Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anarchists...

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 9
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 5 6 7 8 9 template Next
  • #121
    If the workers control the means of production, it doesn't mean they're socalist, it means they're self-employed.

    Marxist Socialism is when the workers - as a whole - control the means of production.
    I refute it thus!
    "Destiny! Destiny! No escaping that for me!"

    Comment

    • #122
      I'm an anarchist, not a Marxist.

      It's an example of socialism, simply not Marxist or any other kind of authoritarian socialism.
      "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
      -Bokonon

      Comment

      • #123
        Originally posted by Ramo
        I'm an anarchist, not a Marxist.

        It's an example of socialism, simply not Marxist or any other kind of authoritarian socialism.
        You need a definition. Please define Socialism.
        I refute it thus!
        "Destiny! Destiny! No escaping that for me!"

        Comment

        • #124
          Again, one definition (I'd say the main definition) of socialism is a system where the workers own the means of production.

          Therefore, early Northern US fits the bill.
          "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
          -Bokonon

          Comment

          • #125
            Originally posted by Ramo
            Again, one definition (I'd say the main definition) of socialism is a system where the workers own the means of production.

            Therefore, early Northern US fits the bill.
            Therefore any agrarian society fits the bill. YUou have defined "family farm". If you want to call that Socialist, that's fine, but bear in mind that that does not cover the same area of economics as Capitalism, Capitalsim being a general system but this kind of Socialism being a microeconomic plan.
            I refute it thus!
            "Destiny! Destiny! No escaping that for me!"

            Comment

            • #126
              Therefore any agrarian society fits the bill.
              Not at all. Feudalism doesn't fit the bill, for instance.

              but bear in mind that that does not cover the same area of economics as Capitalism, Capitalsim being a general system but this kind of Socialism being a microeconomic plan.
              Which is why I'm using "capitalism" in a different context. It's tradition, y'know.
              "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
              -Bokonon

              Comment

              • #127
                Again, the workers owned the means of production, therefore their economic system was socialist.


                The workers as a collective did NOT own the means of production. It was very individualistic. The farmers would be called the bourgeois. Because, as you should know... they were land owners. They each owned a seperate plot of land.

                Unless an immigrant owning his own shop, or families in the Midwest owning their own shops are called Socialist (even if they vote Republican ).

                You are just trying to take the Libertarian ideal and trying to usurp it... sorry.
                “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                Comment

                • #128
                  Workers don't have to collectively own the means of production. They just have to own it in a socialist system, period.

                  Unless an immigrant owning his own shop, or families in the Midwest owning their own shops are called Socialist (even if they vote Republican ).
                  Yep, their businesses are still examples of socialism in action, even if they voted for Buchanan.

                  You are just trying to take the Libertarian ideal and trying to usurp it... sorry.
                  Pah, y'all are just a bunch of splitters, anyways!
                  "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
                  -Bokonon

                  Comment

                  • #129
                    Workers don't have to collectively own the means of production. They just have to own it in a socialist system, period.


                    Are you making things up now?

                    The main difference between capitalism and socialism is the belief in collectivization for socialism and individualism for capitalism.

                    Yep, their businesses are still examples of socialism in action, even if they voted for Buchanan.


                    Nope their business is an example of Lockian capitalism. They were individualistic land owners. They cared nothing for society or the group. They were in it for themselves.
                    “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                    - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                    Comment

                    • #130
                      The main difference between capitalism and socialism is the belief in collectivization for socialism and individualism for capitalism.
                      In socialism collective ownership is impersonal - you own equal part of everything. You don't specifically own something. And in these communities you were referring to no single farmer owned and equal amount of capital anyway. They were private enterprises.
                      "I'm having a sort of hard time paying attention because my automated teller has started speaking to me, sometimes actually leaving weird messages on the screen, in green lettering, like "Cause a Terrible Scene at Sotheby's" or "Kill the President" or "Feed Me a Stray Cat", and I was freaked out by the park bench that followed me for six blocks last Monday evening and it too spoke to me."
                      - Patrick Bateman, American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis

                      Comment

                      • #131
                        OK, I think it´s time to end this discussion...

                        Originally posted by Shai-Hulud
                        Every socialist revolution has been exploited by powerhungry and immoral dictators. How come you be so sure that you're great socialist revolution is not going to re-create totalitarian dictatorship?
                        ´cause we´ll do it right this time

                        Yes, it does. It really does exist in the reality.
                        Well, we can beat ourselves silly with "yes it does" - "no it doesn´t" arguments. I´ll guess this another of those agree to disagree thingies

                        I don't know about you Kamrat X but I want to success, in more ways than one, but one of them is socio-economic success(=social class). Yet, I have ethics of humanism and I believe in many ideals originally created by socialism. However I cling into capitalism, not only because of my needs, but because of needs of any willing individuals.
                        Then we´re different, I don´t pursue "social climbing" in any way.

                        Look. Are you a communist or an environmentalist? Because all communists I know are most concerned of humanity. I put people before the environment and I have hard time trying to understand why some people don't.
                        I´m both! Commie enviromentalists rulez

                        Say what you want to say comrade. You can't hurt my feeling in a debate over politics and I hope I won't hurt your's either. I'm glad that people disagree. Don't you want show me that my perfect capitalist dream isn't that perfect? As long as there are communist parties, whether on Apolyton...or somewhere else, there are serious problems in capitalism. And believe it or not, you're making a difference right now.
                        Well, maybe the shouting was a bit uncalled for, but you pushed a button there
                        I love being beaten by women - Lorizael

                        Comment

                        • #132
                          ´cause we´ll do it right this time
                          You really are an optimist!

                          Well, we can beat ourselves silly with "yes it does" - "no it doesn´t" arguments. I´ll guess this another of those agree to disagree thingies
                          Well, I was presenting more than just "yes it does" arguments. But you haven't really tried to prove your point here. I'm not so sure this comment really gives a lot of insight into this matter: "it just rears it´s ugly head in the editorial pages of bourgoise newspapers and textbooks in political economy". I could ask if you believe that there are such things as consumers and labor unions making a difference in capitalism?

                          Then we´re different, I don´t pursue "social climbing" in any way.
                          One less people to climb over then

                          I´m both! Commie enviromentalists rulez
                          Youre' hoping your excessive use of smilies helps you to hide the fact that you really don't have that much to say?

                          Well, maybe the shouting was a bit uncalled for, but you pushed a button there
                          In politics, shouting is always uncalled for. I was just making a point from my perspective.

                          How many members are there in the Communist Party of Apolyton anyway?....just out of pure intrest
                          "I'm having a sort of hard time paying attention because my automated teller has started speaking to me, sometimes actually leaving weird messages on the screen, in green lettering, like "Cause a Terrible Scene at Sotheby's" or "Kill the President" or "Feed Me a Stray Cat", and I was freaked out by the park bench that followed me for six blocks last Monday evening and it too spoke to me."
                          - Patrick Bateman, American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis

                          Comment

                          Previous 1 5 6 7 8 9 template Next
                          Working...
                          X