racer254 Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 5 minutes ago, motonoggin said: Here's a meme, too, that I am posting unironically that says it better than I can. Sorry, but SMH. Name one thing that is voluntary that actually helps society? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtralettucetomatoe580 Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 10 minutes ago, motonoggin said: I wouldn't sell any of it, I would give it freely to any who asked as long as I had it to spare. And I don't agree that I have exceeded anything. Our goal isn't JUST survival day to day, but survival of our ideas and ultimately self actualization. I believe that will be easier for humanity to reach in the absence of capitalism, but I don't think we should cease to strive for self actualization before capitalism dies. Clearly capitalism works well for SOME, but not all. Therein lies the problem. It is not capable of meeting humanity's needs and relies on exploitation of labor. Can the argument be made that communism works for some but not all? What is more taxing on an individual, the taking of their wealth or the taking of their free will that desires that wealth? What is too much excess then? I don't understand your idea of ideological survival through comforts. Would not an ideal method of insuring survival of ideals be strict adherence to meeting needs and not letting excess corrupt the strength of belief in a system that limits those same comforts through prosperity of oneself? How is diminished incentive not bring about an entire new level of labor exploitation? When does the diminished production due to a lack of hierarchy not in the end hurt the community? Unless you believe human nature will in the end choose to produce more for less? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted November 29, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted November 29, 2016 9 minutes ago, motonoggin said: Any unjustified and illegitimate hierarchy. An example of a justified hierarchy would be a command structure under a revolutionary war. A peacetime example would be a surgeon giving orders in an operating room. You are clearly committed to misunderstanding literally everything. Maybe shut up for a second. Seek help dude. Care to inform us of where anytime in the history of man your system of govt worked? You essentially are talking about the Lenin Communism system which quite frankly sucked for almost everyone in Russia. 6 minutes ago, motonoggin said: Highmark: "Ha ha, moto opposes hierarchies but still stops at stop signs! What a phony anarchist!" Whoosh. I don't oppose hierarchies put in place by a democratic republic and never made such a claim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 8 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said: Can the argument be made that communism works for some but not all? What is more taxing on an individual, the taking of their wealth or the taking of their free will that desires that wealth? What is too much excess then? I don't understand your idea of ideological survival through comforts. Would not an ideal method of insuring survival of ideals be strict adherence to meeting needs and not letting excess corrupt the strength of belief in a system that limits those same comforts through prosperity of oneself? How is diminished incentive not bring about an entire new level of labor exploitation? When does the diminished production due to a lack of hierarchy not in the end hurt the community? Unless you believe human nature will in the end choose to produce more for less? If it doesn't work for all, then it isn't communism. The desire for wealth will die when we all have access to everything humanity produces. And humanity will produce precisely enough to fulfill its desires and goals. This is where star trek is a great example of what things could be like. They no longer work for survival or accumulation of wealth. They work to better humanity and themselves. There are hierarchies, but they seem to be as minimal as possible and superior officers in star fleet and lowly crewmen are seen as equals outside the limited command structure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 8 minutes ago, Highmark said: Seek help dude. Care to inform us of where anytime in the history of man your system of govt worked? You essentially are talking about the Lenin Communism system which quite frankly sucked for almost everyone in Russia. Whoosh. I don't oppose hierarchies put in place by a democratic republic and never made such a claim. No, I am not advocating for authoritarian communism, which is what happened under Lenin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtralettucetomatoe580 Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 25 minutes ago, motonoggin said: If it doesn't work for all, then it isn't communism. The desire for wealth will die when we all have access to everything humanity produces. And humanity will produce precisely enough to fulfill its desires and goals. This is where star trek is a great example of what things could be like. They no longer work for survival or accumulation of wealth. They work to better humanity and themselves. There are hierarchies, but they seem to be as minimal as possible and superior officers in star fleet and lowly crewmen are seen as equals outside the limited command structure. So when we have the resources and production capabilities to produce all that we want is the caveat. How can you say we are there now? If we were to implement this system, I would want a yacht. Can we facilitate that for all men? In this system, since that is not the case, who gets to tell me what I can and can't have? How is that not fascism? Which brings us back to the question, what is excessive? Is my desire for a yacht so? Who get's to determine this? Who restricts it? That restriction cannot be classified as anything other than fascism. I have no issues with a world where leaders are not necessary, I just don't see that world ever being a reality. Explain your ideas on there being no ethical consumption under capitalism. I don't quite understand your meaning of that. Mainly the who or what determines what my perception of ethical should or has to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted November 29, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted November 29, 2016 25 minutes ago, motonoggin said: No, I am not advocating for authoritarian communism, which is what happened under Lenin. How else can your version of collectivism be practiced? Please enlighten us. You are basically a Marxist. Marx·ism ˈmärkˌsizəm/ noun the political and economic theories of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, later developed by their followers to form the basis for the theory and practice of communism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 Why do the leaders of communism and socialism always end up filthy rich? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted November 29, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted November 29, 2016 7 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said: So when we have the resources and production capabilities to produce all that we want is the caveat. How can you say we are there now? If we were to implement this system, I would want a yacht. Can we facilitate that for all men? In this system, since that is not the case, who gets to tell me what I can and can't have? How is that not fascism? Which brings us back to the question, what is excessive? Is my desire for a yacht so? Who get's to determine this? Who restricts it? That restriction cannot be classified as anything other than fascism. I have no issues with a world where leaders are not necessary, I just don't see that world ever being a reality. Explain your ideas on there being no ethical consumption under capitalism. I don't quite understand your meaning of that. Mainly the who or what determines what my perception of ethical should or has to be. To quote Milton Friedman "Just where in the world are you going to find these angels to organize society for us?" Moto is lost in the fact that if it was't for personal success many or most of today's innovations would not have been accomplished. He doesn't get the idea behind if I work my ass off I deserve a bit more than someone who doesn't. No that doesn't mean everyone should not get some basic necessities of life but history teaches us if we continue just to give for not doing anything we will fail. Human nature is a shitty thing in a lot of ways and laziness is sadly part of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted November 29, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted November 29, 2016 1 minute ago, Snake said: Why do the leaders of communism and socialism always end up filthy rich? Socialism is for the socialist not the proletariat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, Highmark said: To quote Milton Friedman "Just where in the world are you going to find these angels to organize society for us?" Moto is lost in the fact that if it was't for personal success many or most of today's innovations would not have been accomplished. He doesn't get the idea behind if I work my ass off I deserve a bit more than someone who doesn't. No that doesn't mean everyone should not get some basic necessities of life but history teaches us if we continue just to give for not doing anything we will fail. Human nature is a shitty thing in a lot of ways and laziness is sadly part of it. Simple questions, What is the American dream? What country are we in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 Just now, Highmark said: To quote Milton Friedman "Just where in the world are you going to find these angels to organize society for us?" Moto is lost in the fact that if it was't for personal success many or most of today's innovations would not have been accomplished. He doesn't get the idea behind if I work my ass off I deserve a bit more than someone who doesn't. No that doesn't mean everyone should not get some basic necessities of life but history teaches us if we continue just to give for not doing anything we will fail. Human nature is a shitty thing in a lot of ways and laziness is sadly part of it. Want to know why stable families stay together? Because there is a leader... one who sets the rules and the punishments. One who has the say, and the wherewithal to enforce it. All this bullshit about no hierarchy is another way of saying I'm sick of being the child in the family. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 7 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said: So when we have the resources and production capabilities to produce all that we want is the caveat. How can you say we are there now? If we were to implement this system, I would want a yacht. Can we facilitate that for all men? In this system, since that is not the case, who gets to tell me what I can and can't have? How is that not fascism? Which brings us back to the question, what is excessive? Is my desire for a yacht so? Who get's to determine this? Who restricts it? That restriction cannot be classified as anything other than fascism. I have no issues with a world where leaders are not necessary, I just don't see that world ever being a reality. Explain your ideas on there being no ethical consumption under capitalism. I don't quite understand your meaning of that. Mainly the who or what determines what my perception of ethical should or has to be. You may not specifically own a yacht, but one would be available to you to use and share with others who desire the same thing. The notion of excessiveness is a social construct. If humanity desires it for itself, it is neither excessive nor indulgent. We are merely realizing our potential. As far as ethical consumption under capitalism... Virtually everything produced under capitalism is a product of exploited labor, therefore, if you want to ethically consume, say, bread, you cannot do so without benefit from the exploitation of labor somewhere along the line. Labor is exploited when the full value produced by said labor is not returned to the laborer who produced it, but instead retained by someone else who holds authority over that labor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 (edited) 2 minutes ago, motonoggin said: You may not specifically own a yacht, but one would be available to you to use and share with others who desire the same thing. The notion of excessiveness is a social construct. If humanity desires it for itself, it is neither excessive nor indulgent. We are merely realizing our potential. As far as ethical consumption under capitalism... Virtually everything produced under capitalism is a product of exploited labor, therefore, if you want to ethically consume, say, bread, you cannot do so without benefit from the exploitation of labor somewhere along the line. Labor is exploited when the full value produced by said labor is not returned to the laborer who produced it, but instead retained by someone else who holds authority over that labor. your ideals infringe on my freedom of religion. As a anarchist you are not to infringe on my freedoms Edited November 29, 2016 by Legend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 10 minutes ago, Highmark said: How else can your version of collectivism be practiced? Please enlighten us. You are basically a Marxist. Marx·ism ˈmärkˌsizəm/ noun the political and economic theories of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, later developed by their followers to form the basis for the theory and practice of communism. Marx believed in stateless communism. Where revolutionaries went wrong was with the reliance on a vanguard to protect the revolution. Authoritarianism always fails. 6 minutes ago, Snake said: Why do the leaders of communism and socialism always end up filthy rich? Authoritarian communism isn't real communism. There is no difference between state control of the means of production and private control of the means of production. 1 minute ago, Snake said: Want to know why stable families stay together? Because there is a leader... one who sets the rules and the punishments. One who has the say, and the wherewithal to enforce it. All this bullshit about no hierarchy is another way of saying I'm sick of being the child in the family. You seem to think anarchy means no hierarchies and no law. What you fail to understand is that there are such things as justified/legitimate hierarchies. I have mentioned a couple of examples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 3 minutes ago, Legend said: your ideals infringe on my freedom of religion. As a anarchist you are not to infringe on my freedoms How? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, motonoggin said: How? read the bible. You said we can look it up about communism, you can look up about Christianity.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, Legend said: read the bible. You said we can look it up about communism, you can look up about Christianity.... I have read the Bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted November 29, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted November 29, 2016 Just now, Legend said: Simple questions, What is the American dream? What country are we in? The American dream is what each of us makes it out to be. For some its simply to get by. Have a roof over their head, warm bed and food on the table. To others its to have finer things like snowmobiles and what not. By definition I would say every US citizen should have an opportunity to achieve success and prosperity through hard work, determination, and initiative. Success and prosperity is what each of us define on our own. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry ginger Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 communism isn't going to override humans lifelong pursuit to have more or be better than other people so it's not possible for it's utopian views to ever take fruit as has been proven. thats been the situation no matter the times going back as far as recorded history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry ginger Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 4 minutes ago, Highmark said: The American dream is what each of us makes it out to be. For some its simply to get by. Have a roof over their head, warm bed and food on the table. To others its to have finer things like snowmobiles and what not. By definition I would say every US citizen should have an opportunity to achieve success and prosperity through hard work, determination, and initiative. Success and prosperity is what each of us define on our own. and they do, some may have to work harder than others but end of the day the opportunity is what you make of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtralettucetomatoe580 Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 10 minutes ago, motonoggin said: You may not specifically own a yacht, but one would be available to you to use and share with others who desire the same thing. The notion of excessiveness is a social construct. If humanity desires it for itself, it is neither excessive nor indulgent. We are merely realizing our potential. As far as ethical consumption under capitalism... Virtually everything produced under capitalism is a product of exploited labor, therefore, if you want to ethically consume, say, bread, you cannot do so without benefit from the exploitation of labor somewhere along the line. Labor is exploited when the full value produced by said labor is not returned to the laborer who produced it, but instead retained by someone else who holds authority over that labor. Who controls the usage of these products? What happens when demand is higher than supply? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted November 29, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted November 29, 2016 19 minutes ago, motonoggin said: You may not specifically own a yacht, but one would be available to you to use and share with others who desire the same thing. The notion of excessiveness is a social construct. If humanity desires it for itself, it is neither excessive nor indulgent. We are merely realizing our potential. As far as ethical consumption under capitalism... Virtually everything produced under capitalism is a product of exploited labor, therefore, if you want to ethically consume, say, bread, you cannot do so without benefit from the exploitation of labor somewhere along the line. Labor is exploited when the full value produced by said labor is not returned to the laborer who produced it, but instead retained by someone else who holds authority over that labor. So everything your pot business produces is under exploited labor? I can assume you have profited from it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, Angry ginger said: communism isn't going to override humans lifelong pursuit to have more or be better than other people so it's not possible for it's utopian views to ever take fruit as has been proven. thats been the situation no matter the times going back as far as recorded history. You're right, humans will have to shed their vanity. I think we are capable of doing that, eventually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry ginger Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 Just now, motonoggin said: You're right, humans will have to shed their vanity. I think we are capable of doing that, eventually. sure we are, SMH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.