Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

I'm a libertarian, please don't hate me.

Page 6 of 7 [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

14 Oct 2012, 5:22 pm

ValentineWiggin wrote:
TM wrote:
So, if we accept Einstein's definition of insanity, "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result" then people who argue for communism are per definition insane.

If it had ever been instituted, then yes, I'd agree.


Think if it like this, if my ideology was to try and have sex with you through the means of smooth jazz, fresh vegetable offerings and loud readings from "Das Kapital" yet every time I tried to do that, the end result wasn't sex, but me being tazed in the balls, then at some point I'd have to realize that even though my intentions were good and I followed my ideology to the letter but the end result is me getting tazed in the balls, the basis of my ideology is flawed.

Same thing with communism, it keeps trying to follow the ideology to the letter with the goal of creating a better world, yet the end result are people getting murdered. At that point, regardless of how nice the end result sounds, one has to realize that it cannot be reached due to flaws in the implementation IE ideology.

If an ideology cannot be implemented, then it serves no practical purpose, if it serves no practical purpose it's either a waste of time or a historical curiosity, at which point it should be allowed to die, instead of being beaten over and over again like the proverbial horse.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

14 Oct 2012, 5:27 pm

ValentineWiggin wrote:
TM wrote:
Communism as a philosophy is revolutionary socialist movement with the end-goal of creating a class-less, money-less and stateless social order based upon common ownership of the means of production as well as a social, political and economic ideology that aims at the establishment of this social order. (As per the writings of Marx and Engels, further developed by Lenin, Trotsky and a quite a few other "thinkers")

Well-done, then.
TM wrote:
Communism in practice is a revolutionary socialist movement, with the end result of creating an authoritarian dictatorship ruled over by an all powerful party, with a personality cult, where the means of production are controlled by the state for the benefit of the party. (as evidenced by every country that ever tried to implement communism).

So, then, communism "in practice" has never actually existed, as per definition number 1?

Thank you. You may sit down now, Johnny.


The first phase of communism has existed; the second one has not, as this requires the abolition of countries, money and private property. The closest thing to the second phase is how the smurfs live.

Saying that capitalism has never existed because Laizzes-faire has never existed.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

14 Oct 2012, 7:14 pm

TM wrote:
Think if it like this, if my ideology was to try and have sex with you through the means of smooth jazz, fresh vegetable offerings and loud readings from "Das Kapital" yet every time I tried to do that, the end result wasn't sex, but me being tazed in the balls, then at some point I'd have to realize that even though my intentions were good and I followed my ideology to the letter but the end result is me getting tazed in the balls, the basis of my ideology is flawed.

Same thing with communism, it keeps trying to follow the ideology to the letter with the goal of creating a better world, yet the end result are people getting murdered. At that point, regardless of how nice the end result sounds, one has to realize that it cannot be reached due to flaws in the implementation IE ideology.

If an ideology cannot be implemented, then it serves no practical purpose, if it serves no practical purpose it's either a waste of time or a historical curiosity, at which point it should be allowed to die, instead of being beaten over and over again like the proverbial horse.


QFT, especially the part in bold.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

14 Oct 2012, 9:12 pm

I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

14 Oct 2012, 9:22 pm

marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


I see you don't buy Marx's assessment that his socialism was "scientific" as opposed to "Utopian". :P

TM's read Marx, I see. Has he read Smith?


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

14 Oct 2012, 9:23 pm

marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


Yeah and in that other thread you kept saying that there are better alternatives than neoclassical economics, but you fail to come up with alternatives.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

14 Oct 2012, 10:45 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


I see you don't buy Marx's assessment that his socialism was "scientific" as opposed to "Utopian". :P

TM's read Marx, I see. Has he read Smith?


TM wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


Yeah and in that other thread you kept saying that there are better alternatives than neoclassical economics, but you fail to come up with alternatives.


I don't see why people have to conform and march lock-step to a particular school of thought. Both Marx and Adam Smith had some good ideas and some bad ideas. Scientists still accept Newton's laws as a useful approximation governing the behavior of relatively large masses at relatively slow speeds. That doesn't mean they have to accept all the nonsense Newton also believed and wrote about at one time or another in his life (and he did believe a lot of nonsense).



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

14 Oct 2012, 10:48 pm

marshall wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


I see you don't buy Marx's assessment that his socialism was "scientific" as opposed to "Utopian". :P

TM's read Marx, I see. Has he read Smith?


TM wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


Yeah and in that other thread you kept saying that there are better alternatives than neoclassical economics, but you fail to come up with alternatives.


I don't see why people have to conform and march lock-step to a particular school of thought. Both Marx and Adam Smith had some good ideas and some bad ideas. Scientists still accept Newton's laws as a useful approximation governing the behavior of relatively large masses at relatively slow speeds. That doesn't mean they have to accept all the nonsense Newton also believed and wrote about at one time or another in his life (and he did believe a lot of nonsense).


From my understanding, most contemporary radical free-marketers don't deify the actually existing Adam Smith, who was pretty nuanced. The deify a really vulgar mischaracterization of him.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

14 Oct 2012, 10:50 pm

TM wrote:
ValentineWiggin wrote:
TM wrote:
So, if we accept Einstein's definition of insanity, "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result" then people who argue for communism are per definition insane.

If it had ever been instituted, then yes, I'd agree.


Think if it like this, if my ideology was to try and have sex with you through the means of smooth jazz, fresh vegetable offerings and loud readings from "Das Kapital" yet every time I tried to do that, the end result wasn't sex, but me being tazed in the balls, then at some point I'd have to realize that even though my intentions were good and I followed my ideology to the letter but the end result is me getting tazed in the balls, the basis of my ideology is flawed.


:lol: That's great.
TM wrote:
Same thing with communism, it keeps trying to follow the ideology to the letter with the goal of creating a better world, yet the end result are people getting murdered. At that point, regardless of how nice the end result sounds, one has to realize that it cannot be reached due to flaws in the implementation IE ideology.

Again, example?


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

14 Oct 2012, 11:05 pm

May the "tazed in the balls" analogy forever live on when explaining the folly of repeating failed policies - unless you're talking to masochists. Then you need the "no tazed in the balls" analogy.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

14 Oct 2012, 11:16 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


I see you don't buy Marx's assessment that his socialism was "scientific" as opposed to "Utopian". :P

TM's read Marx, I see. Has he read Smith?


The Wealth of Nations was one of the first books I ever read on economics.



ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

15 Oct 2012, 12:02 am

TM wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


I see you don't buy Marx's assessment that his socialism was "scientific" as opposed to "Utopian". :P

TM's read Marx, I see. Has he read Smith?


The Wealth of Nations was one of the first books I ever read on economics.

This, combined with what I know about developmental neuroplasticity, is informative.


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

15 Oct 2012, 12:07 am

ValentineWiggin wrote:
TM wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


I see you don't buy Marx's assessment that his socialism was "scientific" as opposed to "Utopian". :P

TM's read Marx, I see. Has he read Smith?


The Wealth of Nations was one of the first books I ever read on economics.

This, combined with what I know about developmental neuroplasticity, is informative.


In what respects?


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

15 Oct 2012, 9:09 am

TM wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


I see you don't buy Marx's assessment that his socialism was "scientific" as opposed to "Utopian". :P

TM's read Marx, I see. Has he read Smith?


The Wealth of Nations was one of the first books I ever read on economics.


Adam Smith did us the good service of studying those social and political factors that make production and productivity possible. He also came upon the idea of a self regulating market ("the hidden hand") in a similar manner to that of Darwin who came up with the idea of "natural selection"). Both are brilliant and necessary leaps from empirical induction to general principles.

ruveyn



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

15 Oct 2012, 9:11 am

Master_Pedant wrote:
ValentineWiggin wrote:
TM wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
marshall wrote:
I hate this black-and-white crap. There are other possibilities besides utopian communism and the form of crass-destructive capitalism that causes so many problems today.


I see you don't buy Marx's assessment that his socialism was "scientific" as opposed to "Utopian". :P

TM's read Marx, I see. Has he read Smith?


The Wealth of Nations was one of the first books I ever read on economics.

This, combined with what I know about developmental neuroplasticity, is informative.


In what respects?


I'm assuming that she attributes my thinking when it comes to economics as being biased by the early influence of Adam Smith.



mikecartwright
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 398

15 Oct 2012, 5:32 pm

I don't.