My biggest problem with capitalism is probably not what you think

Or, maybe it is exactly what you think. But if you clicked on this expecting me to talk about how capitalism leaves the poor hanging out to dry, or how it leaves unwitting consumers victimized by shoddy, unsafe products, or how it leaves workers exploited and exhausted, I'm probably about to surprise you.

My biggest problem with capitalism is that in capitalism, nothing is worthwhile if you can't make a profit off of it. Same goes for people. We're only worth what we can earn.

Let's say when you were a girl, your fondest dream was to grow up and be a ballerina. But when you were a child, "fond dream" hardly does justice to it -- because the very idea of being a ballerina intoxicated you like nothing else. You would get so caught up imagining yourself in that life that hours could pass by and you'd barely notice.

Well, sorry, but ballet is dying because too many people aren't interested in it and guess what - ballet isn't worth doing if it can't make money. That's the rule under capitalism.

It doesn't even matter if you dance for a government-funded company. Someone, somewhere, is going to resent the fact that you're "stealing" the money they worked so hard to earn just to do a boring dance that hardly anybody watches any more. And they'll vote to strip your funding.

So what would we do with a girl like that now? We'd do the sensible thing and nudge her into an interest that's more practical, that she could make money doing. Maybe she becomes an investment banker, maybe she ends up a stripper, but whatever pays the bills is not what she dreamed of doing when she didn't know that she had to sell something of herself in order to have a home and to eat.

So back around 1500 or so, there was a guy who spent three years working on a single painting. When he died, it was still in his possession. He wrote once that it (like the rest of his paintings) still wasn't finished, years after he'd put it aside.

It looked exactly like this:



Try to imagine a world without the Mona Lisa. But I think had de Vinci grown up in today's world, he'd probably be painting stuff that looked more like this:



Why? Because that shit sells, man! And you have to make money to have a home and to eat.

Okay, shifting focus. Here's something that you could go see (if you had the money to travel and the time off from work):



The Great Pyramid of Giza. There will never be anything else quite like it. It was built around 4,500 years ago, by people who were not slaves, actually, and there it stands in Egypt to this day.

Why would anybody build something like the Great Pyramid today? It doesn't do anything. It doesn't generate money, except for some tourism to come see it (and it certainly didn't attract tourists 4,500 years ago). It was huge and time-consuming and expensive to build, and it turned no profit. Modern-day capitalist thinking sees the Great Pyramid as a waste of resources, a pointless investment. A money pit.

We've allowed ourselves to be changed into people who don't undertake anything difficult and timeless unless it's for money. We don't dream big, huge, gigantic, except when it comes to our bank accounts.

With that mentality, we as the human race will never build another Great Pyramid or paint another Mona Lisa. It simply wouldn't be practical.

It's something that kills your soul, having to put a price tag on every single thing you do with your talent.

Especially when you only wanted to dance beautifully.

Hear, fucking, hear!

I mean, it isn't the worst thing wrong with capitalism imo (the commodification of health and education win that prize); but it's up there!

It is a sad fact that doing what you love probably won't make money; and an absolute travesty that so many great artists (in whatever creative field that may be) will never be known as they whittle away their lives in cubicles or behind desks where no one will ever care to notice them. It dulls people's imagination too, crushing possibly great minds. It's why I write continuously, so I never lose that love, even if it never amounts to anything. People should always have their passions and live them out - better than reach old age and think "shame I never did more of XXX".

A question in one of those 'where are you on the political spectrum' quizzes actually had the question of whether 'a writer/artist is as valuable as an investment banker - to what extent do you agree or disagree' or some such thing. And it was a sad question to contemplate and in the end I strongly agreed. Because in 1000 years time the investment banker will be forgotten, however rich they got. The best writer will still have their works read and be discussed by people of all ages.

When banks no longer even exist in the future communist world utopia, writers' works will be being made into the latest 'ULTRA REAL IMMERSION VIRTUAL REALITY SIMULATOR LIFE MOVIES' of the year 3018

PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

For the record, I do not think capitalism is great, but I always laugh at socialists that state they want to live something at actually live capitalist lives.

For example, do you have laptops, computers, i-phones?

We have seen a Communist utopia and it left millions dead and in many different places. It left people unhappy.

Anyway Ben, are you trying to plagerize Alan watts?

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

For the record, I do not think capitalism is great, but I always laugh at socialists that state they want to live something at actually live capitalist lives.

For example, do you have laptops, computers, i-phones?

We have seen a Communist utopia and it left millions dead and in many different places. It left people unhappy.

I have been to a ballet, albeit only once, it was pretty great actually! In terms of 'the arts' as a whole, I continuously buy books, fiction and non-fiction; when I lived in England I loved going to the theatre. I also visited art galleries, and think the government making them free (under Labour, I believe) was great. I love these things; and support funding the arts. I also love the fruits of capitalism (the gadgets you mention, for instance). I don't think capitalism is all bad, it has its place, and so does socialism.

Anyone could tell I was being silly with my last sentence. A communist utopia, for better or worse, is impossible - so is a capitalist one. You are wrong in a utopia of any kind ever having existed though. There were and are 'communist states' but unless you know what 'utopia' means, none of them could be called as such.

utopia = an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect.

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

For the record, I do not think capitalism is great, but I always laugh at socialists that state they want to live something at actually live capitalist lives.

For example, do you have laptops, computers, i-phones?

We have seen a Communist utopia and it left millions dead and in many different places. It left people unhappy.

I have been to a ballet, albeit only once, it was pretty great actually! In terms of 'the arts' as a whole, I continuously buy books, fiction and non-fiction; when I lived in England I loved going to the theatre. I also visited art galleries, and think the government making them free (under Labour, I believe) was great. I love these things; and support funding the arts. I also love the fruits of capitalism (the gadgets you mention, for instance). I don't think capitalism is all bad, it has its place, and so does socialism.

Anyone could tell I was being silly with my last sentence. A communist utopia, for better or worse, is impossible - so is a capitalist one. You are wrong in a utopia of any kind ever having existed though. There were and are 'communist states' but unless you know what 'utopia' means, none of them could be called as such.

utopia = an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect.

What has any of the above have to do with my comments, other than you admotting how ridiculous and dangeroeus communism is?

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

For the record, I do not think capitalism is great, but I always laugh at socialists that state they want to live something at actually live capitalist lives.

For example, do you have laptops, computers, i-phones?

We have seen a Communist utopia and it left millions dead and in many different places. It left people unhappy.

All those goods are made in the 'Communist Utopia' that is China 


Dingus dumbass cat grasp that there MORE than Capitalist or Communist 
it's just like your opinions, that were progressive in the 1950's, but are Regressive today 


Capitalism has also Killed Millions too, Just as many if not more, it has enslaved Vastly More, it had left more with lives not worth living.

veya_victaous wrote:

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

For the record, I do not think capitalism is great, but I always laugh at socialists that state they want to live something at actually live capitalist lives.

For example, do you have laptops, computers, i-phones?

We have seen a Communist utopia and it left millions dead and in many different places. It left people unhappy.

All those goods are made in the 'Communist Utopia' that is China 


Dingus dumbass cat grasp that there MORE than Capitalist or Communist 
it's just like your opinions, that were progressive in the 1950's, but are Regressive today 


Capitalism has also Killed Millions too, Just as many if not more, it has enslaved Vastly More, it had left more with lives not worth living.

Which now China is thirving on Capitalist economy and yet again the little baby has to jump in with insults

Really, show me what capital belief system has killed millions

Remember you have to attribute the capitalist ideals that did

Again if you notice I said capitalism is not great, but hey, you never actually read any replies do you

Your emotions kick in, with negativity and it makes you incapable of an intelligent reply

Didge wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

For the record, I do not think capitalism is great, but I always laugh at socialists that state they want to live something at actually live capitalist lives.

For example, do you have laptops, computers, i-phones?

We have seen a Communist utopia and it left millions dead and in many different places. It left people unhappy.

I have been to a ballet, albeit only once, it was pretty great actually! In terms of 'the arts' as a whole, I continuously buy books, fiction and non-fiction; when I lived in England I loved going to the theatre. I also visited art galleries, and think the government making them free (under Labour, I believe) was great. I love these things; and support funding the arts. I also love the fruits of capitalism (the gadgets you mention, for instance). I don't think capitalism is all bad, it has its place, and so does socialism.

Anyone could tell I was being silly with my last sentence. A communist utopia, for better or worse, is impossible - so is a capitalist one. You are wrong in a utopia of any kind ever having existed though. There were and are 'communist states' but unless you know what 'utopia' means, none of them could be called as such.

utopia = an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect.

What has any of the above have to do with my comments, other than you admotting how ridiculous and dangeroeus communism is?

I responded to every one of your comments if you actually read anything other than my bolded line.

The point to me with such threads is that people do daydream and never actually put those dreams into reality. They generally like billions of people never actually take the risk, of doing things outside their comfort zones.

We are the only people that can change our own stars. Yes laws help change things, but again this has come from people wanting to change their own stars, but also others. If people think happiness, is something to be obtained, then they do not understand and are not truely happy.

Happiness comes from within and there is people with literally nothing, who are happy with their lives and family they have. As people become more and more selfish to things they cannot have.

So what is stopping people living the Utopian dreams they want to live in?

Also why then do others have to then be forced to live their dreams?

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:


What has any of the above have to do with my comments, other than you admotting how ridiculous and dangeroeus communism is?

I responded to every one of your comments if you actually read anything other than my bolded line.

So you are a hypocrite basically and this utopian dream is a pipe dream, as you are comfortable to continue a Captalist life, even though you do not really want to. You clearly fear going after that Utopian dream.

I would have thought being married to the love of your life, is the Utopian dream.

If you want more, then clearly, what then is perfect?

Is it then perfect for you or everyone else?

I'm going to try and address both your posts in this one.

1st post.

As Ben points out, the rigors of day to day life stop people from doing things they wanted to do when they were younger. Far fewer people who loved dancing, singing, drawing, writing etc... continue to do them into adulthood. They get desk jobs because that's where most work that pays averagely is. They have to get money to pay the bills. It is reality for most people.

Of course many continue to fit their creative passions in regardless of the grind. For you, they are the example that proves Ben and myself are complaining over nothing. My point is that whether some do or not, it is a shame it has to be that way.

On a political note, I'd use this shame as a reason why government funding of the arts is a noble pursuit. Since better to leave some kind of cultural legacy than to further its decline by tearing money from anything that isn't profitable.

2nd post.

We aren't hypocrites. There are enough flaws in our own systems but certainly not enough to stop US personally from living comfortably. HOWEVER, as is more often the case on the Left than the Right, we are able to recognise the economic injustice of global capitalism. WE benefit, while people in poorer countries in Asia and Africa, are squeezed of every hour to produce goods for low pay to be sent abroad.

Again, my PERSONAL life is not the discussion. I am very happily married, I do the things I love and will continue to do so; but I recognise that not everyone has that luxury. My economic situation is very ordinary, like everyone it would always be nice to have more, but I don't crave it; I also know that billions would probably wish to have my economic stability. And that is an unfairness caused by capitalism.

Eilzel wrote:I'm going to try and address both your posts in this one.

1st post.

As Ben points out, the rigors of day to day life stop people from doing things they wanted to do when they were younger. Far fewer people who loved dancing, singing, drawing, writing etc... continue to do them into adulthood. They get desk jobs because that's where most work that pays averagely is. They have to get money to pay the bills. It is reality for most people.

didge wrote:Bullshit on every level. The rigors of the day to day stops them? That is what is called a piss poor excuse. As the reality is there is very little stopping people who are driven. That is what you miss, as those successful, and have achieved their goals. Have done so by simple writing down their goals and sought to achieve them. You offer up excuses and why people from the start use that to continually fail..

Of course many continue to fit their creative passions in regardless of the grind. For you, they are the example that proves Ben and myself are complaining over nothing. My point is that whether some do or not, it is a shame it has to be that way.

didge wrote:Wrong again and it shows you both like to live a pipedream, as again what is stopping you. Ben is slightly different as he is doing everything he can to be united with the love of his life in the UK. A law is stopping him, which I stated, he should start a petition, a go fund me and go public with the media. That to me, is doing everything you can to obtain that dream. Ben may see different but is still going to achieve that goal

2nd post.

We aren't hypocrites. There are enough flaws in our own systems but certainly not enough to stop US personally from living comfortably. HOWEVER, as is more often the case on the Left than the Right, we are able to recognise the economic injustice of global capitalism. WE benefit, while people in poorer countries in Asia and Africa, are squeezed of every hour to produce goods for low pay to be sent abroad.

didge wrote:You see more excuses. Again explain to me how and why successful or happy people obtain their goals? Because they are committed to succeed. Only in countries, where there is oppression is that then much harder to require, but still achieveable. Yet you and others continue to buy products from Asia and Africa, thus continuing the very cycle you want to eradicate.

Hence hypocrites

Again, my PERSONAL life is not the discussion. I am very happily married, I do the things I love and will continue to do so; but I recognise that not everyone has that luxury. My economic situation is very ordinary, like everyone it would always be nice to have more, but I don't crave it; I also know that billions would probably wish to have my economic stability. And that is an unfairness caused by capitalism.

I am pointing out how some have Utopian dreams, which will always have something added to this constantly. So if your economic situation is normal, then what is the issue. As again, are you not living that Utopian life, in a foriegn country, doing a dream job, to have written a book and marry the love of your life. What more do you want for yourself? Anyone in the west can have economic stability. They need to stop spending beyond their means. What you are showing to me, is that people expect everything and not have to work to achieve their goals. That is the issue today, the wrong mentality being taught.

Now I am off to work

See ya and have a nice day

Didge wrote:

Eilzel wrote:I'm going to try and address both your posts in this one.

1st post.

As Ben points out, the rigors of day to day life stop people from doing things they wanted to do when they were younger. Far fewer people who loved dancing, singing, drawing, writing etc... continue to do them into adulthood. They get desk jobs because that's where most work that pays averagely is. They have to get money to pay the bills. It is reality for most people.

didge wrote:Bullshit on every level. The rigors of the day to day stops them? That is what is called a piss poor excuse. As the reality is there is very little stopping people who are driven. That is what you miss, as those successful, and have achieved their goals. Have done so by simple writing down their goals and sought to achieve them. You offer up excuses and why people from the start use that to continually fail..

Of course many continue to fit their creative passions in regardless of the grind. For you, they are the example that proves Ben and myself are complaining over nothing. My point is that whether some do or not, it is a shame it has to be that way.

didge wrote:Wrong again and it shows you both like to live a pipedream, as again what is stopping you. Ben is slightly different as he is doing everything he can to be united with the love of his life in the UK. A law is stopping him, which I stated, he should start a petition, a go fund me and go public with the media. That to me, is doing everything you can to obtain that dream. Ben may see different but is still going to achieve that goal

2nd post.

We aren't hypocrites. There are enough flaws in our own systems but certainly not enough to stop US personally from living comfortably. HOWEVER, as is more often the case on the Left than the Right, we are able to recognise the economic injustice of global capitalism. WE benefit, while people in poorer countries in Asia and Africa, are squeezed of every hour to produce goods for low pay to be sent abroad.

didge wrote:You see more excuses. Again explain to me how and why successful or happy people obtain their goals? Because they are committed to succeed. Only in countries, where there is oppression is that then much harder to require, but still achieveable. Yet you and others continue to buy products from Asia and Africa, thus continuing the very cycle you want to eradicate.

Hence hypocrites

Again, my PERSONAL life is not the discussion. I am very happily married, I do the things I love and will continue to do so; but I recognise that not everyone has that luxury. My economic situation is very ordinary, like everyone it would always be nice to have more, but I don't crave it; I also know that billions would probably wish to have my economic stability. And that is an unfairness caused by capitalism.

I am pointing out how some have Utopian dreams, which will always have something added to this constantly. So if your economic situation is normal, then what is the issue. As again, are you not living that Utopian life, in a foriegn country, doing a dream job, to have written a book and marry the love of your life. What more do you want for yourself? Anyone in the west can have economic stability. They need to stop spending beyond their means. What you are showing to me, is that people expect everything and not have to work to achieve their goals. That is the issue today, the wrong mentality being taught.

Note the bolded sections. This is why you miss the point. I'm not talking about me. I'm thinking about others.

It is a concrete fact that people are severely hindered in their efforts to do the creative things they may want to when hampered by day to day life. For some, they may not see it a worth the effort when they have so much else to do. Some will do it, but will never achieve their ultimate dreams because they can't devote their entire time to their art. There are exceptions, J.K.Rowling comes to mind, but they ARE exceptions. That said, the original point was more 'isn't it a shame...' and yes, yes it is.

Anyway, point is you seem to think I want things to improve for me. That isn't the case. And what can/do we do? Well, at the very least we can sign petitions, get things discusses, push whatever zeitgeist is currently pushing for progressive change; and vote for the part least like to perpetuate the problems.

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

For the record, I do not think capitalism is great, but I always laugh at socialists that state they want to live something at actually live capitalist lives.

For example, do you have laptops, computers, i-phones?

We have seen a Communist utopia and it left millions dead and in many different places. It left people unhappy.

More total bulldust from good ol' Dodgie...

Proving once again that he doesn't realise or  recognise the fundamental differences between 'autocratic communism' and 'democratic' forms of 'socialism'; two entirely different creatures..

And why the Dodger still can't be taken seriously in any of these economics/political discussions.

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:


All those goods are made in the 'Communist Utopia' that is China 


Dingus dumbass cat grasp that there MORE than Capitalist or Communist 
it's just like your opinions, that were progressive in the 1950's, but are Regressive today 


Capitalism has also Killed Millions too, Just as many if not more, it has enslaved Vastly More, it had left more with lives not worth living.

Which now China is thirving on Capitalist economy and yet again the little baby has to jump in with insults

Really, show me what capital belief system has killed millions

Remember you have to attribute the capitalist ideals that did

Again if you notice I said capitalism is not great, but hey, you never actually read any replies do you

Your emotions kick in, with negativity and it makes you incapable of an intelligent reply

Once again Didge allows his own dogma to run over any common sense...

Hitler was a capitalist..
Mussolini was a capitalist..
The Jap's during WWII were capitalists..

All of whom required extra resources to help with their empire building and expansionism.

The European governments colonising African and "New World" countries from the 17th century through to the early 20th century were all powering along behind capitalist ideals..

Re: the O/P :

My biggest complaint against both truely strong "pure capitalist" economies and autocratic "communist" states, is how neither of them are able to place a genuine and realistic 'net value' on our environment...

They don't recognise any "intrinsic" value in trees, water, clean air, the ozone layer, life in general, or the "interconnectedness of all things" that underly all of the ecological systems that make up "the web of life"..

That's why coal mines, oil wells, pulp mills and polluting industries keep on winning-out over local communities and healthier environments, far too often.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Re:  the O/P :

My biggest complaint against both truely strong "pure capitalist" economies and autocratic "communist" states, is how neither of them are able to place a genuine and realistic 'net value' on our environment...

They don't recognise any "intrinsic" value in trees, water, clean air, the ozone layer, life in general, or the "interconnectedness of all things" that underly all of the ecological systems that make up "the web of life"..

That's why coal mines, oil wells, pulp mills and polluting industries keep on winning-out over local communities and healthier environments, far too often.

All very true. Which is why we really need the best of both worlds. I would argue right now that there is perhaps too much of an imbalance toward capitalism.

To go further though with the problems of communism and the arts; we saw many efforts under Totalitarian Communism. Plenty of art was produced and all of it propaganda to serve the state. Iconic and historically fascinating, sure, but beautiful it wasn't (though the Soviet National Anthem remains my absolute favourite lol). The fear under capitalism is that some of the arts simply die out. Which is why we need balance. Capitalism has its place, and so does socialism.

Ben asks: "Why would anybody build something like the great pyramid of Giza today?"

Well, don't forget that Pharaoh Khufu was not only a ruler, but a deity. Here in the UK only 40 years ago we finished building what is the fifth biggest cathedral in Europe in honour of a deity...and one, unlike Khufu who, has never been seen by his subjects.

It is called Liverpool Cathedral

I'm fortunate to have been to Giza, by the way. Like many of the pyramids, tombs and temples in Egypt it absolutely mind-blowingly awesome.

It's also very hot and downright claustrophobic inside!

Plus the Arabs selling dirty postcards

Ben wrote:My biggest problem with capitalism is that in capitalism, nothing is worthwhile if you can't make a profit off of it. Same goes for people. We're only worth what we can earn.

I don't understand why this surprises you.  All religions are single-focused.  Any theory strives to find the singularity.  A moral theory, like capitalism, simply reverses the path.

In fact, we don't live in a truly capitalist society, but in what Stephanie Ruhle calls a rule-based capitalism.  That is, we set capitalism loose, but as problems arise we establish rules.  Hence, we see a multiplicity of views.

These rules are what RWers are opposing...they call them PC.  Again, capitalism itself is a rule, so they have to be careful.  They hope people will forget the context, and deal with only things that come up in recent memory.

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:

I am pointing out how some have Utopian dreams, which will always have something added to this constantly. So if your economic situation is normal, then what is the issue. As again, are you not living that Utopian life, in a foriegn country, doing a dream job, to have written a book and marry the love of your life. What more do you want for yourself? Anyone in the west can have economic stability. They need to stop spending beyond their means. What you are showing to me, is that people expect everything and not have to work to achieve their goals. That is the issue today, the wrong mentality being taught.

Note the bolded sections. This is why you miss the point. I'm not talking about me. I'm thinking about others.

It is a concrete fact that people are severely hindered in their efforts to do the creative things they may want to when hampered by day to day life. For some, they may not see it a worth the effort when they have so much else to do. Some will do it, but will never achieve their ultimate dreams because they can't devote their entire time to their art. There are exceptions, J.K.Rowling comes to mind, but they ARE exceptions. That said, the original point was more 'isn't it a shame...' and yes, yes it is.

Anyway, point is you seem to think I want things to improve for me. That isn't the case. And what can/do we do? Well, at the very least we can sign petitions, get things discusses, push whatever zeitgeist is currently pushing for progressive change; and vote for the part least like to perpetuate the problems.

Never missed any point in how you are making excuses for others

Is it a concrete fact?

Based on what evidence?

I have grown up in real poverty and waht stopped me succeeding?

Nothing

The moment you provide excuses for people, then you actually in fact help them think they cannot succeed

So when you say and provide excuses you do nothing to empower them. You infact provide them a means to stay as they are. Feeling that life has dealt them a harsh lesson. Ignoring the fact all people are dealt a harsh lesson in life. Some more so than others. Yours is a view that is inbound in SJW thinking. That people cannot change their stars

I find such thinking so negative and devoid of positivity

So at what price does your utopia cost to others?

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Didge wrote:


Which now China is thirving on Capitalist economy and yet again the little baby has to jump in with insults

Really, show me what capital belief system has killed millions

Remember you have to attribute the capitalist ideals that did

Again if you notice I said capitalism is not great, but hey, you never actually read any replies do you

Your emotions kick in, with negativity and it makes you incapable of an intelligent reply

Once again Didge allows his own dogma to run over any common sense...

Hitler was a capitalist..
Mussolini was a capitalist..
The Jap's during WWII were capitalists..

All of whom required extra resources to help with their empire building and expansionism.

The European governments colonising African and "New World" countries from the 17th century through to the early 20thcentury were all powering along behind capitalist ideals..

Really?

You must be reading some warped history as neither Hitler or Mussolini were capitlaists

Show me the evidence for your claims?

Next explain the actual question I asked over how Capitalism, as claimed, caused millions of deaths through its actual belief??

The opening post could’ve been about me (as you know Ben).
I wanted to be an actress/singer/dancer when I was younger.

I was told by my parents there was “no money in it”.

Short-sighted isn’t the word.

The soul must be nourished, to make life meaningful! You cannot put a price on that.

eddie wrote:The opening post could’ve been about me (as you know Ben).
I wanted to be an actress/singer/dancer when I was younger.

I was told by my parents there was “no money in it”.

Short-sighted isn’t the word.

Edds I think they spoke to you in the language you understood, appropriate for your age  at the time. If they had gone into a deeper debate and given the true reasons, it could have backfired and made you even more defiant. Professional actors & musicians spend the majority of their time unemployed. That's the unglamorous side of 'showbiz' which people don't see.


Another thing - they may have wanted you to concentrate on getting a good solid education first, so as to always have something to fall back on?



There were many times when I tried to dissuade my son from some of his latest ideas, without giving him the true reason for my objections. Esp if i felt he was simply too young to grasp why something might not be in his best interests. Of course he's now old enough to make up his own mind, and follow his dreams.

Maybe capitalism works when you give people what they need, the problems seem to start when it persuades people that they need something that they don't actually need.
As for the arts that is a basic need, every culture has the arts entwined in their everyday lives, (well perhaps not all) It used to be almost everyone would be involved but it has become a bit exclusive over time, a bit professional. A lot of people at one time could do a 'turn' at a social gathering, playing an instrument, dancing, singing, miming, telling stories or jokes, sculpting and painting seem to have become fairly professional early on, with the possible exception of pargetting.

Vintage wrote:
Maybe capitalism works when you give people what they need, the problems seem to start when it persuades people that they need something that they don't actually need.
As for the arts that is a basic need, every culture has the arts entwined in their everyday lives, (well perhaps not all) It used to be almost everyone would be involved but it has become a bit exclusive over time, a bit professional. A lot of people at one time could do a 'turn' at a social gathering, playing an instrument, dancing, singing, miming, telling stories or jokes, sculpting and painting seem to have become fairly professional early on, with the possible exception of pargetting.

"Pargetting"  !!!  That sounds kinky, or painful;  or both..

I had to look that word  up  --   over here, brickies/plasterers/builders call that 'pinking'.

Pargetting, the practice of filling the gap between roof tiles, and the Brickwork on the Gable end of Buildings with Cement .

And mouldings?

????

????

Pargetters would also mould raised patterns into the plaster on the outside of the buildings as decorations, sometimes quite intricate patterns, looks a bit like intricate icing. I think it was mainly done in the South east of England. Its also called pinking I think although I'm not really sure its the same thing. It was done a lot in Germany and eastern Europe as well.

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

Sure, but almost all my money is spent on things I need. I live in a capitalist society and I'm not going to keel over and die to prove a point.

For the record, I do not think capitalism is great, but I always laugh at socialists that state they want to live something at actually live capitalist lives.

I never have, and never would, say I "want to live something at actually live capitalist lives," because I don't know what that means.

For example, do you have laptops, computers, i-phones?

Yes, but you don't need capitalism to have computers, do you? Would the computer never have been invented if it wasn't believed from the get-go that it would become a big seller?

You could actually argue the opposite -- that computers were so different and revolutionary that most capitalists would say no thanks and stick to something they knew would sell.

We have seen a Communist utopia and it left millions dead and in many different places. It left people unhappy.

Show me in any book about Communist philosophy where it says something like, "Well, you're going to have to kill or starve a whole lot of people." Communism, like every other -ism, has been twisted by the powerful.

Besides, who's saying Communism is the answer here? I would prefer to see capitalism regulated so that it served the public interest, over Communism any day.

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

Sure, but almost all my money is spent on things I need. I live in a capitalist society and I'm not going to keel over and die to prove a point.

But are they things you really need, or believe you do?

You do not need to keel over and die to prove a point

I never have, and never would, say I "want to live something at actually live capitalist lives," because I don't know what that means.

But you do live a capitalist life, many do in the west

Yes, but you don't need capitalism to have computers, do you? Would the computer never have been invented if it wasn't believed from the get-go that it would become a big seller?

You could actually argue the opposite -- that computers were so different and revolutionary that most capitalists would say no thanks and stick to something they knew would sell.

But its certainly you buyuing into capitalism, to buy a computer. As that then generates money for that company

Unlikely it would have been invented without the wealth of capitalism or war itself

Show me in any book about Communist philosophy where it says something like, "Well, you're going to have to kill or starve a whole lot of people." Communism, like every other -ism, has been twisted by the powerful.

Besides, who's saying Communism is the answer here? I would prefer to see capitalism regulated so that it served the public interest, over Communism any day.

PMSL, so this is always the worst apologist crap you ever hear from lovers off Communism

Show me a Communist state, that has not had the people oppressed, and there has been many Communist states.

This nonesense when apologists say Communism has been twisted, have clearly never ever read any history properly. They want to believe in some Utopian bullshit that will never exist. The one many reason, is because it simple does not understand humans, and their will to succeed in life. Communism stiffles this at every avenue.

I would prefer people like you actually concentrated on where people are suffering real oppression around the world, based at the hands of sociailist dictators, Theocracies etc. Yet you bemoan capitalism, which has seen a time of greater prosperity for many people in the west. So much so its seen an advance in medical and technological advances. Far more people out of poverty and better off, people living far longer. That is why in the end the Soviet Union failed, as it could not compete economically with the US. Its why China has embraced capitalism within its leftist ideology.

As stated many times, Communism can only work by being enforced, against the will of many people

That is always going to then have countless suffer.

Jules wrote:

eddie wrote:The opening post could’ve been about me (as you know Ben).
I wanted to be an actress/singer/dancer when I was younger.

I was told by my parents there was “no money in it”.

Short-sighted isn’t the word.

Edds I think they spoke to you in the language you understood, appropriate for your age  at the time. If they had gone into a deeper debate and given the true reasons, it could have backfired and made you even more defiant. Professional actors & musicians spend the majority of their time unemployed. That's the unglamorous side of 'showbiz' which people don't see.


Another thing - they may have wanted you to concentrate on getting a good solid education first, so as to always have something to fall back on?



There were many times when I tried to dissuade my son from some of his latest ideas, without giving him the true reason for my objections. Esp if i felt he was simply too young to grasp why something might not be in his best interests. Of course he's now old enough to make up his own mind, and follow his dreams.

Regarding your first sentence, Jules, I have considered this, but I know that you shouldn’t tell anyone, of any age, that they can’t or shouldn’t pursue their dreams.  

It doesn’t make sense to me.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Didge wrote:


Which now China is thirving on Capitalist economy and yet again the little baby has to jump in with insults

Really, show me what capital belief system has killed millions

Remember you have to attribute the capitalist ideals that did

Again if you notice I said capitalism is not great, but hey, you never actually read any replies do you

Your emotions kick in, with negativity and it makes you incapable of an intelligent reply

Once again Didge allows his own dogma to run over any common sense...

Hitler was a capitalist..
Mussolini was a capitalist..
The Jap's during WWII were capitalists..

All of whom required extra resources to help with their empire building and expansionism.

The European governments colonising African and "New World" countries from the 17th century through to the early 20th century were all powering along behind capitalist ideals..

Hitler and Mussolini were both socialists gone bad... far left totalitarian dictators...!

Seems to me there's good in both systems (apologies to anyone already having mentioned this) so why don't we just use the good parts of both systems to make a very good system of living.
Communism/socialism style systems should take care of the basics of life health, education, transport, water, energy etc. and capitalism should take care of making peoples lives more comfortable with 'luxuries', consumerism, although surely, it can only work if the majority of people are paid enough to afford its luxuries, the problem is when either system gets out of control. Although capitalism seems to be causing more problems with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer but even in communism some were, as usual, a bit more equal than others but mainly everyone is poor in the sense of commodities. I think pure communism can work on a small scale like in a kibbutz but as a national institution it can be as bad as bad capitalism, where no one but a few elite can actual win.

Vintage wrote:Seems to me there's good in both systems (apologies to anyone already having mentioned this) so why don't we just use the good parts of both systems to make a very good system of living.
Communism/socialism style systems should take care of the basics of life health, education, transport, water, energy etc. and capitalism should take care of making peoples lives more comfortable with 'luxuries', consumerism, although surely, it can only work if the majority of people  are paid enough to afford its luxuries, the problem is when either system gets out of control. Although capitalism seems to be causing more problems with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer but even in communism some were, as usual, a bit more equal than others but mainly everyone is poor in the sense of commodities. I think pure communism can work on a small scale like in a kibbutz but as a national institution it can be as bad as bad capitalism, where no one but a few elite can actual win.

You mean like some sort of '3rd way'...???


"...FDR loved Hitler’s and Mussolini’s economic policies, loved Hitler’s national socialism. JFK’s father Joe loved Hitler. Stalin had a pact with Hitler, and the Communist Party USA supported Hitler. Hitler called his party, the National Socialists. Fascism is just Naziism, the same socialism, not a middle way or centrist ideology. But when Hitler invaded Russia, suddenly liberals and communists turned against Nazis and fascists the same way Stalin turned against Trotsky, who was also not a centrist or middle way, but a full blown left wing communist, although not quite as much into gulags. The more orthodox Stalinist communists want to end all appearance of capitalism. The more national socialist Nazis wanted to treat the capitalists like the Mafia treated business owners during Prohibition, like a protection racket, taking a cut of their profits. In that sense, maybe fascism is closer to the middle than the absolute extreme, in leaving a pretense of capitalism, while controlling it as much as any totalitarian regime. Instead of gulags, Nazis and fascists had death camps. Here’s another possible summary of economic systems. 4 possibilities, 4 boxes. 2 rows, 2 columns. 1st row is for government ownership. 2nd row retains private ownership. 1st column is government regulation, 2nd column is private competition. Top left box is Stalin, bottom left is Hitler & Mussolini, naziism or fascism top right box is Tito’s Yugoslavia or maybe today’s China bottom right is the traditional competitive capitalism. Monopoly or crony capitalism is closest to fascism, and what the current Democrat Party promotes, closer to Hitler than Stalin, although in a real sense there is little difference..."


https://www.quora.com/Since-fascism-is-the-third-position-between-extreme-capitalism-and-extreme-communism-does-that-it-make-it-a-radical-centrist-ideology

Didge wrote:

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

Sure, but almost all my money is spent on things I need. I live in a capitalist society and I'm not going to keel over and die to prove a point.

But are they things you really need, or believe you do?

You do not need to keel over and die to prove a point

I never have, and never would, say I "want to live something at actually live capitalist lives," because I don't know what that means.

But you do live a capitalist life, many do in the west

Yes, but you don't need capitalism to have computers, do you? Would the computer never have been invented if it wasn't believed from the get-go that it would become a big seller?

You could actually argue the opposite -- that computers were so different and revolutionary that most capitalists would say no thanks and stick to something they knew would sell.

But its certainly you buyuing into capitalism, to buy a computer. As that then generates money for that company

Unlikely it would have been invented without the wealth of capitalism or war itself

Show me in any book about Communist philosophy where it says something like, "Well, you're going to have to kill or starve a whole lot of people." Communism, like every other -ism, has been twisted by the powerful.

Besides, who's saying Communism is the answer here? I would prefer to see capitalism regulated so that it served the public interest, over Communism any day.

PMSL, so this is always the worst apologist crap you ever hear from lovers off Communism

Show me a Communist state, that has not had the people oppressed, and there has been many Communist states.

This nonesense when apologists say Communism has been twisted, have clearly never ever read any history properly. They want to believe in some Utopian bullshit that will never exist. The one many reason, is because it simple does not understand humans, and their will to succeed in life. Communism stiffles this at every avenue.

I would prefer people like you actually concentrated on where people are suffering real oppression around the world, based at the hands of sociailist dictators, Theocracies etc. Yet you bemoan capitalism, which has seen a time of greater prosperity for many people in the west. So much so its seen an advance in medical and technological advances. Far more people out of poverty and better off, people living far longer. That is why in the end the Soviet Union failed, as it could not compete economically with the US. Its why China has embraced capitalism within its leftist ideology.

As stated many times, Communism can only work by being enforced, against the will of many people

That is always going to then have countless suffer.

show me a Capitalist one that has not oppressed people 

You seem to ignore that fact Western capitalism were oppressing people based on skin colour well into the 1970's 
even today vast numbers oppressed world wide. 


China is STILL communist JUST not some Eurotwats definition of Communism that was Literally an idea for a society that existed over a century ago 
China like all peoples, Don't have to Choose One or the other or even fit within the scope of old Eurocentric nonsense.

Ben wrote:Besides, who's saying Communism is the answer here? I would prefer to see capitalism regulated so that it served the public interest, over Communism any day.

I think that's what most lefties want...far from riches or guarantees.  As Stephanie Ruhle says, 'Capitalism with fairness rules.'

Most socialists don't want rewards beyond necessity.  Frankly, I believe that government only owes safety inside and outside.  Any enemy invades your country, your country fights them off.  Any illness or infirmity befalls you, your country fights it off.

The way America approaches healthcare, if they took the same approach with the military each person would be responsible for hiring his own bodyguard and equipping him for war.  Perhaps a small industry could start up, offering border security insurance.  

Didge wrote:

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:PMSL

So do you both buy things that you like?

Sure, but almost all my money is spent on things I need. I live in a capitalist society and I'm not going to keel over and die to prove a point.

But are they things you really need, or believe you do?

You do not need to keel over and die to prove a point

I never have, and never would, say I "want to live something at actually live capitalist lives," because I don't know what that means.

But you do live a capitalist life, many do in the west

Yes, but you don't need capitalism to have computers, do you? Would the computer never have been invented if it wasn't believed from the get-go that it would become a big seller?

You could actually argue the opposite -- that computers were so different and revolutionary that most capitalists would say no thanks and stick to something they knew would sell.

But its certainly you buyuing into capitalism, to buy a computer. As that then generates money for that company

Unlikely it would have been invented without the wealth of capitalism or war itself

Show me in any book about Communist philosophy where it says something like, "Well, you're going to have to kill or starve a whole lot of people." Communism, like every other -ism, has been twisted by the powerful.

Besides, who's saying Communism is the answer here? I would prefer to see capitalism regulated so that it served the public interest, over Communism any day.

PMSL, so this is always the worst apologist crap you ever hear from lovers off Communism

Show me a Communist state, that has not had the people oppressed, and there has been many Communist states.

This nonesense when apologists say Communism has been twisted, have clearly never ever read any history properly. They want to believe in some Utopian bullshit that will never exist. The one many reason, is because it simple does not understand humans, and their will to succeed in life. Communism stiffles this at every avenue.

I would prefer people like you actually concentrated on where people are suffering real oppression around the world, based at the hands of sociailist dictators, Theocracies etc. Yet you bemoan capitalism, which has seen a time of greater prosperity for many people in the west. So much so its seen an advance in medical and technological advances. Far more people out of poverty and better off, people living far longer. That is why in the end the Soviet Union failed, as it could not compete economically with the US. Its why China has embraced capitalism within its leftist ideology.

As stated many times, Communism can only work by being enforced, against the will of many people

That is always going to then have countless suffer.

Ben asked you to show a communist philosophy that says we have to kill or starve people. You can't, because one doesn't exist. Have you ever actually read the Communist Manifesto, didge? I have; and though it has a noble end goal, it is unrealistic. But at no point does it suggest murder or starvation and prerequisite or necessity. It aims for full economic equality. Do you actually think Marx and Engels wanted to murder huge numbers of people?

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:


PMSL, so this is always the worst apologist crap you ever hear from lovers off Communism

Show me a Communist state, that has not had the people oppressed, and there has been many Communist states.

This nonesense when apologists say Communism has been twisted, have clearly never ever read any history properly. They want to believe in some Utopian bullshit that will never exist. The one many reason, is because it simple does not understand humans, and their will to succeed in life. Communism stiffles this at every avenue.

I would prefer people like you actually concentrated on where people are suffering real oppression around the world, based at the hands of sociailist dictators, Theocracies etc. Yet you bemoan capitalism, which has seen a time of greater prosperity for many people in the west. So much so its seen an advance in medical and technological advances. Far more people out of poverty and better off, people living far longer. That is why in the end the Soviet Union failed, as it could not compete economically with the US. Its why China has embraced capitalism within its leftist ideology.

As stated many times, Communism can only work by being enforced, against the will of many people

That is always going to then have countless suffer.

Ben asked you to show a communist philosophy that says we have to kill or starve people. You can't, because one doesn't exist. Have you ever actually read the Communist Manifesto, didge? I have; and though it has a noble end goal, it is unrealistic. But at no point does it suggest murder or starvation and prerequisite or necessity. It aims for full economic equality. Do you actually think Marx and Engels wanted to murder huge numbers of people?

Yes, I have read many philosophies and Communism is just about the worst philosophy.

Which ones? Stalinist Communism? Orthodox Communism? Trotsky Communism? Anarcho-Communism

Just because something does not state something, does not mean that the philosophy by its structure. Will not end up opprressing people. Do you understand that? Where as seen that has always happened. Hence the absurdity of his question and even more so when we have seen communism in practice many times. Even though you and other apologists claim its not real communism.

Hence why I asked him to show me any Communist state in practice that did not oppress people?

The answer is zero and there has been plenty of them which all oppressed people

Which communist Manifesto do you mean and which country that adapted this?

You seem to think only one counts and the one that you like. Which again does not matter. The philosophy looks down upon thos better off and creates a view of jealousy and envy. To the point it causes disharmony between people Thus why we see everytime people suffer when Communism has been implimented. So the question Ben asked, shows he again does not understand the cause and effect of Communism.

A noble end goal?



You really are not grasping the point on this

Marx?

Absolutely, as he was as hateful and racist as they come. He would have ended up making thos better off suffer and like any communist system it would have had to been enforced and countless people suffer. 

So you and others hold this view there is only one true Communism. Its like saying there is only one true Conservatism, and yet we have never seen this. Its the old argument, always used to deflect from the reality. That again Communism has to use Totalitarianism to work. Because its a failed concept. Like I said it fails to understand humans and each time, a group tries to impliment Communism, it has done so by force and collectivism, denying the one thing Marx stated, individualism. Hence why Communism has never ever worked and never will work. It simple has to  enforce its beliefs. Endless suffer and as seen it cannot compete in a capatalist economic world system.

You and ben are simple middle class champagne socialists, thinking that Communism would make a real difference in the world and as seen in practice it never has. Captalism is not great but has brought about prosperity and health for people.

So continue to live the pipe dream but the reality is this. Most people can and do see the flawed nature of Communism. As it awlways requires collectivism to start with to work. Which requires having everyone on board. That simple is never going to happen, and why it has always been enforced. As it fails to understand the evolution of humans itself and individualism itselff.

Oh and for interest why

Over the last two weeks, media elites have decided that communism is the plat du jour. It has been featured everywhere from Elle to Teen Vogue and Ash Sarkar has shot to internet fame for her eloquent phrase “I’m a communist you idiot”.

But Opinium has found that communism has a net approval rating of -52, a full 38 points behind libertarianism. Guido also notes that capitalism polls as more popular than socialism…

Stalin was a nice man, he built all those pretty little Gulags for the people to holiday in ?

Didge wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Ben asked you to show a communist philosophy that says we have to kill or starve people. You can't, because one doesn't exist. Have you ever actually read the Communist Manifesto, didge? I have; and though it has a noble end goal, it is unrealistic. But at no point does it suggest murder or starvation and prerequisite or necessity. It aims for full economic equality. Do you actually think Marx and Engels wanted to murder huge numbers of people?

Yes, I have read many philosophies and Communism is just about the worst philosophy.

Which ones? Stalinist Communism? Orthodox Communism? Trotsky Communism? Anarcho-Communism

Just because something does not state something, does not mean that the philosophy by its structure. Will not end up opprressing people. Do you understand that? Where as seen that has always happened. Hence the absurdity of his question and even more so when we have seen communism in practice many times. Even though you and other apologists claim its not real communism.

Hence why I asked him to show me any Communist state in practice that did not oppress people?

The answer is zero and there has been plenty of them which all oppressed people

Which communist Manifesto do you mean and which country that adapted this?

You seem to think only one counts and the one that you like. Which again does not matter. The philosophy looks down upon thos better off and creates a view of jealousy and envy. To the point it causes disharmony between people Thus why we see everytime people suffer when Communism has been implimented. So the question Ben asked, shows he again does not understand the cause and effect of Communism.

A noble end goal?



You really are not grasping the point on this

Marx?

Absolutely, as he was as hateful and racist as they come. He would have ended up making thos better off suffer and like any communist system it would have had to been enforced and countless people suffer. 

So you and others hold this view there is only one true Communism. Its like saying there is only one true Conservatism, and yet we have never seen this. Its the old argument, always used to deflect from the reality. That again Communism has to use Totalitarianism to work. Because its a failed concept. Like I said it fails to understand humans and each time, a group tries to impliment Communism, it has done so by force and collectivism, denying the one thing Marx stated, individualism. Hence why Communism has never ever worked and never will work. It simple has to  enforce its beliefs. Endless suffer and as seen it cannot compete in a capatalist economic world system.

You and ben are simple middle class champagne socialists, thinking that Communism would make a real difference in the world and as seen in practice it never has. Captalism is not great but has brought about prosperity and health for people.

So continue to live the pipe dream but the reality is this. Most people can and do see the flawed nature of Communism. As it awlways requires collectivism to start with to work. Which requires having everyone on board. That simple is never going to happen, and why it has always been enforced. As it fails to understand the evolution of humans itself and individualism itselff.

Oh and for interest why

Over the last two weeks, media elites have decided that communism is the plat du jour. It has been featured everywhere from Elle to Teen Vogue and Ash Sarkar has shot to internet fame for her eloquent phrase “I’m a communist you idiot”.

But Opinium has found that communism has a net approval rating of -52, a full 38 points behind libertarianism. Guido also notes that capitalism polls as more popular than socialism…

Once again...

All that the old Dodger has proved..

Jordan Peterson is a clueless and uneducated fuckup;  with zero 'real world' economic or political facts to back up his endless bullshit.

************************************************************************

Also interesting to note...

In that last graph there, "Social Democracy" -- the kind of philosophy/economic system that most of the "socialist" leaning people I know would favour -- is the most popular choice in that survey, well ahead of "Capitalism", which in turn is still comfortably ahead of both communism, with poor old "anarchy" out there, lost in the wilderness..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Didge wrote:



Yes, I have read many philosophies and Communism is just about the worst philosophy.

Which ones? Stalinist Communism? Orthodox Communism? Trotsky Communism? Anarcho-Communism

Just because something does not state something, does not mean that the philosophy by its structure. Will not end up opprressing people. Do you understand that? Where as seen that has always happened. Hence the absurdity of his question and even more so when we have seen communism in practice many times. Even though you and other apologists claim its not real communism.

Hence why I asked him to show me any Communist state in practice that did not oppress people?

The answer is zero and there has been plenty of them which all oppressed people

Which communist Manifesto do you mean and which country that adapted this?

You seem to think only one counts and the one that you like. Which again does not matter. The philosophy looks down upon thos better off and creates a view of jealousy and envy. To the point it causes disharmony between people Thus why we see everytime people suffer when Communism has been implimented. So the question Ben asked, shows he again does not understand the cause and effect of Communism.

A noble end goal?



You really are not grasping the point on this

Marx?

Absolutely, as he was as hateful and racist as they come. He would have ended up making thos better off suffer and like any communist system it would have had to been enforced and countless people suffer. 

So you and others hold this view there is only one true Communism. Its like saying there is only one true Conservatism, and yet we have never seen this. Its the old argument, always used to deflect from the reality. That again Communism has to use Totalitarianism to work. Because its a failed concept. Like I said it fails to understand humans and each time, a group tries to impliment Communism, it has done so by force and collectivism, denying the one thing Marx stated, individualism. Hence why Communism has never ever worked and never will work. It simple has to  enforce its beliefs. Endless suffer and as seen it cannot compete in a capatalist economic world system.

You and ben are simple middle class champagne socialists, thinking that Communism would make a real difference in the world and as seen in practice it never has. Captalism is not great but has brought about prosperity and health for people.

So continue to live the pipe dream but the reality is this. Most people can and do see the flawed nature of Communism. As it awlways requires collectivism to start with to work. Which requires having everyone on board. That simple is never going to happen, and why it has always been enforced. As it fails to understand the evolution of humans itself and individualism itselff.

Oh and for interest why

Once again...

All that the old Dodger has proved..

Jordan Peterson is a clueless and uneducated fuckup;  with zero 'real world' economic or political facts to back up his endless bullshit.

And as usual the communist apologist cannot respond to a single point I made and Jordan Peterson made.

They fall back on their fall back policy

They try to deligitimize those that easily show up their views to be absurd

He just roundly obliterated the arguments made by Maxist apologists

So sorry for that ridiculous outburst by Wolf there Eilzel. I am off to work but will look in later. Cheers

My points againt for you

Yes, I have read many philosophies and Communism is just about the worst philosophy.

Which ones? Stalinist Communism? Orthodox Communism? Trotsky Communism? Anarcho-Communism

Just because something does not state something, does not mean that the philosophy by its structure. Will not end up opprressing people. Do you understand that? Where as seen that has always happened. Hence the absurdity of his question and even more so when we have seen communism in practice many times. Even though you and other apologists claim its not real communism.

Hence why I asked him to show me any Communist state in practice that did not oppress people?

The answer is zero and there has been plenty of them which all oppressed people

Which communist Manifesto do you mean and which country that adapted this?

You seem to think only one counts and the one that you like. Which again does not matter. The philosophy looks down upon thos better off and creates a view of jealousy and envy. To the point it causes disharmony between people Thus why we see everytime people suffer when Communism has been implimented. So the question Ben asked, shows he again does not understand the cause and effect of Communism.

A noble end goal?

 

You really are not grasping the point on this

Marx?

Absolutely, as he was as hateful and racist as they come. He would have ended up making thos better off suffer and like any communist system it would have had to been enforced and countless people suffer. 

So you and others hold this view there is only one true Communism. Its like saying there is only one true Conservatism, and yet we have never seen this. Its the old argument, always used to deflect from the reality. That again Communism has to use Totalitarianism to work. Because its a failed concept. Like I said it fails to understand humans and each time, a group tries to impliment Communism, it has done so by force and collectivism, denying the one thing Marx stated, individualism. Hence why Communism has never ever worked and never will work. It simple has to  enforce its beliefs. Endless suffer and as seen it cannot compete in a capatalist economic world system.

You and ben are simple middle class champagne socialists, thinking that Communism would make a real difference in the world and as seen in practice it never has. Captalism is not great but has brought about prosperity and health for people.

So continue to live the pipe dream but the reality is this. Most people can and do see the flawed nature of Communism. As it awlways requires collectivism to start with to work. Which requires having everyone on board. That simple is never going to happen, and why it has always been enforced. As it fails to understand the evolution of humans itself and individualism itselff.

Oh and for interest why

Over the last two weeks, media elites have decided that communism is the plat du jour. It has been featured everywhere from Elle to Teen Vogue and Ash Sarkar has shot to internet fame for her eloquent phrase “I’m a communist you idiot”.

But Opinium has found that communism has a net approval rating of -52, a full 38 points behind libertarianism. Guido also notes that capitalism polls as more popular than socialism…

To prove just what a total fuckwit he can be when he chooses...

Once again, the Dodger tries to paint me as a Marxist, and a "communist apologist"..

Despite the salient fact that not once have I ever been seen either supporting communism, or apologising for any communist dictators.

Even here above, yet again we see Dodge falsely claiming that I have written something that I clearly haven't -- demonstrating how much he lives in his own imagination..

Didge wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:


PMSL, so this is always the worst apologist crap you ever hear from lovers off Communism

Show me a Communist state, that has not had the people oppressed, and there has been many Communist states.

This nonesense when apologists say Communism has been twisted, have clearly never ever read any history properly. They want to believe in some Utopian bullshit that will never exist. The one many reason, is because it simple does not understand humans, and their will to succeed in life. Communism stiffles this at every avenue.

I would prefer people like you actually concentrated on where people are suffering real oppression around the world, based at the hands of sociailist dictators, Theocracies etc. Yet you bemoan capitalism, which has seen a time of greater prosperity for many people in the west. So much so its seen an advance in medical and technological advances. Far more people out of poverty and better off, people living far longer. That is why in the end the Soviet Union failed, as it could not compete economically with the US. Its why China has embraced capitalism within its leftist ideology.

As stated many times, Communism can only work by being enforced, against the will of many people

That is always going to then have countless suffer.

Ben asked you to show a communist philosophy that says we have to kill or starve people. You can't, because one doesn't exist. Have you ever actually read the Communist Manifesto, didge? I have; and though it has a noble end goal, it is unrealistic. But at no point does it suggest murder or starvation and prerequisite or necessity. It aims for full economic equality. Do you actually think Marx and Engels wanted to murder huge numbers of people?

Yes, I have read many philosophies and Communism is just about the worst philosophy.

Which ones? Stalinist Communism? Orthodox Communism? Trotsky Communism? Anarcho-Communism

Just because something does not state something, does not mean that the philosophy by its structure. Will not end up opprressing people. Do you understand that? Where as seen that has always happened. Hence the absurdity of his question and even more so when we have seen communism in practice many times. Even though you and other apologists claim its not real communism.

Hence why I asked him to show me any Communist state in practice that did not oppress people?

The answer is zero and there has been plenty of them which all oppressed people

Which communist Manifesto do you mean and which country that adapted this?

You seem to think only one counts and the one that you like. Which again does not matter. The philosophy looks down upon thos better off and creates a view of jealousy and envy. To the point it causes disharmony between people Thus why we see everytime people suffer when Communism has been implimented. So the question Ben asked, shows he again does not understand the cause and effect of Communism.

A noble end goal?



You really are not grasping the point on this

Marx?

Absolutely, as he was as hateful and racist as they come. He would have ended up making thos better off suffer and like any communist system it would have had to been enforced and countless people suffer. 

So you and others hold this view there is only one true Communism. Its like saying there is only one true Conservatism, and yet we have never seen this. Its the old argument, always used to deflect from the reality. That again Communism has to use Totalitarianism to work. Because its a failed concept. Like I said it fails to understand humans and each time, a group tries to impliment Communism, it has done so by force and collectivism, denying the one thing Marx stated, individualism. Hence why Communism has never ever worked and never will work. It simple has to  enforce its beliefs. Endless suffer and as seen it cannot compete in a capatalist economic world system.

You and ben are simple middle class champagne socialists, thinking that Communism would make a real difference in the world and as seen in practice it never has. Captalism is not great but has brought about prosperity and health for people.

So continue to live the pipe dream but the reality is this. Most people can and do see the flawed nature of Communism. As it awlways requires collectivism to start with to work. Which requires having everyone on board. That simple is never going to happen, and why it has always been enforced. As it fails to understand the evolution of humans itself and individualism itselff.

Oh and for interest why

Over the last two weeks, media elites have decided that communism is the plat du jour. It has been featured everywhere from Elle to Teen Vogue and Ash Sarkar has shot to internet fame for her eloquent phrase “I’m a communist you idiot”.

But Opinium has found that communism has a net approval rating of -52, a full 38 points behind libertarianism. Guido also notes that capitalism polls as more popular than socialism…

Bolded section - you are correct, under Capitalism a huge chunk of the world is oppressed due to dire wages and living conditions, which their governments do nothing about so they can cream off society and let the rich make billions selling cheap goods to the financially better off.

Of course any philosophy can be practiced in a way which oppresses and harms - communism, capitalism, socialist, imperialism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and so and so on. That doesn't mean it is a necessity of those philosophies. NOTHING in Marxist Communism demands people be starved or killed. Communism itself was not the cause of that. Communism is unrealistic, drastically imperfect, hard to practice without causing major issues for a huge number of (mostly very privileged) people, and easy to abuse by a corrupt state. Capitalism is also not without flaws - it encourages greed and selfishness of community and charity, it does necessitate millions to live in poverty and work long hours, it cares not a bit for the environment if not caring makes more money. AGAIN the balance is between the two.

No one is apologising for communism. No one is suggesting ANY state has achieved a communist utopia. You seem to be trying to suggest people are saying something they are not, simply because we don't all turn around and say "OMFG Communism! It's EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL. Only evil or lazy or excuse making idiots would support COMMMMMMMUISM!"

I exaggerate, but that does seem to be close to the point. No one wants communism. No one is saying communist states haven't been awful. No one is asking to tear down every thread of market capitalism in the west.

Eilzel wrote:

Bolded section - you are correct, under Capitalism a huge chunk of the world is oppressed due to dire wages and living conditions, which their governments do nothing about so they can cream off society and let the rich make billions selling cheap goods to the financially better off.

Didge wrote: in the west they are not. Its down to Governements to better spend the money given through the taxes of people. That is not the rich fault is it? And the oppression faced by other nations that are capitalist is because they are basically dictators. Also there is nothing stopping people bettering their lives. This starts at the earliest ages of learning and if parents do not give quality time to the kids, they will start off worse than others. That still does not stop them succeeding in life. So your answer was again piss poor to say the least. basically the views of a Middle class champagne socialist

Of course any philosophy can be practiced in a way which oppresses and harms - communism, capitalism, socialist, imperialism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and so and so on. That doesn't mean it is a necessity of those philosophies. NOTHING in Marxist Communism demands people be starved or killed. Communism itself was not the cause of that.

Didge wrote:Yet more apologist bullshit. As again we have seen that everytime that Communism has been placed in practice what happens? Oppression, the standard of living is dire for most, starvation, countless die and are murdereed under a Totalitarian system. This is the point you cannot grasp, that no matter the nation that adopts Maxism. The same nightmare happens. So it does not matter if it does not demand people be starved or killed. The system demands all people work for the state and people, through collevitivism.Which as seen then ends up seeing countless people starve to death, denied basic freedoms, oppressed etc. 

Every single time

Communism is unrealistic, drastically imperfect, hard to practice without causing major issues for a huge number of (mostly very privileged) people, and easy to abuse by a corrupt state. Capitalism is also not without flaws - it encourages greed and selfishness of community and charity, it does necessitate millions to live in poverty and work long hours, it cares not a bit for the environment if not caring makes more money. AGAIN the balance is between the two.

Didge wrote: So you now think success is greed, where actually i call it people being evnvious where others succeed. Being the fact the same middle class socialists, certainly do not give up their wealth for the poor. I mean how much do you give to those in need?

5%

10%

50%

How much do you think the rich actually give in taxes already?

You see the socialists would rather rob this of someone else. Hence its the most hypocritical bullshit.

Well I believe in Capitalism, even though I think it has many flaws and do care for the envoironment as do many Capitalist EU nations. So to assign that was utterly stupid and desperate

No one is apologising for communism. No one is suggesting ANY state has achieved a communist utopia. You seem to be trying to suggest people are saying something they are not, simply because we don't all turn around and say "OMFG Communism! It's EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL. Only evil or lazy or excuse making idiots would support COMMMMMMMUISM!"

Didge wrote:You certainly are and communism is evil and on a par with Nazism. Which is the problem with Communist apologists. You simple are two b rainwashed to understand the cause and effects off Communism. Its born from a negative view of others better off and wants to basically make all people equal. With no care who gets hurt or suffers in the process. That is evil

I exaggerate, but that does seem to be close to the point. No one wants communism. No one is saying communist states haven't been awful. No one is asking to tear down every thread of market capitalism in the west.

You claimed it was a good philosophy

As seen its bullshit