Political Compass Test

Page 9 of 11 [ 165 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

05 Apr 2011, 2:31 pm

Oodain wrote:

i find the whole capitalism vs. socialism debate to be flawed,
the best results are always a combination of the two, so why constrain oneself by entertaining the idea of the two as seperate entities?

Well a lot of people don't literally want pure capitalism or pure socialism, but they lean towards one way or the other.

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

05 Apr 2011, 2:32 pm

ruveyn wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

capitalism= prosperity[ were you shocked? I grew up in some rough parts of TO and it's nothing new.

I am a Yank and to a certain extent I bought into the propaganda that paints Canada as a sweet wonderful progressive country with little of the poverty due to inequality. I was mistaken.

ruveyn

Canada is much, much closer to being an American corporate welfare state than a Fenno-Scandinavian social welfare state. Blue (rightwing) Liberals in the federal government in the 1990s dismantled many critical social welfare provsions in Canada. Furthermore, Toronto's probably one of the nicer cities in Canada were you to compare it's "Ghettos" to East Hastings in Vancouver or the North End of Winnipeg.

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

05 Apr 2011, 2:35 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:

Oodain wrote:

i find the whole capitalism vs. socialism debate to be flawed,
the best results are always a combination of the two, so why constrain oneself by entertaining the idea of the two as seperate entities?

Well a lot of people don't literally want pure capitalism or pure socialism, but they lean towards one way or the other.

yes but even then they are almost dependent on eachother in some circumstances.

in denmark our "socialist" efforts are only made possible through capitalism and capitalism needs socialism to control and balance the rampant train that capitalism so easily becomes.

_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

05 Apr 2011, 2:35 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

capitalism= prosperity[ were you shocked? I grew up in some rough parts of TO and it's nothing new.

I am a Yank and to a certain extent I bought into the propaganda that paints Canada as a sweet wonderful progressive country with little of the poverty due to inequality. I was mistaken.

ruveyn

Yeah Winnipeg and Vancouver are definitely worse. IIRC Winnipeg is the murder capital of Canada.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Apr 2011, 2:37 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:

Oodain wrote:

i find the whole capitalism vs. socialism debate to be flawed,
the best results are always a combination of the two, so why constrain oneself by entertaining the idea of the two as seperate entities?

Well a lot of people don't literally want pure capitalism or pure socialism, but they lean towards one way or the other.

I believe strongly in a free market. Mind you, companies like Wal-Mart (generic example, I know) make me feel that the current trend in capitalism is a 'limited' free market, as it is hard to compete.
In any case, I think capitalism blended with minimalist-socialism is a good system. Basically what we have in Canada, eh?

_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

05 Apr 2011, 2:45 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:

Oodain wrote:

i find the whole capitalism vs. socialism debate to be flawed,
the best results are always a combination of the two, so why constrain oneself by entertaining the idea of the two as seperate entities?

Well a lot of people don't literally want pure capitalism or pure socialism, but they lean towards one way or the other.

"Socialism" is pretty much useless as a concept unless defined precisely.

I mean, von Haek used the very narrow definition of near total coordinationism to "debunk" all socialism. Karl Marx was rather vague and his definition of socialism (which was a state before communism) was more aspirational musings than a policy program ("free associations", "worker control of the state", etc). Leftwing nationalist economies like Cuba provide other ostensive definitions of socialism. So, to, does the coordinationist and totalitarian appartus of Russia under Lenin and Stalin. The partial nationalization, partial promotion of cooperatives - yet still some privately industry - model of Venezuela and Bolivia are still other examples of "socialism" (they are, come to think of it, under the "leftwing nationalist" model). Still others use the idea of a federation of workers' cooperatives as "socialism" (a society not unlike the Mondragon Cooperative Corporation). Finally, some (but few) would identify the states governed by the "socialist" parties in Europe as examples of socialism, but I'd really regard those instances as socialist in name only - they're much better representatives of "social democracy".

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

05 Apr 2011, 2:46 pm

Vigilans wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

Oodain wrote:

i find the whole capitalism vs. socialism debate to be flawed,
the best results are always a combination of the two, so why constrain oneself by entertaining the idea of the two as seperate entities?

Well a lot of people don't literally want pure capitalism or pure socialism, but they lean towards one way or the other.

There is far too much corporate influence over government, corporate welfare, and too few provisions of social safety in Canada. Sweden or Norway has a better model.

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Apr 2011, 2:47 pm

Quote:

Mondragon Cooperative Corporation

Bethie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster

05 Apr 2011, 3:52 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:

What's not prosperous about a freer economy?

The vast majority of the world who are subsisting and dying beneath the grinding fist of the effects of Western corporatocracy?

_________________
For there is another kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions; indifference and inaction and slow decay.

John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

05 Apr 2011, 4:08 pm

Bethie wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

What's not prosperous about a freer economy?

The vast majority of the world subsisting beneath the grinding fist of Western knee-jerk defenders of capitalism?

Some peoples just can't form a society that can pull itself up by it's bootstraps. It's not like industrial western countries magically appeared one day. America got a little military aid to get started, but the work to build the country was done by Americans working together to organize a functional country. If the "oppressed" peoples of the world stopped hacking rival tribes to death with machetes or sending child soldiers into endless civil war, they would be a step closer to a functional society.

_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud

Bethie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster

05 Apr 2011, 4:16 pm

John_Browning wrote:

Bethie wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

What's not prosperous about a freer economy?

The vast majority of the world subsisting beneath the grinding fist of Western knee-jerk defenders of capitalism?

That's what would happen in any country where people are half-crazed with hunger and forming militias offers them the only sort of power over their circumstances they've ever had.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

05 Apr 2011, 4:18 pm

John_Browning wrote:

Bethie wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

What's not prosperous about a freer economy?

The vast majority of the world subsisting beneath the grinding fist of Western knee-jerk defenders of capitalism?

That is something of an oversimplification. Most of the 'oppressed' people are not tribal, but people living in slums in various third world cities where Western industry has effectively moved the sweaty labor

Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

05 Apr 2011, 4:23 pm

Tried it; got this:

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

05 Apr 2011, 6:59 pm

Vigilans wrote:

John_Browning wrote:

Bethie wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

What's not prosperous about a freer economy?

The vast majority of the world subsisting beneath the grinding fist of Western knee-jerk defenders of capitalism?

Let's also talk about his hagiographic summary of the "bootstrapping" of the USA. Okay, so various fanatical Puritains and religious isolationists started colonies there. They were of above average literacy and diligence, so that's a postive. Various trading posts expanded in America as England entrenched itself in the Americas. England gave America defense and provided finanical support to various projects. There was also a steady supply of Englishmen who came to America to help with various organizational problems (hell, most Americans WERE Englishmen or recent descendants of Englishmen). The Aboriginal peoples of America where displaced from their land.

After all this financial and military support, 1/3 of the people in the 13 colonies got mad at Britian for giving the Ohio Valley to the Native inhabitants of North America and to given the recently colonized French Candiens so much land in addition to a Tea Tax ("Taxation without Representation"). So they rebelled, got a shoot load of aid from France (which bankrupted the country and paved the way for the French Revolution), and defeated the British. They violently displaced and began a campaign of exterminating the aboriginal inhabitants off their lands (so, really, they were hard-working thieves) and proceded to develop their internal industries in a manner most undeveloped countries could only dream of - USING INFANT INDUSTRY PROTECTIONISM (the cornerstone of Alexander Hamilton's industrial policy).

So, yes, that was a huge, rose-coloured oversimplification.

_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

05 Apr 2011, 7:27 pm

Bethie wrote:

AceOfSpades wrote:

What's not prosperous about a freer economy?

The vast majority of the world who are subsisting and dying beneath the grinding fist of the effects of Western corporatocracy?

Corporatism isn't a freer economy, it's the Government intervening in the economy in favour of big businesses whether it's subsidies, higher taxing on one industry in favour of another, or eliminating competition (it's why hemp is illegal in the states). Ideally capitalism would have strict anti-trust laws and keep the Government from intervening as much as possible.

But anyways what does this have to do with screwing other countries over?

@John_Browning: Well religious pissing contests or wars over diamonds aren't gonna be solved by people pulling themselves up by the bootstraps. It goes a lot deeper than that. I'm not an expert on issues pertaining to why certain countries are broke but I do figure political corruption and instability are major factors. I don't believe it's all cuz of the white man or cuz the people themselves aren't doing enough for themselves.

Bethie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster

05 Apr 2011, 7:49 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:

Corporatism...it's the Government intervening in the economy in favour of big businesses .

"Corporatocracy" is not "corporatism"...and neither one means that....at all.

Page 9 of 11 [ 165 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 Next

Jump to:

Political Compass Test Post Reply New Topic

Political Compass Test