RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda.

RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

juliaoceania -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 6:27:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: None of us have displayed "know-it-all-itis" in this thread, and I'm actually very proud of everyone here, even if I do disagree, and will rhetorically attack their positions. You know you never addressed my position, so I have decided you must agree with it. edited from my original comment to state that I do not want you to state "pride" in my postings while attacking my Daddy's, I find that behavior very distasteful. And I find my Daddy's comments quite appropriate. shrugs Assume whatever you wish. FirmKY Not assuming anything... just pointing out you never addressed my points even though you stated how "nicely" I had framed them... I will state that comparing my posting style with my Dominant's to make a point to him and then not addressing my point is par for the course in your pattern of posting. I did not find his posts to be in poor taste or snide or snarky or personal... I am proud of him I have to say, he continually impresses me in keeping his cool even when others are extremely nasty in a PA sort of way and do not address his points... Edited for punctuation

losttreasure -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 6:35:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy The evidence abounds as to the democratic principles which were originally set up in this country in the original Bill of Rights have been systematically dismantled by this Government, almost from it's inception. Jefferson even wrote about the future problems to Adams back in 1789. Plato wrote about the future problems of the political system of democracy thousands of years ago. But as you have not bothered to articulately respond to any of the examples I have given where the government of the United States has abridged democratic principles and civil liberties and constitutional guarantees, and continue to apply dictionary definitions (square peg) to the (round hole) US political system, I can only assume that you have taken the blue pill. I am still puzzled why are we talking about the United States political system on a thread you started about the economic principles of capitalism. However, I really do not expect an articulate rationale behind this rhetorical oddity, so... Peace out. Sinergy We continue to discuss it because you continue to make an issue of it. I do understand your frustration, but I have not attempted to address your examples for a few reasons. 1. Because my initial post in response to you was to address your mocking of our President for having referred to our government as a democracy. I simply wished to point out that it is a common reference and not entirely inaccurate depending upon the context. While, of course, any comment can be taken as an open invitation for further discussion, why you felt it necessary to jump from a clarification of what our form of government is to demanding explanations for alleged transgressions made by said government, I do not know. However, I also have the right to choose not to be diverted from the subject at hand and avoid further degradation of the topic of this thread. 2. Because I prefer to focus my efforts on the friendly exchange of ideas with regard to the impact that capitalism has had in the United States. While I am more than capable of multi-tasking, I find it less stressful and more enjoyable (which is the whole reason I post here) if I limit myself to one or two engagements at a time. 3. Because, to be honest, I'm not entirely certain what exactly it is that you wish me to respond to, articulately or otherwise. You've declared that our government is not a democracy although it was founded on democratic principles. You've alleged that in the intervening years those principles have been wrongly stripped from us leaving us with what, I'm not sure, but you've claimed it is a "Representative Republic". Unfortunately, I've been unable to find any description for that form of government and you've not provided one or likened it to any of the recognized definitions that I've provided, so I'm at a bit of a loss in that regard. If you would be so kind as to provide a link to its definition so that I can distinguish if from just a "republic" in modern political terminology, then perhaps we can go from there. You've also announced that Plato doubted the viability of a democracy, but I'm not sure why you feel that is relevant as you've clearly stated that the United States is not a democracy and no vestiges of democracy remain. What rationale are you looking for? I will say, however, that although I did not start this thread, I do take it as a compliment that you appear to equate myself and FirmHandKY together as a whole. Thank you. [:D] Edited because it's does not mean the same thing as its.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 6:49:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Not assuming anything... just pointing out you never addressed my points even though you stated how "nicely" I had framed them... I will state that comparing my posting style with my Dominants to make a point to him and then not addressing my point is par of the course in your pattern of posting. I did not find his posts to be in poor taste or snide or snarky or personal... I am proud of him I have to say, he continually impresses me in keeping his cool even when others are extremely nasty in a PA sort of way and do not address his points... julia, It is not always possible to address each and every single little sentence, half-formed thought, and even enlightening concept that gets posted. On a long thread like this, there is simply too many of them. There is also a matter of weighing the "worth" of pursuing a conversation with any particular poster. This isn't necessarily a value judgement about the person's worth as an individual, but simply a value judgement about the intellectual "thrill" of discovery on a specific topic. I can pretty much anticipate most of what you will post, how you will respond and what you seem to believe, based on some of our prior "conversations" and many of your other posts. I chose, therefore - for the most part - simply to allow you to participate without either encouraging you, or hindering you. If this troubles you, and you insist on demanding attention from me, then I'll give you the same suggestion that I did last time we got to this point: find the "block" button for me, and use it, please. shrugs Do as you will. Do not expect me to conform to your wishes and desires. FirmKY

juliaoceania -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 6:50:36 PM)
quote: I will say, however, that although I did not start this thread, I do take it as a compliment that you appear to equate myself and FirmHandKY together as a whole. Thank you. [:D] Well some people do not need to insult other people's relationships to make a point on a thread....

losttreasure -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:07:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: I will say, however, that although I did not start this thread, I do take it as a compliment that you appear to equate myself and FirmHandKY together as a whole. Thank you. [:D] Well some people do not need to insult other people's relationships to make a point on a thread.... Julia, I honestly have no idea what you are referring to. I don't recall ever having insulted yours and Sinergy's relationship... and honestly cannot fathom doing so. Frankly, aside from differences in political and spiritual ideologies, I've never seen anything that suggests your relationship is fundamentally different than mine and FirmHandKY's. What I have seen suggests that you both have taken a level headed and mature approach to developing a realistic and workable relationship. Based on that, I've personally felt that of the relationships I've seen develop here recently, yours appears the most viable. However, if you believe that at some point I've implied otherwise, I do apologize. I invite you to message me privately with any specific grievances, and I would be more than happy to express my deepest regrets. Treasure

FirmhandKY -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:17:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY I think some people - who have such a strong distaste for capitalism, and the failures of the US - forget (or never understood) this. FirmKY Specify exactly what it is that gives you the impression "these" people have forgotten anything or what is is they do not understand? Exactly what are the points you are refering too? The point I was referring to was: Either side, taken to the extreme is unhealthy and counter-productive to society. Three of the four examples I gave were: Capitalism without a counter-vailing balance of morality can turn into exactly the horror that some have claimed it is in this thread. Collectivism without a balance of individualism can turn into the horror that we saw in some nations. Enviromentalism without a balanced nod to human growth can turn into dictatorship and redefine humanity into just a parasitic species. What exactly, that gives me the impression that people have forgotten or do not understand this is the absolute refusal by a certain segment of "true believers" on either side of the "capitalism" vs "collectiveism" side of the argument that both have good points, and both have bad points. These are commonly called "ideologues". quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Add to this, the growing political power of the "masses", who then have more political power than mere serfs or slaves, and what you have is power shifting slowly but constantly to more and more people. On a specific kingdom basis that may hold true but not globally. Specify how and what political power is going steadily in the hands of the masses? Since when is power ever something freely "given"? Political Power: is a type of power held by a person or group in a society. There are many ways to hold such power. Officially, political power is held by the holders of the sovereignty. Political powers are not limited to heads of states, however, and the extent to which a person or group holds such power is related to the amount of societal influence they can wield, formally or informally. In many cases this influence is not contained within a single state and it refers to international power. My point is that power is more diffuse now, under free-markets and democracy (republicanism if you want) than at any time in history. I'm not sure where you get "power is ever something freely 'given' " I don't think I have ever said that, or intimated it in anything I've written (politically-wise, anyway) quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Have you watched the videos below? I watched the first one. It's a big video file, and my top download speed is only 200k, so it took a long while to download. Then the video itself is an hour long. Truthfully, I wasn't impressed enough to consider downloading and watching the other's you link to, but thank you for the exposure to that type of thinking. FirmKY

Real0ne -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:20:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Not assuming anything... just pointing out you never addressed my points even though you stated how "nicely" I had framed them... I will state that comparing my posting style with my Dominants to make a point to him and then not addressing my point is par of the course in your pattern of posting. I did not find his posts to be in poor taste or snide or snarky or personal... I am proud of him I have to say, he continually impresses me in keeping his cool even when others are extremely nasty in a PA sort of way and do not address his points... julia, It is not always possible to address each and every single little sentence, half-formed thought, and even enlightening concept that gets posted. On a long thread like this, there is simply too many of them. There is also a matter of weighing the "worth" of pursuing a conversation with any particular poster. This isn't necessarily a value judgement about the person's worth as an individual, but simply a value judgement about the intellectual "thrill" of discovery on a specific topic. I can pretty much anticipate most of what you will post, how you will respond and what you seem to believe, based on some of our prior "conversations" and many of your other posts. I chose, therefore - for the most part - simply to allow you to participate without either encouraging you, or hindering you. If this troubles you, and you insist on demanding attention from me, then I'll give you the same suggestion that I did last time we got to this point: find the "block" button for me, and use it, please. shrugs Do as you will. Do not expect me to conform to your wishes and desires. FirmKY It seems to me that a debate like this is based on a point counterpoint basis or why have it to begin with. Frankly from my viewpoint i would rather see the points of people that request them be addressed than the constant 17 pages of intellectual abuser/victim. passive/agressive bickerfest that i have seen so prevalent throughout this thread. Granted if its the same question over and over or deemed totally off topic i can understand your point but then it takes only a moment to address that. Ok now back to the previously scheduled bickerfest.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:23:47 PM)
FR: Are there any other poster who feels like they have asked me a question, or expressed an opinion that they wish for me to address? I know I got interrupted in my conversation with NorthernGent, but on rereading the thread after that point, it seems like most of the points I would have made, got made without me. But, NG, if ya got something that ya wanna run by me ... [:)] FirmKY

juliaoceania -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:24:49 PM)
Now with inferring my thoughts are half formed[:D] So typical of your debating style

losttreasure -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:35:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Now with inferring my thoughts are half formed[:D] So typical of your debating style Julia, you chose that option to apply to yourself. It seems clear to me that he gave several examples and purposely avoided attaching them to specific posters to avoid personal attacks. Did it even occur to you that he might have intended "enlightening concepts" to encompass your posts or did you immediately assume the worst? As you recently pointed out in another thread, assuming isn't necessarily a good or accurate thing.

Real0ne -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:43:22 PM)
quote: quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY I think some people - who have such a strong distaste for capitalism, and the failures of the US - forget (or never understood) this. FirmKY Specify exactly what it is that gives you the impression "these" people have forgotten anything or what is is they do not understand? Exactly what are the points you are refering too? The point I was referring to was: Either side, taken to the extreme is unhealthy and counter-productive to society. Three of the four examples I gave were: Capitalism without a counter-vailing balance of morality can turn into exactly the horror that some have claimed it is in this thread. Collectivism without a balance of individualism can turn into the horror that we saw in some nations. Enviromentalism without a balanced nod to human growth can turn into dictatorship and redefine humanity into just a parasitic species. What exactly, that gives me the impression that people have forgotten or do not understand this is the absolute refusal by a certain segment of "true believers" on either side of the "capitalism" vs "collectiveism" side of the argument that both have good points, and both have bad points. These are commonly called "ideologues". quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Add to this, the growing political power of the "masses", who then have more political power than mere serfs or slaves, and what you have is power shifting slowly but constantly to more and more people. On a specific kingdom basis that may hold true but not globally. Specify how and what political power is going steadily in the hands of the masses? Since when is power ever something freely "given"? Political Power: is a type of power held by a person or group in a society. There are many ways to hold such power. Officially, political power is held by the holders of the sovereignty. Political powers are not limited to heads of states, however, and the extent to which a person or group holds such power is related to the amount of societal influence they can wield, formally or informally. In many cases this influence is not contained within a single state and it refers to international power. My point is that power is more diffuse now, under free-markets and democracy (republicanism if you want) than at any time in history. I'm not sure where you get "power is ever something freely 'given' " I don't think I have ever said that, or intimated it in anything I've written (politically-wise, anyway) Seems to me those you point out are arguing the point on a cause and effect basis, line item by line item, and you prefer to sum everything up in general terms with use of isms. Its not surprising there is little communication in this thread and everyone is consistantly asking what the other is talking about and clarifying everything. Maybe if everyone made an attempt at speaking the same language it would be helpful. quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Have you watched the videos below? I watched the first one. It's a big video file, and my top download speed is only 200k, so it took a long while to download. Then the video itself is an hour long. Truthfully, I wasn't impressed enough to consider downloading and watching the other's you link to, but thank you for the exposure to that type of thinking. FirmKY My first reaction to that was intersting, i clicked on your profile to see if you were an american. LOL Obviously you disagree, maybe worth a post in the terror thread. As for power, power has many faces and power is taken, not given.

juliaoceania -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:46:47 PM)
Since he quoted me and even titled his response "Julia" I am guessing he was responding to me...lol. It does not matter a hill of beans whether he was talking about my post or not to be completely honest with you. I do not really care if he EVER responds to my post (which btw is directly related to the OP where I supply links whereas others he has responded to were not related to the OP whatsoever and those responses were often just to be condescending and insulting). Now make what you will of what I post but here are the things you will not see me doing: Insulting people's relationships to make a point about their personal philosophies Flatter someone's sub/dom in the same breath I slam them. I just do not behave this way.. it is called good manners.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 7:53:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne It seems to me that a debate like this is based on a point counterpoint basis or why have it to begin with. Frankly from my viewpoint i would rather see the points of people that request them be addressed than the constant 17 pages of intellectual abuser/victim. passive/agressive bickerfest that i have seen so prevalent throughout this thread. Granted if its the same question over and over or deemed totally off topic i can understand your point but then it takes only a moment to address that. Real, while laudable, that's not possible most of the time. I've made quite a few what I thought were really neat points that never got addressed. However, unless it's critical to the flow of the argument, I rarely go back and "demand" that someone address them. How a thread meanders around different aspects of a topic is a fascinating study all itself. Sometimes, however, we also make judgements about what's worth pursuing, and with who. No slight intended, but some posters don't interest me enough to respond to their posts. Other times, I agree with their points, and see no reason for saying so. Other times, the point has been addressed several times already, and it's just a failure of the questioner to read the relevant posts. Other times, I simply skip over a particular poster because they have difficulty in expressing themselves in a manner that is readable, or understandable. Other times, I'm of the opinion that a poster is simply playing the "gotcha" game, and I've no interest in furthering their manipulation. Other times, I know that their mind, and beliefs are so anti-thetical to mine, that it's doubtful that anything is worth the effort. Other times, constant demands of "You gotta address my point" are simply an attempt to derail the conversation, or thread, or an attempt to open up a personal attack. shrugs If a poster who feels ignored wants to claim "victory" and walk off the field - that's not such a bad result, most of the time. FirmKY

FirmhandKY -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 8:08:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Seems to me those you point out are arguing the point on a cause and effect basis, line item by line item, and you prefer to sum everything up in general terms with use of isms. Its not surprising there is little communication in this thread and everyone is consistantly asking what the other is talking about and clarifying everything. Maybe if everyone made an attempt at speaking the same language it would be helpful. No, I disagree. I think the basis, often, of our disagreements is deeper than "the facts". I think often they are based in a difference of our understanding of how the world works, and our beliefs about many other things, so I do try to get to the core beliefs that someone has, in order to address the issues that grow from those beliefs. It's not always a simple thing, and often people have no desire to go there, because it can be challenging. I suspect you run into a lot of the same thing, if your beliefs mirror some of the stuff I saw on the first video. It's difficult to have a discussion about who the "prettiest girl" is, if you don't agree on what "pretty" means or what a "girl" actually is. I think this thread, in general, has been very good, very detailed, and very thoughtful, with many different people who share different outlooks calmly discussing them without a whole lot of rancor. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne My first reaction to that was intersting, i clicked on your profile to see if you were an american. LOL Obviously you disagree, maybe worth a post in the terror thread. As for power, power has many faces and power is taken, not given. I'm not sure that you can say unequivocally that "power is taken". Power can be "taken", but it can also be earned, and it can also be given. Depending, of course, on your defintions of all those things, especially "power'. [:D] FirmKY

Sinergy -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 8:40:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: None of us have displayed "know-it-all-itis" in this thread, and I'm actually very proud of everyone here, even if I do disagree, and will rhetorically attack their positions. You know you never addressed my position, so I have decided you must agree with it. edited from my original comment to state that I do not want you to state "pride" in my postings while attacking my Daddy's, I find that behavior very distasteful. And I find my Daddy's comments quite appropriate. shrugs Assume whatever you wish. FirmKY At times in my life I have been an academic. There are certain attributes that make a successful scholar. 1) An academic studies a subject in depth from multiple sides before arriving at a conclusion. One thing that frequently happens is that the person doing the scholarly research discovers through research that their personal opinion is horribly wrong. A good example was Kevin Phillips researching his own party (Republican) and the influence of the Pentecostal Evangelical religions. He started out Republican, and after he learned about it, he was filled with a sense of dread about what "his" party had become. His book on the entire subject is "American Theocracy," which is quite an eye-opener. Well researched, well documented, endless footnotes and endnotes and bibliographical information, and well written. 2) An academic studies the various sides in depth in order to come up with a defensible position with sources, analyses, etc. 3) An academic publishes their findings EXPECTING and HOPING FOR what is known as "peer review." In so far as thread is concerned, what they post is published with the idea in mind that people can peruse their arguments, offer up criticism, argue with factual information, in order to further the scholarly discussion. Such efforts on the part of other academicians is seen as a positive influence on a scholarly work, not as some "snarky" argumentation. On the other hand, you have people who publish things on, say, an internet web site expounding endlessly about their personal opinion on a subject. When this position is argued with, many people... 1) Refuse to discuss, refute, provide contradictory information about, points made by other people. 2) Use name calling and other argumentative behaviors to try to demean the other poster, in essence, attacking the messenger and not the message. 3) Single-mindedly insist that their opinion is correct without bothering to provide any empirical evidence to support it, or else providing some non sequiter (like a dictionary definition) without providing any supporting information to tie the non-sequiter definition proposed to the subject they are attempting to prove. I may not agree with most of the things which many people who post on here post, but I read them anyways hoping I can learn something. But when it devolves into simple bickering and nastiness, it reminds me too much of my job, which involves my being nasty and picking fights with people. At this point, I get bored and wander away. Just me, etc. Sinergy

Sinergy -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 8:53:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: losttreasure You've alleged that in the intervening years those principles have been wrongly stripped from us leaving us with what, I alleged we had these stripped from us? What I stated was that our government was not a "democracy" in the sense of Plato's definition. Care to clarify your point? Sinergy

FirmhandKY -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 8:55:35 PM)
Luke 6:42

Real0ne -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 9:00:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne My first reaction to that was intersting, i clicked on your profile to see if you were an american. LOL Obviously you disagree, maybe worth a post in the terror thread. As for power, power has many faces and power is taken, not given. I'm not sure that you can say unequivocally that "power is taken". Power can be "taken", but it can also be earned, and it can also be given. Depending, of course, on your defintions of all those things, especially "power'. [:D] FirmKY i was referencing this discussion. a side note thought... since aj, who did the first set of videos also "predicted" that the bush administration would do something horrific and specifically stated on video, even calling out the wtc by name as a probable target i am guessing several weeks to several months before the actual occurance exactly why is it that you find his work uninteresting to the extent that it was not worth your time to watch?

luckydog1 -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 9:01:06 PM)
Perhaps you should look up what Non Sequitur means. A definition can NOT be a non sequitur. Is me pointing out your missue of the term "snarky" or academic?

Sinergy -> RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. (12/26/2006 9:07:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Perhaps you should look up what Non Sequitur means. A definition can NOT be a non sequitur. Is me pointing out your missue of the term "snarky" or academic? I was not referring to you, luckydog1. But to answer you, if we are talking about oranges, and somebody gives the definition of dachsund, that is technically a non sequitur, even if it is a definition. The definition of non sequitur is (1) an inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence. (2) is a statement that does not follow logically from what preceded. Sinergy

Page: << < prev 21 22 [23] 24 25 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875