A World Without Capitalism and Tradable Shares?

[bripat9643]

So is socialism, moron.

Unlike slavery, feudalism, and capitalism socialism does not divide society into two unequal, warring factions. Slavery's masters and slaves and feudalism's lords and serfs and capitalisms owners and employees have no counterparts in a classless, stateless economy.

Historical materialism - Wikipedia

It divides society into two classes: The rulers and the ruled. How is that any better than capitalism? Your claim that socialism doesn't have classes is obvious bunk.

 

[georgephillip]

or example, class warfare. Nazis believed in different classes of people, and sought to bring both together under the control of the Nazi regime. Communists also believed in different classes of people, and sought to bring the workers under the control of the Communists, and purging the bourgeoisie, and slaughtering them.

How did Nazis value individuals?
They didn't.

"Death to Marxists"

Political Prisoners

"Nazis did not find value in individuality.

"For the Nazis, individualism was an egotistic, culture-corroding, Jewish value that would tear apart the fabric of the communal nation.

"The Nazis insisted that the individual had value only in his or her membership in the collective racial community.

"A key Nazi criticism of Weimar democracy in particular and liberal democracy in general was that it emphasized the individual.

"This emphasis in turn misled or duped members of a race into relinquishing their 'natural' race consciousness."

 

[bripat9643]

or example, class warfare. Nazis believed in different classes of people, and sought to bring both together under the control of the Nazi regime. Communists also believed in different classes of people, and sought to bring the workers under the control of the Communists, and purging the bourgeoisie, and slaughtering them.

How did Nazis value individuals?
They didn't.

"Death to Marxists"

Political Prisoners

"Nazis did not find value in individuality.

"For the Nazis, individualism was an egotistic, culture-corroding, Jewish value that would tear apart the fabric of the communal nation.

"The Nazis insisted that the individual had value only in his or her membership in the collective racial community.

"A key Nazi criticism of Weimar democracy in particular and liberal democracy in general was that it emphasized the individual.

"This emphasis in turn misled or duped members of a race into relinquishing their 'natural' race consciousness."

Just like Dem NAZIs.

Democrats value groups, and they hate certain groups. They don't give a crap about individuals. They have said so many times.

Trump and the GOP's cult of individualism was always selfish garbage

The pandemic exposes the truth: Right-wing "individualism" is just selfish garbage

 

[georgephillip]

Communists also believed in different classes of people, and sought to bring the workers under the control of the Communists, and purging the bourgeoisie, and slaughtering them.

Soviet communists believed there was no way to take a feudal, agrarian country with little industrial base and transform it into a socialist (post capitalist) society without a leadership class.

"The term classless society refers to a society in which no one is born into a social class[citation needed].

"Distinctions of wealth, income, education, culture, or social network might arise and would only be determined by individual experience and achievement in such a society.

"For the opposite see class society.

"Thus the concept posits not the absence of a social hierarchy but the uninheritability of class status."

Classless society - Wikipedia

 

[georgephillip]

Capitalism does not believe in different classes of people. The current CEO of Walmart, born in Memphis, to a Vietnam veteran, whose first job, was unloading trucks at a distribution center, for a low hourly wage. He worked his way up, and became CEO of Walmart.

Capitalism doesn't exist without owners and workers; your example of the current CEO of Walmart simply proves a few who are willing to exploit their fellow workers will become management; it doesn't change the nature of capitalism.

 

[georgephillip]

In Capitalism, race is entirely irrelevant.

Capitalism was born of slavery and genocide.
Look at the population of any US prison today and you'll see how wrong your assessment is.
White supremacy and capitalism can't exist without one another.

 

[Andylusion]

For the same reason, we also don't need a national government.

There may be hope for you after all
View attachment 455435
"'Withering away of the state' is a Marxist concept coined by Friedrich Engels referring to the idea that, with realization of socialism, the social institution of a state will eventually become obsolete and disappear as the society will be able to govern itself without the state and its coercive enforcement of the law."

Withering away of the state - Wikipedia

Great. Name one country that after adopting socialist ideology, that the state withered away?

Why would you, from a logical stand point, think that would happen?

After Castro slaughtered his way to power, and the slaughtered the people who put in him in power, did you really think he would allow the power he killed and murdered for years to get, just wither away?

Did Stalin? Did Pol Pot? Do you see Kim Jong Un doing that?

Last I checked China isn't doing that, even has they adopt free-market capitalism.

The state will never give up power.

And no society exists without state government. There is no 'self-governing' society, because when you tell everyone that they are a law to themselves, they kill, steal, and vandalize.

 

[Andylusion]

Capitalism does not believe in different classes of people. The current CEO of Walmart, born in Memphis, to a Vietnam veteran, whose first job, was unloading trucks at a distribution center, for a low hourly wage. He worked his way up, and became CEO of Walmart.

Capitalism doesn't exist without owners and workers; your example of the current CEO of Walmart simply proves a few who are willing to exploit their fellow workers will become management; it doesn't change the nature of capitalism.

That is true, only because people don't want to be owners.

If everyone in society decided they want to start their own business, and everyone be the owners of their own business... they could do that. I know people that have. I know people that fix cars out of their garage.

And that is capitalism. When you use your own money, to invest in your own business, that is capitalism, even if that business involves one person.

1-800-GOT-JUNK, was started by a high school student that had saved up $900 for a job, and bought a truck, and started making money by hauling junk.

That is capitalism. People investing their own wealth and capital, to earn more money for themselves.

So yes, Capitalism could, and does exist in situations without owners and workers. A guy digs a well on his land, so that he can water crops, or water for his cattle. What is he doing? He's investing for his own benefit.

Now the fact is, most people don't want to be owners. Most people want to be 'exploited' to have a job and earn money. Most people don't want to put in 50 to 70 hours a week, running their own business.

And as much as you cry about being exploited, the people who are not exploited are the worst off of any people. Countries where there is no exploitation, end up with poverty and starvation.

Millions of people from all over the world, specifically come to the US to be exploited.

 

[Andylusion]

In Capitalism, race is entirely irrelevant.

Capitalism was born of slavery and genocide.
Look at the population of any US prison today and you'll see how wrong your assessment is.
White supremacy and capitalism can't exist without one another.

Capitalism has nothing to do with crime, and prison population, nor did it start with genocide and slavery.

The reason people are in prison, is because they committed crime.

Are you suggesting that in socialist states, that criminals are not put in prison?

 

[Andylusion]

So is socialism, moron.

Unlike slavery, feudalism, and capitalism socialism does not divide society into two unequal, warring factions. Slavery's masters and slaves and feudalism's lords and serfs and capitalisms owners and employees have no counterparts in a classless, stateless economy.

Historical materialism - Wikipedia

Capitalism does not divide anyone. Nor does it make people into warring factions.

Before 1996 Bezo was an employee.

Before Apple Computer Steve Jobs was a hippie in a commune.

The vast vast majority of the wealthy today, started as regular people working normal jobs. Such as the CEO of Walmart, who started as a low-wage hourly worker.

Phil Robertson was a drunk at a bar. Brian Scudamore was a high school student.

There is no divide. Some people at the top, fall. Some at the bottom rise. Some rich become poor, and some poor become rich.

There is a huge amount of turn over at the top.

Socialism divides people into groups. That's why you are here trying to push that narrative that it is the poor against the rich, because that is fundamental to the socialist ideology.

But Capitalism does not do that.

In Socialism, you are either part of the government, living in luxury, or you are part of the peasant class that lives in poverty.

In Socialism, if you are born on the Chinese farm commune, you live on the farm commune, and you die on the farm commune. You are born poor, live poor, and die poor, and that is your one and only lot in life.

Just like in Cuba before they started allowing capitalism, your best hope was to get a degree in college, to achieve your life long dream of .... being a waiter at the tourist resort. That was the best you could hope for. The alternative was prostitution.

Meanwhile, the rich elites in government, live in luxury. Clear divide between groups in socialism.

 

[Andylusion]

Anyone who believes anything Noam Chomsky has to say is a certifiable moron.

Chomsky's the most important public intellectual in US history; you're not.

"Avram Noam Chomsky[a] (born December 7, 1928) is an American linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, historian,Noam Chomsky - Wikipedia[c] social critic, and political activist.

"Sometimes called 'the father of modern linguistics',[d] Chomsky is also a major figure in analytic philosophy and one of the founders of the field of cognitive science.

"He is Laureate Professor of Linguistics at the University of Arizona and Institute Professor Emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and is the author of more than 150 books on topics such as linguistics, war, politics, and mass media. Ideologically, he aligns with anarcho-syndicalism and libertarian socialism."

Noam Chomsky - Wikipedia

Chomsky has been proven wrong endlessly on his economics.

Chomsky is a linguist. If you want to know about languages, by all means read his books on languages.

But if you believe anything a linguist says on economics, something he knows nothing about, that would make you foolish.

 

[georgephillip]

So does Socialism. Socialism is the direct descendant of slavery and feudalism.
Socialism has society divided into two groups: Masters and slaves. If you doubt that, then you haven't read up on how the entire Soviet system in the 1930s, was built on Gulags.

"In Marxist thought, a communist society or the communist system is the type of society and economic system postulated to emerge from technological advances in the productive forces, representing the ultimate goal of the political ideology of communism.

"A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless and stateless,[3] implying the end of the exploitation of labour.[4][5]"

Communist society - Wikipedia

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So does Socialism. Socialism is the direct descendant of slavery and feudalism.
Socialism has society divided into two groups: Masters and slaves. If you doubt that, then you haven't read up on how the entire Soviet system in the 1930s, was built on Gulags.

"In Marxist thought, a communist society or the communist system is the type of society and economic system postulated to emerge from technological advances in the productive forces, representing the ultimate goal of the political ideology of communism.

"A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless and stateless,[3] implying the end of the exploitation of labour.[4][5]"

Communist society - Wikipedia

Marxist thought

Talk about an oxymoron......DURR

 

[Andylusion]

Are you saying NAZI socialism was a fraud? I've got news for you, moron: all socialism is fraud.

Nazis killed German communists and millions of Soviet socialists. Nazis were capitalists as much as they were white supremacists.

We've already countered that claim. It's not true, whether you admit it or not. And the Soviets were very much racists in every sense, except that they denied it, while nazis openly admitted it. But Soviets slaughtered the Jews and undesirables just as much.



Nazis and Communists, were both Socialists.

 

[Andylusion]

So does Socialism. Socialism is the direct descendant of slavery and feudalism.
Socialism has society divided into two groups: Masters and slaves. If you doubt that, then you haven't read up on how the entire Soviet system in the 1930s, was built on Gulags.

"In Marxist thought, a communist society or the communist system is the type of society and economic system postulated to emerge from technological advances in the productive forces, representing the ultimate goal of the political ideology of communism.

"A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless and stateless,[3] implying the end of the exploitation of labour.[4][5]"

Communist society - Wikipedia

Right... but it doesn't work that way. You can post what they claim communism is... that doesn't change what it actually is.

You can say "communism would end the exploitation of labour"... and that's fine to SAY that... but words don't change actions.

Every socialist system that has ever existed, was vastly more exploitative of labour than Capitalism.

 

[Andylusion]

or example, class warfare. Nazis believed in different classes of people, and sought to bring both together under the control of the Nazi regime. Communists also believed in different classes of people, and sought to bring the workers under the control of the Communists, and purging the bourgeoisie, and slaughtering them.

How did Nazis value individuals?
They didn't.

"Death to Marxists"

Political Prisoners

"Nazis did not find value in individuality.

"For the Nazis, individualism was an egotistic, culture-corroding, Jewish value that would tear apart the fabric of the communal nation.

"The Nazis insisted that the individual had value only in his or her membership in the collective racial community.

"A key Nazi criticism of Weimar democracy in particular and liberal democracy in general was that it emphasized the individual.

"This emphasis in turn misled or duped members of a race into relinquishing their 'natural' race consciousness."

How did Nazis value individuals?
They didn't.

I agree. Nazis did not value individuals. Agreed.

Communists didn't value individuals either.

“a single death is a tragedy, a million deaths are a statistic” -Joseph Stalin

In fact all Socialist ideologies, by definition do not value individuals. Because if you value the individual, then you will respect their rights, and their property. This means you allow some to be rich, and some to be poor, because those are the results of individual choices.

 

[Andylusion]

Communists also believed in different classes of people, and sought to bring the workers under the control of the Communists, and purging the bourgeoisie, and slaughtering them.

Soviet communists believed there was no way to take a feudal, agrarian country with little industrial base and transform it into a socialist (post capitalist) society without a leadership class.

"The term classless society refers to a society in which no one is born into a social class[citation needed].

"Distinctions of wealth, income, education, culture, or social network might arise and would only be determined by individual experience and achievement in such a society.

"For the opposite see class society.

"Thus the concept posits not the absence of a social hierarchy but the uninheritability of class status."

Classless society - Wikipedia

Again, you can post all you want of what Socialists claim. The claims never fit the results.

For example, claims that there is no social hierarchy, and the Un-inheritability, of class status.

Tell that to North Korea. Kim Jong Un, son of leader Kim Jong il, son of Kim Jong Sung.

Cuba, where Fidel Castro was replaced by Raul Castro, and likely to be replaced by another Castro.

China, where Xi Jinping was the son of Xi Zhongxun the revolutionary.

I haven't seen a full fledged socialist system yet, that didn't have inherited power, unless the leaders didn't have children, or hand only girls.

Even then, even if the party leadership didn't have an line of succession, other members did.

Corruption in Vietnam - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Vu mentioned that for high raking government positions, nepotism is typically an underlying criterion for selection.​

This is universal in all Socialist systems. So you can post what Socialists claim socialism will do... but it simply never matches what actually happens.

 

[bripat9643]

So does Socialism. Socialism is the direct descendant of slavery and feudalism.
Socialism has society divided into two groups: Masters and slaves. If you doubt that, then you haven't read up on how the entire Soviet system in the 1930s, was built on Gulags.

"In Marxist thought, a communist society or the communist system is the type of society and economic system postulated to emerge from technological advances in the productive forces, representing the ultimate goal of the political ideology of communism.

"A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless and stateless,[3] implying the end of the exploitation of labour.[4][5]"

Communist society - Wikipedia

In other words, it's a fairytale. Communism is where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average.

 

[georgephillip]

And no society exists without state government. There is no 'self-governing' society, because when you tell everyone that they are a law to themselves, they kill, steal, and vandalize.

Because all pre-existing societies were constrained by natural and artificial scarcity; that will not always be the case assuming a small minority of parasites does not continue to "own" the collective means of production.

Communist society - Wikipedia

"In Marxist thought, a communist society or the communist system is the type of society and economic system postulated to emerge from technological advances in the productive forces, representing the ultimate goal of the political ideology of communism.

"A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless and stateless,[3] implying the end of the exploitation of labour.[4]"

 

[dblack]

And no society exists without state government. There is no 'self-governing' society, because when you tell everyone that they are a law to themselves, they kill, steal, and vandalize.

Because all pre-existing societies were constrained by natural and artificial scarcity; that will not always be the case assuming a small minority of parasites does not continue to "own" the collective means of production.

Communist society - Wikipedia

"In Marxist thought, a communist society or the communist system is the type of society and economic system postulated to emerge from technological advances in the productive forces, representing the ultimate goal of the political ideology of communism.

"A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless and stateless,[3] implying the end of the exploitation of labour.[4]"

More commie barf? Do they pay you george?