The Triumph of Socialism

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]666Rich wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
What Has Capitalism Done to Human Experience???

Rise of Capitalism 1700s - Earning money becomes righteous. New social Institution rises: Manufacturies.
-For the first time, Work is seperated from Life and Leisure. Once you punch your time card, you literally set aside your life, who you are, your family ect…

  1. Manufactory Owner’s best tool for profits: Alienation - set aside your identity, your boss controls body and mind of workers. WORK = LIFE STOPS; exploitation of living human beings.
    New Type of Men: focus on money, calculation, distrustful, indifferent of other men. Humans = A mechanism to extract profit.

  2. 2nd Best Tool for Profit: Division of Labor:
    -Scientific Management - Breaking down work into specialized task - Workers develop a very limited range of skills = workers are now easily replaceable. Instead of expressing their human abilities on the job, people are forced to deny their humanity to act as robots. People cannot express themselves in their work.

  • One dimensional, highly repetitive tasks; Humans become appendages to machines.
    -In absense of satisfaction and personal fulfillment, work becomes meaningless.

the 4 social classes we know today are formed -
Upper tier - high degree of personal autonomy, jobs offer variety, creativity and initiative.
middle - jobs are repetitive and mobility is limited.

Why Capitalists Love the Unemployed:
Unemployed are essential to the operation of the capitalist system because they put downward pressure on wages and provide a reserve labor force that can be drawn back into employment when profit and investment conditions require it. Workers fed up with unfulfillment and repetitive tasks or protest too hard are easily replaced from the reserve army of the unemployed.

Wow, where to start. First did you even watch that video w/ Stossel?

  1. This in no way was related to capitalism, oh wait serfdom was fun for everyone. Prior to the industrial revolution + enlightenment there was NO social mobility. Capitalism changed that. Men did not all of a sudden become dishonest etc, if that was the case then what do you call man prior to that? Honest…hardly, humane? right… really think about what you just said.

  2. Division of labor… do you like posting on T-Nation? I am sure you do. Well without division of labor you can forget that. Nobody forces anyone to learn a skillset or limited skillset. Furthermore it is more profitable for the business and the individual to specialize would you rather be trained by Charlie Francis or Bobby Bottleservice (PT). Work being meaningless is once again a choice. I can name many people that work 80+ hours a week and love it. If you find what you love, then division of labor is fantastic because you can focus on it and trade your abilities to someone specializing in another line of work. 4 social classes eh, now answer me this…what was the class structure prior to this? Oh Monarchs + cronies at the top serfs at the bottom. Small middle class of artisans who coincidently specialized in their field.

You use division of labor in your everyday life, how can you even argue its point.
[/quote]

The goal of this post was not to describe capitalism but instead to explain how it has changed the human experience. Meaning, Humans experienced deeper relationships and fulfillment in everyday life than we do and we can thank capitalism and division of labor for that. Could we have gotten here without it is a question I can’t answer but if capitalism was produced by human thought than most likely the answer is yes.

102

Ok, I understand. I believe that is debateable as well. I can agree on the view of contemporary american society being filled with alot of unhappy over worked people. I do also feel that alot of relationship and fulfillment issues are present. I think this has been an issue throughout history though. There are people that are happy with less, and there are people that have become happy through acheiving more. This extends to the concept of fulfillment which could be an entirely different thread. That lies on the individuals value structure. So you work 80 hr plus weeks, and make alot of money you are young and single and happy. Do the same when you are married and it could be a working prison sentance, but unless you change, then you are still valuing that job and the material wealth it brings over your family.

Values, profits, rewards…is not just monetary in nature.

103

I wonder how many people who post about socialism and capitalism have spent time studying economics. These debates are frustrating to read sometimes.

104

I have nothing to contribute to this discussion but just wanna go on record to say Fuck Socialism and Communism and may Karl Marx and all those motherfuckers rot in hell with the Ayatollah Khomeini’s dick firmly up their ass.

Thank you.

105

[quote]Agressive Napkin wrote:
I wonder how many people who post about socialism and capitalism have spent time studying economics. These debates are frustrating to read sometimes.[/quote]

any book suggestions?

106

[quote]ephrem wrote:
orion wrote:
ephrem wrote:
orion wrote:You find that “reprehensible”?

You should not work with people under 30 then.

…i just liked the way that sounded tbh, and secularization freed many of us [of any age] from dogmatic thinking. Besides, we’ve invented the “poldermodel” whereby, through agreement and concession, parties find solutions that benefit their goals without conflict, because at the end of the day the old VOC motto, “Jesus is good, but profit is better” still holds true…

I am all for dealing with other people.

I do not consider it “dealing” with them if they point a gun at me.

Not even when they are the majority of an arbitrary speck of land.

I find that this is used when the course of action proposed is in no way profitable for me.

…what are you talking about? If the profit is substantial enough no company will allow you to stand in it’s way, freemarket or not…

[/quote]

Which is why we build governments.

Once we establish though that they can redistribute wealth most of that is distributed from the poor and the middle class to the super rich.

See: eminent domain, the bank bailouts, the redistributory effects of inflation.

The fact that we seem to have accepted that governments can take money to give it someone else, for what reason ever, does not make the “power” of big business smaller, it makes it much worse.

107

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
666Rich wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
What Has Capitalism Done to Human Experience???

Rise of Capitalism 1700s - Earning money becomes righteous. New social Institution rises: Manufacturies.
-For the first time, Work is seperated from Life and Leisure. Once you punch your time card, you literally set aside your life, who you are, your family ect…

  1. Manufactory Owner’s best tool for profits: Alienation - set aside your identity, your boss controls body and mind of workers. WORK = LIFE STOPS; exploitation of living human beings.
    New Type of Men: focus on money, calculation, distrustful, indifferent of other men. Humans = A mechanism to extract profit.

  2. 2nd Best Tool for Profit: Division of Labor:
    -Scientific Management - Breaking down work into specialized task - Workers develop a very limited range of skills = workers are now easily replaceable. Instead of expressing their human abilities on the job, people are forced to deny their humanity to act as robots. People cannot express themselves in their work.

  • One dimensional, highly repetitive tasks; Humans become appendages to machines.
    -In absense of satisfaction and personal fulfillment, work becomes meaningless.

the 4 social classes we know today are formed -
Upper tier - high degree of personal autonomy, jobs offer variety, creativity and initiative.
middle - jobs are repetitive and mobility is limited.

Why Capitalists Love the Unemployed:
Unemployed are essential to the operation of the capitalist system because they put downward pressure on wages and provide a reserve labor force that can be drawn back into employment when profit and investment conditions require it. Workers fed up with unfulfillment and repetitive tasks or protest too hard are easily replaced from the reserve army of the unemployed.

Wow, where to start. First did you even watch that video w/ Stossel?

  1. This in no way was related to capitalism, oh wait serfdom was fun for everyone. Prior to the industrial revolution + enlightenment there was NO social mobility. Capitalism changed that. Men did not all of a sudden become dishonest etc, if that was the case then what do you call man prior to that? Honest…hardly, humane? right… really think about what you just said.

  2. Division of labor… do you like posting on T-Nation? I am sure you do. Well without division of labor you can forget that. Nobody forces anyone to learn a skillset or limited skillset. Furthermore it is more profitable for the business and the individual to specialize would you rather be trained by Charlie Francis or Bobby Bottleservice (PT). Work being meaningless is once again a choice. I can name many people that work 80+ hours a week and love it. If you find what you love, then division of labor is fantastic because you can focus on it and trade your abilities to someone specializing in another line of work. 4 social classes eh, now answer me this…what was the class structure prior to this? Oh Monarchs + cronies at the top serfs at the bottom. Small middle class of artisans who coincidently specialized in their field.

You use division of labor in your everyday life, how can you even argue its point.

The goal of this post was not to describe capitalism but instead to explain how it has changed the human experience. Meaning, Humans experienced deeper relationships and fulfillment in everyday life than we do and we can thank capitalism and division of labor for that. Could we have gotten here without it is a question I can’t answer but if capitalism was produced by human thought than most likely the answer is yes.

[/quote]

I do agree that we had a much more intense “human experience” ahile toiling on the fields 18 hours a day while dying of dysentery, or cholera, or typhus but I am glad my life is not that hardcore.

Sometimes I enjoy being confronted with less “human experience”.

Then, capitalism was produced by human thought the way you might think it is. It is an emergent system that was never planned in any way. Insofar the old idea that if an economic system that just happened could be improved by planning an even better one is probably not true.

108

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
Agressive Napkin wrote:
I wonder how many people who post about socialism and capitalism have spent time studying economics. These debates are frustrating to read sometimes.

any book suggestions?[/quote]

Murray Rothbard – “Man, Economy, & State”

109

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
Agressive Napkin wrote:
I wonder how many people who post about socialism and capitalism have spent time studying economics. These debates are frustrating to read sometimes.

any book suggestions?

Murray Rothbard – “Man, Economy, & State”
http://mises.org/books/ManEconState.epub[/quote]

Good suggestion!

Also, “Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis”, by Ludwig Von Mises

This is one of the most robust refutations of socialism – in all forms of its Collectivist creeds – one will ever read.

110

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
Agressive Napkin wrote:
I wonder how many people who post about socialism and capitalism have spent time studying economics. These debates are frustrating to read sometimes.

any book suggestions?

Murray Rothbard – “Man, Economy, & State”[/quote]

Very nice choice. However for an introduction I would recommend an intro to micro and intro to macro textbook. You can get them for like 5 bucks used, easy read, goes over all the basic concepts and ideas about economics. From there then you could read more in depth stuff… I wouldnt start with Mises right off the bat. Freakanomics is a fun book to apply economics to everyday life as well. For a philosophical grounding in economics read some Locke and Smith.

BUT definatley start with those intro textbooks. You will thank me.

111

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
Agressive Napkin wrote:
I wonder how many people who post about socialism and capitalism have spent time studying economics. These debates are frustrating to read sometimes.

any book suggestions?

Murray Rothbard – “Man, Economy, & State”[/quote]

The ant and the grashopper.

:wink:

112

[quote]orion wrote:
DixiesFinest wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
Agressive Napkin wrote:
I wonder how many people who post about socialism and capitalism have spent time studying economics. These debates are frustrating to read sometimes.

any book suggestions?

Murray Rothbard – “Man, Economy, & State”

The ant and the grashopper.[/quote]

Hahahahahaha! Zing!

One summer day a grasshopper was singing and chirping and hopping about.  He was having a wonderful time.  He saw an ant who was busy gathering and storing grain for the winter. 

            "Stop and talk to me," said the grasshopper.   "We can sing some songs and dance a while."

            "Oh no," said the ant.  "Winter is coming.  I am storing up food for the winter.  I think you should do the same."

            "Oh, I can't be bothered," said the grasshopper.  "Winter is a long time off.   There is plenty of food."   So the grasshopper continued to dance and sing and chip and the ant continued to work.

 When winter came the grasshopper had no food and was starving.  He went  to the ant's house and asked, "Can I have some wheat or maybe a few kernels of corn.  Without it I will starve," whined the grasshopper.

"You danced last summer," said the ants in disgust.   "You can continue to dance."  And they gave him no food.
113

That familiar story, in updated, 2002 form, now reads:

"The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer, building his house and laying in supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and he laughs, dances and plays away the summer.

"Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ants should be allowed to be warm and well-fed while others are cold and starving.

"CBS, NBC and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ants in their comfortable homes with tables filled with food. America is stunned at the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so unjustly?

"Al Gore exclaims in an interview with Peter Jennings that the ants have gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper and calls for an immediate tax hike on the ants to make them pay their `fair share.’

"Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration at the entrance to the ant city, where the news stations film the group singing, `We Shall Overcome.’ Jesse then marches his demonstrators into the anthill, where they kneel to pray for the grasshopper and demand franchises and reparations for Jesse and his grasshopper friends.

“Finally, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission drafts the `Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act,’ retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ants are fined for failing to have an affirmative-action program for green bugs and, having nothing left with which to pay retroactive taxes, the ant city is confiscated by the government.”

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_15_18/ai_84971459/

114

[quote]orion wrote:
That familiar story, in updated, 2002 form, now reads:

"The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer, building his house and laying in supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and he laughs, dances and plays away the summer.

"Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ants should be allowed to be warm and well-fed while others are cold and starving.

"CBS, NBC and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ants in their comfortable homes with tables filled with food. America is stunned at the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so unjustly?

"Al Gore exclaims in an interview with Peter Jennings that the ants have gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper and calls for an immediate tax hike on the ants to make them pay their `fair share.’

"Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration at the entrance to the ant city, where the news stations film the group singing, `We Shall Overcome.’ Jesse then marches his demonstrators into the anthill, where they kneel to pray for the grasshopper and demand franchises and reparations for Jesse and his grasshopper friends.

“Finally, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission drafts the `Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act,’ retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ants are fined for failing to have an affirmative-action program for green bugs and, having nothing left with which to pay retroactive taxes, the ant city is confiscated by the government.”

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_15_18/ai_84971459/[/quote]

yea, what were those stupid lazy grasshoppers thinking? lololol

115

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
The goal of this post was not to describe capitalism but instead to explain how it has changed the human experience. Meaning, Humans experienced deeper relationships and fulfillment in everyday life than we do and we can thank capitalism and division of labor for that. Could we have gotten here without it is a question I can’t answer but if capitalism was produced by human thought than most likely the answer is yes.

[/quote]

Wrong. The gowl of the post was to post everything you find wrong with capitalism. You totally ignored all the good it has done, such as, you know, people not dying when they’re fucking 30 from poverty.

116

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Go read some of the eyewitness accounts of what the West Germans saw in Eat Germany after the wall fell. The USSR was a horrifying shithole compared to the capitalist West.
Google it found nothing. Many East Germans, then and now did not want to join a singular German entity. They wanted to slough the East German totalitarian regime that was considered regressive even by neighboring Eastern Bloc nations. The West Germans wanted to ‘buy’ East Germany and flip it like an old real estate property. It didn’t work out like that.

Who what where? You guys bring up all these points, about Russians fleeing Soviet Union, and the liberated concentration camps of East Germany…yet never bring any proof. You want me to bring proof of my statements? I can. You guys on the other hand, can’t. The on shed of proof you brought was contrary to fact, and contradicted itself within the same text. Maybe, if you bring something…you know, substantial?

The USSR was a horrifying shithole compared to the capitalist West.
That’s very off. I would admit for a wealth or upper middle class American the USSR didn’t have as much to offer materially. But for 80% of the world, and the lower classes of Western Europe and the USA, the USSR would have been a better lifestyle and system.

I suppose the ‘Capitalist West,’ was pure benevolence, as if the CIA initiated Kissinger pogroms in Argentina, Chile, Brazil, that left nearly millions dead, ‘were not horrific shit holes’ compared to the USSR, right? Yet I thought Capitalism was so perfect it didn’t need to take heavy handed action like that? Like the manufactured CIA war in Vietnam that left millions dead, and was illegal as the Nazi invasion of Poland, and colonial to the core, as an act of the peaceful Capitalist benevolence you speak of.

To simply try ‘force’ a little bit, the people who did not want to be a part of our system under the rifle butt of the gun, and skin burning chemical weapons to just, you know, see the light.

Or how about, the glorious ‘Capitalist West,’ that is Mexico, having countless peasants risking their life to crawl through septic tanks to the great Capitalist United States? Isn’t Capitalism supposed to be better for everyone? Why are 95% of Capitalist nations impoverished shitholes, yet of course you say “WELL THOSE ARE THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES!,” and only count the ‘successful’ ones.

This is IRONIC because the successful ones you count, are about as Capitalist as China is Communist. Spain, France, Germany, Italy, UK, Canada are all SOCIALIST countries, and these make up nigh ALL of your successful CAPITALIST COUNTRY examples.

So geee, if Capitalism has failed in every country its been in, why are people so eager to try it again?

I guess Capitalism, and Socialism (Communist Ideology), are both failed systems…then perhaps you are getting what I’ve been saying all the long. GET YOUR MIND OUT OF THE COLD WAR MENTALITY! It’s not about the fucking label on the system, it’s about the holistic implementation of it.

The hilarious part is though that he accepts parts of Sowjet propaganda at face value, because they of all people were telling the truth.
And this is why, I continuosly compare, the article to things like a ‘1957 Pravda’ newspaper, or say alot of people in the West are as brainwashed as ‘North Korean Slave Drones,’ right… Becuase I believe everything the Communist say is true! You’re real sharp there, bud.

My whole point is not that Communist ideology gives birth to paradise, or that Capitalism is a failed system. I’m saying we need to move past this Cold War thought, into new holistic systems that envelope the best aspects of either. Yet you guys are so regressive you take that is, 'HE R @ KOMOONEST??!"

Seriously, get in the 21st century.[/quote]

/sigh

I wasn’t alive during the Cold War, so I’m hardly being influenced by it.

117

Also:

You realize that the East Germans BUILT A FUCKING WALL to keep their people from fleeing to the horribleness of capitalism in the west right?

118

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Also:

You realize that the East Germans BUILT A FUCKING WALL to keep their people from fleeing to the horribleness of capitalism in the west right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall[/quote]

You clearly do not understand the purpose of the “antifaschistischer Schutzwall”.

You see, its purpose was not to keep the communists in, but the fascists out.

Now there are people that might argue that the whole layout of the wall makes that highly unlikely but will you really listen to imperialist, bourgeois propaganda?

119

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:Also, “Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis”, by Ludwig Von Mises

This is one of the most robust refutations of socialism – in all forms of its Collectivist creeds – one will ever read.[/quote]

If you already agree with him. If you haven’t made up your mind and/or actually understand socialism, it falls quite flat.

120

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:Also, “Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis”, by Ludwig Von Mises

This is one of the most robust refutations of socialism – in all forms of its Collectivist creeds – one will ever read.

If you already agree with him. If you haven’t made up your mind and/or actually understand socialism, it falls quite flat.
[/quote]

You’ve read it then?