Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Discussion of anything not related to audio or music production
myrnova
Posts: 6451
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 6:58 pm

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by myrnova » Wed May 22, 2013 7:48 pm

Racism does not exist, it was just an old french invention. In 1855 Arthur de Gobineau wrote a book called "Essai sur l'inégalité des races humaines". It was trash, of course, but useful to justify european colonialism, nationalism and slavery. So they invented this pseudoscience called "scientific racism" which pretended to explain ethnic differences throuch "different races" basing on that book. Of course all this crap is anything but scientific. It is like "the protocol of sion": bullshit. But thanks to Hitler's propaganda, a large amount of population, and not only KKK, fascists etc, even today tend to consider racism something true, at the point that even here a certain JMcCock called it "one of the deepest human instincts" :mrgreen: Unless you call "racism" something else ("xenophoby" for instance)? In this case, too, that has nothing to do with "instincts", but with culture.
Last edited by myrnova on Wed May 22, 2013 7:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Machinesworking
Posts: 11081
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by Machinesworking » Wed May 22, 2013 7:52 pm

Funk N. Furter wrote:
Jack McOck wrote: Well it's good that you could refute those points.
I don't need to, they are too stupid to refute. I've given you plenty to go on anyway, but you have ideological blinkers on. Hitler rounded up all the socialists as soon as he got into power. He got into power by banning them from campaigning for the election. He hated socialists. I have proved it to you. As if a socialist would write a letter like that. Your probelem is that you define anyone who is not an extreme 'libertarian' to be a socialist, including Marx, Stalin, Hitler, Obama, George W. Bush, most countries, most everything.
Probably the most succinct thing said in this thread.

Republicans aren't instantly more nationalistic because they're called republicans and not democrats,
a butterfly is not made out of butter, and a noted rabid anti socialist who belonged to an admittedly fascist movement isn't a socialist because his party deliberately chose a name that sounded socialist, and deliberately made their flag look similar to the KPD. Every historian of any note has recognized this as the propaganda it was.


SuburbanThug
Posts: 1478
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:22 am
Contact:

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by SuburbanThug » Wed May 22, 2013 9:02 pm

This is definitely the work of a bunch of tyrannical socialists: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... t-20130425
:x

SuburbanThug
Posts: 1478
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:22 am
Contact:

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by SuburbanThug » Wed May 22, 2013 9:13 pm

Jack McOck wrote: the Marxian Federal Reserve.
"I was confused by the failure to indicate which Marx they were referencing. It could be Groucho, Chico, Zeppo, Harpo..."
-A friend o' mine.
:lol:

Emissary
Posts: 2431
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 11:27 am

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by Emissary » Wed May 22, 2013 9:57 pm

Funk N. Furter wrote:
Jack McOck wrote:
Emissary wrote:Left wingers tend not to use logic, they use obfuscation and mass amounts of rhetoric. I wouldn't even bother arguing with the guy, he suggests the use of force to get what he wants, he's a tyrant and needs to be ignored.
+1.

I withdraw from this debate until the questions raised by the thinking minority have been answered.
Emissary is putting words in my mouth, and desperately looking for an excuse not to debate me now. He accuses me of being a tyrant and then uses as it as an excuse not to debate me! That really takes the biscuit.

What I said was that if the capitalists start shooting, the workers would hopefully fight back. Obviously the workers don't always fight back and then they get massacred, like in Chile in 1973.

Emissary, well done, you've just publicly stated that you are unfit to debate the one person you know who knows these subjects thoroughly!

Cocky, I am not gonna go round in circles answering the most ludicrous points like your claim that fascism and communism are the same. Nobody believes that. You and about 3 other fanatical Rand fetishists, and that's it. Not even right wing conservatives have any time for nonsense like that.

As for your claim that everyone in the world who is not an 'anarcho cap' is a fascist/commie, again, absurd. To debate that would be stupid of me, like debating that the earth is not flat.
Funk N. Furter wrote: Of course some force is required. Any state has to use force. The legitimate use of force is part of the definition of a state
You accept the use of force by the state is moral. Your a dick, please stop debating this tyrant.

stringtapper
Posts: 6268
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 6:21 pm

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by stringtapper » Wed May 22, 2013 9:58 pm

What is the deal with people in this thread who can't use the quote system properly?

:|
Unsound Designer

Machinesworking
Posts: 11081
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by Machinesworking » Wed May 22, 2013 10:40 pm

Funk N. Furter wrote:
SuburbanThug wrote:When racism or subjugation of another culture appears in history has little to do with proving whether it is human instinct or not. The pyramids were created by a culture with a vast social construct. Anecdotally, some tribes who have never seen a white person actually revere them when they see them for the first time. I bet a couple people here will have fun with that one at their jingoist dock parties tonight.

As far as anarcho-capitalism is concerned, I think maybe some of you do not understand the word anarchy. Take a quote from one of your heroes, Murray Rothbard, to light your way.

"We must therefore turn to history for enlightenment; here we find that none of the proclaimed anarchist groups correspond to the libertarian position, that even the best of them have unrealistic and socialistic elements in their doctrines. Furthermore, we find that all of the current anarchists are irrational collectivists, and therefore at opposite poles from our position. We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical."
Murray N. Rothbard
"The goal of anarchists is communism."
Not necessarily IMO the libertarian political spectrum chart is a great example of a better understanding of the differences in thought:
Image

Communism to a degree has an authoritarian side, so resides in it's best form somewhere far left and middle low. Stalin etc. was middle left top, Hitler middle right top. Anarchists would be far left bottom, libertarians far right bottom.
What is scary to everyone is how close all dictatorial systems are in this chart to the systems we have in place now.

Machinesworking
Posts: 11081
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by Machinesworking » Wed May 22, 2013 11:06 pm

Well in that sense the goal is the same for libertarians as well, the difference being in the abstract of what property, liberty and freedom are.
Also to clarify, I would say Anarchists are more center and very bottom, as personal liberty is seen as in some ways more important than collective liberty.

I'll also add that all three are hopeless dreamers, mankind without a system of law, (which is essentially what a government is) is a savage animal. Not all of us, but enough of us are to make it a necessary evil.

H20nly
Posts: 15836
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: The Wild West

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by H20nly » Wed May 22, 2013 11:24 pm

Funk N. Furter wrote:
H20nly wrote:yes the guys who built the pyramids were volunteers. before the colonists, essentially Americans, invented racism in 1776 there was never any type of racial profiling or discrimination in history. in fuct, the British and the French are prime examples of two peoples from two countries who have never had a mean thing to say about anyone.
Slavery in the pre-feudal days was an economic system of it's own. It was their economic system. It was different in the triangular trade period around the time of the industrial revolution when we colonised America. Slaves were simply needed to provide enough labour. A new capitalist class had emerged after the English civil war. They were now the ruling class and the economic system was capitalism. Slavery was important, but is was different to the old slave societies that emerged during the Neolithic and lasted roughly up to feudalism. Those societies were based on conquests of territory and slavery. Capitalism was based on capital and wage labour, primarily.
um... you don't think that enslaving an entire race of people is racist.
ok.

i really can't argue with that. it would require a change in thinking that is greater than the power of words.


your rebuttal to my rebuttal is that people weren't that picky about who they made their slaves so racism didn't exist. :|

if two clans hate each other and battle to the point of extinction or the enslavement of the one or the other clan... that is racist IMO. ask an American Indian or a Mexican Indian about racism... before the whites arrived.

i guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. wiki articles that tell me how [all] Greeks from 4000 years ago thought aren't much help I'm afraid... since something tells me the author is talking out of his ever loving ass if he really thinks he knows what every Greek thought. and Greeks... please... how about the Gauls, Franks, Normans, Saxons and Celts... i suppose it was all pot lucks and pic nics between these people and that animosity was an invention created in 1954 when the Yankees were manufacturing fake moonscapes in petri dishes.
LoopStationZebra wrote:it's like a hipster commie pinko manifesto. Rambling. Angry. Nearly divorced from all reality; yet strangely compelling with a ring of truth.

Machinesworking
Posts: 11081
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by Machinesworking » Thu May 23, 2013 12:08 am

@H20nly there's a difference between nationalism and racism.
Nationalism (or provincialism) used here to describe any regional or cultural prejudice.

While I don't agree that it was capitalism that created racism completely, I do agree that mankinds prejudices in ancient times were largely based on other reasons than skin tone. THe example of Egypt is pretty good actually, there were black and paler rulers at different times. The subjugation of people wasn't based on color.

SuburbanThug
Posts: 1478
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:22 am
Contact:

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by SuburbanThug » Thu May 23, 2013 1:27 am

It is often ignored that in these cultures where slavery was employed that the people weren't strictly of one color. Even in the U.S., one of the last vestiges of slavery, white people were enslaved alongside blacks. The race of the enslaved is often chosen our of convenience rather than prejudice. This seems fairly obvious...

Machinesworking
Posts: 11081
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by Machinesworking » Thu May 23, 2013 2:18 am

SuburbanThug wrote:It is often ignored that in these cultures where slavery was employed that the people weren't strictly of one color. Even in the U.S., one of the last vestiges of slavery, white people were enslaved alongside blacks. The race of the enslaved is often chosen our of convenience rather than prejudice. This seems fairly obvious...
From what I've read, whites (poor english, scott and irish) were generally forced into indentured servitude, usually 7 years.
They were sentenced, slipped a mickey, or talked into it while black out drunk in the UK, then shipped to work in the states as essentially slaves.
In some ways a much worse situation than the black slaves. The slave owners only had you legally for 7 years so abusing and forcing the white slaves to do dangerous stuff, overworking, and malnourisment etc. was common. It was also common for them not to survive to freedom.

All that ended far before slavery did.

SuburbanThug
Posts: 1478
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:22 am
Contact:

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by SuburbanThug » Thu May 23, 2013 2:22 am

My main point is that slavery is a function of economics rather than ideology.

Emissary
Posts: 2431
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 11:27 am

Re: Socialism will save us all (technology edition)

Post by Emissary » Thu May 23, 2013 9:28 am

Funk N. Furter wrote:
Emissary wrote:
You accept the use of force by the state is moral. Your a dick, please stop debating this tyrant.
"There is no academic consensus on the most appropriate definition of the state.[3] The term "state" refers to a set of different, but interrelated and often overlapping, theories about a certain range of political phenomena.[4] The act of defining the term can be seen as part of an ideological conflict, because different definitions lead to different theories of state function, and as a result validate different political strategies.[5]

The most commonly used definition is Max Weber's,[6][7][8][9][10] which describes the state as a compulsory political organization with a centralized government that maintains a monopoly of the legitimate use of force within a certain territory.[11][12] General categories of state institutions include administrative bureaucracies, legal systems, and military or religious organizations.[13]

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a state is "a an organized political community under one government; a commonwealth; a nation. b such a community forming part of a federal republic, esp the United States of America".[1]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_%28polity%29
A left winger quoting walls of text from a website, using no internal logic and avoiding the point? well....thats really shocked me.

Post Reply