Rage against the Machine - Communism Vs. Capitalism (again!)

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
And war...I'm still waiting for you to explain the justification behind every war that ever occured before capitalism was a gleam in Adam Smith's eye....

Why don't you start a capitalism vs feudalism argument? Seriously, this is a very bad strawman argument.

[Velociryx]

Kid, you are the best!

I must commend you, btw. Never mind the fact that your "plan" for the glorious revolution scares the hell out of me, at least you're out there, laying out specifics. Good job for that.

As to your most recent posts:

Why don't you explain this theory of communist business cycle

Okay, I'll admit. You lost me. How this relates to depression is WAAAAY beyond me. Further, when did I ever talk about a "communist business cycle" (genuinely confused by this)

Mental illness is caused by poverty.
Cite?

I honestly believe that you do base your whole self-worth on your earning ability. That is obvious the way you seem to think you are superior. Sadly, I think you would have a serious mental breakdown if you lost your wealth. Our self-worth is not just formed by ourselves. It's socially conditioned. It takes a real effort to get away from our social conditioning, and you have a long way to go.

Projecting again, are we?

Victory by Default


Translation: I can't be arsed to scroll back.

Your big on Russia.

YOU brought Russia up that time, by asking about it.

Try to stay on the subject. We are talking about capitalism.

Ummm....the title of the thread is Communism vs. Capitalism. Clearly, we're talking about both. I know, it's not as much fun to have to face up to the fact that crime existed in your utopia (nor that the rate of alcaholism in the USSR was HUGE), but it IS a comparison/contrast thread, no?

Why don't you start a capitalism vs feudalism argument? Seriously, this is a very bad strawman argument.

Strawman? How 'bout the fact that capitalism didn't even EXIST for the greater bulk of human history, and yet you are blaming it for ever war that's ever been.

Sheesh....

Flare! Hey buddy! Yep...that's me, stirring up trouble again....just like you taught me....

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Updates!

http://atlasaerospace.net/eng/spacefl.htm

Vel in space? Officially, Next!

Total number of patents: Nothing so far in terms of total numbers, but the Matsu****a Corporation (Japan) held 74,114 as of 2002. One company....high side of a hundred thousand....good start....

-=Vel=-

EDIT: Atlas was chosen intentionally, btw....isn't it refreshing to see the beginnings of the free market taking hold in Russia....

[GePap]

Ahh, sdo your private company will get into space riding on the backs of one of the crowning glories of soviet engineering...... interesting, no? Ad to visit the product of government central planning as well.....

The core of the porblem of your argument Vel is as follows:

Obviously you are a particularist, you must be, given your disregard for theory, and your belieef that meaning coems from the little details of life. Well then, if tat is so, then the whole of your argument amounts to "disproving" the Authoritarian, from the top model of communism that coems from Marxist-Leninist and Maoist ideologies. Notice though, the only way you can disrove Coomunism as a general theory is to argue that the only possible form of communisms are these two, but that would (and does) require theoretical arguemts to be made by you on that subject. If you are unwilling to provide theoretical arguemnts about why the forms of communism that have been are the only ones that can be, and that any in the futue would face the same difficulties and challenges, from within and without then your argument can't move forwards, and you can only ever claim to have "disproven" what no longer is.

Wow, good job there, buddy.

[Kidlicious]

Damn server ate my response. This one won't be as good.

The link is inside the quote below.

Originally posted by Velociryx
Mental illness is caused by poverty.
Cite?
Poverty and mental illness

Of all threats to physical health, and mental health in particular, poverty is without a doubt the most fearsome.
The highest incidence of sickness, disability, and mortality of behavioral and psychiatric origin is concentrated in the low-income populations.
Extreme poverty is the world’s most merciless assassin and the principal cause of suffering on this earth. It is the principal cause of reduced life-expectancy, handicap, disability and hunger. Poverty is a prime factor that contributes to mental illness, stress, suicide, the disintegration of the family unit and substance abuse. For many, the prospect of a long life is seen more as a punishment than a reward (WHO,1995).

Yeah, poverty causes mental retardation too as well as all kinds of crap.

One thing I would like to know is why YOU think that you didn't know this.

Originally posted by Velociryx

I honestly believe that you do base your whole self-worth on your earning ability. That is obvious the way you seem to think you are superior. Sadly, I think you would have a serious mental breakdown if you lost your wealth. Our self-worth is not just formed by ourselves. It's socially conditioned. It takes a real effort to get away from our social conditioning, and you have a long way to go.

Projecting again, are we?

I'm no psychologist, but the fact that someone works four jobs to get ahead is pretty telling I think.

[Velociryx]

I thought you'd enjoy that, GePap.

And yes, there are others (one here in the states) offering a much shorter (2.5 minute) trip into space--'bout as long as the Wright Brothers' first flight--which would have technically met your criterion, but I thought it a delicious irony that rather than tear down the biggest achievement of old Soviet Russia, the fledgling capitalists there are actually putting it to good, productive use.

Of course, when I posted the link, I knew YOU would quickly jump on it (predictibility....I LOVE it!), and try to somehow use it to further the argument of your side.

But it's no longer in the hands of the central planning group, is it? And rather than tear it down, the capitalists in russia's train wreck economy are trying to put it to good use (and I just might help support them in that effort!)

As to your label of me.... Particularist...I like that. Has an interesting ring to it.

No...I do not utterly disregard theory. Theory has its place, and its fascination.

What is NOT useful, in terms of theory, is to take a completely hypothetical economic system which exists solely on paper and compare it to a currently enacted and working economic system.

One is smoke and mirrors. Conjecture. One is fact. No valid comparisons can be made of the two.

So...the choices are to REALLY get out there in fantasy land, comparing your paper economic system with an equally idealized capitalistic system (which has nothing whatsoever to do with the day to day world, at that point, since purestrain systems will likely never exist), or, we can compare systems that DO exist.

My argument has been, and remains that whatever the paper theory says about communism, it has been an entirely different creature from communism in its actual implementation, and every TIME it has been implemented, we see the same basic patterns developing (which I'll not go into again, since I've already outlined them at least half a dozen times).

You want to compare a phantom to reality, and I'm saying that such a comparison is pointless (which is WHY I'm not interested in the theoretical aspects of it....it's just not comparable with capitalism--an existing system--that you would compare it to.

As to disproving other possible outcomes of communist implementation...I know you'd LIKE me to do that, cos then you wouldn't have to debate your side (I could just debate both sides), but....you are the one arguing for the red side....it falls to you to convince US that history won't repeat itself...again...

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Yep...I worked four jobs.

I was poor and I did something about it.

I'm not poor any more.

It worked.

Would it crush me if I became poor again?

Nope.

Having been there before, I could do it again.

I worked my way out of poverty, friend. That doesn't mean that my sense of self worth is defined by how much I have right now. Know what I didn't do? I didn't b*tch and moan about it. I didn't whine about people exploiting me. I fixed it.

Still waiting for that cite re: poverty causing (I'm assuming all?) forms of mental illness, retardation, etc.

Should be an interesting read.

-=Vel=-

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Still waiting for that cite re: poverty causing (I'm assuming all?) forms of mental illness, retardation, etc.

Should be an interesting read.

-=Vel=-

What is your major malfunction soldier? Are you in denial now. Look at my last post.

[Velociryx]

Just looked. I didn't see any link there tho....invisible ink, maybe?

No malfunctions here. I've heard mental illness of all types attributed to a number of different causes. Never heard the one about how Schizophrenia was caused by capitalism tho...

-=Vel=-

[Kidlicious]

I'm going to help you out here in the hopes that it will result in a better world.

Poverty and mental illness

Educate yourself.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Velociryx
I thought you'd enjoy that, GePap.

And yes, there are others (one here in the states) offering a much shorter (2.5 minute) trip into space--'bout as long as the Wright Brothers' first flight--which would have technically met your criterion, but I thought it a delicious irony that rather than tear down the biggest achievement of old Soviet Russia, the fledgling capitalists there are actually putting it to good, productive use.

Leaving earths atmospehre all together sort of space, or very high in the atmospehre sort of space? Oh, and until they get someone to orbit the earth (Gagarin was u there for about an hour on his first flight), the best you can say is that US netreprise today is almost caught up with Soviet industry of 1960...wow.

As to your label of me.... Particularist...I like that. Has an interesting ring to it.

No...I do not utterly disregard theory. Theory has its place, and its fascination.

What is NOT useful, in terms of theory, is to take a completely hypothetical economic system which exists solely on paper and compare it to a currently enacted and working economic system.

One is smoke and mirrors. Conjecture. One is fact. No valid comparisons can be made of the two.

Anything for which you can show some evidence or good models is usefull for theory. Relativity came before Einstein could show it at work. You keep using derivative metaphors (smoke and mirrios) instead of valid reasoning. Modern economist do compare this system to a theoretical "perfect capitalism" which they strive towards. After all, take the notion of privatazing SS: no state has a private public pension plan. Those pushing it are pushing it out of THeory. I must assume you disapprove of the plan, given that it is based solely on "smoke and mirrors".

So...the choices are to REALLY get out there in fantasy land, comparing your paper economic system with an equally idealized capitalistic system (which has nothing whatsoever to do with the day to day world, at that point, since purestrain systems will likely never exist), or, we can compare systems that DO exist.

Why? can you give an argument why debating systems as are has any relevance if utterly divorced from debating how system could be? Personally, i don' think so.

My argument has been, and remains that whatever the paper theory says about communism, it has been an entirely different creature from communism in its actual implementation, and every TIME it has been implemented, we see the same basic patterns developing (which I'll not go into again, since I've already outlined them at least half a dozen times).

And if the half-dozen attempts were all based on a single first example driven by faulty ideology, you still only disprove the one form of orthodozy followed.

You want to compare a phantom to reality, and I'm saying that such a comparison is pointless (which is WHY I'm not interested in the theoretical aspects of it....it's just not comparable with capitalism--an existing system--that you would compare it to.

There is no such thing as "reality" outside of the meanings man imposes on the world. You yourself above said that what exsts is not real theoretical cpaitalism, so how can you possibly call yourself a champion of capitalism when you admint it doesn't really exist in form, and you care only about defending the current model, since the current model is and thus must be true and correct?

As to disproving other possible outcomes of communist implementation...I know you'd LIKE me to do that, cos then you wouldn't have to debate your side (I could just debate both sides), but....you are the one arguing for the red side....it falls to you to convince US that history won't repeat itself...again...

-=Vel=-

I would like you to try becuase it would inherently force you to face up to your basic assumptions and either back them up, or perhaps discover that are baseless. Either way you come out better. Mill was correct when he said that if one stops explorings "the truth" it looses meaning. Right now, I can not see that your belieefs have any basis in reason, but are blind faith in the particulars.

[Velociryx]

The etiology of schizophrenia is unknown, but the conditions necessary for its appearance are environmental stress and individual vulnerability

Poverty is a prime factor that contributes to mental illness,….

Still reading but these two quotes jump out at me.

1) The etiology is not known.
1a) LOTS of things cause environmental stress—like, oh, say, being threatened by the party bosses that your family will disappear
2) Says here that poverty is a prime factor. “A” meaning that there are other “prime factors” as well, as in, poverty is one of the factors. Not the cause. Not the only factor.

Further, per the article you sent me to:

More than a third of the world’s illnesses would be preventable if we could change the behaviors that increase the risk of illness

So, the article itself stresses that more than one third of the problem is behavioral in nature (ie – even if poverty was no longer an issue, if basic behavioral changes were not made, the illness would still occur). Unless you are now going to argue that poverty is a behavioral pattern, rather than an economic condition?

Further, given that poverty existed in the USSR, and given that it exists today in China, one can hardly attribute poverty as being in the exclusive domain of capitalism (since neither of those systems were capitalistic).

But that hurts your argument, so we'll just ignore it, right?

-=Vel=-
(as you say....educate yourself )

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Peacefull people are now at a disadvantage. Just change system to a system where peacefull people are not at a disadvantage.

Sure, and after that we'll all congratulate the Easter Bunny, Santa Clause and Glenda the Good witch of the West for pulling off this feat of supreme magic. Or else we could simply wait for the second coming which ever comes first.

Communism is a pipe dream contradicted by the very nature of man.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Communism is a pipe dream contradicted by the very nature of man.

And what does modern man have to do with the "nature of man" anyway?

[Velociryx]

Of course you would like me to try, GePap (said so in my last post, even!). But it really wouldn't be all that entertaining for me to debate both sides of the same issue, so I shall refrain.

Now you can muddy the waters all you want (which you DO seem to love to do), spouting phrases like "there is no truth" (tell that to the guy standing in the bread line, will you--you're haven't REALLY been standing in line for two days waiting for a few crumbs...why? Cos GePap said so, of course! but doing so does nothing for the debate.

Right now, you and I aren't even debating the original issue (and haven't been for some time). At best, we're debating about the debate, which I find, frankly silly, but given your love of semantics games and such, it comes as no great surprise. Rather than debate the matter at hand, you prefer to mosey off into bizzare directions, make some apples to oranges comparisons and call it a day, and hey! If that's your preference, have at it! It is not, however, my preference. If we're going to make comparisons, and if they are going to have meaning, then we should make comparisons of like systems (capitalism as it is now, to communism as it is now). A theoretical discussion of the idealized versions of either does nothing to answer the questions of whether or not they have been successful in their implementation.

But you're a smart fellow. You already know this. I'm just not playing your game and it frustrates you....

And yes....imagine....private enterprise (you know....having to worry about profit, loss, and lawsuits, and more) took a while to catch up to the monolithic state who could throw money and lives at space flight without having to answer to anyone. Shocking....

So...shall we continue debating about the debate of the debate, or playing cutsy games with semantics, or do you have something to add regarding communism, and how it might be implemented differently next time so as not to end up as totalitarian state? (GASP! Vel asking for theory! Will wonders never cease?!)

-=Vel=-