The Communist Manifesto

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Agathon
Wal Mart

I find it ironic that some of the largest corporations effectively plan large chunks of the economy. (By 'effective' I mean 'In real terms', rather than making a value-judgement on how well they do it.)

If Wal-Mart owned everything, would the capitalist system still be considered a free-market by it's most enthusiastic supporters?

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Agathon
It makes one ignorant. I mean, for ****'s sake, the only reason democracies don't tend to go after each other is because they are by accident part of the same power bloc and have historical ties. One might as well point out that English speaking countries don't tend to go to war with each other any more.

Big ****ing deal. None of this has stopped democracies from militaristic BS. Britain and the US have been attacking other countries and meddling in the affairs of others for years.

Like most political science, the democratic peace theory is an incredibly complex edifice built upon almost nothing.

It's not often that I'm broadly in agreement with Mr Agathon, but so far on this thread I must concur. Particularly with this analysis of the so-called 'democratic peace theory'. The actions of the EU elite - contemptuously dismissing the democratic opinions of the electorate when the vote goes the 'wrong' way - demonstrates that democracy is not a genuine principle for these people, but another word for 'agreeing with us'.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by BeBro
The fun is that we usually don't come up with something like "it wasn't really the fault of the colonial regimes" or "they had to do this because they were under attack from outside" or "it wasn't really what colonialism is" nonsense in case of colonialism today.

If excuses are to be made for the capitalist colonialists, let them be made on their own terms, rather than transplanting excuses made for their opponents.

I may be able to help here. Try "White Man's Burden", or "Civilising the Barbarians", or "Might is Right", or "Manifest Destiny".

Perhaps even "God made me do it".

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


I find it ironic that some of the largest corporations effectively plan large chunks of the economy. (By 'effective' I mean 'In real terms', rather than making a value-judgement on how well they do it.)

If Wal-Mart owned everything, would the capitalist system still be considered a free-market by it's most enthusiastic supporters?

No. So far as I know, free marketeers frown on monopolies. With good reason.

...

Re: democratic peace theory... I always thought that was bull****. It's a clear example of mistaking correlation with causation. I see no reason why a democracy couldn't vote to have a war with another democracy.

Hell, the US Civil War strikes me as an (imperfect) example, especially if one takes the "War of Northern Aggression" viewpoint.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


If excuses are to be made for the capitalist colonialists, let them be made on their own terms, rather than transplanting excuses made for their opponents.

I may be able to help here. Try "White Man's Burden", or "Civilising the Barbarians", or "Might is Right", or "Manifest Destiny".

Perhaps even "God made me do it".

Just copy & paste the last couple of Ben Kenobi posts from the Surge thread.

-Arrian

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


If excuses are to be made for the capitalist colonialists, let them be made on their own terms, rather than transplanting excuses made for their opponents.

I may be able to help here. Try "White Man's Burden", or "Civilising the Barbarians", or "Might is Right", or "Manifest Destiny".

Perhaps even "God made me do it".

Way to miss the point. It's pretty clear that any type of policy comes with a certain justification. That doesn't mean we need to buy into it if we find out it's a load of crap. And quite some people seem to have realized today that something like "White Man's Burden" or "Civilising the Barbarians" etc. was a load of crap. Maybe I'm a strange guy, but I really think we should be able to look onto the whole load of nonsense that came out of the Soviet block with the same critical distance instead of blaming anyone else for it...

[Arrian]

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by BeBro


Way to miss the point. It's pretty clear that any type of policy comes with a certain justification. That doesn't mean we need to buy into it if we find out it's a load of crap. And quite some people seem to have realized today that something like "White Man's Burden" or "Civilising the Barbarians" etc. was a load of crap. Maybe I'm a strange guy, but I really think we should be able to look onto the whole load of nonsense that came out of the Soviet block with the same critical distance instead of blaming anyone else for it...

The key point was about interventions in revolutions - from the fledgling USSR to Cuba to Nicaragua. Not a blanket excuse for everything that happened under Stalinism.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Yes. R.J. Rummel, professor of political science at the University of Hawaii has calculated that approximately 55 million Soviet citizens were killed during the years 1917 to 1991.

If you're looking at just political massacres, etc., the number is close to 8.3 million, with another 4.3 million killed in deportations. So that's 12.6 million.

If we look at another example, 2 million were killed in Cambodia in what could only be defined as a state-sponsored act of genocide against its own people.

I thought you meant as you said, "worked to death." Surely you don't industrialize by murdering people. But capitalism has employed 250 million children. Don't know if you are aware of that.

[rmsharpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I thought you meant as you said, "worked to death." Surely you don't industrialize by murdering people. But capitalism has employed 250 million children. Don't know if you are aware of that.

Capitalism didn't employ them; economic necessity did. These kids were toiling in fields long before any sort of economic science was developed. Either the kids worked or you starved.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by rmsharpe

Capitalism didn't employ them; economic necessity did. These kids were toiling in fields long before any sort of economic science was developed. Either the kids worked or you starved.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Re: democratic peace theory... I always thought that was bull****. It's a clear example of mistaking correlation with causation. I see no reason why a democracy couldn't vote to have a war with another democracy.

If they aren't trading partners anyway. Trading partners don't go to war with each other. But I agree with you. If they aren't trading partners they would just as likely go to war with each other regardless of political system.