using Russia or China as an example), and I ask that you extend my particular political beliefs the same courtesy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mikhael Nadyezhda (Mischa) on Nov 9, 2004 22:44:56 GMT -5
But alas, it's not a generalization if that is how it works! You can make generalizations about capitalism because it's been implemented for a couple hundred years, but you can't really make a good generalization about socialism since it really hasn't been done. I can tell you a thousand ways about how the Russian revolution was betrayed, and how China sold out their workers, but all in all, it won't really get us any closer to understanding socialism, since both countries inevitably went back to capitalism anyways.
It just makes sense that the very nature of capitalism is to spread, just look at it on a small level. One person owns a local business, and soon it gets so popular that he/she ends up starting up another, and another, and another. But once it gets big enough, corporations like wal mart aren't going to let him/her get any bigger. If he/she does, they'll send in their super center, and undersell all of his/her products, making him go out of business. Hell, this has happened on a local level, in towns all across America. I don't really know how you can deny that this is going on on the grounds of "this is just a broad generalization."
|
|
|
|
Post by Void on Nov 9, 2004 22:51:01 GMT -5
All government is highly corruptible, the America of yesteryear was much different from how it is today. It doesn't HAVE to be that way, just like Socialism doesn't HAVE to be oppressive. Just because a form of government hasn't been carried out the "right" way doesn't mean that that is the only way it CAN be carried out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen on Nov 9, 2004 23:04:08 GMT -5
how do we know that this isnt how it was intended if it as never been done the 'right' way?... look how many countries are subject to capitalism, and yet, to some people. none of them are doing it the right way.... what does that tell you?,
|
|
|
|
Post by Void on Nov 9, 2004 23:06:31 GMT -5
That they're all modeled after America.
There has yet to be a form of government that DOES work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Keitoleinen on Nov 9, 2004 23:13:09 GMT -5
Some work better than others, and I believe socialism would work better than capitalism for the reasons argued already.
Not all governments are equaly as bad. And some factors that lead to these "bad governments" would be eliminated with the elimination of capitalism. For instance, wealth would no longer be a deciding factor in who has the means to even run in an election.
Though ideally there should be no government at all.
That is why the end goal of socialism is anarchy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen on Nov 9, 2004 23:15:51 GMT -5
eh, turn anarchic to begin with ^_^, destroy the government and everything attached to it. then lets see what happened.... most likely, that will let the human race live for an extra few hundred years, since we will probably destroy our own race
|
|
|
|
Post by Zinn on Nov 11, 2004 14:34:19 GMT -5
I used to be an anarchist, specifically an anarcho-syndicalist, except I discovered that I have no faith in human nature. After being surrounded by people who's idea of political knowlege is calling Kerry gay or Bush stupid, telling me to use smaller words, talking about how drunk they are/were/will be, talking about how I am a "kike commie pinko f*g," beating each other, killing each other, stealing from each other, raping each other, etc, I have come to the conclusion that the majority of humans are contemptable. If this is authentic human nature, or manufactured human nature, I have no idea. All I know is that it grips about 85% of the total amount of people I have ever met. Also, it doesn't really matter whether it is authentic or manufactured, because it is there. Socialism, anarchism, and any other system that revolves around people working together will fail, because greed, lazyness, and apathy are so deeply ingrained in the psyches of humans. It is my understanding, please correct me if I am wrong, that socialism starts out with strict reinforcement, and works its way to anarchism. In my opinion, it has never gotten past stage one because the traits that we find so repulsive are ingrained into even the most altruistic of people. Just give someone an inch of power, and all of those traits are suddenly brought out, or remove the threat of punishment, as in some of the less socialistic forms of anarchism and they also surface.
That is why I believe that we should try to reform our own system, rather than bring in a new one. A new system won't be any better or worse. Every system, including no system, is flawed. Perhaps through the reform of the way children are raised, we can improve human nature to allow for a utopian society. The only problems with that are that the rather nasty conception of human nature that I have could be authentic, or flawed people will pass on their flaws to their offspring, even unintentionally.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zinn on Nov 11, 2004 14:46:22 GMT -5
Sorry to double post, but I thought I should elaborate on my view of human nature. Once again, I don't know whether it has been conditioned into us by capitalist society, as Bassarov says, or wether it is perfectly natural. These are generalizations based upon my own observations.
1. People are greedy.
People will do what they want to make their own lives better, whether through material or spiritual means.
2. People are stupid.
People are generally too short sighted to see the benefit of helping their fellow person. That is one of the reasons religion exists. If religion exists, than helping your fellow person spares you from whatever the supernatural consequences are. People need instant gratification, and easily observed benefits to help others.
3. People are horny.
Only applies to people that have their organs intact. You know which ones. This doesn't really tie into stopping a utopia from occuring, but certain corrupted current systems... I'll let you guess which ones, exploit this to further their goals. I mean, seriously, do you think shampoo ordinarily gives orgasms? Or do you really think that having a gun will make you more manly? Most people will answer no, but on a subliminal level, they believe it. That's why these things are effective advertising, and they are widespread. Of they weren't effective, they wouldn't be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen on Nov 11, 2004 14:49:07 GMT -5
how is having no system flawed?.... over a course of years we will go back to the way we should, if anyone tries to make a system, kill them off..., humans should just go by instinct like the animal's we are and stop trying to act better then we
are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zinn on Nov 11, 2004 15:04:20 GMT -5
Have you ever heard the phrase "give people an inch, and they will walk all over you"?
Well, its true. Without any government, at worst people would run around stealing, burning, pillaging, raping, etc. At best, there would be no more organized food and water procurement, and people would starve to death. We are animals. However, as animals, we will rip each other to shreds when the going gets tough. That isn't a good thing. I think humans are defined by how we try to act better than we are. In fact, it is in that trait that I put the most hope. We should all try to reject our base natures.
Besides, unless you are exceptionally strong, do you really think you would survive survival of the fittest? I know I sure as hell wouldn't.
Pure anarchism puts the schoolyard bullies in charge. The ones that can beat others into the ground. Its like capitalism, but on a smaller, disorganized scale.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mikhael Nadyezhda (Mischa) on Nov 11, 2004 16:35:30 GMT -5
I agree with you to an extent that these certain traits within humans are ingrained, but I have some big issues with your points when you say "it doesn't matter whether they come from society or not, because they're there." Holy cow Zinn, I have no idea how you can believe this. That makes a HUGE difference, imagine the implications of "you're born a sexist", versus "society makes you sexist." If for no other reason, it gives you the hope that they can overcome said sexism. And that was just one example by the way, but you know what I'm getting at here.
There are two ways you can address this point.
1. Let's assume people are greedy. What's more greedy than wanting to work 20 hours a week for 40 hours pay? What's more greedy than wanting free health care, free schooling, free access to every kind of medical facility? What's more greedy than taking back what's yours to begin with??
2. If you only look skin deep, then yes, people do appear very greedy. But what do people most often vote, or look for in a leader? Putting food on the table, and protecting their families. People aren't racist because they want to be on top, they're racist because they want to protect their families from those big scary black men across the street listening to that "tupak shaker" (by the way, this was meant as an insult towards "white America", and not an insult towards blacks). I hate to say it, but voting for George Bush proves this point. People actually believe that he is protecting us from scary arab evildoers who want to hide nuclear weapons under our sinks. Which brings me to your next point-
Okay, I have to give you that one. It has been an obstacle to organizing since the beginning of time (yes, there has been opposition to authority since the beginning of time [Lillith for example]). So what do you do to overcome said obstacle? Teach-ins, forums, study groups, rallies, picket lines, etc. The corporate newspapers are so overflowing at the seams with lies, so you create your own newspaper, and other media outlets, 'zines, webpages, leafletting, etc. Just because the movement is painfully low as of late, doesn't mean that things will always be the way they are. It's our job to educate the masses, and it's their job to participate. If they aren't participating, then either 1. we're not doing our jobs, or 2. they're content with the way things are. But the priveledged middle class is slowly widdling away, the slums behind the wal marts are getting so huge that even their super centers can't hide them anymore, their bloody family members are losing their jobs, and the little they are holding on to are being slashed as well. Union enrollment is at an all time low for the entire nation, benefits are being slashed left right and center, capitalism is in such a crisis right now, that it cannot go on like this. People are going to start questioning why they can't put food on the table. And we have to get to them before Rush Limbaugh can.
This goes back to the question of "does life imitate advertising, or does advertising imitate life?" Well, I would argue the former. Media has been so ingrained into our existance, that it's turned into a background static noise. So, what do you do to break through all the ambient background mantra of "buy more stuff"? More and more explicit sexual innuendo. Even if you don't like it, it sticks in your mind, and we are being reached at a subconscious level. There is a reason why over 90% of sexual assaults are against women, and it's not because "boys will be boys". And it doesn't have to be that way! Which goes back to my previous point of geurilla media. If you get enough people in the streets, they could move mountains.
Literally, and figuratively.
|
|
