FirmhandKY
Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
quote:
ORIGINAL: luckydog1
-----Marx was totally wrong. We are not wage slaves, we own our own capital and are free to rent it for contract or wage.
Wrong. The moment land was claimed as personal property was the moment people lost their freedom. I'm sure there are many native Americans who would bear this out if they had survived.
An average person doesn't need to work 40 hours a week 50 weeks per year to survive in relative comfort. The reason that we in the west have so much is because others in the world have so little. This planet doesn't have enough resources for everyone to live to the standard of the average westerner, for this to happen, humans need five planet earths and that's before the problem of global warming. That is not to say we have to return to the year blob but it does mean we have to alter the way we live and consume and stop wasting valuable resources and stop polluting and destroying our environment.
I've said it before, capitalism is like a man jumping off a tall building and as he passes the sixth floor he shouts, 'Look! I'm still flying!'
1. The moment land was claimed as personal property was the moment people lost their freedom.
Wrong. It is primarily the principle of private ownership that leads to the philosophical belief that all men have rights and the rule of law. Private property was the start of freedom.
2. many native Americans who would bear this out if they had survived ...
Wrong. You attempt to juxtapose, transpose and claim a relationship between the supposed "native American" spiritual beliefs as some kind of "natural freedom", which fails to take into account much of their realities of life. In other words, you are taking an utopian view of native American life before European colonization and comparing it to you false sense of what capitalism is all about today.
Comparing two things, neither of which is accurate, doesn't make for a very convincing argument.
And, as I've said before, you are anti-capitalistic, anti-American and a believer in an utopian society over the reality of people and the world. Your comment about native Americans is simply your skewed view of American culpability that you use in an attempt to justify and rationalize your hatred of all things American. If you look at history and pre-history, it's doubtful you'll be able to find any nation or people who did not take their land from another population somewhere.
3. The reason that we in the west have so much is because others in the world have so little.
Wrong. The reason that we in the west have so much is because we are the ones who came up with science, personal freedom and responsibility and free markets. As the report that I started this thread with shows, as those values permeate the world, then the standard of living grows.
4. This planet doesn't have enough resources for everyone to live to the standard of the average westerner ...
Depends. If you are a believer in a zero-sum world and society, and confuse short-term market shortages with the long-term ability to provide a "standard of living" you may be right. However, I reject that interpretation.
5. for this to happen, humans need five planet earths
Wrong. Nice sound bite. Not much reality to it, I suspect. You (and your source) are likely using straight line interpolation, without taking into account any other factors.
As I mentioned before, all you have provided on this claim are reports about the report. The actual science, logic and reasoning behind these claims are nowhere to be found, which, as I have said, makes me suspicious of their methodology.
According to Malthus, we all starved to death in the middle of the 19th century due to the !massive! population growth of the time. As Wikipedia says: a prediction which failed for several reasons, including his use of static analysis, taking recent trends and projecting them indefinitely into the future, which often fails for complex systems.)
I suspect you have the same or similiar problem with your supporting study.
6. we have to alter the way we live and consume ...
True. But, you wish to force a change through fiat and the reduction of rights and freedoms. I believe it is more humane and more likely to suceed if those changes are guided by intelligent policies that take into account human nature, freedoms and rights under a capitalistic economic system. The way we do things may change .... the things we do may change ... but the quality of life should increase, not decrease over the long term.
7. and stop polluting and destroying our environment.
True. But, I suspect that you'll be much more successful by paying attention to 2nd and third world pollution (China? Russia?) than you will in targeting American pollutors, as the US environment and anti-pollution laws have done a lot to "clean up" our environment. But ... no, what you do is rail against the US because we use so much of the resources of the rest of the world .... because it is capitalistic ... and free ... and (generally) respects private property ...
8. I've said it before, capitalism is like a man jumping off a tall building and as he passes the sixth floor he shouts, 'Look! I'm still flying!'
Wrong. I tried to think of a mirrored, humorous analogy to poke fun of your stance, but on re-reading your comments, I don't see much of any kind of "belief" on an economic system you prefer other than feudalism - which you claim to not desire either.
I guess, just as long as it isn't something that can be called capitalism, or have private property - you'll accept it.
Kinda reminds me of the saying "A man who believes in nothing, will fall for anything."
FirmKY
< Message edited by FirmhandKY -- 12/20/2006 2:06:20 PM >
_____________________________
Some people are just idiots.
|
RE: Failure of the world-wide capitalist system ... kinda. - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread