Socialism... A rationalization of escape.

[PubliusInfinitum]

Capitalism is the natural order of economics...

Socialism, which is communism at an early stage of development... is a function of secularism, and the unbridled arrogance of the Social Scientists that they've some means to control the Economy...

It's the same arrogance which allows them to believe that they can control the environment.

When the left has finally pissed the world off and the inevitable spasm comes which destroys them; what will rise from tha ashes of that extinction will be Capitalism... Defined as the free exchange of the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties; capitalism is simply how people trade the value which they possess for the value which they desire, want or need... and it works every time that it is tried...

What I love about the advocates of 'mixed economies' is how they clammer on about how corruption is inherent in capitalism; so they demand that 'just enough Socialism is necessary to keep capitalism in check...' when the socialism is being advanced by the same beings which could not manage to honestly exchange fair value for fair value... So their SOLUTUION is to give those same CORRUPTIBLE PEOPLE MORE POWER... through which their unbridled arrogance will corrupt far more deeply, and in ways which are far more destructive...

Socialism is a lie... it's not an economic system of any kind... it's a ideology... which uses economics as a means to its decietful end.

Socialism is merely a rationalization where the individual is said to be incapable of maintaining their responsibilities, so those responsibilities are placed upon the State. What the advocates of Social Science fail to recognize is that liberty, FREEDOM, is directly attributable TO THE RESPONSIBILITY RESTING WITH THE INDIVIDUAL and that/those individual holding himself and his neighbor accountable to those responsibilties. The responsibility to fairly trade with their neighbor, is an intrinsic, inseparable element of their human RIGHT... where that responsibility is forfeited, the right is forfeited and with that right goes FREEDOM.

The solution is not to succumb the the weakness which seeks to rest one's burdeon of responsibility upon the ethereal myth of "The People"... as such will never be the option of the freeman to look back upon... the solution is to hold one's self and each other accountable; and to do so through, in the case of the United States, the Constitutional Republic which was designed to DO JUST THAT. The Constitution that was designed to LIMIT the scope of Government power and to protect the rights of the individual and to HOLD EACH ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS in maintaining their responsibility to not infringe upon the rights of another, in the process of exercising their rights.

Socialism... the Advocacy of Social Science is not a viable economic theory... Communism is not a viable theory of cultural cooperation... They're one in the same rationalization, where each individual advocate wants to separate the THEMSELVES from their RESPONSIBILITIES... and this I suspect in yet another human attempt to 'have their cake and eat it too...' Left-think is little more than a means to find an 'easier way'... than the day to day struggle, the burden common in each one of us, to do the right thing...

The worst part; and I do mean the worst... is that the liberty born from the US Constitution; the individual liberty to freely exchange the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties... the freedom to choose our own path, to set out own course... which we enjoy today, despite its many imperfections; THIS IS AS EASY AS IT GETS

The socialists living amongst us are determined to dream us back into bondage... where inevitably, should we fail to stop them, the generations which follow us will wonder how lame we had to be, to freely give up our freedom, on the hope that we could separate our freedom from our simple responsibility to do the right thing.

 

[Agnapostate]

Seeing this the first time in its condensed form was bad enough.

 

[Newby]

Awesome post, PI.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Seeing this the first time in its condensed form was bad enough.

Ahh... needless to say, the return of Ag-whats-her-name, doesn't bode well for the health of one Live Uninhibited.

It's good to see that you've learned your place Ag... It shows a wisdom born of experience that you've opted to wholly avoid the argument where there is no means for a contest to prevail.

Good for you!

And that's 'doubly-good for freedom...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Awesome post, PI.

Thanks Newb...

Isn't cool how the opposition has run for the rhetorical tall grass?

That's what reason does to the unreasonable... it crushes their means to confuse and distract and otherwise undermine the culture.

So they turn to those things which serve those ends.

 

[Newby]

Awesome post, PI.

Thanks Newb...

Isn't cool how the opposition has run for the rhetorical tall grass?

That's what reason does to the unreasonable... it crushes their means to confuse and distract and otherwise undermine the culture.

So they turn to those things which serve those ends.

If you're not a writer of some kind, you should be. You're very talented at very clearly and concisely stating an opinion with a lot of wit and sarcasm added in. I love it!

Not to mention, you're absolutely right.

 

[Agnapostate]

Ahh... needless to say, the return of Ag-whats-her-name, doesn't bode well for the health of one Live Uninhibited.

It's good to see that you've learned your place Ag... It shows a wisdom born of experience that you've opted to wholly avoid the argument where there is no means for a contest to prevail.

Good for you!

And that's 'doubly-good for freedom...

Your idiocy and ignorance of economics has already been rebutted elsewhere; there's no need for repetition.

 

[Gurdari]

Capitalism is the natural order of economics...

Socialism, which is communism at an early stage of development... is a function of secularism, and the unbridled arrogance of the Social Scientists that they've some means to control the Economy...

It's the same arrogance which allows them to believe that they can control the environment.

When the left has finally pissed the world off and the inevitable spasm comes which destroys them; what will rise from tha ashes of that extinction will be Capitalism... Defined as the free exchange of the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties; capitalism is simply how people trade the value which they possess for the value which they desire, want or need... and it works every time that it is tried...

What I love about the advocates of 'mixed economies' is how they clammer on about how corruption is inherent in capitalism; so they demand that 'just enough Socialism is necessary to keep capitalism in check...' when the socialism is being advanced by the same beings which could not manage to honestly exchange fair value for fair value... So their SOLUTUION is to give those same CORRUPTIBLE PEOPLE MORE POWER... through which their unbridled arrogance will corrupt far more deeply, and in ways which are far more destructive...

Socialism is a lie... it's not an economic system of any kind... it's a ideology... which uses economics as a means to its decietful end.

Socialism is merely a rationalization where the individual is said to be incapable of maintaining their responsibilities, so those responsibilities are placed upon the State. What the advocates of Social Science fail to recognize is that liberty, FREEDOM, is directly attributable TO THE RESPONSIBILITY RESTING WITH THE INDIVIDUAL and that/those individual holding himself and his neighbor accountable to those responsibilties. The responsibility to fairly trade with their neighbor, is an intrinsic, inseparable element of their human RIGHT... where that responsibility is forfeited, the right is forfeited and with that right goes FREEDOM.

The solution is not to succumb the the weakness which seeks to rest one's burdeon of responsibility upon the ethereal myth of "The People"... as such will never be the option of the freeman to look back upon... the solution is to hold one's self and each other accountable; and to do so through, in the case of the United States, the Constitutional Republic which was designed to DO JUST THAT. The Constitution that was designed to LIMIT the scope of Government power and to protect the rights of the individual and to HOLD EACH ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS in maintaining their responsibility to not infringe upon the rights of another, in the process of exercising their rights.

Socialism... the Advocacy of Social Science is not a viable economic theory... Communism is not a viable theory of cultural cooperation... They're one in the same rationalization, where each individual advocate wants to separate the THEMSELVES from their RESPONSIBILITIES... and this I suspect in yet another human attempt to 'have their cake and eat it too...' Left-think is little more than a means to find an 'easier way'... than the day to day struggle, the burden common in each one of us, to do the right thing...

The worst part; and I do mean the worst... is that the liberty born from the US Constitution; the individual liberty to freely exchange the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties... the freedom to choose our own path, to set out own course... which we enjoy today, despite its many imperfections; THIS IS AS EASY AS IT GETS

The socialists living amongst us are determined to dream us back into bondage... where inevitably, should we fail to stop them, the generations which follow us will wonder how lame we had to be, to freely give up our freedom, on the hope that we could separate our freedom from our simple responsibility to do the right thing.

Can't tell if you think this is a serious argument or not... I pray you're beeing clever.



This is priceless "The socialists living amongst us are determined to dream us back into bondage..."

hahaha so is this "Left-think is little more than a means to find an 'easier way'... "

Socialism can be what we make it, it isn't as simple as some may think, nor is any other social model for co-habiation and sustainable existence. The natural order? Look at nature. You'll find examples of communal or socialist behaviour, and every-man-for-himself examples too.

Why do humans have families... because we're 'genetically' socialist? Or because we found a workable model for a certain stage in our evolution, to make sure certain needs were met, etc. Why do we form communities? Why work together to mutual benefit if it's so evil? Perhaps because if we acted like individuals all the time, self-centered and only self-motivated we'd have died off a long time ago. Socialistic behaviour allows us greater ability as we become more than the sum of our parts so to speak.

You sound like you just discovered Ayn Rand and think her anti-collectivist pseudo-argument is somehow well-thought out.

I assume you never rely on socialized services either, as they are the antithesis of your belief system...?

 

[editec]

Capitalism is the natural order of economics...

Yes and plastic is the nature order of hydrocarbons.

You're an idiot, man.

Socialism, which is communism at an early stage of development... is a function of secularism, and the unbridled arrogance of the Social Scientists that they've some means to control the Economy...

Societies = socialism duh! Did I mention you were a clueless idiot?

It's the same arrogance which allows them to believe that they can control the environment.

Arrogance? We don't hold a candle to you, sport.

When the left has finally pissed the world off and the inevitable spasm comes which destroys them; what will rise from tha ashes of that extinction will be Capitalism... Defined as the free exchange of the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties; capitalism is simply how people trade the value which they possess for the value which they desire, want or need... and it works every time that it is tried...

Thank you for your 8th grade perspective on capitalism, lad.

What I love about the advocates of 'mixed economies' is how they clammer on about how corruption is inherent in capitalism; so they demand that 'just enough Socialism is necessary to keep capitalism in check...' when the socialism is being advanced by the same beings which could not manage to honestly exchange fair value for fair value... So their SOLUTUION is to give those same CORRUPTIBLE PEOPLE MORE POWER... through which their unbridled arrogance will corrupt far more deeply, and in ways which are far more destructive...

You don't actually read the news, do you?

Socialism is a lie... it's not an economic system of any kind... it's a ideology... which uses economics as a means to its decietful end.

Whatever the market will bear. Caveat emptor, dude.

Socialism is merely a rationalization where the individual is said to be incapable of maintaining their responsibilities, so those responsibilities are placed upon the State.

So tell me, how big IS your army?

What the advocates of Social Science fail to recognize is that liberty, FREEDOM, is directly attributable TO THE RESPONSIBILITY RESTING WITH THE INDIVIDUAL and that/those individual holding himself and his neighbor accountable to those responsibilties.

There actually is some truth to that. What a shame you don't understand your responsibility to the society that carries you.

The responsibility to fairly trade with their neighbor, is an intrinsic, inseparable element of their human RIGHT...

Which necessitates a government to insure that FAIR trade, in most cases.

where that responsibility is forfeited, the right is forfeited and with that right goes FREEDOM.

Yup...living with other people demands some curtailments on freedom.

Sucks to be human, doesn't it?

Cockroaches are totally free, lad.

 

[midcan5]

"Civilization has to be defended against the individual, and its regulations, institutions, and commands are directed to that task." Sigmund Freud

I am never sure what to make of these straw arguments? The author hasn't the faintest idea what socialism is and for that matter doesn't even know anything about capitalism. What purpose do these bizarre arguments serve and for whom? There is so much wrong in the post, it would be impossible to correct. In this case it is necessary that one throw the whole thing out as nothing of substance is contained therein.

Look Inside:

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Socialism-Very-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0192804316/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1238693541&sr=1-1#reader]Amazon.com: Socialism: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions): Michael Newman: Books[/ame]

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Very-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0192802186/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1238694079&sr=1-4]Amazon.com: Capitalism: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions): James Fulcher: Books[/ame]

 

[WorldAHope]

Vague, useless rhetoric that relies upon jargonism and blanket unsubstantiated opinion statements,
is of no value to anybody anywhere.
Can you use it to build a house or fix a car ?
Can you use it to actually run a Capitalist enterprise, the daily setup and operations of a business,
with empty ideological chatter ? No.
It is an adolescent essay that has no utiliatrian real world value, at all.

IF you were ever in the military, Publius, you'd be trained to set aside the theoritical noise
and apply the tactical or strategic lessons that are taught to all officers and non-coms.
They don't mention Theory all that much or Ideology. They shut that talk down as wasted time and as deadly distraction from the mission and tasks at hand.
The military schools and fieid commanders focus on the Reality they face, rely upon Facts to guide their actions, to get REAL results, by any means - whether it fits neatly into a Theory pigeonhole, or not.
And so it is in Business. You won't hear corporate managers using words like "Socialism" and "Capitalism" to direct their decisions. They look for results. Real tangible results from procedures they know or think or hope will work.
Empty Theoretical Political rhetoric is for ignorant pundits who love to hear themselves talk,
and for theory addicted academicians, or for space cases who ponder their navel and look for pretty patterns in the stars and are certain they are a genius.
Go back to junior high school professor.

 

[N4mddissent]

Here's an alternate view for anyone interested.

Why Socialism

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Ahh... needless to say, the return of Ag-whats-her-name, doesn't bode well for the health of one Live Uninhibited.

It's good to see that you've learned your place Ag... It shows a wisdom born of experience that you've opted to wholly avoid the argument where there is no means for a contest to prevail.

Good for you!

And that's 'doubly-good for freedom...

Your idiocy and ignorance of economics has already been rebutted elsewhere; there's no need for repetition.

Of course... they must be, after all you're inability to do so here is proof of it!

LOL... Leftists...

You can't make this stuff up kids... Luckily, they're HELPLESS to avoid demonstrating it.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Capitalism is the natural order of economics...

Socialism, which is communism at an early stage of development... is a function of secularism, and the unbridled arrogance of the Social Scientists that they've some means to control the Economy...

It's the same arrogance which allows them to believe that they can control the environment.

When the left has finally pissed the world off and the inevitable spasm comes which destroys them; what will rise from tha ashes of that extinction will be Capitalism... Defined as the free exchange of the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties; capitalism is simply how people trade the value which they possess for the value which they desire, want or need... and it works every time that it is tried...

What I love about the advocates of 'mixed economies' is how they clammer on about how corruption is inherent in capitalism; so they demand that 'just enough Socialism is necessary to keep capitalism in check...' when the socialism is being advanced by the same beings which could not manage to honestly exchange fair value for fair value... So their SOLUTUION is to give those same CORRUPTIBLE PEOPLE MORE POWER... through which their unbridled arrogance will corrupt far more deeply, and in ways which are far more destructive...

Socialism is a lie... it's not an economic system of any kind... it's a ideology... which uses economics as a means to its decietful end.

Socialism is merely a rationalization where the individual is said to be incapable of maintaining their responsibilities, so those responsibilities are placed upon the State. What the advocates of Social Science fail to recognize is that liberty, FREEDOM, is directly attributable TO THE RESPONSIBILITY RESTING WITH THE INDIVIDUAL and that/those individual holding himself and his neighbor accountable to those responsibilties. The responsibility to fairly trade with their neighbor, is an intrinsic, inseparable element of their human RIGHT... where that responsibility is forfeited, the right is forfeited and with that right goes FREEDOM.

The solution is not to succumb the the weakness which seeks to rest one's burdeon of responsibility upon the ethereal myth of "The People"... as such will never be the option of the freeman to look back upon... the solution is to hold one's self and each other accountable; and to do so through, in the case of the United States, the Constitutional Republic which was designed to DO JUST THAT. The Constitution that was designed to LIMIT the scope of Government power and to protect the rights of the individual and to HOLD EACH ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS in maintaining their responsibility to not infringe upon the rights of another, in the process of exercising their rights.

Socialism... the Advocacy of Social Science is not a viable economic theory... Communism is not a viable theory of cultural cooperation... They're one in the same rationalization, where each individual advocate wants to separate the THEMSELVES from their RESPONSIBILITIES... and this I suspect in yet another human attempt to 'have their cake and eat it too...' Left-think is little more than a means to find an 'easier way'... than the day to day struggle, the burden common in each one of us, to do the right thing...

The worst part; and I do mean the worst... is that the liberty born from the US Constitution; the individual liberty to freely exchange the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties... the freedom to choose our own path, to set out own course... which we enjoy today, despite its many imperfections; THIS IS AS EASY AS IT GETS

The socialists living amongst us are determined to dream us back into bondage... where inevitably, should we fail to stop them, the generations which follow us will wonder how lame we had to be, to freely give up our freedom, on the hope that we could separate our freedom from our simple responsibility to do the right thing.

Socialism can be what we make it

Well sure... why we can make a frozen desert and call it socialism... and who could argue against frozen deserts?

Of course that frozen desert wouldn't BE socialism... but we could make socialism anything we want it to be...

Why we COULD make socialism into a free market where free individuals freely exchange goods and services for the fair value possessed by other free individuals... where each individual is endowned by their Creator with unalienable rights to pursue the fulfillment of their life, without interference, infringement and usurpation by a strong central government... where each individual is keenly aware of and adheres to the unalienable RESPONSIBILITIES inherent in those rights, with a Constitutional Republic based upon laws, not men; governed by three seperate but equal branches of government which legislate law, execute law and try evidence and decide upon the weight of that evidence, upon high thresholds of justice, where those laws are challenged or violated; where representatives of the legislature and executive are elected to office from the citizenry which were naturally born in this country, who bring their prudent judgment in matters of cultural governance.

But of course THAT wouldn't be Socialism...

Because Socialism is an idea which places the false rights of the collective over the just rights of the individual... and despite your ignorance to the contrary, where we apply socialism, we establish unfettered power with the state, for the purposes of infringing upon the rights of the individual; to benefit the collective... which is an actual impossibility, but the goal of the Socialist nontheless.

The natural order? Look at nature. You'll find examples of communal or socialist behaviour, and every-man-for-himself examples too.

So what? There are many instances where communal behavior is perfectly plausible, wholly prudent and inherently NATURAL... where each individual willingly submits to central authority and works collectively for the betterment of the whole.

I operate two such organizations... my own family and my business. And not only does it work, it works well.

It works because each member of our little collective is known, personally, to the other; close relationships are formed, the strengths and weaknesses of each member is known to the next; and when and where one is in need and unable to produce, the others provide to the extent of their means to provide for them.

When, as is often the case, it is found that someone is not pulling their weight, that they are waiting on the others to produce, taking advantage of the good will of their neighbor... the central authority (Howdy... How are ya? ) steps in and snatches a knot in their ass...

Such a system cannot work beyond the interpersonal relationship and absent virtuous, prudent, just leadership, it will not work at ANY level.

But THAT is not Socialism... is it? Because Socialism is the strong central authority which demands compliance by those who are decidely NOT interested in working to the betterment of your life, or the life of that guy in Seattle which is driving over the bridge presently looking to his left over Puget sound. And they do not want to work for that guy, BECAUSE THEY DO NOT KNOW THAT GUY...

Which is their RIGHT.

Communal living is not socialism... it's communal living and there is NO US CONSERVATIVE which stands against service to country and and community, civil order or helping their neighbor where help is needed and desired... and THAT is not socialism.

Socialism speaks to governance... tyrannical governmant, precisely as I described above.

So spare me the relativist, progressive nonsense...

 

[ItsFairmont]

I laugh at those who scoff at socialism and praise to the end capitalism. They think they understand the difference.

Read on....



The United States was the ultimate capitalist society. It was going great, of course, until the pro-capitalists decided to get government involved. Corruption, bribery, etc. made it so that business invited the government into the game.


Think about the robber barons. They said, "Keep government out of it." But what happened when the workers organized and formed unions? The businesses (like Ford Motor Company) calle the cops to break the strikes.


You can't have it both ways.


Do you want government involvement or not? It really is that simple. If you treat your workers like crap, and they go on strike, and then you call in the cops (ie, government) to help you, don't be surprised when the government then wants to have more control on your business.


The day corporations stop giving money to the politicians is the day I will believe they truly dislike government involvement.



For the record, I love capitalism. I think it's the only smart way for an economy to work.

But when you get in trouble (think of GM, AIG, Chrysler, Ford, etc.) do NOT ask the government for help or they WILL have the RIGHT to have a say in how you do business.


Don't try to get in the pockets of politicians if you don't want them to pull some of your strings in return.

It really is that simple.

 

[ItsFairmont]

Capitalism is the natural order of economics...

Socialism, which is communism at an early stage of development... is a function of secularism, and the unbridled arrogance of the Social Scientists that they've some means to control the Economy...

It's the same arrogance which allows them to believe that they can control the environment.

When the left has finally pissed the world off and the inevitable spasm comes which destroys them; what will rise from tha ashes of that extinction will be Capitalism... Defined as the free exchange of the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties; capitalism is simply how people trade the value which they possess for the value which they desire, want or need... and it works every time that it is tried...

What I love about the advocates of 'mixed economies' is how they clammer on about how corruption is inherent in capitalism; so they demand that 'just enough Socialism is necessary to keep capitalism in check...' when the socialism is being advanced by the same beings which could not manage to honestly exchange fair value for fair value... So their SOLUTUION is to give those same CORRUPTIBLE PEOPLE MORE POWER... through which their unbridled arrogance will corrupt far more deeply, and in ways which are far more destructive...

Socialism is a lie... it's not an economic system of any kind... it's a ideology... which uses economics as a means to its decietful end.

Socialism is merely a rationalization where the individual is said to be incapable of maintaining their responsibilities, so those responsibilities are placed upon the State. What the advocates of Social Science fail to recognize is that liberty, FREEDOM, is directly attributable TO THE RESPONSIBILITY RESTING WITH THE INDIVIDUAL and that/those individual holding himself and his neighbor accountable to those responsibilties. The responsibility to fairly trade with their neighbor, is an intrinsic, inseparable element of their human RIGHT... where that responsibility is forfeited, the right is forfeited and with that right goes FREEDOM.

The solution is not to succumb the the weakness which seeks to rest one's burdeon of responsibility upon the ethereal myth of "The People"... as such will never be the option of the freeman to look back upon... the solution is to hold one's self and each other accountable; and to do so through, in the case of the United States, the Constitutional Republic which was designed to DO JUST THAT. The Constitution that was designed to LIMIT the scope of Government power and to protect the rights of the individual and to HOLD EACH ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS in maintaining their responsibility to not infringe upon the rights of another, in the process of exercising their rights.

Socialism... the Advocacy of Social Science is not a viable economic theory... Communism is not a viable theory of cultural cooperation... They're one in the same rationalization, where each individual advocate wants to separate the THEMSELVES from their RESPONSIBILITIES... and this I suspect in yet another human attempt to 'have their cake and eat it too...' Left-think is little more than a means to find an 'easier way'... than the day to day struggle, the burden common in each one of us, to do the right thing...

The worst part; and I do mean the worst... is that the liberty born from the US Constitution; the individual liberty to freely exchange the goods and services to the mutual benefit of both parties... the freedom to choose our own path, to set out own course... which we enjoy today, despite its many imperfections; THIS IS AS EASY AS IT GETS

The socialists living amongst us are determined to dream us back into bondage... where inevitably, should we fail to stop them, the generations which follow us will wonder how lame we had to be, to freely give up our freedom, on the hope that we could separate our freedom from our simple responsibility to do the right thing.

Can't tell if you think this is a serious argument or not... I pray you're beeing clever.



This is priceless "The socialists living amongst us are determined to dream us back into bondage..."

hahaha so is this "Left-think is little more than a means to find an 'easier way'... "

Socialism can be what we make it, it isn't as simple as some may think, nor is any other social model for co-habiation and sustainable existence. The natural order? Look at nature. You'll find examples of communal or socialist behaviour, and every-man-for-himself examples too.

Why do humans have families... because we're 'genetically' socialist? Or because we found a workable model for a certain stage in our evolution, to make sure certain needs were met, etc. Why do we form communities? Why work together to mutual benefit if it's so evil? Perhaps because if we acted like individuals all the time, self-centered and only self-motivated we'd have died off a long time ago. Socialistic behaviour allows us greater ability as we become more than the sum of our parts so to speak.

You sound like you just discovered Ayn Rand and think her anti-collectivist pseudo-argument is somehow well-thought out.

I assume you never rely on socialized services either, as they are the antithesis of your belief system...?

Dude, don't make sense. Some people are frightened and offended by this logical argument you make.

 

[editec]

"Civilization has to be defended against the individual, and its regulations, institutions, and commands are directed to that task." Sigmund Freud

I am never sure what to make of these straw arguments?

Horses make horsecrap out of it, so it's not a total loss.

The author hasn't the faintest idea what socialism is and for that matter doesn't even know anything about capitalism.

He knows what he's been told.

What purpose do these bizarre arguments serve and for whom?

Catharsis?

Well, to be fair, they also make me feel smarter.

There is so much wrong in the post, it would be impossible to correct.

The boy need regooving.

In this case it is necessary that one throw the whole thing out as nothing of substance is contained therein.

Think of it as a springboard upon which one can wow the audience with your horse routine in ironic wit.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Irony: incongruity: incongruity between what actually happens and what might be expected to happen, especially when this disparity seems absurd or laughable:

(The Op is) Vague, useless rhetoric that relies upon jargonism and blanket unsubstantiated opinion statements,
is of no value to anybody anywhere.

Can you use it to build a house or fix a car ?
Can you use it to actually run a Capitalist enterprise, the daily setup and operations of a business, with empty ideological chatter ? No.
It is an adolescent essay that has no utiliatrian real world value, at all.

IF you were ever in the military, Publius, you'd be trained to set aside the theoritical noise
and apply the tactical or strategic lessons that are taught to all officers and non-coms.
They don't mention Theory all that much or Ideology.

Why is it always so easy to spot the idiots?

I was in the US Marine Corps for 6 years and trained internationally with numerous other branches of the US military and those of other nations and without exception at every point of my considerable training... principles were specified, theories were advanced which rested upon those principles and practical application of those theories were tested, continuously and without cessation.

What Military Service were you involved with skippy, where principled theory was not discussed ad nauseum?

They shut that talk down as wasted time and as deadly distraction from the mission and tasks at hand.
The military schools and fieid commanders focus on the Reality they face, rely upon Facts to guide their actions, to get REAL results, by any means - whether it fits neatly into a Theory pigeonhole, or not.

You're either a liar, or you're an idiot... or most likely the dreaded COMBO.

And so it is in Business. You won't hear corporate managers using words like "Socialism" and "Capitalism" to direct their decisions. They look for results. Real tangible results from procedures they know or think or hope will work.

What does ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE POINT ADVANCED IN THE OP?

Empty Theoretical Political rhetoric is for ignorant pundits who love to hear themselves talk, and for theory addicted academicians, or for space cases who ponder their navel and look for pretty patterns in the stars and are certain they are a genius.
Go back to junior high school professor.

The OP spoke to very specific points... To which NOT A SINGLE ONE, did you choose to speak, you simply choose to vacuously declare the opinion 'empty'... even while you lament "Vague, useless rhetoric that relies upon jargonism and blanket unsubstantiated opinion statements

LOL... Leftists...

 

[Iriemon]

Capitalism is great. It harnesses greed and desire for material stuff into a powerful engine of economic growth which IMO should not be not be squelched.

On the other hand, capitalism could give two shits about people. A person's value in capitalism is his market value. If you are disabled, too old, or for whatever reason just don't have a lot of market value at the moment for whatever reason, capitalism could not care less if you starve to death.

That's why there's a little room for social programs too. Unless you simply view people as market value units.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Capitalism is the natural order of economics...

Yes and plastic is the nature order of hydrocarbons.

You're an idiot, man.

Classic Non Sequitur... Did you mean to impart such a sweet irony? Few people would advance a conclusion which wholly departs from the stated premise, an indisputable sympton of idiocy, where their disjointed conclusion projected that very affliction upon their opposition.

Socialism, which is communism at an early stage of development... is a function of secularism, and the unbridled arrogance of the Social Scientists that they've some means to control the Economy...

Societies = socialism duh! Did I mention you were a clueless idiot?

Well sure... you comrade's already declared that 'we can make socialism into anything we want...' why not just redefine socialism to be "Society..."

(Isn't it cool how the left can't operate within the well understood meaning of words? At every point of challenge, they demand that their arguments are misrepresented, that the words and phrases they used in advancing their argument mean different things 'to them'... I spoke of the deceit inherent in left-think... Ed is demonstrating just that, in this now discredited screed.)

For the record, Webster's Collegiate 2009 defines Socialism as follows: You'll notice that it contests the notion that "socialism can mean anything to anyone..."

so·cial·ism [sṓshə lìzəm]
or So·cial·ism [sṓshə lìzəm]
n
1. political system of communal ownership: a political theory or system in which the means of production and distribution are controlled by the people and operated according to equity and fairness rather than market principles
2. movement based on socialism: a political movement based on principles of socialism, typically advocating an end to private property and to the exploitation of workers
3. stage between capitalism and communism: in Marxist theory, the stage after the proletarian revolution when a society is changing from capitalism to communism, marked by pay distributed according to work done rather than need

The responsibility to fairly trade with their neighbor, is an intrinsic, inseparable element of their human RIGHT...

Which necessitates a government to insure that FAIR trade, in most cases.

ROFL... And who pray tell suggested otherwise?

(Notice how the leftist must demand that their opposition is advocating for anarchy. US Conservatism stands upon the bed-rock principles upon which the Constitutional Republican government of the US rests... we DEMAND that limited government which recognizes and protects the rights of the INDIVIDUAL. We recognize that the responsibility inherent in our endowed unalienable rights require valid and just juris prudence to guarantees civil order...

We emphatically REJECT the antithesis of that Constutional government... Socialism. Yet this leftists comes to assert that our Constitutional Republic of the US is in effect anarchy... Anyone need anything else from this leftists? I think she's made her point...)

where that responsibility is forfeited, the right is forfeited and with that right goes FREEDOM.

Yup...living with other people demands some curtailments on freedom.

Yet another non sequitur... The speaker herself could not possibly connect that conclusion with her sourced premise, upon which it rests. But to HER, it is the essence of pure reason.

And this friends is why we need to begin in earnest, the long and painful debate on how a viable culture can possibly sustained, when sub-intellects such as that continuously demonstrated by Ed here, are able to cast a vote in that society.

She can't even form a lucid response in a thread on an internet message board. Yet she is perfectly entitled to cast her vote, which will position a similar idiot in high office.

We can either recognize the problem and actively debate the potential solution or allow the problem to fester before it destroys us all.