Socialism

Post Reply New Topic

Soon, the masses will rebel against the facsit captialists

our people will have a better world

you do know that socialism leads to fascism due to the ultimately failure of trying to keep people equal and keep business from growing on its own.


but then again, with socialism you don't have to worry about capitalistic competition....so no need to innovate or move above your station in life...because you're stuck there anyways. so your economy stalls.

let's not forget that capitolism requires tons of laws and regulations and rules to keep socialism working.



if you wanna see why socialism fails....check out venezuela. they're about to fall flat on the socialism tip.

Actually, that was taken directly from Rothbard.



Slavery was an economic system, and a gross violation of human rights. I would never say that slavery was part of "human nature," although the thrill of absolute power certainly seems to be part of humanity. I suppose that is why Mises said "do not give into evil." And also, the desire to control others is a key reason why I think a decentralized government leads to more freedom.

sounds kinda libertarian....i like that.


so you probably also see chavez's elevation of control as just plain stupid for the people of venezuela. rule by decree....yeah, we'll see how long those 18 months really turns out to be.

No, but the economies are driven by capitalist mechanisms. You wanted an essay, no way in hell am I giving one. A complete definition of human nature might take an entire book given every eccentricity. Capitalism maintains its power because people can see a way to improve upon their own existences by bettering themselves. Capitalism is not a weasel word, it is a word describing a type of economic system, the only way for a state to be socialist is for it to BE socialist, otherwise capitalism still ends up being the fire in the engine.

Then it isn't socialist because it is driven by capitalism. I do not accept the mixed economy as being half and half but rather just capitalism with some governmental aspects put into it.

I am not writing an essay, I already told you that man is described as having relatively high intelligence and for having some level of self-interest. We can add a few things on there to make it prettier and more complete, however, that works within the basic nature of the organism.

Except that slavery's abolishment does not eliminate a core characteristic of human nature. You are claiming that structures are the same as human nature, we are claiming that human nature simply has some solid characteristics with specifics such as slavery being only indications of those characteristics but not characteristics in and of themselves. Honestly, I gave a simple enough definition of human nature to be workable.

There is no multiple, there is one human race, there is a set of characteristics that common characteristics define it going as simple as to say logic, then going as deep as heuristics on seeing and physical measurement, psychological tendencies and propensities, sexual behavior, division between the genders, emotionality, and everything and to define it all would be a great problem. The division between barbarianism and superiority is done artificially and only to appease your moral biases.

Not very likely, and fascists and capitalists do have some differences. Fascism has more in common with socialism though than capitalism given the strong governmental controls it exploits.

Given the immense centralization of power required for all of that, yes, it does. Have you read "Road to Serfdom"?
Right, socialism tends to lack dynamism and competition.
[quote[
let's not forget that capitolism requires tons of laws and regulations and rules to keep socialism working.[/quote] Not sure what you were trying to say there, both systems require laws but socialism tends towards more byzantine laws in order to keep people from not screwing things up. Just think of a bureaucracy, and just imagine that bureaucracy never having to change anything for anyone.
The thing that is keeping their economy going is pretty must just oil, foreign investment and other things are going to die.

Definitely not a good idea, the man will end up aiming for autocracy. Especially given that this control will allow him to get his hands on just about everything.

Oh, yeah. It worries me. It is such a short sighted venture. In the long run, they will be a lot worse off. Of course, to quote Keynes, "in the long run, we'll all be dead." Have you read The Mystery of Capital? I think that it is one of the most important books to read right now.

And the Road to Serfdom by F.A. Hayek is excellent.

And if you want a really, really, really good book, read Human Action, by Mises. Excellent, excellent book. If you like the idea of libertarianism, you'll like Mises A LOT! (Actually, if you like the idea of freedom, you'll like Mises.)

i meant socialism requires a lot of laws to keep capitalism out of the state and that it requires more laws in general to protect the people and like you said....keep them from screwing up.

i'm a libertarian so in general, the more the laws...the worse the conditions are.


....so obviously i've been going insane between bush's christian fundamentalist agenda and the democrat's anti-gun, anti-video game/music agenda.

sounds like i'm gathering up a reading list here...yay.


i tend to be more of an autodidact so i love reading and learning new stuff. i probably could have gone to college for history but that would have required stupid work and memorizing names and dates instead of the point. because, afterall, history is just one giant parable....it's a matter of learning the lessons, not a matter who did what to whom.

Preach on! Totally with you on all that shiat

I would recommend Road to Serfdom above Human Action. Both are important books, however, the former is one that more people will be able to relate to, the latter is economic theory.

I got what you were saying about capitalism/socialism. It wasn't worded very clearly, but it was clear enough to be decoded.

And it isn't just Bush. Bush is the Head of the State, but he is supported by all those nice little congressmen and senators so able and willing to take your money and give themselves raises with it---among other things. DO NOT get me started on the mess we are currently in...

But I, too, am not happy with the way things are going.

realize i'm still toiling through a copy of mismeasure of man by stephen jay gould....good book but very fact heavy and very dry.

I would recommend Road to Serfdom above Human Action. Both are important books, however, the former is one that more people will be able to relate to, the latter is economic theory.[/quote]

Yes, Road to Serfdom is shorter and easier to understand right off. Human Action requires a bit more concentration. And if you are interested, I have a lot of books to recommend. I LOVE to read.

(But also read The Mystery of Capital by Hernado DeSoto. Very interesting take on poverty and what we can do to help.)

i hate neo-conservatives as well. the ideology behind it is about as weak as the ideology behind communism...a bunch of lofty ideas put down on paper to sound nice but completely and utterly ineffective when put into action. we'll be lucky to recover from the neo-con revolution in the next 15 years.

actually, the neo-conservatives have a lot in common with socialism....they both believe in a stong and large central government that dictates both how people should live and how the market should run (except neo-conservatism tends to gravitate more towards crony ism in the economy and tends to spend more than socialists).


my main man for president in 2008 right now is ron paul. on the republican ticket but he's more of a libertarian if you check out his voting history.

what's this we stuff? i'm in the class known as "working poor" just above poverty level. i think i made maybe $12k or so?