well, no.. the thing is capitalism is dangerous in the fact that it can sustain itself for roughly 200 years before turning ugly. it builds infrastructure but also sets the bomb to destroy it
Disturbed has to be trolling, right?
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 10:07:06 AMwell, no.. the thing is capitalism is dangerous in the fact that it can sustain itself for roughly 200 years before turning ugly. it builds infrastructure but also sets the bomb to destroy itAll you're doing is spouting cryptic nonsense that doesn't challenge what I'm saying or even make much sense.What does sustain itself for 200 years before "turning ugly" even mean?
Quote from: Meta Cognition on January 26, 2015, 10:14:37 AMQuote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 10:07:06 AMwell, no.. the thing is capitalism is dangerous in the fact that it can sustain itself for roughly 200 years before turning ugly. it builds infrastructure but also sets the bomb to destroy itAll you're doing is spouting cryptic nonsense that doesn't challenge what I'm saying or even make much sense.What does sustain itself for 200 years before "turning ugly" even mean?it means that capitalism encourages corruption. and its basically humanely impossible to have pure capitalism due to human nature itself.the system should just be scrapped if its not realistic
Quote from: Mad Max on January 26, 2015, 10:07:46 AMDisturbed has to be trolling, right?Pretty sure this thread attracted the attention of the government and they made a couple of accounts to disuade us from becoming socialists.
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 10:17:51 AMQuote from: Meta Cognition on January 26, 2015, 10:14:37 AMQuote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 10:07:06 AMwell, no.. the thing is capitalism is dangerous in the fact that it can sustain itself for roughly 200 years before turning ugly. it builds infrastructure but also sets the bomb to destroy itAll you're doing is spouting cryptic nonsense that doesn't challenge what I'm saying or even make much sense.What does sustain itself for 200 years before "turning ugly" even mean?it means that capitalism encourages corruption. and its basically humanely impossible to have pure capitalism due to human nature itself.the system should just be scrapped if its not realisticExcept it doesn't because, as I already said, most of the most capitalist countries on the planet are largely free of corruption. I bet you can't even name on instance of genuine corruption that has plunged a capitalist economy into decay.So the system which has given 1pc of human history 99pc of its wealth is unrealistic, whereas your ideal of a classless society is realistic? Give me a break.
most of the capitalist countries are the embodiment of corruption.
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 10:32:54 AMmost of the capitalist countries are the embodiment of corruption. I'm not going to take you seriously if you insist upon making broad and unsubstantiated claims like that. So I'll put forward my challenge again: name me one instance of genuine corruption resulting from a genuinely capitalist economy that has caused a society-wide downturn.
I can't because genuine capitalism has never occurred
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:23:41 PMI can't because genuine capitalism has never occurredOkay, broadly capitalist. I think we can safely define a fair few nations as sufficiently capitalist to warrant judgement; otherwise what the fuck is your criticism even based on? So, go ahead. Broadly or typically capitalist countries that have had significant socio-economic problems because of capitalism?
Quote from: Meta Cognition on January 26, 2015, 03:26:18 PMQuote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:23:41 PMI can't because genuine capitalism has never occurredOkay, broadly capitalist. I think we can safely define a fair few nations as sufficiently capitalist to warrant judgement; otherwise what the fuck is your criticism even based on? So, go ahead. Broadly or typically capitalist countries that have had significant socio-economic problems because of capitalism?alright, here is a chart of corruption for 2010almost all of the countries in red have had capitalist platforms introduced or are poor.and the socialist countries like france and canada are less corrupt than the capitalist ones
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:33:57 PMQuote from: Meta Cognition on January 26, 2015, 03:26:18 PMQuote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:23:41 PMI can't because genuine capitalism has never occurredOkay, broadly capitalist. I think we can safely define a fair few nations as sufficiently capitalist to warrant judgement; otherwise what the fuck is your criticism even based on? So, go ahead. Broadly or typically capitalist countries that have had significant socio-economic problems because of capitalism?alright, here is a chart of corruption for 2010almost all of the countries in red have had capitalist platforms introduced or are poor.and the socialist countries like france and canada are less corrupt than the capitalist onesoh my fuck.....
socialist countries like france and canada
Quote from: Jocephalopod on January 26, 2015, 03:36:24 PMoh my fuck.....This guy is so obviously pretending to be stupid. Meta is only replying because he likes to win arguments, not because he actually has anything intelligent to bring up. I respect government agents, I really do, but I can fucking tell who they are just by the way they try to manipulate people.
oh my fuck.....
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:33:57 PMsocialist countries like france and canada
if people would just actively listen
Quote from: Meta Cognition on January 26, 2015, 03:38:41 PMQuote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:33:57 PMsocialist countries like france and canada like you haven't been doing that this whole timeif people would just actively listen conversations would go alot smoother
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:45:42 PMif people would just actively listenI've been doing that this entire time but when you come out with shit like Canada and France being socialist it's difficult to keep the effort up. Canada and France are not socialist. And your graph quite nicely displays a clear correlation between private, economic freedom and a lack of corruption and the development of wealth. When I said 'broadly capitalist', I didn't mean every country under the Sun which at some point had a nominally capitalist government; I assumed you had the nous to grasp that. Now, we can debate the extent to which certain countries are truly capitalist, but you still have all your work still ahead of you to explain the resilience of Australia, the success of Hong Kong and Estonia, the successful market reforms of China and countless other examples of capitalism working. But what your graph didn't do is answer my question, which was to do with you giving me a single instance in which capitalism has induced serious economic hardship within a country. Answer that question.
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:45:42 PMQuote from: Meta Cognition on January 26, 2015, 03:38:41 PMQuote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:33:57 PMsocialist countries like france and canada like you haven't been doing that this whole timeif people would just actively listen conversations would go alot smoother if you would just actively use more than your brain stem to formulate discussion people would
capitalism is fundamentally flawed, you'll see in the next 80 years that these countries will go down hill.
your not supposed to find corruption so i cant answer your question to be honest
i can't have 5 discussions at once
Quote from: Jocephalopod on January 26, 2015, 03:41:40 PMthe thing that amazes me is that I've met people who are just as stubborn and mentally delayed as this guy IRLfor the sake of my sanity i hope it's not real Yeah but stupid people are easily manipulable, so it's extremely odd that some idiot would have become a communist despite the heavy anti-communist rhetoric in the United States. Not that there aren't idiots who do become anarchists or communists, but generally they're not so dumb that can't rely on some form of logic (even if its broken and applied as chunks rather than one cohesive sentiment) and they'll usually be able to write in proper English. But this user just screams "look at how uneducated I am and how I support this radical idea". If the guy behind the account isn't a schemer or some sort, it's one hell of a coincidence.
the thing that amazes me is that I've met people who are just as stubborn and mentally delayed as this guy IRLfor the sake of my sanity i hope it's not real
Quote from: DisturbedMind883 on January 26, 2015, 03:54:20 PMi can't have 5 discussions at onceI can. We aren't going to go easy on you because you can't handle it. That isn't how debates work, and you should be ready and willing to properly defend the ideas and values you espouse, especially when they're so radical and ahistorical.