Have you noticed the inherent contradiction within the standard right wing justification for capitalism ?

Have you noticed the inherent contradiction with the standard right wing justification for capitalism ?

Whenever they attempt to justify capitalism they do so on the grounds that it has increased production - therefore standards of living - However this argument means that, Roman slavery ect was justified considering it resulted in higher standards of living - increased innovation ect - they proceed to deny this and in doing so contradict themselves.

As seen throughout history capitalism slavery and exploitation go hand in hand -

The funny part is that when you confront them with this by mentioning the historical means used to build capitalist wealth they try to CHANGE the DEFINITION of capitalism to - Lassie Faire ' which has never been implemented' ! - They do so in order to remove capitalism from its historical negative effects, the stupid thing is that in making a case FOR capitalism they use the benefits created by state capitalism therefore justify the means used to attain those benefits !

They say capitalism is wonderful because of economic growth in the early US - or the British Empire

Mention that this wealth was derived from slavery and conquest and they are compelled to reply with -

'Well that was the state - not capitalism' - however without the state enforcing such oppression and conquest the very economic benefits they use to justify capitalism would not exist !

They are aware of this contradiction but prefer to ignore it - they deceptively work to uphold the buguarsie agenda and undermine class struggle.

Not even all capitalists / anarcho capitalists are aware that this is a contradiction, though. Mass production doesn't always improve living standards, except for the CEOS...

There was a classroom "experiment" dealing with both Socialism and Capitalism. The first day, the biased teacher told the children that on the first day of the experiment, the classroom was set up as a socialist system. They had to do push ups and one piece of candy was awarded for each five push ups they did -- at the end of doing push-ups, all the candy earned was divided up by the amount of students and given out (each student got three pieces). The next day, the biased teacher told them that it was a capitalistic system and nothing would be divided up. The conclusion of the teacher was that there was more production of candy over all the capitalistic day.

This was a very well known experiment after a letter was sent to a former US president (I think it was Nixon) about the classroom "experiment". He used it to justify capitalism once. What doesn't make sense is that Socialism doesn't give out candy -- it provides social programs for those who can't afford them and it puts the makers of products in power of their products.

Capitalism has changed our entire culture to the point where profit matters over people (in general) and it makes me sick.

We need mass change!

Inkus2000 wrote:

Have you noticed the inherent contradiction with the standard right wing justification for capitalism ?

Whenever they attempt to justify capitalism they do so on the grounds that it has increased production - therefore standards of living - However this argument means that, Roman slavery ect was justified considering it resulted in higher standards of living - increased innovation ect - they proceed to deny this and in doing so contradict themselves.

As seen throughout history capitalism slavery and exploitation go hand in hand -

The funny part is that when you confront them with this by mentioning the historical means used to build capitalist wealth they try to CHANGE the DEFINITION of capitalism to - Lassie Faire ' which has never been implemented' ! - They do so in order to remove capitalism from its historical negative effects, the stupid thing is that in making a case FOR capitalism they use the benefits created by state capitalism therefore justify the means used to attain those benefits !

They say capitalism is wonderful because of economic growth in the early US - or the British Empire

Mention that this wealth was derived from slavery and conquest and they are compelled to reply with -

'Well that was the state - not capitalism' - however without the state enforcing such oppression and conquest the very economic benefits they use to justify capitalism would not exist !

They are aware of this contradiction but prefer to ignore it - they deceptively work to uphold the buguarsie agenda and undermine class struggle.

Ya, my dad argues like that a little. And then he will deny that the means of production should be returned to its rightful owner (the workers) because history has distorted who it originally belonged to. That's an absurd argument since i don't want to give it to the descendant of the one man who's spindel created wealth for some capitalist who made new means of production with it, and so on. He just can't get through his head the idea of collective ownership. It's just completely alien to him, and he doesn't have the imagination to picture it, apparently.

I've become way sick of arguing with capitalists. It's always the same backwards, hypocritical and contradictory arguments as everyone else uses.

Quote :

Ya, my dad argues like that a little. And then he will deny that the means of production should be returned to its rightful owner (the workers) because history has distorted who it originally belonged to. That's an absurd argument since i don't want to give it to the descendant of the one man who's spindel created wealth for some capitalist who made new means of production with it, and so on. He just can't get through his head the idea of collective ownership. It's just completely alien to him, and he doesn't have the imagination to picture it, apparently.

I've become way sick of arguing with capitalists. It's always the same backwards, hypocritical and contradictory arguments as everyone else uses.

LOL - Yea another one I hate is when they try to assert that capitalism is democratic but saying 'people vote with their dollars' LOL - One of Milton Friedmons famed quotes.

Apart from the fact that this argument can only be used in an economic context it's also worth pointing out that those with more dollars have more votes - so much for democracy

Inkus2000 wrote:

Quote :

Ya, my dad argues like that a little. And then he will deny that the means of production should be returned to its rightful owner (the workers) because history has distorted who it originally belonged to. That's an absurd argument since i don't want to give it to the descendant of the one man who's spindel created wealth for some capitalist who made new means of production with it, and so on. He just can't get through his head the idea of collective ownership. It's just completely alien to him, and he doesn't have the imagination to picture it, apparently.

I've become way sick of arguing with capitalists. It's always the same backwards, hypocritical and contradictory arguments as everyone else uses.

LOL - Yea another one I hate is when they try to assert that capitalism is democratic but saying 'people vote with their dollars' LOL - One of Milton Friedmons famed quotes.

Apart from the fact that this argument can only be used in an economic context it's also worth pointing out that those with more dollars have more votes - so much for democracy

Perhaps we should start buying and selling votes. =p

KenCat wrote:

Perhaps we should start buying and selling votes. =p

I would like to purchase near 20,000 votes to be directed to Fidel Castro. err...obama

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Perhaps we should start buying and selling votes. =p

I would like to purchase near 20,000 votes to be directed to Fidel Castro. err...obama

*vomits* Obama! hehe
I used to sympathize with him, but he's not doing enough for true change. A tweaking of the health care system is not change -- when we can have a free, classless, equal, clean society is when we have change.

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Perhaps we should start buying and selling votes. =p

I would like to purchase near 20,000 votes to be directed to Fidel Castro. err...obama

*vomits* Obama! hehe
I used to sympathize with him, but he's not doing enough for true change. A tweaking of the health care system is not change -- when we can have a free, classless, equal, clean society is when we have change.

Well as a reformist, little could lead to alot in my mind, and McCain is just..ridiculous, and Ron Paul is somewhat of a gun maniac. So i must vote for the only one left.

I personally do not like any of them. BUUUUT better than Bush (besides McCain, i would swear they are brothers)

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Perhaps we should start buying and selling votes. =p

I would like to purchase near 20,000 votes to be directed to Fidel Castro. err...obama

*vomits* Obama! hehe
I used to sympathize with him, but he's not doing enough for true change. A tweaking of the health care system is not change -- when we can have a free, classless, equal, clean society is when we have change.

Well as a reformist, little could lead to alot in my mind, and McCain is just..ridiculous, and Ron Paul is somewhat of a gun maniac. So i must vote for the only one left.

I personally do not like any of them. BUUUUT better than Bush (besides McCain, i would swear they are brothers)

You said you were an environmentalist, right? Why not vote for Cynthia Mckinney or Ralph Nader (lol) -- that is, if you want to 'vote' or your master. :]

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Perhaps we should start buying and selling votes. =p

I would like to purchase near 20,000 votes to be directed to Fidel Castro. err...obama

*vomits* Obama! hehe
I used to sympathize with him, but he's not doing enough for true change. A tweaking of the health care system is not change -- when we can have a free, classless, equal, clean society is when we have change.

Well as a reformist, little could lead to alot in my mind, and McCain is just..ridiculous, and Ron Paul is somewhat of a gun maniac. So i must vote for the only one left.

I personally do not like any of them. BUUUUT better than Bush (besides McCain, i would swear they are brothers)

You said you were an environmentalist, right? Why not vote for Cynthia Mckinney or Ralph Nader (lol) -- that is, if you want to 'vote' or your master. :]

Macro Enviornmentalist, so no. (I think i just made that up )

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Perhaps we should start buying and selling votes. =p

I would like to purchase near 20,000 votes to be directed to Fidel Castro. err...obama

*vomits* Obama! hehe
I used to sympathize with him, but he's not doing enough for true change. A tweaking of the health care system is not change -- when we can have a free, classless, equal, clean society is when we have change.

Well as a reformist, little could lead to alot in my mind, and McCain is just..ridiculous, and Ron Paul is somewhat of a gun maniac. So i must vote for the only one left.

I personally do not like any of them. BUUUUT better than Bush (besides McCain, i would swear they are brothers)

You said you were an environmentalist, right? Why not vote for Cynthia Mckinney or Ralph Nader (lol) -- that is, if you want to 'vote' or your master. :]

Macro Enviornmentalist, so no. (I think i just made that up )

As in you alone try to make the environment better with personal decisions?
Okay, then who would you vote for (if you don't mind me asking, of course)?

"As in you alone try to make the environment better with personal decisions?
Okay, then who would you vote for (if you don't mind me asking, of course)?"

Well, i don't beileve alot of things enviormentalists beileve, but than again some of it i do, so i guess i can't nessecarily call me one, but i still do hold their main intentions at heart, which is why i do.

Well considering McCain talks in loophole lies, HIlary is somewhat a fanatic about winning and already lost, and Ron Paul is a gun Nut, and the others don't stand a chance, the only one left is "Muslim-Obama" As i said before though, really i don't care for any of them, it will probably just turn out like Bushy boy all over again

Rename wrote:

"As in you alone try to make the environment better with personal decisions?
Okay, then who would you vote for (if you don't mind me asking, of course)?"

Well, i don't beileve alot of things enviormentalists beileve, but than again some of it i do, so i guess i can't nessecarily call me one, but i still do hold their main intentions at heart, which is why i do.

Well considering McCain talks in loophole lies, HIlary is somewhat a fanatic about winning and already lost, and Ron Paul is a gun Nut, and the others don't stand a chance, the only one left is "Muslim-Obama" As i said before though, really i don't care for any of them, it will probably just turn out like Bushy boy all over again

"it will probably just turn out like Bushy boy all over again"
You seem to get it, so why vote for Obama?

I see Obama as one of the best politicians our generation will ever see.. Much like JFK to to the older generations..
JFK stood for many good things, but he still went to many secret wars, killing thousands/millions and still endorsing the capitalistic system.

KenCat wrote:

"it will probably just turn out like Bushy boy all over again"
You seem to get it, so why vote for Obama?

I see Obama as one of the best politicians our generation will ever see.. Much like JFK to to the older generations..
JFK stood for many good things, but he still went to many secret wars, killing thousands/millions and still endorsing the capitalistic system.

Oh i do understand, but as i said, who else? In my view, he is the one that will bring at least some of my ideals in, ethe others are war-pigs, Obama on the other hand is just a slight war-pig. Vote for the lesser evil in this case, and you already know i endorse capitalistic system if it is reformed

It raises the standard of living for THEM not us

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

"it will probably just turn out like Bushy boy all over again"
You seem to get it, so why vote for Obama?

I see Obama as one of the best politicians our generation will ever see.. Much like JFK to to the older generations..
JFK stood for many good things, but he still went to many secret wars, killing thousands/millions and still endorsing the capitalistic system.

Oh i do understand, but as i said, who else? In my view, he is the one that will bring at least some of my ideals in, ethe others are war-pigs, Obama on the other hand is just a slight war-pig. Vote for the lesser evil in this case, and you already know i endorse capitalistic system if it is reformed

I'm almost ashamed..

Obama IS a war pig, just like the rest of them.. I prefer not to vote for any evil.

"who else?"
The people.

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

"it will probably just turn out like Bushy boy all over again"
You seem to get it, so why vote for Obama?

I see Obama as one of the best politicians our generation will ever see.. Much like JFK to to the older generations..
JFK stood for many good things, but he still went to many secret wars, killing thousands/millions and still endorsing the capitalistic system.

Oh i do understand, but as i said, who else? In my view, he is the one that will bring at least some of my ideals in, ethe others are war-pigs, Obama on the other hand is just a slight war-pig. Vote for the lesser evil in this case, and you already know i endorse capitalistic system if it is reformed

I'm almost ashamed..

Obama IS a war pig, just like the rest of them.. I prefer not to vote for any evil.

"who else?"
The people.

Did you say war or WHORE

KenCat wrote:

I'm almost ashamed..

Obama IS a war pig, just like the rest of them.. I prefer not to vote for any evil.

"who else?"
The people.

Nah don't be ashamed. It's the normal ideas of capitalists, hard to explain really. But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war..

Which president will support the people? hmm
nope

Inkus2000 wrote:

Have you noticed the inherent contradiction with the standard right wing justification for capitalism ?



They say capitalism is wonderful because of economic growth in the early US - or the British Empire

Mention that this wealth was derived from slavery and conquest and they are compelled to reply with -

Don't forget the infamous Imperialism

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

I'm almost ashamed..

Obama IS a war pig, just like the rest of them.. I prefer not to vote for any evil.

"who else?"
The people.

Nah don't be ashamed. It's the normal ideas of capitalists, hard to explain really. But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war..

Which president will support the people? hmm
nope

"But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war"
If you only think inside capitalistic means, then they may seem far apart. If you think on a more global means, they naturally seem more close together.

"Which president will support the people?"
None, or else they wouldn't run for power over people.

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

I'm almost ashamed..

Obama IS a war pig, just like the rest of them.. I prefer not to vote for any evil.

"who else?"
The people.

Nah don't be ashamed. It's the normal ideas of capitalists, hard to explain really. But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war..

Which president will support the people? hmm
nope

"But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war"
If you only think inside capitalistic means, then they may seem far apart. If you think on a more global means, they naturally seem more close together.

"Which president will support the people?"
None, or else they wouldn't run for power over people.

If I could vote I'd vote for Obama just because of his socialist views on Taxes...

Killuminati wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

I'm almost ashamed..

Obama IS a war pig, just like the rest of them.. I prefer not to vote for any evil.

"who else?"
The people.

Nah don't be ashamed. It's the normal ideas of capitalists, hard to explain really. But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war..

Which president will support the people? hmm
nope

"But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war"
If you only think inside capitalistic means, then they may seem far apart. If you think on a more global means, they naturally seem more close together.

"Which president will support the people?"
None, or else they wouldn't run for power over people.

If I could vote I'd vote for Obama just because of his socialist views on Taxes...

Obama is nowhere near socialist, even if he does want to raise taxes.. lol
Cynthia Mckinney, Mike Gravel, Ralph Nader -- these are politicians/rulers I hate the least. lol

KenCat wrote:

Killuminati wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

I'm almost ashamed..

Obama IS a war pig, just like the rest of them.. I prefer not to vote for any evil.

"who else?"
The people.

Nah don't be ashamed. It's the normal ideas of capitalists, hard to explain really. But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war..

Which president will support the people? hmm
nope

"But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war"
If you only think inside capitalistic means, then they may seem far apart. If you think on a more global means, they naturally seem more close together.

"Which president will support the people?"
None, or else they wouldn't run for power over people.

If I could vote I'd vote for Obama just because of his socialist views on Taxes...

Obama is nowhere near socialist, even if he does want to raise taxes.. lol
Cynthia Mckinney, Mike Gravel, Ralph Nader -- these are politicians/rulers I hate the least. lol

Obama was going to raise taxes on the rich and keep taxes on the poor/middle class the same...muchj better than what Mccain wants to do only policy I could find from any of them I like

Killuminati wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Killuminati wrote:

KenCat wrote:

Rename wrote:

KenCat wrote:

I'm almost ashamed..

Obama IS a war pig, just like the rest of them.. I prefer not to vote for any evil.

"who else?"
The people.

Nah don't be ashamed. It's the normal ideas of capitalists, hard to explain really. But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war..

Which president will support the people? hmm
nope

"But really i don't see how he is even near the level of McCain when it comes to war"
If you only think inside capitalistic means, then they may seem far apart. If you think on a more global means, they naturally seem more close together.

"Which president will support the people?"
None, or else they wouldn't run for power over people.

If I could vote I'd vote for Obama just because of his socialist views on Taxes...

Obama is nowhere near socialist, even if he does want to raise taxes.. lol
Cynthia Mckinney, Mike Gravel, Ralph Nader -- these are politicians/rulers I hate the least. lol

Obama was going to raise taxes on the rich and keep taxes on the poor/middle class the same...muchj better than what Mccain wants to do only policy I could find from any of them I like

Agreed. But uhm, how about a classless society without ANY taxes!? lol