To:

Zcom_simple
Home » Z Blogs » Noam Chomsky's Blog » An End to Capitalism?

Hello,

Blogs are a familiar feature on the internet - where users post content in an accumulating manner, with comments, and search options, etc. They facilitate expression and exploration, and via attached comments, also debate and synthesis.


Reading and
Navigating Blogs

Our blogs are quite powerful. Each writer can post, as is typically the case. Sustainers who have the option can also post, however. All Blogs appear in the blog system, and sometimes also in content boxes the top page of ZNet - and always via the left menu of the top page - and can be found via searches, etc.

Commenting on blogs follows the blogs, attached at the bottom, and blog comments, like all others, are also visible in many places that show comments including in the forum system. In addition, the entire blog system gathers content for everyone - but one can look at the accumulating content in many ways.

  • For example one can look at one writer's efforts - so one is seeing what is effectively a blog system for that one writer, or Sustainer.
  • One can also look at the content by topic, seeing blogs that are tagged as being about a certain topic - or place, as well. Thus, when doing that, it is a blog system about a topic, or a place, with many contributors.
  • One can look at only writer blogs, or only sustainer blogs, as well.
  • One can look at blogs for particular Groups, too.

All this is easily done using the left menu. Searches allow even more variables and refinements.


Creating Blog Posts

If you are a Sustainer with permission, and are logged in, you will see a link in the left menu for you to post a blog - and you can use that to post one, and then tag it various ways (such as with a topic or place, or a group tag), and once you do, it is in the system with you as the author.

You can also use the console button to the left to post a blog - anytime and from anywhere in the site, as long as you are logged in.

Meanwhile, enjoy the blogs - and, by the way, if you are a Free Member or a Sustainer with a ZSpace page, of course you can put one or more content boxes on it, pulling blog links of any sort you may want to filter for, for example, by you or by your friends or by others - and by topic, about places, for groups, etc.

Blogs

9

Noam Chomsky's Blog

Web Address: http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/noamchomsky
Bio: (More)

All Chomsky Blogs

Recent Chomsky Content

Znetarticle_icon ZNet Articles
Zmagarticle_icon ZMag Articles
Zcommentary_icon ZCommentaries
Zaudio_icon ZAudios
Zvideo_icon ZVideos
Zblogpost_icon Blog Posts
Zbook_icon Books
Zvideo_icon ZStores

An End to Capitalism?

By Noam Chomsky at Jun 01, 2005

PDF Version

Printer Friendly Version
Change Text Size a- | A+
The state-corporate system is quite remote from anything that might be called "capitalism" or a "market system," though it has elements of both. This system will doubtless continue to change, as it has in the past. The recent global investor-rights agreements change it substantially, as do ongoing steps to reduce or dismantle the benefits systems (particularly limited in the US) and to restrict the threat of democracy, hence potential public influence, by neoliberal measures. As to how it will evolve, and how long people will be willing to tolerate it... we can't know. Prediction in human affairs is generally abysmal, because so little is understood in any depth about such extraordinarily complex systems, and because so much depends on will and choice. That's the real issue: can we make the choice and exert the will to avert the disasters you describe and create a decent world. It would not be hard to argue that the system will destroy the species before it is significantly changed. Today's headlines give a good reason. The non-proliferation treaty (NPT) is one of the thin threads on which survival of the species hangs. The 5-year annual review conference just collapsed. The prime reason is that we did not make the choice, and have the will, to compel our own government to abide by its essential provisions -- in fact, to refrain from tearing them to shreds, as it has been doing.

Comment On This Blog Post  See All Comments (546)

Z

capitalism's evils

By Anonymous, Anonymous at Sep 24, 2006 23:11 PM

If you want to see what capitalism has done to the world check out this link!

http://www.okimc.org/newswire.php?story_id=1206&topic=miscellaneous&language=all

Reply this comment

Z

The Business owner

By Anonymous, Anonymous at Sep 06, 2006 20:26 PM

Lets just examine the logic of the above statement, and express it in a slightly different form to reveal its flaws- ' the slave owner deserves more than his slaves, he's taken the risk of transporting them, he may lose capital in the process, and he's obliged to feed and maintain them for the rest of their productive lives.' Indeed. The question that remains however is, 'how is it that society came to be divided between owners of capital and wage slaves in the first place?' The answer has little to do with 'risk taking' and talent and a lot to do with conquest, imperialism, extreme violence and exploitation.

 

 

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Aug 09, 2005 22:47 PM
RA wrote: "You still, however, have not grasped or accepted the distinction between stewardship and depredation." Interesting... I thought they eliminated this forum format. Anyway, I have grasped the distinction but you are right -- I have not accepted it. Stewardship only becomes necessary after depredation and stewardship seems like something of a slippery slope that often becomes depredation. The best form of environmental stewadship I can think of is preservation and protection but there may be problems that have run too far out of control. Global warming, for example, may be an unstoppable negative feedback loop. I certainly don't think more technological "solutions" will save us, but it may be that primitivistic taoism won't either.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Aug 09, 2005 22:33 PM
rally, I agree with you that cars pose as great a dangers to us as the predators our ancestors had to contend with sans sophisticated weaponry. Any responsible parent realizes this. You still, however, have not grasped or accepted the distinction between stewardship and depredation.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Dat_fly, Datfly at Jul 29, 2005 05:12 AM
Although I understand that Chomsky's comments are necessarily truncated, it seems that he is vague on some important points. In particular, when he says that the "state-corporate system is quite remote from....capitalism or a market system" it seems to me that both the 'state' and the 'market' are both integral elements of capitalism (as a socially constituted system of production). It is quite unclear what type of 'capitalism' Chomsky is talking about. Capitalism is inherently contradictory and crisis-ridden and adapts to counter challenges. This is not to say that capitalism 'acts' but that the social relationships of power that constitute this system serve to reinforce it. This essentially means that it cannot be understood as some kind of fixed or ideal' capitalism', but more in terms of the social forces that drive change.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Micfreed, Mf6 at Jul 28, 2005 03:29 AM
A very important fact I learned in a history class was that when the terrible conditions that men, women, and especially children were living under during the industrial revolution were investigated, there was a decision made: It was decided that rather than continuing to pay the family so little that they all had to work, that the men would be paid sufficiently so as to be able to have a sustainable home life for their families. Between this, pay inequities between the sexes and minorities over the years and other unbelievable facts such as the the salary of the average baseball player, would somebody respectable please put the real rules governing the economy of the world out there in layman's terms? I'm tired of trying to explain to those who just can't get their minds around the concept just how arbitrary and malleable the decisions governing our lives are, like how Nixon rtemoved the gold standard and how that affected things etc.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 22, 2005 20:09 PM
Rallybird. See my previous post if you missed it. I stated my opinion on Orwell's interpretation of what Gandhi was saying. I think there is a world of difference between committing suicide and hoping others will follow your example and asking others to kill themselves while you continue to live. I believe Gandhi would never advocate the latter, as it contradicts his principals of the sacredness of all life and his commitment to furthering universal freedom.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 11:28 AM
http://awok.org/ http://www.eces.org/ The Black Mesa Syndrome: Indian Lands, Black Gold – http://arts.envirolink.org/arts_and_activism/JudithNies.html Elders fight to keep land – http://www.senaawest.org/peabody/Elders_fight.htm McCain proposes closing federal relocation office – http://www.senaawest.org/mccain/relocation_office.htm Anti-power plant rally continues on first day of Navajo council meetings – http://www.geocities.com/louve14/dineh/protest.htm http://www.blackmesais.org

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 11:06 AM
bwong wrote: "You know you are not likely to win any convert anytime soon." I'm not looking for any "convert". bwong asked: "If you hate civilization so much why don't you and your primitivist friends find a patch of wilderness somewhere and become real primitives?" I've visited people who are doing just that. They were also part of a clearcutting protest moveement in the pacific NW. bwong wrote: "I promise I will take you more seruously then." I doubt you care what I've done or where I go and, frankly, I don't care what your opinion of me is. bwong wrote: "It should be easy, you need zero fund except maybe a plane or bus ticket. since you're so passionate about this you owe it to yourself to put your vision to the test. Imagine the reward, finally you got to experience the wonderful life of being one with nature, eat healthy food, befriend the wolves, be away from traffic jams and the sick sight of Mcdonald's." It's not as easy to find a piece of land to live on as you might so erroniously think. Anyway... I'm going up to tribal lands this weekend and I hope you don't miss me too much. Hope you get a clue while I'm gone.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 22, 2005 11:01 AM
"There were certainly grey-haired elders amongst the hunting-gathering tribes of North America" There are several healthy 100 year olds in McAmerica as well.What does that prove? Besides the grey hair elders you spoke of might be only 35 years old. st. Francis of Xavier was a hermit who led a lifestyle as close to primitive as possible in his time. He was described as a frail elderly man with white hair, bent back and he walked with difficulty. He was suffering from bone and joint diseases; stomach problems and was almost blind. But he was not even 40 when that description was written! (tbc tomorrow)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 22, 2005 10:34 AM
RB You know you are not likely to win any convert anytime soon. Most people will just laugh at you. If you hate civilization so much why don't you and your primitivist friends find a patch of wilderness somewhere and become real primitives? Committed religious followers put their words into action by building their own communes one should not expect less from aspiring exiles from civilization. I don't mean going camping for a weekend in some national park. At least you should spend a year in some wilderness without any benefit of civilization, no cloths, no glasses, no books, no bike,..well, you may use whatever transportation to get to your destination of choice. Why don't you do that and write us back this time next year? I promise I will take you more seruously then. It should be easy, you need zero fund except maybe a plane or bus ticket. since you're so passionate about this you owe it to yourself to put your vision to the test. Imagine the reward, finally you got to experience the wonderful life of being one with nature, eat healthy food, befriend the wolves, be away from traffic jams and the sick sight of Mcdonald's. Don't forget how immensly this experience would boost your recruitment effort for the primitive cause. You will be a lot more credible if you have actually walked the walk. In the mean time I am frankly inclined to think that you're just a big talker.Prove me wrong, please. Yours sincerely, bwong

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 09:50 AM
bwong wrote: "The low life expectancy of primitive hunters and gatherers is well known. A somewhat counter intuitive fact is that life expectancy didn't markedly improve in EARLY, EMERGING argricultural based civilizations." There were certainly grey-haired elders amongst the hunting-gathering tribes of North America. And the fact that life expectancy didn't improve amongst early agricultural civilizations isn't counter-intuitive because their diets were restricted to the available monocultured crops and they probably lost knowledge of medicinal plants (as they plowed them under or burned them as they cleared forests). The effect of toiling endlessly in the fields may or may not have been healthy. The "evidence" of forensic autopsy of ancient humans is flimsy. Where is it? In any case, a broken bone or missing tooth on an ancient corpse is hardly compelling evidence since modern civilized humans have health problems too. And I wonder how dangerous those dreaded predators that you're so afraid of compare to cars (which kill tens of thousands every year before factoring in the environmental consequences of car production and use).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 22, 2005 09:45 AM
rb's argument in a nutshell: Life causes death.No one can dispute that. You won't die if you were not alive to begin with. Therefore life has only harmful effects: inevitable death and the suffering, diseases, agonies that eventually lead up to it. It follows that the best thing is never have been born in the first place. But unfortunately we have been born so we should try to find a way back into our mother's womb. If that fails, we should kill ourselves early before old age and nasty diseases have a chance to get us. Q.E.D

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 09:29 AM
bwong wrote: "No, you didn't. If that is the case animals wouldn't have epidemics, which is certainly false." They would if they came into contact with and were manipulated by civilization -- which truthfully happens. bwong wrote: "I agree SOME diseases are more likely in crowded society with civilization. But without civilization primitive societies simply cannot sustain a large population. The existence of the larger human group also make the effect more devastating." Primitive societies don't WANT a large population, as I have previoulsy pointed out, and the first and third sentences support my position. The diets and lifestyles of primitive cultures (that weren't in contact with civilized society) prevent many health problems like heart disease (a leading killer) and various cancers which are often a result of diet. Not to mention the fact that primitive cultures don't create and spread carcinogens like civilized society does. bwong wrote,concerning agricultural practices: "Again you selectively focus only the side effects, which can be remedied with our better knowledge." But instead the problems are conveniently exacerbated and agricultural practices are becoming even more harmful. It's like one step forward and 2 steps back with technology -- and that's generous.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 22, 2005 09:24 AM
"..He tried to hedge with "Besides the argument may actually be about some low tech societies rather than primitive ones, whose life expectancy was likely uniformly low..." You clearly cannot read so let me spell it out slowly. First, I offered evidence of forensic autopsy of ancient humans to prove you wrong. A common counterclaim is that reported life expectancy in some civilizations is so low because high infant and children mortality(skew the statistics (which you apparantly are not even aware of!) This was a weak defense for your thesis because 1) high infant and children mortality was hardly a sign of a superior way of existence 2)This counter argument, albeit weak, might not even be availiable for primitives because it might actually refer to some early civilizations. The low life expectancy of primitive hunters and gatherers is well known. A somewhat counter intuitive fact is that life expectancy didn't markedly improve in EARLY, EMERGING argricultural based civilizations. With ample demonstrations of your reading and logical skills here I am not surprised if you have read this and mistaken it as evidence that primitives lived long and healthy lives.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 09:06 AM
Graeme wrote: "The toy didn't kill you, you killed yourself with the toy. As I said, the technology itself is neutral." But what if the "toy" was inherently dangerous, like nuclear power, genetic engineering, or nanotech? Or, what if the process that created the toy was toxic and poisoned the river where I got my water? What initially looked like a gift was actually a death sentence. And part of te problem with materialistic technology is not only that it's and creation use so often involves destruction of the environment, but also that the mindset of creating a technological device distracts one from observing and fully comprehending the wonders of the natural world which IS being ravaged. The technique of the logos distracts and prevents one from direct experience with nature as one is asorbed in an artificial symbolic representation of nature. Then, when all the i's are dotted, the technology presents a destructive tool or a tool which will allow more destruction to be brought about. It may be unlikely that groups of nature-loving people who want limited mediation with the world will ever come to be again, but I don't think it is impossible and I don't think they would be less than human. I do believe the techno-industrial system will eat itself and that those who survive that feast may (re)develop the attributes that I have described. Is that fair?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 22, 2005 08:59 AM
"I showed how diseases are a problem of mass civilized societies.." No, you didn't. If that is the case animals wouldn't have epidemics, which is certainly false. I agree SOME diseases are more likely in crowded society with civilization. But without civilization primitive societies simply cannot sustain a large population. The existence of the larger human group also make the effect more devastating. But so what? Either you're wilfully obtuse or you didn't read it first time, let me tell you again why your fact is irrelevant. Your argument is like saying many horrible diseases only show up in old age. This is true, but it is not an argument against longevity and medicine that prolong life. It is even more absurd to argue therefore we should all commit sucide at 45, which exactly parallels your argument. "I showed how agriculture has been historically harmful" Again you selectively focus only the side effects, which can be remedied with our better knowledge. (tbc)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 08:46 AM
MCorbin, I don't know why it would be so hard to believe that Gandhi advised suicide since he also threatened to commit suicide himself, by fasting, unless the riotous violence between muslims and hindus ended (after the british left). I'm talking about his statement that he gave to his biographer Louis Fisher following WWII. Orwell also draws attention to this line of action suggested by Gandhi: "...Gandhi's view was that the German Jews ought to commit collective suicide, which 'would have aroused the world and the people of Germany to Hitler's violence.' After the war he justified himself: the Jews had been killed anyway, and might as well have died significantly." I could very well be mistaken but these views were corroborated by Louis Fischer and George Orwell, whim I find them both reliable sources, and don't think the statement is in conflict with Gandhi's beliefs or other actions. I (re?)posted my response to your morbid question Thursday, July 21 at 04:39 AM.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 08:09 AM
Graeme wrote: "Chomsky doesn't NOT pay his taxes, i.e., he pays them." This may be the unfortunate case today, but he has promoted tax refusal in the past and I think it would be a good tactic to take up today for a number of reasons. Here are some links to that effect... http://www.chomsky.info/debates/19670323.htm http://www.answers.com/topic/tax-resistance This last site refers to Chomsky as a "Tax Resister of Note".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 22, 2005 08:03 AM
Rallybird: http://www.alshindagah.com/jan2001/9a.html What Gandhi wrote in 1938: "If I were a Jew and were born in Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would claim Germany as my home even as the tallest gentile German may and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon. I would refuse to be expelled or to submit to discriminating treatment. And for doing this, I should not wait for the fellow Jews to join me in civil resistance but would have confidence that in the end the rest are bound to follow my example." This is exactly what I said would be the right thing to do if you feel mass extinction is the way to go: offer and example for others to follow. That is not the same asking other people to kill themselves while you continue to live. I also strongly disagree with your assertion that non-violent protest equals suicide. I think it probable that Gandhi had been the victim of propaganda. Israeli peace activist Aron Trauring agrees: "Some Jews go beyond Orwell and call Ghandi an anti-Jewish Nazi sympathizer. Orwell just thought him stupidly naive. While I am a great admirer of Orwell, he of all people should have been careful not to use propagandistic techniques to discredit a view he was not sympathetic to. Ghandi would never call on anyone to commit suicide." I still have no idea what your answer was to my suicide question in the first place. Didn't you say you tried to post it but somehow it didn't show up here?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 07:35 AM
Graeme wrote: "Drawing maps doesn't have to be correlated with property contracts, nor written laws (which were actually quite an improvement over lawless societies, which is why they were made)." These things are all correlated because they involve the technique of the logos (technology proper) which is the basis of civilization. As for the second part of your statement (in parenthesis)... that is just an opinion. An opinion I disagree with since many civilized nations of laws are the most brutally destructive (like America and Nazi Germany). Graeme wrote: "You are talking about all kinds of different socioeconomic systems, each with its own internal logic; there is more difference across these systems than between these systems as a group and primitive systems." Are you suggesting that there is more of a difference between Capitalism and Marxism than there is between civilized and primitive societies? Graeme wrote: "Which is why we must be careful with it. But technology is part of human evolution; it wasn't given to us by aliens." I knew it was only a matter of time before you brought in aliens. Are you suggesting that primitive societies who don't have or want technology are less than human?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 07:08 AM
Graeme wrote: "We use petroleum because it's cheap, not because 'civilization' is predestined to use it." I didn't say that civilization was "predestined to use it". I saying that it is the primary fuel of modern civilization and that civilization will be hard-pressed, for many reasons, when it runs out. As for when it runs out, you can believe the Exxon PR if you want, I don't and I've provided links before showing why. Graeme wrote: "Scientists are already developing environmentally-friendly synthetic alternatives to plastics. Nanotechnology and the like will no doubt make this even easier." Yes, and they're working on flying cars and eternal life chambers too -- perhaps you'll even get a pair of X-Ray specs someday! Nanotechnology is another dangerous technology, potentially as dangerous as nuclear power and biotech, but that, of course, deosn't seem to bother you. And statements both you and bwong have made DO sound like Andrew Jackson supporting the Indian Removal Act. Congratulations, you both sound SO presidential!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 06:46 AM
Graeme wrote: "Bwong completely dismantles your case and you respond by attacking minute (and unimportant) details? He's probably right anyway, which is why you didn't bother to do any research to see whether he was or not." HA! He's "probably right" and *I* didn't bother to do any research?! I'm afraid you've got the situation backwards. I showed how diseases are a problem of mass civilized societies, I showed how agriculture has been historically harmful (and how it continues to be), and I showed how simple details like "Having a life expectancy of 30 and with your teeth all gone by then;" actually apples more often to civilized societies more than primitive societies. He tried to hedge with "Besides the argument may actually be about some low tech societies rather than primitive ones, whose life expectancy was likely uniformly low." And now you prop up his arguments with "He's probably right anyway," and suggest that *I* do research. Talk about misinformed hubris. Geez. By they way, now you can say show signs of misinformed hubris as that would be typical of your juvenile and uncomprehending debate and discourse skills. Throw in some more uninformed insults about primitive societies while your at it.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 06:23 AM
MCorbin wrote: "Do you know of any text of him advocating people killing themselves? I should say up front that I will disagree if you site non violent protest as an example." Frankly I think suggesting that people run into the clubs of the police should count, but that's not what I'm talking about. It was obviously a very controversial opinion, like many of his opinions, but he suggested that to his autobiographer that Jewish People and Czechs should kill themselves to draw attention to their growing mistreatment at the hands of the Nazi's who, at first, were slightly more subtle with their genocidal intentions. It's not hard to find this documented suggestion, which he later stood by, if you care to look. And, again, threatening to fast till death as an example, and leading people in to the clubs of officers when he led a march to the sea to make salt... ought to count as well. I think it's just that most modern so-called gandhians (an expression he disliked like the title Mahatma) don't really want to deal with the serious nature of his protests. The orginal gandhians were non-violent, but they did not fear provoking violence done to them even to the point of death.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 22, 2005 05:45 AM
Rallybird said: "you read books "on" him. This is a very common mistake since he actually wrotes so much in english and you don't need to read his popular biographies" I have read some of Gandhi's writings also. Do you know of any text of him advocating people killing themselves? I should say up front that I will disagree if you site non violent protest as an example.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 02:28 AM
Graeme wrote: "There have been mass suicides in India recently, due to the effects of neoliberal capitalism, and the world's press hasn't even take note." I believe their has been an epidemic of suicides but not a single mass suicide per se. And I wonder how you heard about if not from the world's press -- and do you know more about the situation there now, perhaps even feeling sympathetic about it? Graeme wrote: "Somehow I doubt these people could have possibly afforded drugs of any kind, whether they worked or not." I think you missed my point... I was suggesting that any suicide, whether overtly political or not, is a serious thing which ought to make us question how the world has come to be so unbearable to some people. I wasn't suggesting that political activists take anti-depressants and then commit mass suicide. Graeme wrote: "By the way Chomsky doesn't not pay taxes, the last time I looked." I know, that was my point. It was one of the behaviors that I believe others should emulate. So what was your point?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 02:07 AM
Graeme wrote, concerning the corruption of politicians: "No, not because they are 'civilized;' because that's what the internal logic of their socioeconomic/political systems propel them to do." I believe there is an "internal logic" of materialistic techno-civilization as opposed to the internal logic of primitive societies. This seems rather obvious. The technique of the logos has always been about power and control -- ever since maps could be drawn, property could be contracted, and punishing laws could be written. The nature of the materialistic technological society is to tinker and experiment willy-nilly, as if nature were just one big toy. This is perhaps summed up in the hacker credo: "Information should be free." But this doesn't take into account what type of information and, instead of respecting and appreciating the earth and life as it has evolved, technology must been implemented without knowing where it will take us or what it will do to us. Furthermore, If technology gives me a fun toy and then that toy kills me, I wouldn't say there are good and bad aspects of technology. You can't seperate the good from the bad technology because if you did you would impede science (which has no morality). And, now that horrible technologies have fallen into the hands of "evildoers", it will be hard to take those technologies back before being utilized. The perceived good that comes with technological system is outweighed again by the harm it does.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 01:13 AM
MCorbin wrote: "I have immense respect for Ghandi, have read many books on him and I can say that you are dead wrong here. Ghandi never suggested that anyone commit suicide." Well he was a prolific writer, so I doubt either of us have read all his work, but your ignorance of what he wrote hardly makes me "dead wrong". You are the one who is wrong and I did answer your morbid question. BTW, I just noticed that you read books "on" him. This is a very common mistake since he actually wrotes so much in english and you don't need to read his popular biographies when you can read his auto-biography.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 00:49 AM
bwong wrote: "Technology is manipulating natural forces for our purpose.If we were as ignorant about nature as you suggest none of our technology would work." I didn't say that civilized people didn't know anything about nature I said YOU were typically ignorant and arrogant when you suggested that primitive peoples know less. Making a bunch of shit and knowing how to destroy other things does take knowledge, but knowing the subtleties of nature, what kind of plants are good for certain ailments (for instance), and being able to live sustainably in nature does not sound like ignorant naivete to me. Such thinking reminds me of the Andrew Jackson who said at his Second Annual Address about the "Indian Removal Act", among other things: "It will separate the Indians from immediate contact with settlements of whites; free them from the power of the States; enable them to pursue happiness in their own way and under their own rude institutions; will retard the progress of decay, which is lessening their numbers, and perhaps cause them gradually, under the protection of the Government and through the influence of good counsels, to cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 22, 2005 00:28 AM
bwong wrote: "Killing for oil is not essential to mordern civilization. The fighting for oil is more about control over resources rather than access. i.e having the power of turning off the tap for others as a means of blackmail.This is not based on need. It is about hegemony of the empire rather technology and civilization." AH... it's about control rather than access. Anyway... seeing as how all this technology needs fuel, and since fossil fuels (particularly oil) have an incredible amount of btu's, I think the techno-industrial society will have a hard time finding a substitute for petroleum. You say it's not essential to modern civilization but it powers the incredible number of vehicles in that civilization, it makes plastics possible, asphalt, agricultural petrochemicals, the base for pharmaceuticals, and the list goes on. I'd say it IS a pretty essential ingredient to keeping modern civilization going. As we have become slaves to technology we have become addicted to it's fuel -- and that fuel will run out. bwong threw this in at the end of one of his posts, so I will too: "Besides the argument may actually be about some low tech societies rather than primitive ones, whose life expectancy was likely uniformly low." May actually? Likely? Way to hedge!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 23:54 PM
"it is POSSIBLE to be completely horrified and repulsed by what has happened/is happening to "primitive" societies all over ..AND to not think their way of life is the best possible option..; believing the latter does not automatically make one an apologist for the former" Graeme Exactly. Rb sets up one strawman after another: if you think agriculture is a great invention you must be a fan of big Mac; if you're for science you must be pro genocide etc.For someone who detests farming his house must be full of scarecrows. You mentioned physics and thermodynamics. Rb will come back to accuse you of pro nuke. Reminds me of a creationist who blasted evolution because Darwin was appropiated and bastardized by racists and eugenicists. Rb makes no distinction between proper use and abuse of technology. He confuses technology and the society in which the technology is embedded. His catagorically anti tech stance obscures the economical-political factors that determine the ownership and deployment of technology and let the system off the hook. His rosy depiction of primitive lifestyle ironically shows how much a city boy he really is. Reading him you think it is all about picking tasty cherries, laying around watching wildlife and being one with nature. Add some crystal and ritual chanting you have a new age weekend retreat. Rb probably thinks the mass suicide in India is great since 1)India is overpopulated anyway 2)The dead are farmers, archenemies of the enviroment

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 21:21 PM
"I don't know how big of a problem AIDS or smallpox was for pre-American natives UNTIL they came into contact with civilized people." Indeed the Incas and Aztecs succumbed to small box only after contact with the white men.But these empires were not "primitive" by any definition. It is true that certain types of epidemics are more likely to developed with a crowded society with agriculture. But a non agricultural society simply cannot sustain such a population size in the first place. Your argument is like saying longevity is bad because people who die young don't get dementia, cancers and a whole bunch of other nasty diseases.True, but moot, something else get them before they have the opportunities to develop old age diseases. To go one step further you recommend people to commit suicide before the age of 40 to avoid the old age diseases. Epidemics occur among animal species even without human intervention. It is ridiculous to say civilization alone is responsible. The only place without risk is the graveyard. What you avocate is the literal suicide of humanity(80% + of current population)and human civilization to avoid the risk of misusing technology. Your attitude towards risk management can be summed up beatifully by a Chinese proverb "chopping off one's toes to avoid being biten by the sand bugs"(the bugs bite your toes when you walk on the sand)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 21, 2005 20:39 PM
Rallybird said: "my response to the morbid suicide suggestion (which I also found trite and insulting) is... " I did not mean to offend, I think it's a very appropriate question to your arguments and you have completely dodged it. And: "Gandhi did suggest committing mass suicide to draw attention to other atrocities." I have immense respect for Ghandi, have read many books on him and I can say that you are dead wrong here. Ghandi never suggested that anyone commit suicide. If he believed committing suicide was the answer to anything he would have done it himself. Example: When Ghandi went on a hunger strike to protest the Hindu Muslim fighting in India, he didn't tell anyone else to do it, he did it himself. The hunger strike did not result in suicide but I believe the same principal was at work. Also: "While I don't endorse the idea, it might be a somewhat meaningful way to go if you just can't stand living in the madness of the modern world anymore" You are still talking about the benefits of other people dying. My question was about you volunteering to end your life to further what you describe as the best thing for the world, which you can't or won't answer.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 20:11 PM
"The predators you worry about excessively because you are a tame civilized person taught to fear nature. " Yes, when the primitive saw a lion he would go pat it and said "nice kitty".Give me a break. Primitive humans were much more fearful of nature. The fear often euphemistically referred to as "respect". They learnt that from their dealing with mother nature, which can be capricious and enormously cruel.This is reflected in many ancient lores and religious practises. "Fearing nature" was not invented by the "tamed" humans. It was essential for ancient humans to survive. You again show your tendency to see nature through new agie, Hollywoodish rosy colour lenses.With such attitidue you would be the first causalty of natural selection in a primitive society. Someone should write a fiction satirizing jungle boy wannabes like you. That would be fun to read. "This is purely ignorant arrogance. Like you've been reading the "Indian Removal Act"." Technology is manipulating natural forces for our purpose.If we were as ignorant about nature as you suggest none of our technology would work. But your whole point is that technology has become too devastatingly powerful for our own good. You can't have it both ways. PS The Natives were not "primitives". This is a White men's conception. Many First Nations would be offended by this label.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 19:51 PM
"..freedom doesn't involve war machines blowing people up everyday for oil to fuel our traffic jams" Killing for oil is not essential to mordern civilization. The fighting for oil is more about control over resources rather than access. i.e having the power of turning off the tap for others as a means of blackmail.This is not based on need. It is about hegemony of the empire rather technology and civilization. "The primitive life expectancies have been known to be much greater than 30. The teeth of the civilized human are weaker because of diet (and quickly developing [d]evolution). " You obviously think the primitives were enjoying a free, lifelong camping trip as is evident from your ignorant romanticization. Frosensic studies of well preserved cropses of ancient humans show that their bodies sustained a lot of cuts and bruises and decays due to their exceedingly harsh lives. And all died at very young age. About life expectancy. I have heard the counterpoint that in some societies reported life expectancy is skewed towards the low end because of exceedingly high infant and children mortality. IF one can survive til adulthood chances are he might live to an ripe old age.But this is hardly a rosy alternative. Besides the argument may actually be about some low tech societies rather than primitive ones, whose life expectancy was likely uniformly low.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 13:03 PM
bwong asked: "What is the real definition of freedom?Having a life expectancy of 30 and with your teeth all gone by then; being persued by preditors; dying of easily preventable diseases and being vulnerable to all natural elements?" I can tell you this much... freedom doesn't involve war machines blowing people up everyday for oil to fuel our traffic jams. The second part of your question was an inaccurate caricature. The primitive life expectancies have been known to be much greater than 30. The teeth of the civilized human are weaker because of diet (and quickly developing [d]evolution). The predators you worry about excessively because you are a tame civilized person taught to fear nature. And the diseases you speak of show up mostly in civilized mass society thanks to close proximity with others and excessive amounts of all kinds of waste which create an unnaturally large population of vermin and disease carrying creatures. I don't know how big of a problem AIDS or smallpox was for pre-American natives UNTIL they came into contact with civilized people. bwong wrote: "We know a LOT more about nature then the primitives who thought the gods were pissing when it rained. " This is purely ignorant arrogance. Like you've been reading the "Indian Removal Act".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 12:39 PM
Alright, my apologies, I stand corrected. My post in response to MCorbin's morbid question didn't get posted for some reason. I'm also sorry that I've been so angered by some of these recent posts. It's just that some of the descriptions about primitive cultures are caricatures of reality and downright insulting (suggesting their beliefs run only as far as a McDonald's). It's been proven in court that McDonald's uses meat raised on Amazonian land that was recently clearcut and that, combined with the destruction of the few primitive cultures remaining, angers me. In any case, my response to the morbid suicide suggestion (which I also found trite and insulting) is... I don't think it's the best idea, but Gandhi did suggest committing mass suicide to draw attention to other atrocities. While I don't endorse the idea, it might be a somewhat meaningful way to go if you just can't stand living in the madness of the modern world anymore (and many people apparently can't). Of course, every suicide is a very serious thing that ought to make us question how it came to be that a life was made so unbearable. Thankfully, they have modern wonder-drugs for depression now... Oh wait... those drugs actually increase the suicide rate. Nevermind. You can't argue with science. Anyway, I'd prefer to stick around and... argue with science (or at least against technological "cures"). Sorry to disappoint.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 12:22 PM
"And are you suggesting that the modern world has a "more humane social order" .." Talking about ineptitude in comprehension. I said a certain level of material abundance is the NECESSARY condition for compassion. I didn't say it is the sufficient condition. But at least we CAN make that political choice, that's the whole premise of activism. "he more technologically sophisticated civilization has become the more destructive it has become (in terms of all life, the environment, and any real definition of freedom)." What is the real definition of freedom? Having a life expectancy of 30 and with your teeth all gone by then; being persued by preditors; dying of easily preventable diseases and being vulnerable to all natural elements? Technology has the potential to be abused, but being vulnerable is no liberation. "After you .. "tame" the environment the wilderness is no longer there to FREELY explore and learn from" We know a LOT more about nature then the primitives who thought the gods were pissing when it rained. We are not as intimately connected to nature, but that is not necessarily bad. The primitives were selected by nature, the slow ones, the near sighted ones were eaten by lions. The dumb ones who couldn't tell plants apart were poisoned by toxic mushrooms etc.Survival compels them to know nature intimately. If you think a primitive can "freely" explore nature you wouldn't survive a single day. It is not like a camping trip.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 11:55 AM
Bwong quoted me and wrote: "'I also distinguished between certain levels of horticulture and agriculture.' That is because you DEFINE things in such a way to suit your arguments, like using factory farming as a "typical" example of agriculture." WRONG. I distinguished BECAUSE THERE IS A DISTINCTION. I'm not sure where I used factory farming as a "typical" example of agriculture, but isn't it? I'm not going to defend organic farming but it isn't even the most common form so... IT IS NOT TYPICAL. Does that not make sense? For that matter... McDonald's are fairly typical end users of typically factory farmed animals. It's not like all those burgers are from free-range cattle. bwong wrote: "But political footdragging is unrelated to technology perse." Odd that politicians don't seem to drag their feet when funding the creation of horribly destructive implements of technology. But that's what politicians do because they are civilized and the nature of civilization is dominating and destructive -- as has been shown again and again. Your topsoil argument just doesn't jive because, once again, talk is cheap but reality is... what's actually happening (topsoil erosion continues unabated). But wait! Maybe we need more technology to save us from our technological errors! And then we'll need more to save us from the problems that arise from that technology! And then... NOW I'm starting to understand your point of view.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 11:38 AM
"Of course... there are Big Macs and factory farms now. How many species will have gone extinct by the time you can say, "supersize it"?! " Now who is guilty of trivializing arguments? As if Mcdonald's and corporate factory farms are the only kind of agriculture in recorded history of civilization. "I also distinguished between certain levels of horticulture and agriculture " That is because you DEFINE things in such a way to suit your arguments, like using factory farming as a "typical" example of agriculture. Is organic farming agriculture or "horticulture"? Growing pot in your basement is 'horticulture. "I also pointed out that the birthplace of civilization (the fertile crescent) has become a desert after years of intensive farming " This is not inevitable with better understanding of soil ecology. We don't always act on the knowledge we have, as in global warming. But political footdragging is unrelated to technology perse. Where is your response to MCorbin? Leading a more sustainable life is a cope out if that was your answer. A "more sustainable" lifestyle is not going to achieve the mass population reduction required to implement primitivism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 11:21 AM
bwong wrote: "Our freedom to choose a more humane social order is predicated on our ability to tame the enviroment: technology." HA! Tell that to Thoreau! And are you suggesting that the modern world has a "more humane social order" than that which existed and exists in primitive societies?! The more technologically sophisticated civilization has become the more destructive it has become (in terms of all life, the environment, and any real definition of freedom). After you so euphamistically "tame" the environment the wilderness is no longer there to FREELY explore and learn from. Even IF some primitive societies for some reason had to look especially hard for natures bounty, there was a lot more freedom in finding it than there is in toiling in the fields (or factories). In trying to be fair to you, I think you are probably just misinformed by outdated anthropology that was incorrectly taught for so long. Much of this anthroplogy was probably written as justifaction for wiping out the pre-american natives (and other primitive cultures). In any case... please don't make me give you the proper definitions for technology and civilization again -- they aren't just the simple terms that you make them out to be and we should be discussing with precision and detail as opposed to the common parlance (TY RA).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 10:55 AM
BTW... I think you are misinformed about nutritionally sound diet of primitive societies. A very few might have infrequently had trouble harvesting (and I'm sure you'll think of picking fruit from a tree as agriculture and hunting buffalo as farming) enough food from pristine nature, but that is nothing compared to the millions of malnourished people TODAY in the modern "civilized" world. I also distinguished between certain levels of horticulture and agriculture but you missed that (like so many other things) and you really don't seem to care about the details of definitions anyway. I also pointed out that the birthplace of civilization (the fertile crescent) has become a desert after years of intensive farming -- global warming might even speed up that process. Agricultural practices have also helped bring about the extinction of many types of food which civilized humanity will never taste. Of course... there are Big Macs and factory farms now. How many species will have gone extinct by the time you can say, "supersize it"?!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 10:52 AM
A "primitive" society will reinvent technology and organizational complexity will arise to cope with enviromental challenges when the conditions are right, whether you will it or not. The KINDS of social structure we adopt are contrainted by the material enviroment. Our freedom to choose a more humane social order is predicated on our ability to tame the enviroment: technology. In primitive societies where resources are scarce, the old, the sick, the disabled were often left to die(that's why population of primitive societies were low) Compassion has to be purchased with a level of material abundance. Since the invention of the first stone tool humans were seperated from the animal kingdom. Civilization is an integral part of humanity. Barring a catastrophere, we can no more return to a "primitive" state than RB can go back to his mother's womb. The primitivists mindlessly romanticize the past while taking a lot of modern technology for granted. Their "vision" is just escapism of the well fed.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 10:33 AM
After the way you have trivialized primitive societies (in much the same way as the early genocidal americans did) I won't bother giving you a definition of culture. You and Graeme can continue believing that all primitive societies need is a few big macs (speaking of culture) to start down the "better" path of civilization. I did respond to MCorbin's suicide question but your morbid comprehension didn't notice that fact (like many others). I suppose I should have said (since you don't get it even when I'm perfectly clear) that I'm trying to live a MORE sustainable and less destructive lifestyle. I don't think it is wholly sustainable, nor do I think that, even if every single person tried, people would be able to prevent many of the catastrophes that techno-industrial civilization put into motion. That said... I think there is something fulfilling in a more direct experience with nature (without the technical mediations that many find themselves addicted to) and in trying to preserve as much of the natural world as possible for future generations. I'm not saying that the whole earth will be completely obliterated, I'm saying that it will continue to be over(ab)used to the point where it will not be able to sustain the current human population. Misinterpret as you will...

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 10:10 AM
Here is a TECHNICAL definition of civilization: "In the technical sense, a civilization is a complex society. It is distinguished from simpler societies but is not considered superior to them. Everyone lives in a society and a culture, but not everyone lives in a civilization. In general, civilizations share the following traits: # Intensive agricultural techniques, such as the use of animal power, crop rotation, and irrigation. This enables farmers to produce a surplus of food that will not be needed for their own subsistence. # A social hierarchy. This can be a chiefdom, in which the chieftain of one noble family or clan rules the people; or a state society, in which the ruling class is supported by a government or bureaucracy. Political power is concentrated in the cities. # The establishment of complex, formal social institutions such as organized religion and education, as opposed to the less formal traditions of other societies. # Development of complex forms of economic exchange. This includes the expansion of trade and may lead to the creation of money and markets. # The accumulation of more material possessions than in simpler societies." These are just a few attributes of civilization. Most decent dictionaries will add use of the written word (the technique of the logos) as necessary for civilization.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 10:08 AM
"My "cure" is living a sustainable life ..so that, when the collapse comes, it won't be so bad" So you are saying "a sustainable life" PRECEEDS the collapse. If it is sustainable than the collapse, if it comes, is NOT caused by civilization(maybe a giant meteorite or something), otherwise it wouldn't be "sustainable". If a "sustainable"civilization is possible BEFORE the collapse,then it is not true that civilization inevitably leads to collapse. So, what the heck are you talking about? Logic apparantly is also a tool that the primitive gladly abandon. You still haven't answer the question, you admitted the primitive vision cannot be realized without a drastic reduction of population. In my estimation,maybe a mass genocide of 80%+ of the population on earth. So how is your "cure" better than the disease? How do you bring about this population reduction required by primitivism if the collapse is "not so bad"? It has to be *bad enough* to achieve your goal. MCorbin's question deserves an answer, will you set an example by volunteering your demise for the enviroment?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Davis_brock, Bjwd at Jul 21, 2005 09:40 AM
Wow, rallybird, you are a lovely person. You and RobertAllen ought to find a way to combine your arrogant genes to produce a super, ultra cocky clown of a human being. Just another example of little men talking big on the anonymous Internet. I am going to agree with Graeme on the McDonald's comment. While you may hate it, the unending quest for food that dominated life prior to modern times (and still does is many areas) is not a form of life I think many would desire.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 21, 2005 09:38 AM
RB wrote:"If you wouldn't mind, let's try to raise the level of discourse" Then he raised his level of discourse thus: "All I can say to this is... Fuck you, you arrogant American bastard.." Now back to business. "The second part... civilization isn't bad because it leads to it's OWN downfall, it's bad because the processes it implements destroy and undermine the basis FOR ALL LIFEFORMS (including humanity)" Typical of the all or nothing thinking of the idealogue. It is one thing to say certain practices of our society, if unchecked, would undermine all life forms(though even that is debatable, bacteria are still life forms), but quite another to say that ANY kind of civilization would INEVITABLY have that effect. But if technology is used unwisely, even the bows and arrows of primitive hunters would, and indeed had led to mass extinction of large mammals, as noted before.(But then bows and arrows are also technology so in your primitive commune that would be banned too) "Civilization .. is bad because it clearly threatens threatens nature (bio-diversity as well as cultural diversity " Hello? There is no "cultural diversity" without civilization. Civilization IS culture! A bunch of primitives scavanging and playing hide and seek with saber tooth tigers all day is not a "culture" and it is hard to imagine much "diversity" in such existence.Even most indigenous cultures were argriculturally based. They were hardly "primitive" by your standard.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 02:56 AM
Graeme wrote (after quoting me out of context and making an unclear point about morality): "Your whole argument is either circular, as bwong points out: civilization is bad because it threatens civilization; or ridiculous: civilization is bad, because it threatens nature." Wrong and wrong. Civilization is not bad because it threatens itself (as I clarified in my last post) and it is bad because it clearly threatens threatens nature (bio-diversity as well as cultural diversity which is often tied cloesly to the former) with its superflous materialistic trappings. (bio-diversity as well as cultural diversity which is often tied cloesly to the former). Graeme wrote: "As for primitive cultures, give them 5 minutes in McDonald's and see how long they remain anarcho-primitivists." All I can say to this is... Fuck you, you arrogant American bastard. Why don't take your McCulture and your McCivilization and shove them right up your McAss. It does no good to be civil with the civilized because they are ignorant, pompous, assholes. Forget raising the level of discourse because you and some others on this board deserve no respect -- not least because of that last statement of yours. I hope your electric car gets stuck in a traffic jam and I hope somebody spits in your Big Mac.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 21, 2005 02:14 AM
bwong wrote: "In your view 1) the collapse of civilization is inevitable 2) civilization is bad because it inevitably leads to its own downfall 3) therefore we should renounce civilization and move back to the cave, thereby surrendering before we are inevitably(in your view) defeated. Which parts misrepresent your position?" The second part... civilization isn't bad because it leads to it's OWN downfall, it's bad because the processes it implements destroy and undermine the basis FOR ALL LIFEFORMS (including humanity). bwong wrote: "I don't see how a collapse,-- which I don't think is inevitable,--is any worse than your 'cure'." My "cure" is living a sustainable life and protesting against various forms of destructive technology so that, when the collapse comes, it won't be so bad. You may not believe the collapse is coming, but we'll simply have to agree to disagree on that as I believe the evidence is there. If you wouldn't mind, let's try to raise the level of discourse.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 20, 2005 21:13 PM
Bwong, Rallybird's views are the same as several friends of mine so I have heard these arguments before: We humans are guilty of being the biggest threat to all life on earth (I agree with this part), and therefore the best thing that could happen would be for 80% of the population to die off, so then the remaining 20% will be able to live good quality lives, uncrowded, unpolluted, living in harmony with nature. The latter part I disagree with. I sympathize with the desire to live clean and sustainably but this vision is, at best, well-meaning but unintentionally sociopathic. At worst, it's akin to Nazi ideology with a twist: mother nature will do the "cleansing" for us, so we can enjoy a better future without blood on OUR hands. This vision always has one consistent component to it: The 80% who will die off will be other people not including friends and family. At least no one I've talked to has admitted that their own death or anyone they love would be an acceptable casualty. Bwong I believe you are right about Chomsky not approving here. As he has said more than once: If we want to avoid being hypocrites, we must apply the same standard to others that we apply to ourselves. Rallybird, if you really think mass reduction of human population is the answer then you should be the first to volunteer die and try to convince as many people as possible to follow your example, or admit that you are wishing OTHER people would die for your sake.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 20, 2005 18:49 PM
"you avoided ALL of my questions" That is because they are more than adequately answered by Graeme. Besides, most of your questions are idiotic anyway. "Then you wrote: "Logically you should be encouraging more pollution and destruction in order to hasten the return of your primitive golden age." This makes no sense after what I've written" In your view 1) the collapse of civilization is inevitable 2) civilization is bad because it inevitably leads to its own downfall 3) therefore we should renounce civilization and move back to the cave, thereby surrendering before we are inevitably(in your view) defeated. Which parts misrepresent your position? You freely admit the current population cannot be sustained in your primitive paradise.To call a spade a spade this means a lot of us(probably 80%+ of the world's population) must die.I don't see how a collapse,-- which I don't think is inevitable,--is any worse than your "cure". Since collapse is unavoidable, and civilization is undesirable anyway(because it leads to its own collaps!!) 1) why do you care about ending our destructive behaviour, which will only prolong civilization 2) But by your premise, collapse is inevitable, why waste time trying to stop the preordained? 3)Since a collapse would lead to the same outcome of primitivism anyway (a point you explicitly made),what's the big deal to you? You mirror the Christians who gleefully wait for the rapture, except they are more consistent in their madness.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 20, 2005 11:33 AM
First of all, bwong, you didn't acknowledge your patently inept comparison. Secondly, you avoided ALL of my questions. Then you wrote: "Logically you should be encouraging more pollution and destruction in order to hasten the return of your primitive golden age." This makes no sense at all after what I've written. Your logic is obviously flawed, it disregards almost everything I've written. You then wrote: "I can't help feeling there is a disturbing similarity between your posts and fundamnetalist Christians who eagerly wait for the rupture." But blind faith in technology and conquest of the land is more along fundamentalist christian lines. You then asked a question what I've clearly answered before: "Is that a wish or a prediction?" I see no reason to re-present the evidence that environmental degradation will eventually reduce the human population. Bwong then wrote: "You are saying any argriculture at all, not just some argricultural practise, are insustainable and therefore we should simply give up on food production." I can't bag on you for your grammar or spelling, but I hope you are aware that people ate a healthier diet before agriculture became the institution that it has become. I didn't know how to respond to this: "Even more bizzare, you reason that we should abandon farming is that it makes itself unsustainable." That is bizarre. Finally: "It requires quite a feat to unentangle your logic." This is because you are a moron.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 20, 2005 10:54 AM
"Humans have lived without agriculture and will again when they've damaged the environment enough and created the circumstances that will make agricultural practices impossible." Is that a wish or a prediction? You are saying any argriculture at all, not just some argricultural practise, are insustainable and therefore we should simply give up on food production. This is blatantly absurd and it reveals once again your all or nothing mindset which is the hall mark of all fanatics. If you think we should give up on agriculture altogether what do you care about its sustainability? Even more bizzare, you reason that we should abandon farming is that it makes itself unsustainable. It is like a man who preemptively relingish all his savings because he fears otherwise he will spend all his money and become poor. It requires quite a feat to unentangle your logic. You're right. You're even more nuts than the unabomber.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 20, 2005 10:29 AM
"as Chomsky suggests, go on a tax protest. Beyond that, I think people of good conscience ought not bite their tongues about these issues. A visible protest movement is also necessary" I doubt that Chomsky would be too sympathetic with your irrational anti-technology rant. We need mass protest but no sane person would be sympathetic with your goal of going back to the caves. If anything crazies like you discredit the worthy causes. "Without these things, which won't last anyway, the current population of the earth will not be sustained..that it is not a matter of "wanting"..." If it is so inevitable you should be happy that the abberation of civilization which you so detest will end soon.Logically you should be encouraging more pollution and destruction in order to hasten the return of your primitive golden age. I can't help feeling there is a disturbing similarity between your posts and fundamnetalist Christians who eagerly wait for the rupture.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 20, 2005 10:24 AM
bwong makes a bad comparison: "Well then too bad for 'the enviroment'. Even beavers making damn destroys the enviroment by that logic." But beavers making dams don't create dust bowls and deserts the way human agricultural practices and beavers have an evolutionary need for their sustainable homes. Humans have lived without agriculture and will again when they've damaged the environment enough and created the circumstances that will make agricultural practices impossible. bwong wrote: "We want to limit destructive activities to keep the ecosystem hospitable for HUMAN CIVILIZATION. Destroying civilization for the enviroment defeats the purpsoe." But if civilization is actually destroying the human sustaining aspects of the environment, what good is it? Shouldn't life be more important than this thing you call civilization? What is your definition of civilization and what makes it so worth trying to save?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 20, 2005 10:02 AM
"non-primitive cultures that take up even the technology of agriculture..destroy their environment" Well then too bad for "the enviroment". Even beavers making damn destroys the enviroment by that logic. I am human, not Gaia.From my narrow persepctive I oppose reckless destruction of the enviroment because it hurts OURSELVES. My "enviromentalism" is completely anthropocentric. Until the sun eventually burns out,the enviroment will be there in one way or the other. Bacteria floursh in landfill and sewer. There is not net loss from the "enviroment's perspective",--if it has one.Happy bacteria is as good for Gaia as happy fish. But it would not be good for US to live on garbage dumps. The "enviroment" itself is in constant changes even without humans. Ice ages; vocanic eruptions; contentital drifts all change the enviroment drastically. Eventually the sun will die and that will be the end. The idea of "preseving the enviroment" for the sake of "mother earth" makes no sense. We want to limit destructive activities to keep the ecosystem hospitable for HUMAN CIVILIZATION. Destroying civilization for the enviroment defeats the purpsoe.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 20, 2005 09:22 AM
I wish I had written this but bwong did: "Often the impacts of technology will not be apparant until many years later.I am not just talking about enviromental impacts, but also the ways new technologies transform societies. It may also be a valid point that the use of certain technolgy(say the internet) contributes to social isolations. There is an inherent complexity involved in the deployment of technology. " Could you provide some examples of these insidious forms of technology? bwong wrote: "However, rallybirds' 'primitivism' sounds like a rehased vesrion of the Unabomber Manifesto. It is neither thoughtful nor useful." Kaczynski went about getting published in a particularly nasty way (even nastier than usual) but there are some valid points in his manifesto "Industrial Society and It's Future". Not that I agree with everything in it, or that my primitivism is a rehash of his pre-industrial industrial ideal (which was still technological civilization proper), but I hope you have actually read it since you compared our ideological positions.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 20, 2005 08:22 AM
(2 of 2) Graeme wrote: "Quite a few eh? Yeah, I'm sure anarcho-primitivists make up a good 0.01-0.02% of the US population. You're simply 'calling for' something, yet I'm the one making 'hollow platitudes?'" Even the number are only a few thousands (nevermind the primitive cultures that have survived), I would say that was quite a few. And I know quite a few people, including myself, who have been involved with forest defense (living at the clearcuts), and some who are actively practicing a primitive lifestlye. Beyond that, I've been involved in other protests against the system and my ecological footprint probably isn't the largest. In any case... my life experiences have taught me to spot hollow platitudes like yours. You're saying little and I'll bet you're DOING even less. I think it was Phil Oaks who sang it best... "Love me, love me love me, I'm a liberal!" Remind you of anyone?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 20, 2005 07:48 AM
(1 of 2) Graeme misunderstood: "As for 'apologia,' how about advocating a system which requires massive human casualties to bring about, allegedly on the grounds that if we don't, such casualties will happen anyway? It's almost Nazi-esque in its warped 'logic.'" The system which advocates "massive human casualties" is obviously the techno-industrial system -- which is actually bringing about the massive human casualties with global warming, the "green revolution" (complete with biotech), ozone depletion, species extinction, famine, war (potentially nuclear), etc. Graeme wrote: "I would "like to see stopped" the corporate depredation of the natural world to build unnecessary and destructive things (for one), which I would 'bring about' with a new socioeconomic order, a la Parecon." I think maybe we disagree on what is unnecessarily built. I feel that plastics can go (and more specifically petroleum), strip-mining, clear-cutting, and unsustainable agricultural practices that will eventually end anyway (it will blow away like dust in the wing). Without these things, which won't last anyway, the current population of the earth will not be sustained. And I wish you'd understand that it is not a matter of "wanting" or "advocating" but, rather, is a matter of simple consequences which ought to be easily understood.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 20, 2005 07:25 AM
RA wrote: "I hate much of modern technology too; but I also believe that ALL of its destructive aspects are foisted upon us by the capitalists," What about industrial Marxism, it seems just as bad. And non-primitive cultures that take up even the technology of agriculture (beyond horticulture) destroy their environment (to say nothing of the techno-"miracle" of the so-called "green revolution"). Just look at what happened to the birthplace of agriculture and civilization -- the fertile crescent became a wasteland after years of extensive agricultural practices. RA wrote: "Most people are aware of the danger of nuclear proliferation and global climate change, to cite the 2 gravest concerns I have here, but are virtually powerless to do anything about them." Don't be such a defeatist! At the very least we can try to live as minimalistically as possible and, as Chomsky suggests, go on a tax protest. Beyond that, I think people of good conscience ought not bite their tongues about these issues. A visible protest movement is also necessary IMHO. It seems to me that advocating worker control of the MOP might be too reformist. We need a lot of change quickly (if things like global warming and GMO's are to be stopped) and beyond organizing widespread wildcat strikes (which aren't completely unprecedented [France 1968]) I don't know about unionization or worker control.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 19, 2005 22:17 PM
Rallybird, I wonder if you would agree with this statement: the duality of "nature" vs. "man" does not exits. I believe it. All life is nature. I would also add that all matter is nature as well, and that includes technology. The line we draw in our minds between what is considered to be part of nature and what is not is purely theoretical, subject to opinion and does not exist outside our minds. Natural events - for example massive, wide spread volcanic eruptions could extinguish life on earth just like nuclear war. It sounds like your argument for banning technology is that we humans cannot be trusted with it and the threat to our existence is too great. Is this a critique of human nature, or do you believe that people have the capacity to learn to use technology safely?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 19, 2005 00:03 AM
" there is also a particular race-based system at play: any white person in society is born with certain advantages (or minus certain disadvantages) that only the wealthiest blacks can overcome..Race and poverty are simply too highly correlated.." Graeme "White" is not a homogenous group and probably more diverse in terms of income and status comparing to any particular "non white" group(just because it is very losely defined, bigger and has been around much longer) I didn't deny that race and poverty are in some way correlated, but that also conceals a lot complexities. There are factors such as acculturation, network etc, that tend to disavantage minorities, but these are more circumstantial than intrinsically tied to race. Would a Polish, white immigrant who speak almost no English be having advantage over, say, a second generation East Indian with a U of T degree? Minorities should not be lumped together as well. I think there is evidence that blacks suffer a lot more in terms of systemic racism than other groups. As noted, I support AA to a degree.But one must acknowledge that it is a very blunt instrument and other, non racial factors such as economics should also be considered. AA is a manifestation of society structured as a zero sum game.Scarcity of opportunities may not even arise in a more reasonable society.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 18, 2005 22:10 PM
A more rational economical system will remove the structural incentives,--short term profit motive, growth for growth's sake,-- for abusing technology. But not all problems stemming from the misuse of technologies will magically disappear simply because the "workers" now own the MOP. Human short sightedness transcend politics and class. Often the impacts of technology will not be apparant until many years later.I am not just talking about enviromental impacts, but also the ways new technologies transform societies. It may also be a valid point that the use of certain technolgy(say the internet) contributes to social isolations. There is an inherent complexity involved in the deployment of technology. While I take great exception to rallybird's views, I don't want to convey the idea that one cannot raise critical issues about the use, misuse, and overuse of technology.There are many valid and useful angles to explore and discuss technology critically. However, rallybirds' "primitivism" sounds like a rehased vesrion of the Unabomber Manifesto. It is neither thoughtful nor useful.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 18, 2005 07:50 AM
rallyman, don't leave; you have some very good ideas. Strange, I was thinking of weighing in even before I got to your request. I hate much of modern technology too; but I also believe that ALL of its destructive aspects are foisted upon us by the capitalists, (e.g., automobiles and nuclear bombs). Most people are aware of the danger of nuclear proliferation and global climate change, to cite the 2 gravest concerns I have here, but are virtually powerless to do anything about them. Meanwhile, capital increases because of the very practices that entail these immense problems, e.g., automobile magnates are making money hand over fist. A worker takeover of the MOPs, as I said before, would mean that this imperative would cease to exist, along with the attendant problems. Simply put, if it's the practice of increasing capital that is responsible for the above species threatening problems, then we could solve them by developing an economic system that does not involve this practice. BTW, 'common vernacular' is redundant; I think you meant to say 'common parlance'.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 18, 2005 07:22 AM
Graeme actually wrote: "Some people get hostile when other people point out gaping holes in their 'arguments.' I'm too tired at the moment to respond fully but if this is how you get when people point out little details like logic to you then you really aren't worth the effort any more." OMFG, I'm ROFL! Do you realise this is a PUBLIC site for discourse and debate -- where others can reread the the thread and see for themselves who is dodging questions, confusing the issues, and basically saying NOTHING. The only way one can reasonably respond to the last bit of tripe you posted is by saying... I'm rubber you're glue. Nyah Nyah nyah nyah nyah. Sometimes I wonder why I bother. Where are you RA? Somebody, who can follow a thread, stick to definitions, and generally offer something more than inept platitudes, needs to put me in my place. If you don't stop biting your tongue I'll be forced to write this site off like so many others. I know you've got an opinion on these subjects so, to use the common vernacular -- shit or get off the pot.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 18, 2005 06:35 AM
First of all... the things I metioned were and ARE done ON PURPOSE with full knowledge (at some levels more than others) that these activities ARE in fact destroying the earth. The people promoting these activities often know the consequences but simply don't care. Don't tell me to get a dictionary when you need to get a clue. Graeme wrote: "...which is why I advocate an entirely new socioeconomic system." This is a hollow plattitude. Wow, an entirely new socioeconomic system, of course! Any details or plans for this that you care to share? Oh wait... true democracy and worker's control of the MOP. Right. Graeme wrote: "The implications are that we have to change things, now, and use realistic mindsets and theories to do so." More hollow platitudes. I'm the one (of a quite a few I must say) calling for the discontinuation of various technologies and a complete change in lifestyle, what have you got? You sound like a techno-apologist who would continue many of the practices that are destroying the environment and causing untold amounts of suffering around the world. If not, what actions would you specifically like to see stopped and how would you have them stopped?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 18, 2005 03:25 AM
Graeme wrote: "...this isn't the same thing as deliberately destroying the planet. I don't see what's so difficult about this." How about launching the a-bomb, dumping toxic waste in the ocean, clear-cutting the forest, or releasing a genetically modified organism that failed your (unreleased) animal tests? Graeme wrote: "Again, the problem of using the gun is a more important (at least moral) question than making it; the same argument after all could be raised about spears, or swords, or big rocks." Says you! Sharpening a spear IS different than strip-mining materials for a gun and having a technological society that "educates" people to make bigger, "better", and more powerful things. The technique of the logos is hierarchical power par excellence. It starts off relatively restricted and then the teachers force the ideologies entailed in it upon the students who are taught that it is better to use symbolic control over the elements rather than have a respectful direct experience with the natural world. In any case... using means of production are often more destructive than the things they produce. Also, what you are failing to miss is that the techno-industrial system is causing widespread destruction and immiseration which, in all likelihood, WILL lead to a dramatic reduction in human population. People might realise that global warming, GMO's, peak oil,holes in the ozone, etc. are bad things, but do you really understand the combined implications?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 17, 2005 21:29 PM
McCorbin, Exactly. The ultra-wealthy whites whip up hatred of blacks (and, again, I must emphasize that, in nature, no such group exists) to obscure the fact that they are stealing from ALL working class Americans- they divide and conquer. I have the same problem with the dupes who complain about paying taxes yet fail to realize that the capitalists are confiscating the lion's share of the wealth they create.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 17, 2005 18:11 PM
All good points. But why aren't those working class whites raving mad at Bush and other ultra-wealthy whites and only see a problem with blacks? Again, there must be a rational explaination for thier finding the poor blacks a more worthy target than a rich whites. Any idea what that might be?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gwbush212121, Prokerkus_ at Jul 17, 2005 07:10 AM
"I can't remember even once in my lifetime ever seeing someone other than a white male object to anything other than a black person getting the college slot or job through AA." Then you should get out there more! Nowadays many minorities, especially Asians are starting not only to speak out against it, but are actually being PENALIZED by it! Think about how unjust that is for a second - historically discriminated against Asians being hurt by something designed to protect ALL minorities. Furthrmore, the whites that it does hurt are overwhelmingly poor and working class hurts and are thus hurting the Democratic Party and the Left as we are falling out of favor with them and the Republicans are using them to their advantage. The Bushs and Gates (and Jordans and Powells) of the world are NEVER going to be affected by AA: they have enough to money to withstand it. It's poor and working whites who are hurt by this system and who should not be as they have their own disadvantages and (class based) discrimination.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 16, 2005 20:33 PM
" I don't think it is fair to suggest that all "angry white males" against affirmative actions are racist." I can't remember even once in my lifetime ever seeing someone other than a white male object to anything other than a black person getting the college slot or job through AA. Either it's the media singling white males out, or they are virtually the only ones complaining. Perhaps if we didn't have to deal with our historical racist framework (and present-day racist) we would not need it, but I don't see anything more promising happening to correct the disproportion of privilege. Even if the playing field were level (it's not) today the problem of people entering into that "level playing field" at vastly different economic starting points would tilt the advantage back to those in power. So not only do we have to overcome the lingering effects of state sponsored slavery, we also have the problem of concentration of wealth to the exploiters from the exploited. And it's not all racial, but I believe a huge part of it is.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gwbush212121, Prokerkus_ at Jul 16, 2005 18:57 PM
bwong: "I think economical,--class,--is the most important factor in determining one's opportunities in life. Just because you're white does not mean you're advantaged. The correlation between race and wealth is a macro phenomenon, it is true only "on average". It becomes problematic when you address indiviual cases based solely on information valid "on average". The offsprings (does he have any?) of Bill Cosby is much more priviledged than your white working class Joe. I don't think it is fair to suggest that all "angry white males" against affirmative actions are racist." Hear hear! I agree 100% with this! AA has become a system that hurts other minorities as well as hurting working and poor whites which should not be penalized. It's just another way the conservative/moral values people can try to paint Democrats and the the left as being "out of touch" with blue collar America.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 16, 2005 16:11 PM
Re: affirmative action. While in general agreeing with the idea of "leveling the playinging field" and acknowleding the existence of systemic racism(primarily against blacks and the Fisrt Nation), I do have a problem with (exclsusive)race based affirmative action. I think economical,--class,--is the most important factor in determining one's opportunities in life. Just because you're white does not mean you're advantaged. The correlation between race and wealth is a macro phenomenon, it is true only "on average". It becomes problematic when you address indiviual cases based solely on information valid "on average". The offsprings (does he have any?) of Bill Cosby is much more priviledged than your white working class Joe. I don't think it is fair to suggest that all "angry white males" against affirmative actions are racist. PS I use "burger flipper" as an example for menal jobs. It doesn't mean I am promoting Mcdonald as a health food. Words shouldn't be taken too literally. I will address rallybird's rather tiresome anti-tech diatribes later as my computer appears to be overheating.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 16, 2005 08:50 AM
Graeme wrote: "The problem is in the risk of accident, not creating people who consciously want to destroy the earth." For chrissakes... I already explained how technicians will do horribly risky things for cash and even train to launch global thermal nuclear war. Have you forgotten already? You can check it out. Graeme then wrote: "I wasn't talking about the manufacturing process, I was talking about shared responsibility for the shooting." Did you forget that I was part of this discussion too and that I WAS talking about the problem of not only a society that would use a gun but even create one. Graeme: "Whether you want it or not, it isn't going to come about without more massive death and suffering than even capitalism has ever 'accomplished.'" The only reason I ever would argue with this is that it might not simply be capitalism that is causing so much death and suffering. I call it techno-industrial society and it doesn't seem to be getting kinder or gentler. Graeme wrote: "Of course I do, but I disagree with a 'solution' that would be an order of magnitude worse than the problem." How would a more sustainable lifestyle be an order of magnitude worse than what the world is currently facing? In any case, try to respond to what I'm asking and not what you want to think that I am asking. Please.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 16, 2005 08:15 AM
Graeme wrote: "Which is a problem, certainly." But before it was what no one wanted -- and now it's certainly a problem? And, "while not ignoring the role of the manufacturer," you seem to have done just that in your failure to respond to the overtly destructive manufacturing process. As for what soul-sapping is... perhaps it has something to do with sitting silently under flourescent lights for hours on a nice summer day. Of course, I could be wrong -- feel free to argue the point. Graeme asked: "How are we supposed to regress thousands of years without the very calamity we are trying to avoid?" But I never said it was a regression OR that we are going to avoid it. YOU are the one who believes primitivism to be regression (obviously as opposed to "progress") and don't seem to think that techno-industrial society is bringing about an assortment of great calamnities. I, on the other hand, beg to differ.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 16, 2005 07:17 AM
McCorbin wrote: "With education comes technology." This statement is simply not true. Primitives who do not make use of the logos technique have histories dating back dozens of generations and probably have been educated at least as well as any botanist about the types and uses of various plants. The list could go on... Then the NRA argument: Certainly it's the person that kills not the gun, right? Except the gun makes it far more easy to kill and the society that has invested the time in such a destructive device may have other issues. Furthermore, the creation of the gun involves all sorts of destructive techniques such as strip mining for the metal (and probably fuels to melt it). Furthermore the extensive education required for such a destructive device (to say nothing of nukes) is probably somewhat soul-sapping. Graeme wrote: "Well if its not an accident it has to be on purpose; I don't think anybody wants to destroy the world on purpose." Most obviously, if it pays well enough, technicians are willing to risk it and maybe even launch. THAT is the grim reality.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 16, 2005 06:12 AM
I don't remember who said this but I like it none the less: "More and more, human existence is a race between education and annihilation". With education comes technology. If it's used wisely, we benefit....if it's used unwisely, we perish. I think my earlier comments on how abstract systems need not be blamed for man's exploitation of man- that instead we should examine our behavior, apply here also. Why blame technology for violence or injustice? Certainly it's the person that kills not the gun, right?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 16, 2005 05:15 AM
At least liberals know something about the institutional racism that still exists in the techno-industrial society but, as bwong wrote: "One doesn't make 'choices' in a vaccum. You 'choose' only among availiable options." This observation is not true only about issues of race. You suggest paying burger-flippers and mop-pushers more for the hard work they do but their jobs still aren't the most dignified and, what are they going to do with any extra money they might recieve under your system? Aren't they just going to become evermore voracious consumers and demand that more gadgets are developed at the cost of the environment and any negative consequences the newly developed technology might subtly entail? Similiarly, if an oppressed minority is co-opted into the system and becomes a cop or, at the opposite end of the spectrum, a nuclear physicists or genetic engineer, aren't they just involving themselves in other destructive aspects of the system? Congratulations, now you're part of a society that doesn't discriminate on the basis of race but oppresses across the spectrum while continuing to destroy the underlying basis for all life. How very progressive and civilized.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 16, 2005 03:49 AM
I'm guessing Roger finds affirmative action offensive. Did you ever notice that whenever affirmative action crops up in the news there is always a white male or group of them carrying signs, shouting mad about a black guy who was perhaps less qualified and got to go to Yale, or got the job that he felt entitled to? How come you never see those guys objecting to rich WASP legacies who got to Yale or got the cushy job with lower qualifications, (Bush is a perfect example) solely for the reason that he had connections and money? How can someone find a poor disadvantaged person taking their place more objectionable than a privileged rich person taking their place? There is only one explanation that I can think of: latent racism. I could be wrong. Roger may welcome affirmative action, or he may be outraged that Bush took a much smarter kid's slot at Yale.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 15, 2005 23:19 PM
(continued) "But even you must admit, all these factors (getting pregnant by the time you're 18, dropping out of high school) are by CHOICE! You CHOOSE to do these things. With life, there are consequences for the actions one takes. Capitalism gives people the freedom to make dumb ones." One doesn't make "choices" in a vaccum.You "choose" only among availiable options. In a very stratified society such as the U.S the options availiable vary a great deal. You have to be either an idiot or joker to sound as if some black kid born in a ghetto and Bush make "free choices' on a more or less equal footing. You sound as though only those who end up poor make dumb choices". This is just condenscending crap. People make "dumb choices" all the time(just read Bush's biography) But bad choices do not carry the same penalty. For a white, middle class kid with wealthy enough parents to bail him out spending a few years on boozing, doing drugs, and getting some girls preganat is probably just part of "growing up". A black kid in the ghetto may be punished by a life sentence of poverty and downward spiral for the same sin.Black "role models" like Bill Corsby apparantly think the sentence is just.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 15, 2005 22:53 PM
"But even you must admit, all these factors (getting pregnant by the time you're 18, dropping out of high school) are by CHOICE!" Every statement you make as usual contains so many misconceptions it is difficult to decide where to start. Your portrait of poverty is a caricature. It is as if only people who lacks a highschool diploma, the lazy, and those who are pregnant before 18 are poor(what happens to the guys?)Whoever makes such a stupid statement(Bill Cosby the clown, I think) along with those who cite him approvingly are living in a dream world. There are no rich people without poverty. In a hierachial society poverty is built in. If everyone take your kind advice to stay in school to get a Ph.D in rocket science, a Ph.D in rocket science will be worthless. You would need one to qualify for burger flipping. You don't have to be Ph.D to figure that out. In a society that structured as a zero sum game you'll always have a lot of losers no matter how "hard" one tries to play by the rule. It is impossible for everyone to be winner. Society needs people to the menial job no matter how educated it is. Instead of blaming the burger flipper for his lack of education one should be asking why the he is paid so little for his work. People who make minimum wage work harder and often under harsher work conditions than anything a frat boy like yourself can imagine so don't insult our intelligence by telling people to "work harder".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 15, 2005 21:41 PM
Thanks Apple for getting in the spirit of things here. What Prokerkus fails to understand is that I'm not trying to make a point other than that I loathe R., finding him so contemptible that I would say the vilest things possible about his own mother and father. (Let's not forget that innocent Iraqis are dying as we speak because of the views he harbors and the American govt. official he admires.) I gave up trying to convince him of anything a long time ago, as he showed himself to be obtuse. Prokerkus displays the same trait in failing to see R's long-winded sermonizing as belying an inflated sense of his importance- bragging, in a word. To Prokerkus himself: any time you are ready to throw down with me boy, just say so. Let's see how well you can defend Capitalism. I've humiliated hundreds of misguided punks like you and would love the chance to do it again. Make my day; attack my argument: 1. Capitalism entails slavery- forcing workers to spend their time creating wealth for others. 2. Slavery is evil. 3. What entails evil is evil itself. 4. Thus, Capitalism is evil. QED

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matrix4, Appleman at Jul 15, 2005 20:34 PM
Ah, but Prokerkus my boy, no one really cares what you think! You are an intellectual lightweight of the first degree. Now run along and go back to school to gain some much needed knowledge. Or do you have another ass to kiss?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gwbush212121, Prokerkus_ at Jul 15, 2005 19:36 PM
"What's funny is SAYING such a thing about YOUR parents" No it's not funny at all. It's really sick and disturbing. You don't need to insult somebody's parents like that just to make a point. Let me tell you that NO one outside of the people who already strongly agree with you would find it even mildly entertaining. I surely don't. "at least 2 readers that I know of; DID think that it was funny" The fact that you could only find 2 readers means that most people didn't. Myself, Greame, Bwong, Roger have all critisized your disgusting comments. That's 4 right there and I'm sure RealPC would be a 5th if he ever came back. By the way, if you are referring to Bwong as 1 of the 2 people that thought it was funny you better look at his comments again: "Robert, you're cracking me up." was in direct response to a reply you gave to GREAME, not to Roger and it had nothing to do with your vulgar sexual references. And he also said:"Sorry Robert, me think the excessive references to sexual acts are getting a bit creepy." "You fancy yourself a skillful debater" When has Roger ever called himself that? As far as I can tell, from the all sides, you are the only one that talks about "beating the intellectual shit out of people" and yet all you do is make grotesque sexual jokes, vulgar insults and predictable comebacks. You seem like the very definition of a pseudo-intellectual and not a very good one either. Your comments are doing your cause more harm than good.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 15, 2005 17:46 PM
Roger the Boot Licker, If your life is any indication of how the rest of his descendents are living, then your grandfather is a miserable failure- just like GWB. His life, as I and others have already pointed out to you, is actually an indictment of the economic system you tout, something your obtuseness keeps you from realizing. Moreover, you yourself have no idea what it means to live a good life, as evidenced by your holding up of conformists such as Powell, Rice, and Clarence Thomas as role models. It's all about pleasing the capitalists with you. If they told you or one of your heroes to lick excrement off a sidewalk, you'd be down on your knees before they could say 'lackey'. You fancy yourself a skillful debater. But all you have been doing here is running your mouth; there are holes in your arguments the size of those in the pack of lies lackey Powell told the UN to support the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq. You have rebutted NOT ONE of the objections raised against your invidious views on race and capitalism. Now go away and don't come back until, as the inner city hoopsters you so despise would say, you have got a game.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 16:45 PM
His dream came true. But the truth of the matter is that my family is no exception; there are litterally millions of American families that share this very same story. I realize that Grame may be young, but let me tell you, as most Americans have come to realize: the older you get and the more you see of the world, the better you appreciate the splender that is the United States of America. Now does the Right have all the answers? Does the Left for that matter? No, I don't believe either one does. But I will tell you this: the more we can debate about these issues, freely and openly; without any fear of persecution or repercussion, the more we can all say, regardless of our political affiliation and without any hesitation: May God Continue to Bless America and its people.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 16:21 PM
On my end, I hope that I have brought a much-needed counterpoint to these discussions of Noam Chomsky, the controversial and radical writer whose "blags" often get turned into worshipping shrines. Hearing contrasting points of view are good things and I hope that I have contributed something in this respect, even if I get called vicious names for doing so. I also encourage readers to not forget my previous reading list(s) which give further information on some of the topics we discussed briefly. We have debated a wide variety of issues from culture to Cuba to El Salvador to capitalism. I am not going to regurgitate all the main points that have been made as that will serve no useful purpose and be far too time-consuming. What I will do however, is speak a little bit about what I love about America and my own experiences with capitalism and freedom.When my grandfather came to this country, he had barely a penny in his pocket. He worked 12-14 hour shifts under difficult conditions; but never once did he complain, never once did he waver in the firm belief and firm conviction that this country was the very best thing the world had to offer. He worked hard and saved his money, so that his US-born children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren could go to college and live a better life.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 15:57 PM
What is the reaction of when young blacks see people such as Rice or Powell, people that should be considered role models, turned into "collaborators" or "Uncle Toms?" What does that say to them? "Don't be like thse people! Don't be a success! Or else you will be called one of those bad names! So don't be that Secretary of State! Don't be that Supreme Court Justice! Don't be that lawer! Don't be that professor! Don't be that doctor...." The list is endless and it goes on and on until, well until you reach the economic level they are currently at today. This is wrong. Limiting the potential of young black Americans by telling them that anyone that breaks out of the cycle of poverty is somehow a "traitor" is wrong and it's one of the major reasons why some minorities are unable to find the success that other persons of color, with a history of racial discrimination enjoy. My opponent and I also have deep philosophical differences as well: Grame believes in a utopian and idealistic world that while may be full of good intentions, would bring about disastrous results. History has shown us all too many examples of this occurring. I believe that no matter how many problems America may have, that it is still the greatest country the world has ever known. Which is why of course, one sees millions of immigrants of all different colors flocking to its shores in the pursuit of freedom and economic opportunity and mobility.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 09:16 AM
I have enjoyed this debate with Graeme. I think he is sincere in his beliefs and I thank him for debating me in a (generally) respectful manner. I do believe however, that he is also sincerely wrong in his beliefs. America is a great country. One that we, as Americans, can all be proud of. This does not mean that America has not made its mistakes nor does it imply that America has not done things in our past which we may not be all too proud of: slavery certainly being one of them. Where we do disagree however, is what should be the reaction to past historical injustices. I do not believe that discrimination of the past justifies reverse-discrimination that we find ourselves in today. Grame believes in "institutional racism" and the idea that successful minorities are somehow "chosen" (in a strange process never fully explained) by a magical entity to become "collaborators" to the system. He and other members of the Left call successful blacks like Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice: "Uncle Toms", "Race-Traitors" and "Tokens." I believe that this is sending precisely the WRONG message to America's future and to communities of color.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 15, 2005 07:56 AM
"Who am I actually debating here? 2 Canadians primarily and an American (I assume) that thinks that someone's parents having sex with dogs is "funny" or "clever".. No, no, you misunderstand. What's funny is SAYING such a thing about YOUR parents (who, all kidding aside, must be rotten people themselves or pitiable to have produced a son like you- one shudders at the thought). I can get away with it only because you are such a thoroughly reprehensible figure, the Richard Nixon of Turning the Tide. And at least 2 readers that I know of; DID think that it was funny: they understood what it means for someone to be beneath contempt. The only thing keeping me going in these dark times is my firm belief that you, Shaq, (who is a shitty basketball player) GWB, and the rest of the war mongers in this country will one day be answering to God Almighty, if not working people, for countenancing the senseless slaughter now taking place in Iraq.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 07:41 AM
"The report said that the number of millionaires in North America grew nearly 10 percent in 2004, thanks to low interest rates and tax reform. The two main drivers of personal wealth creation -- economic growth and market capitalization -- worked together to generate the strongest growth in high net worth wealth that we've seen in more than three years," said James P. Gorman, executive vice president of Merrill Lynch." America has 7.5 of the 8.3 millionaires on this planet. Why hasn't Europe caught up you ask? "The socialist legacies are providing the biggest obstacle for the European Union to satisfy its thinly veiled aspirations to rival America's status as a "hyper power." Unfortunately, for Europe the longer it embraces socialist policies and favors secular breakdowns of the family unit the harder it will be for the continent to maintain the relatively high standards of living it thought it had achieved" - Milton Friedman Capitalism, for all its warts and flaws, has triumphed.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 07:19 AM
"All factors highly correlated with not being black, not suprisingly." But even you must admit, all these factors (getting pregnant by the time you're 18, dropping out of high school) are by CHOICE! You CHOOSE to do these things. With life, there are consequences for the actions one takes. Capitalism gives people the freedom to make dumb ones. Unfortunately they must also pay the price for these mistakes. If you choose to get someone pregnant at 15 and drop out of high school, What kind of life do you expect to have? Why should I or anyone else following the rules, going to school and doing the right things have to pay for your mistakes? Making these kind of bad choices are your own fault; not that of the system. " all of whom conform to your narrow definition of success: extremely right-wing, or a sports star?" Colin Powell is not "extremely right wing" by any stretch of the imagination. "Capitalism has helped a few white people through history, at a tremendous cost to virtually everybody else." Capitalism has created 7.5 Millionaires, 300 billionaires in THE US ALONE! The amount of wealth and kind of high-quality living standards created in the most advanced capitalist societies, such as the North America and Western Europe cannot be denied.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 15, 2005 06:20 AM
"I am winding down here. I will respond to the last comments you made and conclude with my closing statement." Roger the Friedman Fan Hey Greame, check out the nice redundancy. He's going to conclude with his CLOSING statement. I'll bet you thought that he might CONCLUDE with his opening statement. Only a pseudointellectual would make a rhetorical mistake like that. And in the end, after all the insults about his character, all of which found their mark, that is the bottom line with this guy- he's a wannabe.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 06:18 AM
"George W. Bush is "religious" in the way Khomeini was "religious." ..a man of "moral values" the way Stalin was..of "moral values." He is a war criminal and a liar.." You are full of Communist propaganda aren't you? To compare Bush to Khomeini or even worse, Stalin, is just so incredibly propagandistic and out of the mainstream it's very hard to find the right words to describe it. Stalin was a murderer of 40 million people, in cold blood. Bush freed two oppressed, terrorist supporting nations and gave them freedom. No matter what you think of the wars comparing them to Stalin's heinous crimes is just incredibly inaccurate. "The point was the hypocrisy of Disney, which refused to run a Michael Moore film but lets Harvey's..." But there is a difference: Paul Harvey is running a radio program where viewers don't expect anything other than his views; which he airs everyday at the regularly scheduled time. Michael Moore (a proven liar and propagandist) on the other hand tried in vain to influence the outcome of a Presidential election by passing off his incredibly false/one-sided propaganda piece "Fahreinheit 911" as a "documentary" Thus using the factual assumptions one makes of documentaries to insert outright lies, falsehoods and extreme leftist propaganda. For the truth about Moore: www.MooreLies.com www.MooreExposed.com www.MichaelMooreHatesAmerica.com www.MooreWatch.com

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 05:52 AM
"Who are you to tell the left what kind of candidates they should run?" Someone wanted to know how to reach out to red states, particularly the moral values voters. I, being a conservative Republican and in a red state, thought that I'd be one of the few in here that could answer it. "Something like 65% of Americans agree with Roe v. Wade." Yea but how many would act on it? How many would vote on that issue alone? "..there is too much disrespect towards "normal people" in the so-called "Red States" form those living in so-called "Blue states" Thanks Grame. "extremely suspicious voting "irregularities" in Ohio (.. so severe they would have invalidated the election.." Give it up. Bush won by more than 100,000 votes in Ohio. Kerry wouldn't have conceded otherwise. "he still won by the slimmest percentage of victory of any election in the previous 88 years"" I have never in my life seen a President attacked the way he was: "liar!" "war monger!" "war criminal!" "idiot!" "stupid!" etc etc. All these words were commonplace among Democrats, the liberal media and the Left. Propaganda movies came out a few months before the election. Anti-Bush books came out in huge numbers. Soros and other celebrities threw out MILLIONS to defeat him. The Left was hellbent on defeating Bush. The fact that he won and that it wasn't even that close (4 Million vote difference) speaks volumes of the faith the American people have in the President.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 05:28 AM
"Everybody values education..." Perhaps, but some more than others. Some cultures have a history of using their hands while some are more involved with the sciences and learning. These cultural differences (which are further elaborated upon by American blacks such as Jesse Lee Peterson, Star Parker etc) are paramount in a society where educational opportunity is about as equal as can be without being oppressive or socialistic, not to say that it isn't tougher for students in some schools than others, but it does give everyone the OPPORTUNITY to succeed if they really work at it. This is why America is called the equal OPPORTUNITY nation. We seem to be "stuck" in this circular argument. Let me just say that culture DEFINITELY has an impact on people's lives. Go to the average Asian household and go to the average White or Black household and tell me you don't see any differences. Give me a break. Higher test scores by Asians with even LOWER economic opportunity than their white counterparts is no accident. Blacks dominating many US sports despite being only 12% of the population while you see virtually any Asians involved in professional sports. (And don't insult our intelligence by pretending it's this mystical "preordained" process.) Try going to Wall St, Park Place, Chinatown and Harlem; diffrences persist and they are real. Again, if you lived in America you would know this; it wouldn't even be an argument.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 03:22 AM
"So you decide who the best athlete in a given year is based on his political opinions?" No, I supported Shaq because he was/is the better player. I didn't want to get into the pecularities of NBA statistics since that's neither here nor there (although if you ask coaches who they want on their team: Shaq or Nash, Shaq wins in a landslide) What I did want to show however, is that I admire Shaq on a much less superficial level than just his b-ball accomplishments. I admire him as a patriot and for his moral values: his "Let's Roll!" comment when asked about the war and his support of the troops. "Again, this reinforces my conclusions: you hate black people, except in those rare cases where a black person thinks the "correct" things." That's ridiculous and typical leftist propaganda. Everyone who isn't Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton is a "collaborator" in your eyes. I hate black people yet I can literally name dozens who I admire, as opposed to you who can hardly name any Cuban Americans which you admire. Michael Jordan, who was one of the people I mentioned, is a registered Democrat and supported Bill Bradley in 2000. How's that for saying the right thing? The fact of the matter is that the reason I know so many of the new leaders in the black community and know about black issues in America because is I do care very much about black people and seeing their lives improve and I know that capitalism is the way to do it as it has done for so many others.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 02:56 AM
But the point is, that you don't hear Jews saying "Oh! We've been persecuted for 2,000 years! No wonder were in poverty!" Jews (and many other minorities) are extremely successful both economically and in education, and yes they do correlate. I remember reading somewhere that if a US citizen were to, by the time they were 18: Graduate high school, not get pregnant or anyone else pregnant and not get AIDS, that their chance of getting into poverty was virtually nil. The fact of the matter remains that George W. Bush has put together the most diverse administration in US history. 1st Black Sec. of State. 1st Black woman Sec of State, 1st Hispanic Attorney General...yet Grame and the far Left still loosely use the word "racist" to describe conservatives. Incredible. "Gangsters" refers to the fact that a large percentage of the Cuban exile community in Miami had or continues to have ties to organized crime. This is a well known fact. ...as Roger knows perfectly well." I understand that an ELEMENT of Cuban exiles had connections with organized crime. So do many other ethnic groups. Italians, for one. But you don't go around calling Italians "gangsters" The same can also be said of blacks: "Black people have a higher crime rate than most Americans, with ties to gang violence so I call them criminals and gangsters." However, one would be considered racist by the Left, the other perfectly OK as they do not fit the typical lefist streotype.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 02:29 AM
To call all these people, (US blacks who are successful, politically conservative) "Uncle Toms" or "collaborators" is just so demeaning and in my mind, a form of racism as well. Lefists, Rightists, peoples of ALL politicial persuasions should applaud when a minority reaches success in their lives! Colin Powell came from poverty! Ditto with Rice. These aren't people born with a silver spoon in their mouths; they had to work HARD to get what they achieved. I believe these people should be held up as models to what can be accomplished. The (far) Left believes in making fun of them and calling them names like "collaborators" or saying how "they are more white than black" Just pure slander. Besides, isn't it a little bigoted to say how a "white" or "black" person should act like in the first place? "How many Irish were slaves? Jews? Japanese?" Again, this speaks of ignorance! Jews WERE slaves, for a very long time. Not to mention being treated probably worse than slaves in many other countries that they emigrated to, Germany being one of them. The Irish were nearly starved to death by the British. The Chinese were held as virtual slaves during the railroad construction and Japanese were sent to internment camps during WWII, not to mention racist laws against Asians in general.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 02:05 AM
"I've never read any of these three (and I don't intend to) but they seem to be more or less variations on the same theme: black people should become white, then they'll succeed." You know, you are really so narrow minded when it comes to this. After thinking about it though, I can now see why: Who am I actually debating here? 2 Canadians primarily and an American (I assume) that thinks that someone's parents having sex with dogs is "funny" or "clever"..no wonder they really don't understand how America works. Most Americans know that blacks tend to complain about their situation in life (ie the reparations movement, affirmative action in which minorities such as Asians and poor whites are taken advantage of) even though other minorities have gone through great difficulties as well. Fortunately, new leaders in the black community are starting to emerge: Jesse Lee Peterson, Clarence Thomas, Bill Cosby, and Condoleezza Rice are starting to preach responsibility and taking control over your OWN actions and your OWN life. Why, in a Fox News poll just the other day, a majority of blacks beleived that they blame white people too much for their problems. As Peterson once said "For a long time in the black community, there was this streotype that books were for white people." When you have streotypes such as these is there any wonder why the high school dropout rates remain dismal?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Antiamerican800, Bernardo at Jul 15, 2005 01:38 AM
Many of Chomsky's arguments are ultimately based, it seems to me, on the notion of good and evil. On morality. But other cultures or even the same culture at different times have differing conceptions of morality. And a universal grammar or proposed genetic basis for morality amounts to nothing more than the ability to have moralistic conceptions, differing over time and geography. Chomsky somewhere brings up an encounter with South American Indians and how he conversed with them about wrongs committed by the state authorities. And how only by sharing common notions of right and wrong was such a conversation possible. True, but there are other South American Indians who would not have minded having him for supper. As the main course. Chomsky also says that the moral culture has improved since the 1960's, but where does the standard for this "improvement" come from? If morality is innate shouldn't the slave owners of the American South been conscious of "wrong doing?"

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 15, 2005 01:37 AM
I am winding down here. I will respond to the last comments you made and conclude with my closing statement. "If by "foremost expert" you mean "vulgar propagandist" (Chomsky's words on Lewis)," I hate to say to say it Grame but it's been pretty evident that you have a high adoration of Chomsky that borders on obsession. I mean, you quote him constantly, virtually every other post and you even have copied his writing "style." I just think it's getting a bit creepy. Must all Chomsky followers treat him as such a godly/worshipping figure? "Kissinger is an indictable war criminal.." How many Noble Peace Prize winners do you know that are "war criminals?" Kissinger has been a respected adviser to several Presidential administrations. He felt that in Vietnan it would be best to have a liberal democratic gov rather than a Marxist dictatorship. The cost was too high in the end but unquestionaly, Vietnam was worse off under Communist rule just as North Korea was/is worse than South Korea. "Friedman is an idiot" Pulitzer Prize winner, NYT bestselling author, these are all authors have the very highest reputation. Bernard Lewis is extremely well-respected. As for Friedman, yes, he as well as many on BOTH parties made on a mistake on the whole WMD thing. But it is completely disengenous of the Left to make it seem that only people like Friedman got it wrong when everyone from Hillary Clinton to Howard Dean were saying likewise at the time.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 14, 2005 22:16 PM
As an American white male who was raised from birth not to be racist, I can honestly say that I don't believe it's possible to be a white male in America and remain untouched by the constant societal reinforcements of racism. We will inherit latent, institutionalized racist ideologies unless we are consciously vigilant against them sneaking past our conscious mind. When we don't question societal norms and traditions, that is when we are most vulnerable to unconscious acceptance or even enthusiastic promotion of ideals that perpetuate racism. Hearing such unabashed promotions of racist ideals here I assume that the commenters are blissfully unaware that their proverbial pants are hanging down, and therefor see no need for shame and in fact are quite confused by our objections to their comments.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 14, 2005 01:57 AM
And concerning the "Great Emancipator", Robert, don't forget that he played various roles in the continuing genocide against the pre-American natives -- first in Illinois and later at the national level. As for Ike... despite all his great speechifying, his policies nevertheless seemed to promote the same military-industrial complex he condemned.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 14, 2005 01:13 AM
"Sorry Robert, me think the excessive references to sexual acts are getting a bit creepy. ... Perhaps you're trying to teach us something about Freud today?" Nah, I'm just practicing in case I ever meet asshole in person. I want to say the vilest thing possible to him.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 14, 2005 00:31 AM
Sorry Robert, me think the excessive references to sexual acts are getting a bit creepy. I assure you I am neither prudish nor stodgy. Perhaps you're trying to teach us something about Freud today? :)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 14, 2005 00:10 AM
"So if Asians are (generally speaking) heavily focused on education and studies and Blacks (generally speaking) more focused on athletics, it would explain .." It can also be "explained" by society's expectation. With people having ridiculous ideas such as yours it is not surprising that it becomes a self-fufiling prophecy.Black kids would be given the "hints" that perhaps they should become pro footballers if they aren't doing so well in schools. On the other hand, teachers may spend extra time with Asians who are falling behind. But no one would limit the career choices of "whites" based on such narrow stereotypes. The notion that racial minorities can be "slotted" according to their alleged genetic or cultural predispositiona is an old colonial practice of ranking non whites according to the service they provide for the white master. As noted earlier, in the Apartheid systems in Indonesia, South East Asia and Africa, the races who are "less dark",--Chinese in SE Asia, and East Indians in Africa,-- were given the more "privileged" roles to do "brain work", while the darker skinned natives were cosigned to physical labour. It is not difficult to imagine what would have been the justifications :just reread the quote from Roger word for word. Roger's repugnant racist drivels is just the same old theme without even a lot of touch up.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 13, 2005 23:17 PM
(continued) Many 2nd and 3rd generation Chinese immigrants cannot speak or read Chinese.I and most of my Chinese peers know almost nothing about Confusius and have never read any of his book.I can tell you a lot more about Plato. You must be more Chinese than I am to insist that somehow I am possessed by the ghost of Confusius without even knowing it! Some Chinese immigrants pretend they're expert of "Confusian philosophy" to impress non Chinese, perhaps out of an overcompensated sense of national pride. But many of them are blowing smoke. "That's my main point. And do you seriously deny the Confucian philosophy as having a tremendous impact on Chinese society? " The impact of Confusianism in may be somewhat exaggereated. The vast majority of Chinese, in the thousands of years between Confusius and the communists, were illiterate peasants. It is hard to say to what degree "Confusianism" reaches beyond the (traditionally tiny) elite, which happened to write(and read) all the books. Scholars of "Chinese culture" can be misled if they rely too much on the written words. Max Weber and cultural scholars then thought Confusianism was the very reason why China was oppressive, poor and backward. Now the "experts" tell us the opposite. This proves that nabulous concepts like "culture" can be twisted in any ad hoc way to accomadate any fact or agenda. It has almost zero explanatory power.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 13, 2005 22:44 PM
"And the fact that Chinese, among other Asians are able to achieve success in other countries backs up my argument completely " I have just explained why your "facts" don't back up your argument in that you have glossly misunderstood and misrepresented the nature of Chinese "success' in Asia without reference to historical context. Comparing to the massive impact of very deleberate policies of the colonial rulers whatever "Cultural" factor that may be at play was simply negligible. "Do you agree that Asian Americans have a much higher level of education and income than other minorities do?" First off, having higer education and having higer income are two seperate matters and they don't necessarily correlate.Here in Canada, immigrants as a group has higher education than Canadian born, but they are also as a group poorer and work harder. The same pattern is true in the U.S. Secondly, "Asian Americans" are not a homogeneous group. There are differences in origin, degree of assimilation, education and professional background prior to coming to the U.S etc. Once you break down all these factors I don't think it is meaningful anymore to speak of "Asian culture" or "Confusian culture". (to be continued)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 13, 2005 20:51 PM
To my readers, I see that I have been misspelling 'Iraqi'. Sorry. Roger the Anti-Chomsky has also told me that I've misrepresented his father's admonition. It was his mother, not dogs, that he was supposed to be dildo fucking in the ass- and that only to give him more time to read Friedman, not, as I suggested, because he was in principle opposed to his son being with other women. Mea culpa, mea culpa.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 13, 2005 19:15 PM
"Abe Lincoln freed the slaves and fought an unpopular war." Rog the Ignorant For strategic reasons, Capitalist Lackey Abe freed SOME of the slaves and did not see the Civil War in moral terms until he wrote his 2nd Inaugural Address. Prior to that, he saw the slaves as inferior beings and favored repatriating them. To suggest that he is a paragon of virtue is to grossly oversimplify the facts. But what do you expect from someone whose father is on record as advising him, 'Why bother with women when you can dildo fuck dogs in the ass'? With an old man like that, it's no wonder ole Rog's mind's warped.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 13, 2005 17:46 PM
"And I know you'll disagree but George W. Bush is known as our "moral values" President and is a deeply religious man." You're damn right I will disagree: he's a wicked drunk who wouldn't know Christianity if it kneed him in the balls. Historians will regard him as the piece of shit that he is.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 13, 2005 17:29 PM
Prokerkus: "but try to reach out to people in the red states and cultural conservatives. I am a Democrat because I see us as being the ONLY option right now to defeat the conservative/moral values movement." If you are really serious about reaching out to the socially conservative, religous/moral values community then you need to start putting out better candidates. Despite what the far leftists say, John Kerry was not a good choice because he was too liberal, too elitist and just out of touch with the American voter. Social conservatives in the South and Rocky Mountain West don't want another abortion on demand, anti-war/pro Saddam, pro gay marriage, anti military, "global test" candidate. You just can't win running on those issues in the red states. Liberals need to start RESPECTING the moral values community instead of calling us names. Grame - As for US Presidents that shouldn't be hanged for war crimes (which hardly needs to be argued in the first place) Jimmy Carter was known as the "Human Rights" President. In fact he was critisized for being too soft in the middle of the Cold War. Dwight D. Eisenhower liberated Europe from Nazi oppression. Abe Lincoln freed the slaves and fought an unpopular war. Woodrow Wilson was a progressive and idealistic President who gave women the right to vote. And I know you'll disagree but George W. Bush is known as our "moral values" President and is a deeply religious man.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 13, 2005 16:52 PM
"The World is Flat" by Thomas L. Friedman, Pulitzer Prize winning author (Basically, anything written by Friedman makes for an interesting read) Ha ha ha; he reads Friedman, a thoroughly discredited shill for Bush's evil war, a journalist and, as such, an expert on NOTHING! (If I'm ever in the same room as him I'll treat him to description of his precious wife and daughters fingerfucking each other.) Ha ha ha; what a joke he is! Ha ha ha, help me bwong, I can't stop laughing.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 13, 2005 10:45 AM
I am NOT saying that this makes anyone "superior" or inferior to another; what I am saying is that this does have an effect on what happens. So if Asians are (generally speaking) heavily focused on education and studies and Blacks (generally speaking) more focused on athletics, it would explain why you see mostly blacks in college football, basketball, etc while very few Asians. While this also would explain why one sees a disportionate amount of Asians in fields such as medicine, which there are. Culture does an effect and talking about them openly and honestly does not make one a racist. And the fact that Chinese, among other Asians are able to achieve success in other countries backs up my argument completely as it proves that it IS truly because China is a repressive country which severely limits economic mobility and educational opportunity that you don't see the same level of education or comparable income that you see Chinese have everywhere else in the world where such freedoms are granted. What is so difficult about understanding that? Bwong: We seem to be disagreeing on the Hows and the Whys but let's just get this settled: Do you agree that Asian Americans have a much higher level of education and income than other minorities do? That's my main point. And do you seriously deny the Confucian philosophy as having a tremendous impact on Chinese society? While certainly not an expert myself, I can assure you you'd be in a league of your own if you did think so.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 13, 2005 10:23 AM
"Any sociologist who denies the existence of institutional racism..." But the quote I just gave you did NOT say that sociologists denied the existence of institutional racism but that they deny it is the ONLY factor for socioeconomic disparity. Look, no one is denying racism exists, I surely don't, but what I and many others are saying (Black and white) is that racism is not the ONLY nor is it even the MAJOR reason why some inequalities remain. We point to the achievements of other minority groups with long histories of discrimination such as Jews, Asians and Cubans, look at their remarkable success and wonder why the "institutional racism" does not apply for them. Yes, grave injustices have happened to African Americans. But how many other ethnic groups could say the same? Irish? Jews? Japanese? Chinese? The list goes on and on. What is clear however is that some minority groups make their past injustices more of an issue than others do as to why they are not achieving the success they feel they deserve. As a possible (but certainly not the only) factor involved, many of us look to cultural identifications such as importance of education as one of the primary reason for this. It is completely accurate to say that different cultures value different things as being important and it stands to reason that education would be one of those things.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 13, 2005 09:51 AM
"If I was "racist" I would likely be prejudiced towards all Cubans.." So then by your very own definition, I am clearly not a "racist" as I endorse and support many African Americans. I have just cited to you the works of several Black authors whose books I recommend. I also am a big admirer of people like Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Michael Jordan, Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, Armstrong Williams, Tiger Woods and Shaquille O'Neal. In fact, I supported O'Neal as MVP of the NBA over Steve Nash, a white Canadian. How's that for "racist?" Nash was a (typical) ultra liberal of the anti-war/pro-Saddam variety while O'Neal is a great American; when asked how he felt about the war he responded with "Let's Roll!" and a huge grin, he posed for a magazine cover with a full US military uniform on, has donated money to the troops and volunteers his time over at the local police department. Now that's MY kind of sports hero. And if there was a Presidential election between say a John Kerry or a Howard Dean versus any of the Black politicians/intellectuals I have just mentioned, I would vote for them in a heartbeat. Why, I even said publicly that Rice would make a great VP candidate. I have stated my admiration for many African Americans so by your own standard I am not a racist.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 13, 2005 09:23 AM
Grame, I am only recommending the book for the (pre revolutionary) STATISTICS in the back of the book; not for the analysis and not for being balanced. You can ignore the entire analysis for all I care, but this was the only book that I could think of off the top of my head that I know definitely has them. You don't even have to agree with her interpretation of the statistics (or mine), but at least let's be on the same page when it comes to the state of Cuba in the 1950s. I can also recommend you to this site: http://www.neoliberalismo.com/Archivo-01/unnecesary.htm which has quotes from esteemed and highly-respected authorities on Cuba such as Hugh Thomas (who wrote "Cuba or the Pursuit of Freedom", forgot to mention that one, probably because I never read all of it, it's something like 1500 pages.) Also let me just say that you shouldn't really be bragging about visiting Cuba; the US gov really doesn't want you to go there and it has classified it as a terrorist state. Besides, the dollars that you spend there are helping to support a represive regime and helps to prolong the suffering of the Cuban people. It doesn't surprise me that you unimpressed with the DOUBLING of financial aid the West is giving to Africa, despite making such hardcore figures of the Left, such as Bono, downright ecstatics. It seems that there is virtually nothing the West can do to please the far left save embracing socialism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 13, 2005 08:23 AM
Here are a few more books I forgot to add to my reading list that may be relevant to the discussions here: "The World is Flat" by Thomas L. Friedman, Pulitzer Prize winning author (Basically, anything written by Friedman makes for an interesting read) "Diplomacy" by Henry Kissinger, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize "What Went Wrong?" by Bernard Lewis, America's foremost expert on the Near East and while on the subject of the de-victimization culture and new leaders in the African American community: "What color is a Conservative?" by JC Watts "From Rage to Responsibility" AND "Scam - How the Black Leadership Exploits America" by Jesse Lee Peterson "Pimps, Whores and Welfare Brats - From Welfare Mother to Conservative Messenger" by Star Parker Brief Synopsis - "America has two economic systems: capitalism for the rich and socialism for the poor. This double-minded approach seems to keep the poor enslaved to poverty while the rich get richer. Let's face it, despite its $400 billion price tag, welfare isn't working."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 13, 2005 06:08 AM
"It's kind of hard to tell when you're being serious and when you're joking." Graeme, My wife and children have also told me that; but blurring the line between them (between you and me) is part of my schitck. Seriously, though, as I have said here before, I feel compelled, especially in light of what's happening in Iraq, to condemn capitalists and their lackeys in the strongest possible terms. I am at war with people like R; I am not even trying to persuade them of anything. All I want to do is verbally spit in their faces for the benefit of my readers. Granted my situation is not as perilous as Che's, but the motherfucker is still defending my enslavement, not to mention the slaughter and maiming of hundreds of thousands of Iraquis. Today's insults I dedicate to the brave activists who disrupted the recent G8 meeting. Their exploits are described at http://www.counterpunch.org. It's a preview of what's in store for R and his kind.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 13, 2005 02:03 AM
"Robert, you're cracking me up." bwong Thanks buddy, I'm glad someone got the joke. Graeme is quite knowledgeable, but seems a bit stodgy at times; wouldn't you agree? But there's more: R's mom, when interviewed by the British tabloid Perverse, said that she was turned on to dog cock sucking by her husband, who enjoyed "licking their balls." "My favorite partner," she recalled, "was a French poodle, George W," who unfortunately ran away after "(her) selfish son Roger fucked him in the ass."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 13, 2005 00:55 AM
Graeme, Sorry, I meant to write 'The point of insulting a person's relatives is to insult that person himself'. As for the specific content of the insult in ?, I believe that it serves to indicate just how much I despise R: you'll grant that one would not say such a thing to another person unless one considered him to be incredibly vile. (I love that story about Che, God rest his soul, saying 'Fuck you' to his executioner after being asked for his last words.) Granted, spitting in his face would be preferable, but under the circumstances .... Anyway, you'll understand when you get older.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 13, 2005 00:50 AM
"The point of insulting people is to insult them." Robert, you're cracking me up. :) Graeme, Nice summary on the G8 on your blog.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 13, 2005 00:29 AM
Graeme, The point of insulting people is to insult them.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 12, 2005 22:41 PM
"President Bush and the leaders of seven other major industrialized nations pledged Friday to double the amount of aid for Africa in five years and substantially raise it for other poor countries ...." The niggardly motherfuckers could WIPE OUT 3rd World poverty RIGHT NOW if the will existed. Neither Africans nor anyone else should have to beg for assistance, as the MOPs could be used to provide EVERYONE with a decent living. Does anyone really believe that the money grubbers running the G8 will be making sacrifices to help their African brethren? Whatever aid goes to them will, rest assured, comes from working folks who are already generous with what little they have. The other thing that needs to be said here is that Roger's mother is an inveterate sucker of dogs' cocks. (So much for civil discourse, eh Graeme?)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 12, 2005 21:05 PM
Hey lefties look -The Big Bad West Strikes Again! GLENEAGLES, Scotland, July 8 -- President Bush and the leaders of seven other major industrialized nations pledged Friday to double the amount of aid for Africa in five years and substantially raise it for other poor countries, capping a summit conducted in what British Prime Minister Tony Blair called the "shadow of terrorism." "Before leaving, Blair declared that the "hope" and "humanity" behind the aid deal sent a powerful and timely message. "The clear signal we have sent on Africa," he said, "stands in stark contrast to the politics of terror." "Doubling aid to Africa has not been easy. I'm very proud to report that these figures are extremely meaningful," Bono told reporters." "Blair noted that the rich countries now had to ensure that the money pledged was actually disbursed, and that Africans had to use the funds wisely: "In the end it is only vibrant African leadership, capable of giving good governance to its people, that will ultimately make the difference."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gwbush212121, Prokerkus_ at Jul 12, 2005 19:29 PM
As the resident centrist on this site allow me to give my two cents on this epic debate we're having here between the right and the left. Both Roger the Anti-Chomsky and Graeme are making excelllent points. I am learning from both of them so I would like to thank both of them for that. Let's be fair however and realize that both have made points that have gone unanswered and it is not so easy for Roger as he is debating 5 people at once. I do not believe that either Roger or Greame is racist. I think Roger's biggest problem is that he generalizes a bit too much while Greame tends to exaggerate a bit more than he should. However I agree with Asians being very studious as I have personally observed this at my school. I think we all need to take a breather and take it easy on all the name calling from all sides. If like me you disagree with most of Roger's politics then you should refrain from calling anyone "gangsters" or "pig dogs" or "asshole" as that does nothing, but try to reach out to people in the red states and cultural conservatives. I am a Democrat because I see us as being the ONLY option right now to defeat the conservative/moral values movement. But for better or worse, as America is more conservative than liberal, the Left must find the center once more in order to take power away from the Republicans and break this one party monopoly on power. That's it for now: may the debate be more civil and may cooler heads prevail.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 12, 2005 17:23 PM
"If it is true that Asians work so very hard in order to make ends meet, then this proves the INHUMANITY of the system, not its worth!!! It is inhumane to work 7 days a week with two jobs! The fact that the system MAKES people do this if they have any chance of having a livelihood speaks volumes of the FAILURE of the capitalist system to show a human face." Appleman my man! To Graeme and bwong: Did you notice that your buddy realasshole is not condemning R's racism? The latter, you will recall, reemerged here to lend support to the former, who was getting his sorry ass kicked by us. Now he's taking a breather and letting his partner in slavery carry the fight, messing up this forum further. That's how the right operates when it comes to racism. Oh, there may (now) be some tepid criticism of racism in general from asshole; but the fact that he has not yet repudiated the above racist comments as well as their author speaks volumes about his politics. To borrow a phrase from George Wallace, there's not a dime's worth of difference between him and R.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matrix4, Appleman at Jul 12, 2005 15:56 PM
I want to right now condemn the politics of Roger and his right wing populism which I consider to be FALSE populism. Roger is nothing more vicious pro capitalist reactionary who should be treated as such. What also needs to be pointed out about Roger's FALSE comparisons is that the Asians, Cubans and Vietnamese that came here were largely politically opposed to the revolution in their home counties, were reactionaries politically and were businessmen or capitalists pig-dogs themselves. If it is true that Asians work so very hard in order to make ends meet, then this proves the INHUMANITY of the system, not its worth!!! It is inhumane to work 7 days a week with two jobs! The fact that the system MAKES people do this if they have any chance of having a livelihood speaks volumes of the FAILURE of the capitalist system to show a human face. Education is meaningless and possibly even counterproductive if all it is is an indoctrination course in being obedient as well as a good slave to the capitalists and to the market. Real education comes from learning who you are, what your real history is, what your country is really doing in your name and what the capitalist system is truly all about. Graeme and I have had disagreements in the past but here I will back him up completely: The Cuban exiles in America ARE gangsters, as well as dope pushers, cocaine dealers and sleazy businessmen.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 12, 2005 08:18 AM
Roger, That father and grandfather of whom you are so proud- they are pieces of shit too.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 12, 2005 07:53 AM
"God has nothing to do with anything, sorry, I'm not that religious." Prokerkus So you have refuted the Ontological Argument, the Cosmological Argument, and the Argument from Design? You must know more philosophy than Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, and me; otherwise you would not be making such a bold claim, right?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 12, 2005 06:27 AM
The East Indians played a similar role in Africa and the Jews in some Eastern European countries in medeival time. This is the classical strategy of divide and conquer. The majority were deprived of the technical skills and wealth to run the country on their own. The racial minority, while posessed the know how and the wealth, were impotent politically. The apartheid system(with different degrees of formality in different cases)built up enough empathy and mistrust between the minority and the natives that the minority were likely to identify themselves with the colonial rulers.Instead of allying with the majority they would be far more inclined to seek protection against them by appealing to the rulers. The past plays a big role in shaping the present. This is an obvious point which I don't think need elaboration for any thinking person.But your posts typically pretend as if the world starts in a blank slate everyday. (to be continued)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 12, 2005 06:04 AM
The phenomenon is not limited to the Western world; in Malaysia, ethnic Chinese constitute 27% of the population yet control 40-50% of the wealth..." This alone shows the quality of your sources.To attribute Chinese success to the mystical notion of Confusianism shows complete ignorance on Asian history and colonalsim. Chinese were IMPORTED to places like Malaysia and Indonesia by the colonial rulers as managers and technocrats. In Indonesia, where the Chinese are a very wealthy minority, there was an aparthied system under Dutch rule.Interactions between the Chinese and the natives were strictly forbidden. Even Chinese settlers in Indonesia prior to Dutch arrival were classified as "natives" and were treated differently from the new arrivals. The Dutch recruited Chinese from provinces whith different dialects than older Chinese settlements in order to prevent socialization. The Chinese were groomed as technocrates, merchants and professionals, while the natives were cosigned to farming, the menial tasks, the military and the civil services.The two groups had seperate education streams that developed different skills. In a few generations, the Chinese were able to acquire the relevant skills and build their network in lucrative areas like commerce, banking, shipping. Conversely the natives, with neither the skills and the connections, were denied access. You don't need any mysticism to understand the dyanmics. (continued)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 12, 2005 04:39 AM
"If your numbers are true however, I'm sure you can easily recommend some sources to me (I won't hold my breath)." Yes. Look up the UN statistics circa 1959. (Yes, the UN was very different back then, no time to get into it now) "The only book I could find with that title seemed to be some kind of introductory high school book about the country" It's called "Real Life in Castro's Cuba" (Forgot the "Real" part but then again, it proves I'm not using a search engine) It was my son's required book in his "History of Cuba" course at the University of North Carolina; a 400 level course. Besides, even if it was a high school-level book I'm just referring it for the statistics, nothing more. " (after all you said the US was one of the first countries to get rid of slavery, not the 2nd last)." Wrong yet again. I had said the WEST was one of the first to abolish slavery, not the US in particular. By the way, I did not limit my analysis to only the Western Hemisphere so that makes your comment invalid on 2 fronts. My point in saying that was that although slavery was of history's worst crimes, it had been accepted and its use was widespread in most of the world. The West did not start it but it was one of the first to end it and spread liberal ideals all over the world. This does not excuse slavery but the Left shouldn't make it seem that only the West is at faulkt when nearly the entire world was involved with slavery to some degree as well.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 12, 2005 02:33 AM
The Left's Double Standards of Racism: Grame just called ALL Cuban Americans "gangsters" yet that elicits no response from anyone here. No cries of racism, no condemnation, nothing. Why not? Because he is "one of our guys?" Your ideological ally? But I guess people here will continue to ignore it because he's "one of us" Hmmm...I wonder what else the Left will choose to ignore because the person committing the acts is "one of us", let's open a history book and find out. Now it's perfectly OK for Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson to make slurs against Jews, it's fine for Al Sharpton to be a rabid anti-semite and it's no problem that Grame calls Cuban Americans "gangsters." As long as you say "the right things",it really doesn't matter how bigoted you are. If you a minority with a history of discrmination and become ecnomically successful you become a target for the Far Left. Cubans, Jews, successful Blacks like Condoleeza Rice and Bill Cosby, among others have all received thier share of racist attacks because they are breaking out of this cycle of blaming the "system" for your problems. They are examples of what can be done in a capitalist society; successful minorities going out there and making things happen for themselves. That can't be tolerated for it proves that there must be other reasons than just "the system" as to why some minorities are unable to find the success that others have.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 12, 2005 02:05 AM
From wikipedia.com: "Taking into account that some minority groups are able to become even more successful than the majority racial group, even with historical racial discrimination, some sociologists believe supposed institutional racism is not the root cause of socioeconomic disparity between racial groups." "As of 1997, half of Asian Americans aged 25 to 29 held bachelor's or higher degrees, as compared to 29% of Caucasians, 14% of African Americans, and 11% of Hispanics" "According to the United States 2000 Census, the median household income of Asian Americans is USD $55,521, higher than the majority Caucasian population, Blacks, or Hispanics" "The phenomenon is not limited to the Western world; in Malaysia, ethnic Chinese constitute 27% of the population yet control 40-50% of the wealth." "Cultural factors are thought to be part of the reason why Asian-Americans are successful in the United States. East Asian societies themselves, in general, will often place enormous resources and emphasis on education. For example, the Chinese culture places great value on work ethic and the pursuit of knowledge. This cultural value is associated with Confucianism. In traditional Chinese social stratification, scholars were ranked at the top — well above businessmen and landowners. This Confucianistic view of knowledge is evident in the modern lifestyle of many Asian American families, where parents will push their children to study very hard and achieve high marks."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 12, 2005 01:39 AM
"Immigrants are SELECTED for their wealth, skills and education before they are allowed into the country" OK and I assume that other immigrants receive the same selection process as Asians do. Yet Asian Americans still maintain a great deal more education, and higher incomes than Hispanics, RECENT African immigrants, etc. "Moreover, the impression of "successful" Asians fail to take into account many Asian immigrants who are slaving away in many sweatshops and brothels in the U.S." No it doesn't; there are exceptions to everything of course. But that doesn't take anything away from the stunning success of Asians in America and their ability to reach to the very top of the chain in this country despite a long history of discrimination. Why do 2nd and 3rd generation Asian Americans have made such strides over African Americans, Hispanics, and even whites that have lived in this country for far longer? "Many refugees such as the Vietnamese boat people were well educated professionals in their home country" Every Vietnamese immigrant I know was dirt poor when they came here. I'd like to see some statistics to back this up (I will be presenting my own shortly)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 11, 2005 22:19 PM
This debate has similarities to the Hitchens Chomsky debate about 9-11. http://www.zmag.org/chomskyhitchens.htm Roger's comments here suggest that he suffers from typical American-style (Limbaugh, Hannity etc) latent racism. Latent in that the advocator is naively unaware of the inherent racism of the ideals he advocates. Chomsky: “That Hitchens cannot mean what he writes is clear.... He must be unaware that he is expressing such racist contempt for African victims of a terrorist crime, and cannot intend what his words imply.” I think in the spirit of giving Roger the benefit of the doubt we should regard his arguments here as Chomsky did with Hitchens. Let's assume that he is not overtly racist, but simply mislead as millions of other Americans are. I also hope that this is the reason for his defending economic feudalism (and by extension unavoidable poverty). When someone makes us aware that we have been unconsciously behaving in a racist manner we can view it as a positive thing: a raising of awareness that addresses aspects of ourselves that can be improved. Or we can get angry at the messenger and view it as a negative thing: a personal insult. Roger, look at it as constructive criticism. I suggest you take an objective, critical review the ideals you have been promoting here. BTW, you still have not responded to the debunking of your El Salvador “facts” even though you say you did.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 11, 2005 21:32 PM
Roger the Coward, Your upper middle class lifestyle ain't worth shit; in fact, it's evil, as it comes at the expense of others. You lie as well: of course you think lazy blacks should imitate hardworking Asian immigrants, otherwise you would not have cited this racist myth in the first place. Your so called education (and that of your hardworking heroes) doesn't amount to anything either; all it's produced is smugness, money grubbing, and conformity- in a word, philistinism. Oh, Roger and his forefathers, such virtuous people, let us sing their praises in loud voices. (You can almost hear the Star Spangled Banner playing in the background.) You are a fucking joke. And talk about running from a debate- where's your rebuttal of my argument against Capitalism or requisite definition of 'responsibility'? I don't need to engage you on the topics you mention- though I surely could- as bwong and Graeme have already kicked your ass there. I got news for you boy: I have standing amongst scholars, something you will never attain. I'll give you a 100 dollars if you can explicate any of my publications, which are available at my website, http://home.twmi.rr.com/robertallen. Notice, too, how I'm unafraid to identify myself. I wouldn't visit a right wing website, as I can't stomach your kind. But, if I did, I guarantee you, I would not post under a pseudonym, the way you do here, you gutless wonder.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 11, 2005 20:29 PM
"anyone who works as much as the people asshole R cites in his racist diatribe is sick, not to be imitated." I never said they should be imitated; I only showed examples of people with extremely disadvantageous situations being able to lead a very nice life and provide for their children to go to college so THEY DON"'T HAVE to work that hard. You cannot compare the disadvantages of an Asian immigrant not knowing the langauge, speaking with a heavy accent, being forced to work right away as they must provide for their family and coming from a completely different culture with African Americans who were born and raised here, speak English fluently and are vastly more familiar with its culture. The fact that you cannot answer why it is that Asian Americans have a much higher degree of education and income than African Americans speaks of your own ignorance. "Now I don't believe their claims for a minute," Get out of the welfare crowd and start talking to real people. I meet people who work 6-7 days a week all the time. My grandfather for one, now myself and my parents are all college-graduates and solidly in the upper middle class. Robert, you can't kick the intellectual shit out of anyone if you tried. You are not even attempting to debate me on El Salvador or Cuba or pretty much anything else for that matter; most likely because you know nothing about it.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 11, 2005 18:04 PM
I stand by my statement that anyone who works as much as the people asshole R cites in his racist diatribe is sick, not to be imitated. Now I don't believe their claims for a minute, but let's suppose they are true. They would show nothing except that some people willingly accept the lot of a slave. The rational thing to do here IS to rebel against the system, what asshole dismisses as whining and irresponsibility- being a good oppressor, what HE demands is compliance! (Notice how he has failed to take up my challenge to define 'responsibility'- he can't philosophize. I'm kicking the intellectual shit out of him, as promised, and he's too ignorant to know it.) By his lights, those who escaped the plantations on the Underground Railroad were simply lazy; if only they had been willing to work harder they would have been promoted to 'house slaves' and had it much easier.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 11, 2005 15:48 PM
By even discussing these matters in racial terms (and haven't we strayed way off topic anyway?) this lowlife punk has revealed his ignorance: THERE ARE NO RACES. Any scientifically literate person knows that the Human Genome Project has conclusively demonstrated this, which is what many biologists had long believed. There are no genetic markers for race, as there are for, say, gender. It is, thus, an empty concept, a human construct inapplicable to reality. Biologists now eschew it in their theorizing, unlike the uneducated asshole with whom we are now dealing.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 11, 2005 11:56 AM
"Yes, "Asian culture" is why Laos, Cambodia, Mongolia, Burma and North Korea are so wealthy and well-educated." Most of the countries you have on that list are very repressive (North Korea, Burma, Cambodia, Laos) and severely limit the opportunities for its citizens. I have been told on more than 1 occasion by Asian Americans that one of the reasons they work so hard here is because of the great opportunities that exist and the access to higher education which can be extremely elusive if not impossible in their home countries. "If "Asian culture" values education so much how come 80% of Chinese were illiterate before the communist revolution?" Read what I said above about repressive states and the lack of opportunity in many countries. Besides, are you seriously denying that education is not an extremely important goal for most Asian-American families? "Unlike black Africans who were bought over here in chains.." But I'm not comparing Asian-Americans with black slaves; I am comparing Asians Am's with African Americans circa 2005. 150 years after slavery and nearly 50 years after the Civil Rights Act. "This myth of "model minority" I don't know who you're quoting because I've never used the term. I'm under no illusion that any minority is a model one; I only point out that Asian-Americans have a much higher degree of education and income and I'd like to know why.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 11, 2005 11:23 AM
"I was quoting (or paraphrasing if you will) an Asian friend of mine. It is very dishonest of you to quote them as if I had said it." Then your Asian friend is as ignorant as you are and perhaps just as racist. I am not surprised the least because I am Chinese and I have encountered and debated many Chinese Canadians who are equally smug.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 11, 2005 11:02 AM
I should add that the Vietnamese boat people were prescreened in various refugee camps in Asia before they were resettled in Western countries. So again this is not a random sample and it proves nothing about the alleged superiority of Asian culture. Also, if "culture" and work ethics were determining factors why are there so many poor people in many Asian countries? If "Asian culture" values education so much how come 80% of Chinese were illiterate before the communist revolution? This myth of "model minority" is completely racist trash talk which serves to legitimize the ongoing oppression against those who "can't make it". It is a relic of colonalism which constructs a racist hierachy of non white racial groups according to the services they provide for the masters. So "Asians" do technical work while blacks specialize in "sports" and entertainment , etc, like Roger says.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 11, 2005 10:51 AM
"Does Cosby think Vietnamese immigrants can never become doctors because "they don't speak English" Vietnamese immigrants who have troubling speaking English have trouble because it is not their natural language. Cosby's (valid) point is that for so many US Blacks speaking in "street language" IS their natural way of communicating. And it's not a "young vs old" issue; Cosby also said that he heard the same if not worse but the kids mother and father. "American talk radio is an infamous extreme right wasteland of jingoistic xenophobia, racism and all around empty-headedness" Which is heard by tens of millions of people each and every day. I bet that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly in 1 day get more listeners than the entire Pacifica network does in a month. "And you wonder why your arguments aren't taken seriously by the left" Oh yea, I care very deeply: Republican President, Republican Senate, Republican House, Republican Supreme Court..whew! I'm shaking in my boots! So I'm not taken "seriously" in a die-hard far left website huh? Go figure. I have been a loyal and active member of my local Republican Party for years. I volunteered my time to work for Senator Jesse Helms, one of the great senators of our time. By the way, try going to a hardcore right wing website, say of Oliver North or Rush Limbaugh and see how "seriously" you are taken over there. (You'll last 2 minutes) Tell me how it goes.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 11, 2005 10:32 AM
"Data" are worthless without a proper context. It is ridculous to compare Asian immigrants with black Americans (or the Fisrt Nations) Immigrants are SELECTED for their wealth, skills and education before they are allowed into the country. Unlike black Africans who were bought over here in chains and were bought and sold like livestocks, immigrants come to the U.S BY CHOICE with their cultures and dignity remain more or less intact. Many comunities, say the Chinese, have extensive supporting network. Many refugees such as the Vietnamese boat people were well educated professionals in their home country(often only those with money were able to bribe officials and pay the smugglers to get out) Moreover, the impression of "successful" Asians fail to take into account many Asian immigrants who are slaving away in many sweatshops and brothels in the U.S. P.S Normally I prefer civil discourse, but Roger's defense of black slavery is so repungant that unfortunately only a Robert Allen style "reponse" is appropiate. One loses one's humanity even by attempting a "rational" debate.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 11, 2005 10:27 AM
And speaking of racism: "Ask any former gangster who was kicked out of the country by a new regime that wouldn't let them oppress their own people for fun and profit anymore?" Calling Cuban Americans "gangsters"? That's by far the most racist comment I've seen on znet. Naturally, it elicits no response from the Left. Are you aware of the Mariel boatlift and the subsequent Cuban emigrants who are progressively becoming more and more black, mixed and poor? "Gee, I wonder what they'd say? I know, why don't you go to Cuba itself and ask the people there? I did. That's not exactly the response I got." Hmmm..and living in a totalitarian, repressive dictatorship that holds political prisoners, murders its own people, state-controlled media, etc etc wouldn't have anything to do with that, right Grame? "and the black "leaders" (who are about as "black" as Michael Jackson)" Ah, the skin color game, nice. The Left did this with Colin Powell not so long ago. "They used to have a word for those kind of people: "house slave" (or something worse)." So anyone that speaks out against the prevailing liberal orthodoxy of blame whitey and everyone else for your own problems as Asian, Jewish and other immigrants take your spots at the colleges and universities get called vicious names? Forgot to add Condoleezza Rice. Potentially our next Vice President, would be the first woman and the first Black..and oh yea, she's a Republican.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 11, 2005 09:58 AM
"Ah, now for the racist drivel." I was quoting (or paraphrasing if you will) an Asian friend of mine. It is very dishonest of you to quote them as if I had said it. "But good for them, if you aren't lying (which I think you are). They probably weren't hated and oppressed as much as blacks.." What am I lying about? That Asian-Americans have higher degrees of education and income? Nope, that's not a lie. That many Asian immigrants have negative attitudes of Black people? That's completely accurate. Go to the average Asian immigrant and ask them how they feel about a Black man marrying his daughter. Let me know how it goes. I have enough experience with Asian immigrants of many different nationalities to have a pretty good idea. I do accept that Blacks have had historical disadvantages that Asians didn't have; (And let's not forget that Asians have also been discriminated against as well) but also remember that Blacks have MANY advantages over Asian immigrants: they know the language, don't speak with a heavy accent, and are vastly more familiar with its culture. Opposing these kneejerk reactions to blaming the system, capitalism, the "man" and everything else in the world instead taking personal responsibility and questioning why some ethnicities do vastly better than others is not "racist drivel" and is a completely valid question.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 11, 2005 09:19 AM
"you are probably incorrect about [pre revolutionary Cuba's] education and literacy rates" "Probably?" Why don't you know? Aren't you familar with the situation in Cuba before the revolution? How can you possibly be able to judge anything if you have no clue? How can you say what Castro's achievements are if you do not know what kind of country he inherited? I understand that the fact that Cuba in the 50s was already one of the leaders in literacy and education does not bode well for leftist propaganda about the regime (and is obviously rarely discussed), but you should should still be aware of it. There's a book called "Life in Castro's Cuba" which contains such statistics if you need someplace to look them up. "I mean no disrespect to all people who self-identify as "right wing," but my God, this guy Roger makes you all look like ignorant.." Yea, real ignorant, talking in depth about presidents of El Salvador and statistics from pre-revolutionary Cuba, I'm sure everyone knows about that... "and the fact that the US was actually the last country in the Western hemisphere..to abondon slavery" Wrong again. Brazil abolished slavery in 1888, becoming the last country to do so in the Western Hemisphere.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 11, 2005 08:51 AM
"And let's see scientific studies supporting your claim" Yea, right, I'll just put that alongside of all the other scientific studies that have been posted on this board... Honestly Robert, I could put up a million studies, it wouldn't change your mind one bit; you are a far left ideologue and you are extremely stubborn in your beliefs. I have many sources to back up my claim but I gather it will fall on deaf ears. Grame: "Yes, by insisting on their full and immediate withdrawal" OK and when you get back down to the real world let me know. The troops are not coming home anytime soon. Faced with that reality, again, it is important to support the troops no matter where you stand on the war. "El Salvador, both in 1980 (when you could really see what "a totalitarian one party state that murders its own people" looks like)" That's just an outright lie. El Sal. was not a one party state in the 80s and power was transferred on 3 different occasions. President Borja of the ARENA party lost to Duarte of the PDC in 84. In 89, Duarte handed over power to Christiani of the ARENA party. 3 elections, 3 different Presidents of 2 different parties in less than 10 years. Cuba: 1 Dictator, 1 Party, 0 elections in 50 years. Now if Robert Allen had any integrity left he would call Grame on this outright lie.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 11, 2005 08:17 AM
Rallybird: If I curse like a 12-year old do I get your poster of the month award too? Robert: "..and anyone who does is a workaholic." Oooh! Workaholic! That's a bad word to Lefties right? (Worse than even patriotic I'm sure)Coming to a country of opportunity and working your butt off, coming from nothing and then becoming a home owner, that nasty old Vietnamese immigrant! He should have gotten welfare, stayed in his 1 bedroom apartment and complained about the "system" and the "man" keeping him down all day! Yea that's it! Read Chomsky and go see a Michael Moore movie! Vote Democrat all the way! Fortunately Robert, some people choose to WORK, and yes work hard, to make things happen for themselves and their families. You (and Grame and the rest) can toss all the cusses and "racist" nonsense you want but until someone answers why Asian immigrants, who come from a completely foriegn culture, not knowing the langauge AND must deal with speaking with a heavy accent once they do learn it, have a higher degree of education and income than other groups that have been in this country for generations, have always known the language and are vastly more familiar with its culture.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 11, 2005 06:15 AM
Graeme wrote: "...but even the fact that they seem so hopeful about 'accidental' mass death occurring anyway is enough to make theirs one ideology that I could never get behind, sorrry." This doesn't refute the likelihood of any of the problems I presented as potentially occurring (and not as an "accident" but as a direct result of techno-industrial civilization running amuck). No one wants to be "behind" that, but that's different than recognizing the potential and growing problem that we face with technology that is out of control (pandora' box). I'm glad we could agree on bio-tech, now can we agree that nuclear technology is to risky to contiunue experimenting with? BTW, sorry about my poor use of the idiom... straw dogs, straw men, castles in the air and such, dog-gone-it!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 11, 2005 00:58 AM
Thank you, rally.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 11, 2005 00:14 AM
Robert wins my "Favorite Poster of the Month" award. Congratulations!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 10, 2005 22:42 PM
"How can it be that so many black people are still so poor?? I came to this country with nothing! Didn't even know the language! And now, 20 years later, I own a home, 3 cars and sending 2 kids to college at the same time! This person worked 2 jobs, 7 days a week, but they made it!" They made shit; you racist bastard. Nobody should have to work that much in the first place to make it; and anyone who does is a workaholic. (And let's see scientific studies supporting this claim. You have nothing here but anecdotal evidence, made up of exaggerations to boot, just the sort of thing I would expect from a shameless liar like you.) But you want to defend a system that requires as much by blaming its victims. What of all the working poor who do work almost constantly and barely make ends meet- in this ROTTEN country and elsewhere? It's nothing but a racist myth that African-Americans are lazy and do not value education, a myth perpetrated to excuse heartless scumbags like you (and I don't care if it is Bill Cosby saying it) and the system you defend. Unwittingly, though, you have buttressed my point: workers under Capitalism are slaves. You have not even met this argument. And now you want to talk about "responsibility," another philosophical term you can't even define. You have a lot more nerve than intelliegence or humility.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 10, 2005 18:24 PM
Which is why of course, President Bush doubled his total of African Americans and increased his vote among all minority groups. And allow me to launch a pre-emptive strike on the whole "racism" onslaught that I'm sure will follow as there is no way to attack my arguments about the Black community otherwise. There was a movie that came out last year called "White Chicks" where 2 Black "comedians" the Wayans brothers, dressed up as two white girls and "acted" white throughout the movie. The Left did not have one word to say about that. No Tim Wise denunciation, no Amy Goodman special, no Howard Zinn crocodile tears. NOW, how about if two Southern whites decided to make a movie called "Black Hoes" where they imitated a 300 lb. Black mom with 9 kids who didn't know who the father was of any of them going around saying "Who be my baby daddy?" What do you think the reaction would be? 'RACISM!' 'WE LIVE IN A RACIST COUNTRY!' 'THE SKY IS FALLING!' 'PROTEST! Tim Wise would go on tour, Amy Goodman would feature it, Howard Zinn would include it in his "A Commie's History of America", Michael Moore would make a movie about it. But when it happens to whites, the Left couldn't care less. And they still wonder why white men are voting Republican in ever greater numbers?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 10, 2005 18:00 PM
They are better off than many people are who have spent generations in this country and have always known the idiom. So what is the reason you ask? I think we have to look at the culture. It's not that anyone is "superior" to anyone, it's the cultural traits that are put in high regard. For example, Asian culture generally upholds education as being extremely important; thus you see a high number of doctors are Asian. Black culture is more geared towards excelling in sports, being physically strong and being "tough." Black "leaders" are also at fault as well. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have promoted this culture of "blame everyone else" for your problems. Blame Whitey! Blame the system! But never look at yourself. Fortunately however, this is starting to change. Jesse Jack(ass) is losing clout and new leaders are starting to emerge: Jesse Lee Peterson, Clarence Thomas, and Bill Cosby are beginning to talk about personal responsibility. In the words of Cosby: "They can't speak English! I can't even talk the way these people talk: 'Why you ain't,' 'Where you is'. And I blamed the kid until I heard the mother talk...then I heard the father talk. You can't be a doctor with that kind of crap coming out of your mouth!" Jesse Lee Peterson went on to add: "Bill Cosby is right! It's about time blacks spoke the truth about problems in the black community!" If a white person had said any of this, the Left would call it racism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 10, 2005 17:29 PM
I think it's time to bring up two words which has been anathema to the Left lately: Personal Responsibility. It seems that all the Left wants to do is blame, blame, blame. 3rd world countries never do anything are their own; it's always the West's fault! The Devil made them do it! People aren't poor because of their own actions in life, it's the system's fault! How can people (or poor countries) ever get out of their condition if all they are given is advice on who to blame for their own mistakes? That's never going to work. In America, if you are poor it is pretty much (barring some extreme example) your own fault. There have been so many examples of people that have come from NOTHING to become filthy rich. And what about Jewish and Asian immigrants - people that came to this country with nothing and have a long history of discrimination against them, now generally enjoy a great deal more prosperity than other groups, who have been here longer do. Why so? Because Asians and Jews focus so much on EDUCATION, they are extremely hard working as well, doing whatever they have to do so that their children go to college. In fact, I know many Asian parents who come up to me and ask, "How can it be that so many black people are still so poor?? I came to this country with nothing! Didn't even know the language! And now, 20 years later, I own a home, 3 cars and sending 2 kids to college at the same time!" This person worked 2 jobs, 7 days a week, but they made it!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 10, 2005 01:41 AM
"Grame - I'm glad you mentioned "slavery" in your response to the influence of Western civilization. I wrote a few things on it but had to cut it out as I ran out of space. Even if you take the West's worst crimes, such as slavery, you will find that not only did slaves live better than they do in most other places (incl. Africa) but were freed quicker than almost anywhere else as well. Indeed, to this day slavery STILL exists in some parts of the world." You rotten motherfucker, slavery still exists in the US. You have not refuted the argument against Capitalism based on this fact. And the US has no business in Iraq, just as it should not have interfered anywhere in Latin America.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 09, 2005 22:33 PM
bwong wrote: "Your bicycle has a steel frame, no? What are the tires and the tubes made of? Do you know the level of technology required and the amount of energy it takes to create your bike?" Again, your creating a straw dog to attack in the ad hominem manner. I was saying that I ride my bike to demonstrate that I wasn't THAT lazy _AND_ was saying that I live moments without technology. I hate having to keep making this point, but the fact that I use technology doesn't really diminish my argument and indeed may strengthen it. I won't restate how AGAIN, just to keep the discussion moving forward, but please... stop creating straw dogs out of thin air or by attributing the statements of someone else to me. In fact, I probably ought to stop responding to your inane and convoluted remarks altogether because, while I accept that there may be some holes in my positions, you my waste time by imagining holes instead of dealing with the reality of any flaws. You can respond that you "do so" but I can't care. Perhaps you could do us both a favor. BTW, I am not a "die-hard luddite". But, if I was a die-hard NEO-luddite, then you may not be able to even hear the finer aspects of the position which, I'm sure, would be just fine with you -- since you ignore the actual substance of my arguments anyway. I have good zinging comeback for you... "There is no substance to your arguments!" That would be a statement, like your others, which would TOTALLY put me in my place.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 09, 2005 21:52 PM
Grame wrote: "...in order for it even to become possible, would likely result in 4 or 5 billion deaths, like bwong says. It would take a lot to be worse than capitalism, communism and all other systems ever employed combined, but that would do it." Primitivists don't need to promote a population crash since the techno-industrial system will likely cause it to happen. Even if you don't buy the Olduvai Gorge (peak oil) likelihood (http://www.hubbertpeak.com/duncan/olduvai2000.htm) there is still the possibility of global thermal nuclear war. Or, maybe, due to the population density, a flu pandemic will occur. Or maybe, due to environmental collapse (caused undeniably by the technological system) the plankton will die, or maybe a genetically engineered crop will cross-pollinate with worse results than were even discovered in the lab (but not made public)-- http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/uproar052705.cfm http://www.navdanya.org/articles/terminator_tech.htm Or, maybe some combination of the above wil occur. In any case... maybe we can agree that bio-technology ought to be seriously restricted due to it's inherent dangers.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 09, 2005 20:30 PM
"Nobody is "exalting" the achievements of Cuba" That's just a lie. The Left always talk about the (might I add, PHONY) achievements of Cuba. Castro plays with the statistics because he knows how he and the Left have used them to defend his illegitimate regime and his violent, heinous repression. Where do you think the UN gets those statistics from anyway? From government sources. The UN is obviously an ultra-corrupt anti-American organization that should not be taken seriously. (Heard of the Oil for Food scandal?) This is well known in the US. Just turn on the radio. They put Libya and Cuba on its "Human Rights" Panel. Need I say more? Also it must be understood what Cuba was like BEFORE the revolution. And please, don't take my word for it: go to Miami and ask any Cuban American, they'll tell you. Cuba was a prosperous country with one of the highest education and literacy rates in Latin America. Furthermore, Patriotic Cubans hated the Batista regime yes, and the US only nominally supported him (and STOPPED supporting him, but alas, it was too late) but never wanted a complete overhaul of the economic system. We lost Cuba and for that I an eternally sorry. However, here is the most telling statistic: Pre-revolutionary Cuba was a place Western European IMMIGRATED TO! In fact, many even had to be turned down! That's 1950s Cuba: a place which had to turn down wealthy, white Europeans because there were so many. Now, you can't even get a Haitian to go there.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 09, 2005 20:00 PM
"Since 1982, there have been 9 free and fair democratic elections in El Salvador" "The government (of El Sal.) generally respects human rights" - US State Department 2005 Report on El Salvador Bwong - You accuse me of supporting the Contras. I challenge you to find me even MENTION the word "Contra" in any post I made on Znet. Grame - I'm glad you mentioned "slavery" in your response to the influence of Western civilization. I wrote a few things on it but had to cut it out as I ran out of space. Even if you take the West's worst crimes, such as slavery, you will find that not only did slaves live better than they do in most other places (incl. Africa) but were freed quicker than almost anywhere else as well. Indeed, to this day slavery STILL exists in some parts of the world. Colonialism had its negatives and positives. It brought education to the people, liberal beliefs, Western ideals such as democracy, liberty and so on. With regards to Germany post-WWII I was referring to the fact that the Western Allies let Germany rule itself after it was ready as opposed to occupying it indefinitely (as the USSR did) I believe a similar model should be followed in Iraq; gradually letting the people rule themselves as we support its growth and education in a liberal democracy.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 09, 2005 17:47 PM
Grame: Read up on the Kissinger Commission. It was created by a group of once again, Democrats AND Republicans. It looked at the situation of El Salvador in the 1982 and 1984 elections and confirmed their fairness. They supported Reagan's anti-Communist, pro-democratic program. To quote a very liberal media anchor, Dan Rather (Commenting on the 1982 election in El Sal) "Hurrah! A million people to the polls! Victory for democracy!" Even the New York Times confessed to the accuracy and fairness of the results. IMO, when you are running to the Left of Dan Rather and the New York Times, you are not in the mainstream. You know, I'm really glad we're discussing this because there are so many paralells between El Salvador in the 80s with Iraq today. I suppose the media has been ignoring this because they do not want to talk about what was a clear victory for Ronald Reagan. In fact, Bush administration officials are now openly speaking of the "Salvadoran Model" when it comes to Iraq. In both Iraq and El Sal. you have had elections, a fledging democracy, a brave people risking death in order to participate in democracy, and a group of violent terrorists in the countryside, supported by outside forces, using barbaric tactics in order to terrorize innocent people. No matter what you think of the war in Iraq, all civilized persons must join together in supporting the troops and standing united against the terrorists.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 09, 2005 05:31 AM
"I ride past the library on my bicycle every day and live quite a few minutes without technology. SO... stop with the ad hominem attacks." Your bicycle has a steel frame, no? What are the tires and the tubes made of? Do you know the level of technology required and the amount of energy it takes to create your bike? Your posts have repeatedly show that you have very little understanding of what you're ranting about and take an aweful lot of technology for granted. This is not an ad hom attack, it just demonstrate how utterly unrealistic your idea is. Talk is cheap. If even a die hard Luddit like yourself cannot walk the walk. How can you expect anyone to take you seriously.BTW, I am afraid I insulted the Luddites unfairly, as they were not against technology in the way that nuts like Zerzan do, but rather,they were against the way technology was deployed to marginalize them economically.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 09, 2005 05:10 AM
"What did that first quote about technology have to do with your response about Chomsky's linguistic theories?" I should have quoted from your first rather than the second paragraph.But since you quote the two together I suppose they are somehow related. "The fact that Chomsky's linguistic theories are relatively undisputed doesn't mean much.. the experts used to agree the world is flat." There are legitimate critique based on scientific evidence and nonsensical criticism based on religious/ political dogmas. Since you apparantly cannot distingush them I rest my case. Graeme, Nice rebuttal to Roger. I admire you for your patience. His posts are so full of nonsense that I don't even know how to refute them without having to write a long essay. He said the Afghanis are better of under the U.S "liberators" than the Mullahs while conveniently forgetting the U.S has created the "Islamofascists" for their cold war tit for tat against the U.S.S.R in the first place. The U.S then supported the Islamic fundamentalists in Afghan also inthe name of "spreading democracy". These guys have neither a senese of irony nor shame. Roger complained the Sadinista were not truly "democratic", yet had no problem with Reagan backing the Contras. They are terrorists by ANY definition.Presumably cutting out the tongues of captured civilians, among other well documented atrocities of the contras, was just a way to "spread democracy" in Roger's universe.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 09, 2005 04:40 AM
Graeme attributed Zerzan's writing to me and wrote: "This from a guy who just typed this on a computer and demanded links because he is too lazy to walk down to the local library!" I guess I could not put forword the ideas of others for discussion, but, in any case it IS an ad hominem attack because, just because I recognize something is wrong and still do it doesn't make it right. And again... I am using technolgy primarily to question tehnology and so maybe my "sin" is somewhat hedged, don't you think? I don't care... I used to use the public library computers until the patriot act and you don't know how lazy I am. I ride past the library on my bicycle every day and live quite a few minutes without technology. SO... stop with the ad hominem attacks. Finally I will say that the current population as it is constituted may be unsustainable and the human species may very well be devolving -- becoming acclimated and dependant upon the techno-world while losing a connection with nature. Later... I'm going outside to ride my bicycle. I'll respond to Graeme when I get back.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 09, 2005 04:17 AM
What did that first quote about technology have to do with your response about Chomsky's linguistic theories? Graeme then wrote: "Based on the quote Zerzan's objection has the same scientific merits as the Church's condemnation of Galileo..." Isn't the exact oppososite true? How dare anyone question the infallible technology which will bring us into the promise land? The fact that Chomsky's linguistic theories are relatively undisputed doesn't mean much since, after all, the experts used to agree the world is flat.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 09, 2005 04:14 AM
"Yes: more of the soul-destroying, eco-destroying malignancy that has created the current nightmare!" This from a guy who just typed this on a computer and demanded links because he is too lazy to walk down to the local library! This is not ad hom attack.If you cannot live a minute without the convenience of that "soul destroying" technology you shouldn't expect anyone to take your suggestion of mass returning to the stone age seriously. If we were to live in complete "harmony" with nature we would have to allow nature to operate as it does with other species. The disabled, the sick should be left to die as this is the way nature takes care of the sick and the disabled in animal species. Instead to expecting to be cured by medicine(which is a technology), when you're sick you should just lie around and let the disease takes its course. We cannot have argriculture, which is the basis of all civilizations. Instead we should become hunters and gatheres. How does primitive hunting and gathering support the current population? No problem, the superfulous(maybe 80% of world's population) will strave to death, maintaining nature's equilibrium. What a romantic, soul enriching world that would be. Nature is blood soaked in tooth and claw. Its oppressions can be worse than any human institution if given free reign. Some so called "anarchists" demand freedom from all human oppressions, yet think we should submit to the most ruthless tyrant of all,--mother nature.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 09, 2005 03:37 AM
"His responses repeated all the discredited, unexamined pro-tech cliches, now less and less credible among anarchists: technology is a mere tool, a 'quite neutral' phenomenon to be seen only in terms of specific, similarly unexamined uses." I have to laugh at such "criticism" directed at Chomsky. In essence Zerzan objects not because he has any evidence that Chomsky is wrong about language or that he has a better, alternative model in understanding language.He objects because Chomsky's theory can be intepreted in a way which some anarchists deem politically incorrect. Based on the quote Zerzan's objection has the same scientific merits as the Church's condemnation of Galileo or some Marxists' attack on Mendelian genetics in Stalin's era (Remeber Lysinko(sp?)) The basic points of Chomsky's theory are pretty much undisputed among workers in lingusitic and related displines, not withstanding the uninformed rants of some political hacks. While generally consider myself a leftist, I have serious problem with some segments of the "left"(Pomo comes to mind) who seem to be incapable of rational thinking and carrying out rational discourse.They are downright hostile to rationality and are damn proud of it. It is not a right wing conspiracy that such people are not taken seriously in the "main stream" or anywhere. They deserve to be marginalized.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 09, 2005 01:40 AM
Zerzan's critique of Chomsky deserves a little more attention... "Language develops along an intrinsically determined path, very much like a physical organ. In this sense, Chomsky says language 'simply arose' (1988) and that we should study it as 'we study any problem in biology' (1978). In other words, language, that most fundamental part of culture, has no real relationship with culture and is a matter of instinct-driven formation through biological specialization. ... "His responses repeated all the discredited, unexamined pro-tech cliches, now less and less credible among anarchists: technology is a mere tool, a 'quite neutral' phenomenon to be seen only in terms of specific, similarly unexamined uses. Chomsky actually declares that cars are fine; it's only corporate executives that are the problem. Likewise with robotics, as if that drops from heaven and has no grounding in domination of nature, division of labor, etc. In closing, he proclaimed that 'the only thing that can possibly resolve environmental problems is advanced technology.' Yes: more of the soul-destroying, eco-destroying malignancy that has created the current nightmare!" More Zerzan is definitely in order... http://www.spunk.org/library/writers/zerzan/sp001184.txt

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 09, 2005 01:11 AM
"Always remember when reading Chomsky that he has an anti-American agenda. He was once quoted on record as saying: "If every American President would be held up to the standards of the Nuremberg Trials, they would be hanged!" He is not balanced and does not even attempt to be objective. Take him with a grain of salt." You piece of shit- you cannot refute what the good Prof. says; he would kick your ass in an argument- just humiliate you- like Graeme is doing.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 08, 2005 21:10 PM
To Prokerkus and Appleman: 1. Noam Chomsky is not an anarchist. In fact, he is often condemned by real anarchists such as John Zerzan. Chomsky advocates INCREASING the power of the federal gov., hardly an anarchist point of view. Here are some excerpts of that critique: "His (Chomsky's) goal is for "a significant degree of democratization," not the replacement of political rule by a condition of no rule called anarchy. Hardly surprising, then, that his personal practice consists of reformist, issues-oriented efforts like symbolic tax resistance and ACLU membership." http://www.primitivism.com/chomsky.htm 2. Yes Grame thinks Kerry is a "genocidal war crinimal" but remember this is the guy who called the Democratic Party, the party of Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton and Michael Moore, a "far right Party." 3. Always remember when reading Chomsky that he has an anti-American agenda. He was once quoted on record as saying: "If every American President would be held up to the standards of the Nuremberg Trials, they would be hanged!" He is not balanced and does not even attempt to be objective. Take him with a grain of salt.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 08, 2005 20:13 PM
For that matter, almost every American wants this to happen. Except the Far Left. As President Bush said: "There is a mainstream in American politics and my opponent sits on the Far Left bank" America and the West have brought so much freedom and prosperity its hard to believe that there would be some that would oppose it so greatly. Overwhelmingly, their contributions merit praise: Great Britian spread democracy all over the world. As did America. It is no coincidence that if you look at the world today and examined the [non-Communist] countries in which the West has the most influence in, almost all of them today emjoy a liberal democratic gov. Latin America is a great example of this. Fast forward to the present. Iraq and Afghanistan are the new frontiers for the spread of democracy. Already in Iraq it is happening. You can see the democratic process underway by brave Iraqis. Chomsky went on record to state that the US would NOT ALLOW democracy to happen in Iraq. Well, I won't bother refuting him, the results speak for themselves. Iraq and Afghanistan are far better off under the guidance of the West than they would be under their feudal masters. And when the world community decides that they are ready for self-rule, we will let them; just as it happened with Germany after WWII. Yes the West has made mistakes, but to deny their overwhelming positive contributions in the world is to deny history itself.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 08, 2005 19:47 PM
"As if poor, untrained guerrillas with no representation in the US could trick anybody." How much training and education does one need in order to say "Atrocity happened over here and the bad guys, our enemies did it!" The guerillas tried to stir up trouble in the US the same way it happened in Vietnam. They knew that victory militarily was not possible. "..such as Western intervention being a 99% negative thing." This is what I really wanted to get into. You know with the terrorist attacks just the other day, it really reminds you of what's important in this world: Defeating terrorism, catching Bin Laden, securing the Homefront. Someone mentioned the pathetic "G8 thing", the World Community and civilized nations should not be talking about welfare money to anyone when we have these brutal thugs, Islamic Terrorists, threatening innocent people. THAT is what world leaders should be discussing! Western intervention has brought so much good in the world, unquestonably. The fact of the matter is that places like Africa have had a LOWER standard of living SINCE the West left. Now did colonialism have its negatives? Of course. I do not deny this. However, it is also inaccurate to ignore all the positive results of which they are many. As Christopher Hitchens said: "We are going to bomb Afghanistan OUT of the Stone Age." We (the world community) must not lose Iraq or Afghanistan like we lost China or Cuba. No one, Democrat or Republican, wants this to happen.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 08, 2005 19:15 PM
"El Salvador should emulate Cuba immediately, since its people unquestiobaly live far better off than those of virtually any other state in the region" No, Cuba is a totalitarian repressive one party state that murders its own people. Anyone who believes that a country such as this represents "the best possible result" either doesn't know the horrors of life in Cuba or is an ultra left wing supporter of brutal regimes. There are plenty of democratic examples for El Salvador to follow: Costa Rica, Mexico and of course..the US. Places where people are not jailed or killed for speaking against "the leader." "Nicaragua under the Sandinistas was a model of a free and democratic state in Central America" No, Nicaragua was not a democratic state. Its only "election" which it won was boycotted by the major opposition parties "rendering it meaningless" (quoting you about El Sal where the same thing happened) When the Sandinistas actually had an election which the opposition participated, it resulted in defeat, and has resulted in defeat ever since. Just like in El Salvador. But I'm sure they still represent the "overwhelming majority of the people" right Grame? For the truth about the Sandinistas read up on the brutal repression they committed on the defenseless Miskito Indians and their censorship of the media. Remember, this is Grame's model of a "free and democratic state."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 08, 2005 18:53 PM
MCorbin: "You have not responded to challenges..." I spent the last 2 hours responding to his statements. I can't be here all day but if there is a main point I left out it's unknown to me. Grame:"what about all the Haitians and Dominicans that do the same (not to mention Mexicans)? " But no one's running around exalting the achievements of a Mexico or Haiti like the Left does for Cuba. Invalid comparison. "Gee, I don't know, restrictive US law and sanctions against..trade with Cuba? Ever hear of Helms-Burton?" Helms Burton was in the mid-90s, what about all those other years? Besides it's not really enforced anyway. Cuba DOES trade with Europe and Latin America; where you could pretty much get whatever the US has. "[elections in El Sal] with massive intimidation and terror tactics so severe as to render the elections meaningless every time." So says the Far Left. Other sources, including eyewitness reports from BOTH Democrats and Republicans observing elections in El Salvador tell a very different story. "Those are all extremely different cases" My point though wasn't about the cases; it's about the Left's REACTION to those cases, which remain constant. If US intervention had been successful in ANY of those other cases, the Left would be crying foul and talking about how they were on the verge of democracy and freedom; however we now know that's not the case. They were repressive and brutal just like all revolutionary Communist regimes have been.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 08, 2005 15:29 PM
"Hardy har har", laugh all you want Robert but how many people are capable of having the kind of back and forth we've just had on El Salvador and Latin America? Would 1% be a conservative estimate? Even among educated and well-informed people here I doubt very many could. Yes I read David Horowitz from time to time, I also read many other authors as well. (As my yet to be addressed, "reading list" proves) By the way, don't be so quick to laugh at who other people read; know that many American intellectuals would have the same reaction if you told them you read Chomsky. And Grame, how do you know that Chomsky does not come here and read the comments? Just because he doesn't post any replies? And if that is the case, WHY doesn't he come on here to post anything? Isn't that a little arrogant? Many if not most other bloggers do, is Chomsky just too good for us? Now Back to El Salvador: Grame: "Actually he does condemn human rights abuses by Castro's regime," What is the ratio of "condeming" Castro's abuses with praising Cuba's "achievements"? 1 to 100? "And Nicaragua? Guatemala?..." Grame, you had said that in Cuba you don't see the kind of misery you see everywhere else in Latin America period. Not in x number of countries, but Latin America carte blanche. I was merely pointing out this to be incorrect, which it is.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 08, 2005 07:37 AM
I will cede some points to the ad hominem attacks based on the contradictions between the position I'm upholding and my lifestyle, but I've responded to that previously and the fact that I'm somewhat a slave to the machine does not really diminish my argument. I have also used the term "western" (eurocentric) civilization too loosely when I should have been referring to civilization proper (based in the technique of the logos, i.e. technology). Graeme's link is still broken (click it yourself) and the other was quoted and WEAK. While I'll readily admit the research shortcomings of the internet, I don't see why I should take three trips to my pathetic library to request a book, pick it up, and drop it off, when it may be perfectly nonsensical. You can't provide a decent link to back your positions? I'll try to stop with the arrogance of "I am right, no you're wrong" for the sake of civility, but I think I am stating the obvious ;p. I also might set up a usenet group where we might be able to debate/discuss these points more easily. How does one access Graeme's blog? Finally, what was wrong with this link (http://dieoff.org/page224.htm)? I thought it was well written and insightful.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 08, 2005 07:00 AM
Graeme, I think Diamond writes a very insightful, informative and interesting book with a lot of rare cross discipline synthesis.It is very enjoyable to read and I definitely learn a lot about geography and immunology if nothing else. While he avocates a very interesting paradigm which definitely worths exploring, He may be a bit weak in elucidating the roles of culture, social organizations and institutions. In that sense he does lean too much towards enviromental determinism. That may reflect his background as a natural scientist(who may be less sensitive to "intangible" and specific factors such as culture and emphasizes more on "universals" that can be pinned down quantitatively) Diamond argues convincingly that enviromental factors set very sharp constraints on the shape of societies. But I don't think "social" factors are simply passively molded by the enviroment.IMO they are entangled in complicated ways.It seems non enviromental factors become more prominant once civilizations reach a certain critical point. There are also some counter examples to his thesis that more "sophiscated" societies always won in the game of conquest.The Huns and the Mongols came to mind(so much about RB's anti technology rant. The "Barbarians" hardly had any technology comparing to their highly developed victims) I will definitely visit your blog.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 08, 2005 06:38 AM
"It's not that we're intentionally trying to be insensitive, but when liberals talk about 40 million without healthcare, I can't help but think that we need to be spending our resources here at home not saving the world." It is not because of lack of resources that you can't help the needy at home. It is because of the obscene distribution of wealth. The economical pie has become bigger yet those in the bottom(as well as the middle) are getting less, not just in comparative term but in absolute term as well. With 40 million uncovered and many more with inadeque cover yet the American health system is more costly than any country with public health coverage. This alone proves that the problem is not lack of resources. The U.S is not expected to "save" the world. The world would be thankful if the U.S stop screwing it.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 08, 2005 06:15 AM
"I thought the G8 Summit was about how world leaders can give more to Africa to relieve the AIDS epidemic? I also support the whole Live 8 campaign with U2's Bono who I admire very much" The conditions attached to the phony "debt" relief require recipients to continue on the disastrous path of "economical reform" which further cements Africa's economical subordinate role and prevents any real development. The termns forbid recipient countries from diverting resources for the people(governments are required to cut public spendings on health/education, etc) Geldolf and Bono may be well intentioned(I don't want to second guess their motives), perhaps also try to alley their liberal guilt. But they are incredibly naive and ill informed. The first live aid was billed as hunger relief for Africa. I don't know if Geldolf was aware during the whole time when the Etheopians were supposed to be starving there were beautiful resorts in Etheopia where rich tourists can have any delicacy they craved. "Live Aid" is in effect begging for charity while Africans should demand justice. There is also something incredibly ironic and disconcerting to see a bunch of bloated Westerners partying away in the name of helping the starving Africans. Whatever the intention, it's more about concert goers having a good time and feeling good about themselves than actually "helping" Africa.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 08, 2005 05:54 AM
"they complain about US companies going overseas to the third world where they pay their workers very little: Isn't it better to have any job than no job? Isn't it better to make SOME kind of money rather than starve, as so many do as you just pointed out? " You sound as if U.S companies are performing a charity. It is as if they open shops in the third world to "create jobs" for the poor local rather than to maximize profit margin. Taking advantage of desperate people is called "exploitation". By your logic sex tourists should be given medals instead of being put in jail. Afterall, they do "create jobs" for child prostitues, pimps, hotels and resorts employees and the locals would be worse off without their kind patronage. A lot of people are MADE desperate thanks to policies of the Western world to begin with. For example, colonization and subsequent IMF, world bank policies transform Africa's self sustaining economy into an exporter of ccash crops and cheap resources. Its economy becomes subordinate to the needs of the West and is subjected to the unprdictable market force. As a result the Africans lose the infrastructure, capacity and knowledge to develope for themselves and are effectively reduced to beggers.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 08, 2005 04:57 AM
".. I have enough formal debate experience to know when I'd be racking up points. Besides, you ASSUME that I AM a primitivist and not merely making their case." Indeed that was my assumption. In your first or second post here you self righteously accused blog participants of engauging in pointless, academic debates just to prove their superior intelligence/knowledge/debating skill. Now are you saying these are actually YOUR purposes all along? That you are merely "making the case" for something that you yourself don't even really believe in just for debating sake?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 08, 2005 04:34 AM
"Can't you find any decently written web pages to support you revisionist allegations" I have just mentioned two books which you can find in any decent library. Have you become so dependent on computer technology, so comfortable with the convenience of point and click and so adapted to disembodied information in point form catering for short attention span that you can't read a real book with a narrative anymore? Since you think written language is a curse isn't it ridiculously hypocritical for you to demand written sources in tghe same breath? In the oral tradition you don't ask for written sources and references. You believe whatever the elders tell you even if they say the earth is flat. There maybe some sustainable primitive societies, but they have their own challenges and problems.Self styled "exiles" from civilization who rely on web pages for their knowledge often fail to see that through their rosy lenses. With due respect, I wonder how long will you(or I for that matter)last in such societies.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 08, 2005 04:11 AM
"The pre-American natives had tools (NOT technology) to "fight off predators" but they did not recklssly engage in biocide because they did not have the greed/gluttony inherent in western _civilization_ proper." You just contradict yourself right here. If "greed/ gluttony" of "Western Civilization" were the reasons for bloody conquest, reckless destruction of enviroment and biosides then technology is not the culprit. Presmably, less harm would be done with the same level of technology in the hands of more "noble" civilizations. You have a very narrow and ignorant view of "Western Civilization". You sound as if it is self contained and well defined. Fact is, "Westrn Civilization" inherented most important technologies(printing, navigation, gun powder, etc) from non Western sources. Your broadstroke characterization of it as uniquely and "inherenently" greedly and gluttonous is just as appalling as any racist caricature of non white cultures. But by syaing this you implictly admit that the problems stems not from technology per se, but its deployment, which is a "cultural" CHOICE. But if greed and gluttony is "human nature"(cannot be mitigated by culture)hence technology always results in harm NO MATTER who wields it then your "noble" pre American Natives simply couldn't have existed. They were not genetically so different from other "greedy" humans.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 08, 2005 03:54 AM
bwong writes: It appears that your ideal word of primitive innocence (deluded IMO) would come only as a result of say, a nuclear holocaust. My position does, admittedly, merely provide a critical look at the technological system and it's consequences. That said, not all people would have to "regress" (as you so eurocentrically put it) because they still live sustainably in primitive societies -- of course they are still threatened by the encroaching techno-industrial civilization. I'd also suggest something like what is described in this link could happen (http://dieoff.org/page224.htm). BTW -- At least Graeme provided links (as requested), albeit broken and weak links. Can't you find any decently written web pages to support you revisionist allegations? And I don't care if people don't totally accept my arguments because I'm not a populist and I have enough formal debate experience to know when I'd be racking up points. Besides, you ASSUME that I AM a primitivist and not merely making their case. In any case, I don't feel that the arguments I'm putting forward have been adequately refuted. It's nice that people try though.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 08, 2005 03:37 AM
Rallybird, It seems you blame all our problems basically on civilization. I doubt that it is possible or desirable for humans to regress(yes, I use the word regress) back to the primitive point without written language.If civilization is the original sin, I gladly embrace it. It appears that your ideal word of primitive innocence (deluded IMO) would come only as a result of say, a nuclear holocaust. I can't say I am sympathetic with the extremist view you expouse here and I doubt that I am alone. I am afraid your rally cry will remain unheeded. For info about how the primitive hunters wiped out large animals in Australia and elsewhere and how other ancient civilizations destroyed their enviroment, Alone with Graeme's sources, you can see, for examples, Ronald Wright's 2005 Massey lecture "A brief history of progress" or Jared Diamond's beautifully written "Guns,Germs and Steel" and the sources cited.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 08, 2005 02:55 AM
(2 of 2) Graeme exalted: "So you admit that technology can be used in both moral and immoral ways." What I was doing was presenting a simple paradox, hardly compromising my position. Graeme wrote: Europeans didn't massacre Native Americans because they disrespected their wig-wams, they massacred them because they wanted their land. But they JUSTIFIED the massacres with arguments that disrespected the simple way pre-American natives lived. Europeans saw their lifestyle as heathen, savage, and inferior -- thus ok to massacre. Graeme wrote: Natives also started using firearms at their earliest convenience – it's not like they were ideologically opposed to high technology, they just hadn't invented it yet. Using a product of the technolgocial process is different than creating the technological process. And a technological society was anathema to their value system. The pre-american natives may have been somewhat corrupted by the European way of life but to say that they merely hadn't adopted a technological mindset yet suggests that their way of life was not sustainable and they they would inevitably become a technological society -- and this is simply wrong, eurocentrism at its finest. Graeme proposes the old: Massacres amongst different warring tribes were common in some areas of North America, as was abduction of women. I hope you can provide better links to back this up, but native wars were NOTHING like the genocide perpetrated by the europeans.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 08, 2005 02:22 AM
The first of the requested links was "NOT FOUND", as anyone who checked it knows, and the second site could be summed up in this less than compelling sentence: "There are two main hypothesis as to why these extinctions occurred. Paul Martin's 'overkill hypothesis' and the climatic change hypothesis are the most popular explanations, but some have suggested a combination of the two or even different theories altogether." Graeme wrote: I also think your definition of technology is awfully narrow and self-serving. One definition I found was simply "the techniques used to produce artifacts," under which tools would certainly qualify. You can use the most simplistic definition of technology if you want, but I was just giving you my definition as it involves the technique of the logos. Graeme wrote: There are no certainties, but less harmful is always better than more harmful, in my opinion. Just wanting something better is not really fighting for it any more than throwing the terms "true democracy" or "MOP" will change anything. Some of my questions were not answered or were answered out of context in the creation of straw dogs. I won't take up five consecutive pages reasking my questions in their proper context and will instead keep answering your questions in short order... BTW, I think my earlier posted definition of technology was more accurate, but, for the sake of argument, maybe we should consider the cultural differences of hi- and low-tech societies.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gwbush212121, Prokerkus_ at Jul 07, 2005 23:28 PM
I know, I know, I'm gonna be called "selfish" or "narrow minded" but that's just the way I and I think most Americans feel about this. It's not that we're intentionally trying to be insensitive, but when liberals talk about 40 million without healthcare, I can't help but think that we need to be spending our resources here at home not saving the world. It's like when they complain about US companies going overseas to the third world where they pay their workers very little: Isn't it better to have any job than no job? Isn't it better to make SOME kind of money rather than starve, as so many do as you just pointed out? Uh, I would hate to think that every American that had a John Kerry bumper sticker on their car was a supporter of a "genocial war criminal".. I thought the G8 Summit was about how world leaders can give more to Africa to relieve the AIDS epidemic? I also support the whole Live 8 campaign with U2's Bono who I admire very much and am hopeful that Bush will listen to Tony Blair, a liberal who most Americans could support, who is much smarter and more humane than Bush could ever be. My sympathies and condolences go out to the victims in London. Allen: I am not a "Heartless fool." I donate to more orgnanizations than I imagine 90% of people do. I really don't see how I am "sucking up" if I am disagreeing with Greame but attempting to do it in a polite and civil manner. "God" has nothing to do with anything, sorry, I'm not that religious.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 07, 2005 23:11 PM
Thanks for the info on capitalism Greame. ... I just don't see how I'm a wage slave if I'm making decent money and have control over how I live my life. I understand completely that that's not how it is in much of the world, but, and I hate to sound harsh but I don't think it's our business to go around saving the world, I think we have enough problems at home to worry about." That's it, suck up to Graeme. He won't call you a heartless fool, as I will. If you want to continue believing falsely that you are free, that's your business- the fact is TIME is stolen from you, making you a slave. (You fail to realize this only because you refuse to consider my argument.) But don't try telling other people that they shouldn't be troubled by the abject poverty that, only by the grace of God, you have managed to avoid.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gwbush212121, Prokerkus_ at Jul 07, 2005 22:57 PM
Thanks for the info on capitalism Greame. Much of it was new to me, I read the paper and think I stay reasonably well informed but I don't see that too often. Here is my response to your other comments: About the gulag: I think most people when they hear the word "gulag" think of the Soviet gulags and draw that comparison. So it was a poor choice of words for Amnesty since people are not systematically being executed in Guantanamo. "2 billion of us "survive" on less than a dollar a day." Yes but here's the thing: what's 1 US dollar to you and me may not hold the same value for someone living in the third world. In other words, 1 US dollar to them might mean a great deal. "The top few percentage points of every society throughout history have lived extremely well." Yes I agree completely but in my opinion I feel that this has happened in every country and in every system no matter what it is. There has always been elites: in the US it's the CEOs, in the Communist countries it's the Party leadership, I don't see that variable changing anytime soon. I just don't see how I'm a wage slave if I'm making decent money and have control over how I live my life. I understand completely that that's not how it is in much of the world, but, and I hate to sound harsh but I don't think it's our business to go around saving the world, I think we have enough problems at home to worry about.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 07, 2005 11:44 AM
Graeme wrote: "Even the Native Americans wiped out several large species of American wildcat and other predators rallybird." I'd be interested in reading up on that, can you provide a couple of decent weblinks to that information? But, even if that's the case, which I somewhat doubt, wiping out an animal that is a direct threat to your tribe is a little different than causing the most devestating period of mass extinction due to sheer hubris. graeme asked: "...do you think technology is inherently destructive, or can it be used for both positive and negative purposes?" I think if you look at a history of technology (as properly defined earlier -- not merely meaning tools) you will see that, with the introduction of the logos technique (technology), arose hierarchical systems of domination over the land, animals, and fellow human beings. Since that auspicious beginning we have been brought to the modern age and now live under the threat of mutually assured destruction, holes in the ozone, global warming, unprecedented famines, etc. And we are not yet even at the HEIGHT of techno-industrial civilization. Whenever technology seems to be giving a gift, it really ends up taking away. Take the car, for example, or the computer... and despite all of the harmful effects their creation and uses causes, here we are... slaves to the machines. Is technology a good thing? No, not even when it's nicely packaged.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 07, 2005 10:11 AM
(2 of 2) bwong writes: "While the Aztecs, etc, destroyed their worlds for lack of forsight the capitalist economy prevents us from doing the right things even while we know what has to be done." But I am not defending the Aztecs because they were not primitives like the pre-American natives, the Australian aboriginals, the South American tribes, etc. As I challenged someone to do, bwong wrote: "Rallybird types his anti technolgy piece with his computer." This is true (I don't even write at the library any more), and I recognize that computers are horribly destructive devices, but I try to use this advanced technology in the only moral way -- against itself. I don't like cars either (and don't own one) but I would not be opposed to driving in a demolition derby at the car factory. bwong writes: "..it is completely unrealistic to argue we should go back to the caves." I don't know who "we" are, but this is an over-simplification of primitive cultures. Some primitive tribes lived in wig-wams and disrespect of that type of simple shelter was the kind of thing used to justify genocide. bwong writes: "as long as we have enough technology to fight off predators we would still be able to use that technology recklessly to carry out 'biocide'." The pre-American natives had tools (NOT technology) to "fight off predators" but they did not recklssly engage in biocide because they did not have the greed/gluttony inherent in western _civilization_ proper.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 07, 2005 09:10 AM
bwong writes: "Since human must use technology,--even stone tools are technology,-I don't know what his position would lead us." This may be a problem of definition: Tech-nol-o-gy n. According to Webster's: industrial or applied science. Technology proper implies the systematic of written language (that being the first technique and basis of civilization proper). This is not the same as using simple hunting implements, woven baskets, or basic shelter. The caveman walking into a cave is hardly a technological use of that cave. This is not to say that non-technological peoples were not (are not) wise, compassionate, or creative. I believe you'll find that any (or most) of the early _civilizations_ that you mentioned destroying their evironment did so with the technique of agriculture (which almost always came with the technique of a written language). I'm not sure about the Australian aboriginals wiping out all the large land mammals (like the kangaroo?), but I can point to the pre-American natives here living in ecological harmony with the buffalo and bear. In any case they seem to have reached a point of harmony and their "destructive" lifestyle certainly doesn't compare to the destruction of techno-industrial civilization. bwong wrote: "It is impossible for us to exist without massive enviromental impacts..." and that is obviously wrong given the example of the pre-American natives just given. (1 of 2)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 07, 2005 04:34 AM
BTW, Rallybird types his anti technolgy piece with his computer. Do you know much it takes to support the technology with which Rallybird can broadcast his/her ideas? Do you know what happens to all the dead computer parts, which are not recyclable. One can cut down the use of cars by biking. But you still need steel to make bikes. To make steel requires a lot of energy. Solar energy appears to be "clean", but the cells required a lot of energy to manufacture and they end up in the landfill when they expire.The list goes on. It is one thing to advocate responsible use of technology and minimize waste, it is completely unrealistic to argue we should go back to the caves. And as noted, even then, as long as we have enough technology to fight off predators we would still be able to use that technology recklessly to carry out "biocide".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 07, 2005 04:13 AM
Rallybird appears to be saying technology is inherently evil. Since human must use technology,--even stone tools are technology,-I don't know what his position would lead us. Even before the industrial revolution the Incas, Aztecs, the Eastern Islanders and countless other civilizations had completely destroy their enviroment and ecologies. Even the cave men weren't any better. All big mammals in Austrialia extincted, presumably due to overhunting, within a centry or two of the arrival of early humans(now known as the aboriginals)some 40,000 years ago. The same pattern of extinctions was witnessed in other parts of the world accompanying early human settlements. It is impossible for us to exist without massive enviromental impacts but they can be mitigated if we use technology with better forsight and more restraints.To be able to gauge the consequences of our actionswe need more, notless science. Capitalism cannot survive without perpetual growth which is fueled by consumption and waste. It creates a structural pressure against conservation and restraint. While the Aztecs, etc, destroyed their worlds for lack of forsight the capitalist economy prevents us from doing the right things even while we know what has to be done. Nice job Graeme.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 07, 2005 02:44 AM
Graeme, You are doing yeomen's work here and absolutely humiliating the insipid Roger (he reads Horowitz, ha, ha, ha, ha ... what a joke)- thanks.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 06, 2005 21:03 PM
Roger the Anti-Chomsky: "here is where I serve my most useful purpose: Elminating Leftist Illusions." You have not responded to challenges to your previous statements about El Salvador that were so outrageous that a anyone following events there wouln't bother to laugh at them, but as I have said before they have been challenged here and if you do not respond then why should we take your views seriously on El Salvador or any other topic?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 06, 2005 19:54 PM
Here is some more info on the matter: (From Paul Crespo's classic critique of Chomsky, available at www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=11902) "The citations he (Chomsky) does use correctly are often from mainstream leftist newspapers such as the UK's Guardian, or obscure local sources such as a Peruvian church-based publication or other leftist “human rights groups.” Never does he acknowledge that these may be questionable, or biased sources. Yet, according to Tim Brown a fellow of Stanford University's Hoover Institution, many of these so-called atrocities were deliberate fabrications and deserved a much more skeptical reading. He states: I was personally witness to literally hundreds of instances in which international human rights activists condemned alleged human rights violations by anti-Communist guerrillas that were later proven to have been fabrications. Recently, the former military commander of the FMLN of El Salvador has explained very carefully and on the record to me just how this was done and how easy it was for them to manipulate the American human rights establishment because their fabrications were always accepted without question by their American sympathizers. Chomsky can certainly fall into this category." Now I have spent the last 2 hours describing in detail why Chomsky is wrong or at the very least, deserves to be taken with a large degree of salt. Noam Chomsky has an agenda and he ignores evidence that does not support it.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 06, 2005 19:26 PM
"If anything, they [Terrorist, pro-Communist armed guerillas] were the Salvadoran version of the American Revolutionaries (although less elite)." Good one Grame! Gave me a chuckle! What was you said that you were smoking again? "The vast majority of the people killed in the war died at the hands of the military and government-linked death squads." OK, here is where I serve my most useful purpose: Elminating Leftist Illusions. You see Grame, you like Chomsky seem to have the same problem: Fierce, critical cynicism towards anything the West does or says while "hook line and sinker" gullibility towards sources that "say the right thing" without any question towards their accuracy or fairness. The fact of the matter is that those "Human Rights Reports" that you cite were heavily influenced by the Communist guerillas and many of whom were left-leaning (One can't imagine too many conservatives bending over backwards to join a low-pay thing like that) themselves. Thus, they had a natural tendency to support/be sympathetic towards the guerillas while being incredibly harsh against the government. Hmmm, harsh against one side, uncritical against the other...remind us of anyone we know, Grame?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 06, 2005 18:27 PM
"Only in a...culture such as our own could [El Sal.] be referred to as a "free and democratic government"..it likely WOULD have known..freedom and democracy, had the US left the place alone" Just like Russia would have known a free and democratic gov. had those Western allies not interfered? Just like Cuba would have known it had the US been successful at the Bay of Pigs? Defeated North Vietnam? Well you get the idea. The Left always seems to think the next big revolution is the utopian "real deal" if only the big bad West not interferred! However, history and past experience tells us a very different story. "It took 12 years of .."counter-insurgency"..to squelch the democratic impulses of the Salvadoran majority, who..favoured causes sympathetic to the FMLN" So I assume you believe that the vicious, car bombing, terrorist guerillas in Columbia represent the "overwhelming majority of the people" as it is taking over 40 years to defeat them? Guerillas and revolutionaries typically do NOT represent the vast majority of the populace; most of whom just want to eat, work and sleep in peace, and could care less about politics. "..nor were they ever under any danger of becoming a Marxist dictatorship." How can you say that? Armed guerillas with no experience in any kind of democracy, only violence, backed by Cuba, a one-party repressive state are suddenty going to turn around and embrase liberal Western democracy? You must be smoking something pretty strong Grame.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 06, 2005 18:02 PM
"Cuba doesn't have political freedom, certainly" Funny, Chomsky doesn't seem to mention one word about that, but he does have a lot to say about their so called "achievements." "but it doesn't have death squads and the kind of abject poverty you see everywhere else in Latin America either." Not true: Costa Rica, Puerto Rico, Uruguay all have relatively prosperous economies and a GREAT deal more political freedom. If Cuba was this "oasis" of Latin America, why are people literally dying to get out? And don't say politics, getting food on the table is infinitely more important to the average person than what ideology the government currently has. On the Myth of the Cuban Embargo: What is stopping Cuba from trading with every other country in the world? The Embargo is just a scapegoat for Castro to blame his repression on and a "symbol" to give to the Cuban American community. "..given the choice, I bet the vast majority of Salvadorans would prefer a "Marxist dictatorship"...than their current paradise" I never called El Sal. a paradise. Well, they obviously don't since in the Presidential elections they have lost every single time, overwhelmingly. "So in this case..El Salvador should immediately become a Marxist dictatorship." What? Are you saying that the best possible result for El Salvador would be a Marxist dictatorship? A brutal, repressive, one-party state? I hope the new guy Prokerkus sees this one. Welcome to the American Left!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 06, 2005 09:34 AM
Graeme wrote: "Power would be equitably distributed." (under worker control) But I ask: How so? I know you've said democracy, but that's not a magic word and democracy is far from incorruptible. What if all the workers who are assholes get together and still want to make war machines (to be used against those that don't)? Graeme wrote: "The system would be set up so as not to allow this. " Would there be cops and an army to prevent it? What else would they enforce? Graeme wrote: "Rocket scientists aren't exactly workers" ... "But again, there are peaceful avenues you can direct advanced knowledge of physics and chemistry into." Oh really? Name one for each field. Finally, you suggested that people needed houses to live in(wood houses in particular) and cars to travel. This is just wrong. People need shelter and can travel without cars (and still have a decent culture). As for the autobahn, reread the first post on pg. 40.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Hellnation76, Hellnation at Jul 06, 2005 09:04 AM
...

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 06, 2005 09:03 AM
Graeme asked: "I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are you an anarcho-primitivist? Do you think technology itself is to blame for the destruction of the earth, or just its application?" I've been called worse things than an anarcho-primitivist. Please rephrase the second question, it wasn't clear to me. Graeme wrote: "surely democratic controls of industry would be vastly superior to our current hierarchical structure" Precisely what kind of democracy are you talking about that can't be corrupted and become hierarchical? Grame wrote: " Yes, under capitalism (workers built the bomb), because he/she had to, not because it is his/her "nature" to do so; why would workers decide to build bombs and toxins in the first place if they didn't have to? They had to? Why? And if they jusified those actions so long ago, what prevents them from using the same justifications now? You know, there is a war on terror going on -- so you have to drive to work, build those war machines, and generally keep the military industrial complex going -- or the terrorists will get ya! (I was being facetious, but I trust you get my point.) (1 of 2)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matrix4, Appleman at Jul 06, 2005 07:27 AM
Prokerkus: First let me welcome you. Then let me address briefly some of your points: As long as you are living under a bourgeous capitalist system you will ALWAYS be a slave. A slave to the market. A slave to the those that have attained the most capital. You may think you can choose what to buy and where to work, but in reality, you are only following market-forces that tell you what industry or business needs workers at this particular time. Once you are not needed, you are dropped without a second's forethought. Choosing between two rich-corporate capitalists in a bourgeous winner take all election is certainly no real choice. Socialism means true democracy because it means worker's democracy, not plutocratic democracy. As Leon Trotsky once said: "Socialism needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen." As for me, there are many states that I admire to a certain extent: the USSR under Lenin, Cuba, Vietnam, and Venezuela. The problem with Greame is that he like Chomsky is an anarchist - someone who does not believe in any state. I already mentioned in another post why this is incorrect. The main thing you need to understand right now is to attain a proper Marxist education as soon as possible. Read Lenin's "State and Revolution" for starters. Go to the webpage www.marxist.com and click on the Marxism FAQ window for an introduction into the subject.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 06, 2005 06:54 AM
RA wrote: "I see no reason why the MOPs could not be operated so as to protect the environment. How does the envrionmental harmfulness of any toxic factory change just because it comes under the control of the workers? If they still have unfounded faith in the technological manifest destiny (that I wrote of in my posts on page 44), they will still engage their machines in environmentally harmful ways. As I said before, technicians are workers still workers and some of them believe in what they are doing while others simply don't want to do other kinds of work (for whatever less pure motives). Many don't see the dangers of technology and others are willing to risk those dangers (to others, the environment, or even themselves) due, perhaps, to their convoluted sophist philosophies. And I fear that those who don't want anything to do with the MOP still won't have a place in this newly organized society while they will still have to suffer the consequences of the toxic (and otherwise destructive) means of production.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 06, 2005 05:57 AM
rallybird, Look, the economy I have in mind is not competitive at all. The profit motive is behind the decisions you rightly criticize (the ones that lead to depredation). Sans that, I see no reason why the MOPs could not be operated so as to protect the environment.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 06, 2005 05:26 AM
We are not slaves. We choose what to do, what not to do ... Robert - I was tempted to say something at the beginning but I held my tongue. When you insult people like the way you do, it only hurts your own cause and negates anything intelligent you have to say as the focus is put on the insults and not on your message." Prokerkus, You must not have read any of the numerous previous posts of mine in which I show that we are not free in the way you think. And don't flatter yourself thinking that I care what YOU think of me.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 06, 2005 04:48 AM
Robert... I'm all for seperating the wheat from the chaff which is why I avoid discourse with the bigger idiots even more than you but, from the looks of things on this board, I fear the human race may be experiencing something of a crop failure. And still I wait for even any semi-rational response to my posts which are now a few days and pages back. I fear that intelligent public discourse may, practically, be dead. The usenet forums are junk, slashdot didn't impress me, indymedia is only rarely ok, and now this Chomsky space is starting to seriously disappoint. I don't know what is to be done, but I guess I can try to hope that things pick up (here or anywhere). Best Regards

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gwbush212121, Prokerkus_ at Jul 06, 2005 04:05 AM
Thank you Graeme for that nice response, I appreciate the feedback that you give here. I am glad we agree that Socialism has failed and that it is marred by violence and oppression. However when you say something like "capitalism IS slavery" I begin to roll my eyes. Look, capitalism may be many things but slavery? That reminds me of Amnesty saying that the Guantanamo Prison was like a Gulag. Overplaying your hand like that really does more harm than good. We are not slaves. We choose what to do, what not to do, what to buy, where to work, whom to read, and who to elect as our representatives. True, the two-party system needs to be reformed but nothing is stopping a group of frustrated Americans from voting an Independent candidate if they had the desire to do so. I also would like to ask you Greame, is there any country in the world whom you admire? It seems that the problems you elaborate on are typical of the problems facing any other country. Robert - I was tempted to say something at the beginning but I held my tongue. When you insult people like the way you do, it only hurts your own cause and negates anything intelligent you have to say as the focus is put on the insults and not on your message. Especially when that someone is a newcomer, it's not exactly a classy first impression. BTW, please don't use that whole "extreme right winger" stuff with me - I voted for John Kerry, am a member of Amnesty International, and a big supporter of the G8 Summit.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 05, 2005 20:26 PM
Sorry Rallybird, I meant to addess my previous comment to Roger the Anti-Chomsky. Sorry for the mix-up. I hope Roger the Anti-Chomsky will respond.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 05, 2005 16:53 PM
"I hate to say it, but Rallybird and Roger seem to be making some pretty solid points. Capitalism, for all its evils, does appear to work. Socialism or worker controlled MOP has never worked. There's a reason for that. Human nature. As human beings, there will always be someone who wants to get ahead, wants to be richer, more powerful, even the most powerful. The only answer socialism has for dealing with these people are through violence and repression. Tactics that have unfortunately marred every revolutionary socialist regime." Roger is a piece of shit and unless you respond properly to the following rebuttal you will be considered one too. (rallybird is a different matter to which I will attend shortly.) You have ABSOLUTELY no evidence that human nature exists, let alone that it entails the traits you mention. But let's suppose you are right: it does not follow that we should allow exploitation, any more than it follows that we shouldn't proscribe murder, assuming vengefulness is also a part of human nature. If exploitation is SLAVERY, as I have shown repeatedly, then it must be illegal and those who practice it punished. Of course, such malefactors won't be happy with that; but so what, neither are hitmen who are sent to prison. Further Marx makes it very clear that people should be allowed to become wealthy- just not via the exploitation of labor.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gwbush212121, Prokerkus_ at Jul 05, 2005 15:18 PM
Hello everyone! Prokerkus here - Seeker of Knowledge and Wisdom! I guess I have been a part of that great 'silent' majority for awhile, reading everyone else's posts. Here are my comments: I hate to say it, but Rallybird and Roger seem to be making some pretty solid points. Capitalism, for all its evils, does appear to work. Socialism or worker controlled MOP has never worked. There's a reason for that. Human nature. As human beings, there will always be someone who wants to get ahead, wants to be richer, more powerful, even the most powerful. The only answer socialism has for dealing with these people are through violence and repression. Tactics that have unfortunately marred every revolutionary socialist regime. I don't know enough about El Salvador to comment I just know that in Latin America governments come and go all the time. Coups and civil wars are commanplace. And whether we like it or not, democracy is on the rise there in almost every country. Graeme - You seem to be very smart, very honest and make some good points as well. However, you seem awfully idealistic and I'm afraid you will find out shortly that most people do not share your beliefs. Bill Gates et al will not hand over their billions without a fight. Worker MOP isn't all their cracked up to be. Want my take on it? Socialism or Worker MOP appears to be one of those things where it's good in theory, bad in practice.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 05, 2005 12:14 PM
Dearest MCorbin, I wasn't talking AT ALL about El Salvador (I didn't think it was worth the effort). We were talking about something entirely different (see my posts on page 44) which seemed to be avoided or dismissed by going into this El Salvador topic with a guy who wants to argue how great the USA is. So WHO is framing the debate with WHOM and how. I wasn't changing the subject, I was trying to maintain the initial subject of this blog which is capitalism (what it is, why, and how). SO, if you have something intelligent to say, instead of trying the old commie tactic of putting words into the mouth of your idealogical opponents, read all my posts on page 44, and THEN maybe we can debate things civilly.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 05, 2005 09:27 AM
Rallybird wrote: "Graeme... Before launching into your history of El Salvador I guess you didn't see my posts about the roots of capitalism" If Graeme didn't take to task your El Salvador comments I was going to. You are either very misinformed or worse, however your statements have been made here and now they have been challenged and you are trying to quickly change the subject. If this is your modus operandi than this is not a debate and you are wasting our time just being argumentative. At least put in the effort to stand by your "facts". It would be best to set the record straight on this particular point before moving on to the larger debate on the roots of capitalism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 05, 2005 06:53 AM
Graeme... Before laucnhing into your history of El Salvador I guess you didn't see my posts about the roots of capitalism, it's connection with technology, and the futility of a worker controlled government. The arguments are all still there on page 44 though (if you or anyone else would care to comment).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 04, 2005 23:28 PM
Why do birds sing? It's just their nature. The worker built the bomb and dumps the toxins in the river. Often the worker and soldier are one in the same (and both want promotions). I don't see the power principle disappearing under worker control. And where would this reform begin turning into "worker control"? What would the lumberjacks do with the lumbermill and yet remain competitive? In my example above with the rocket scientists... what would they do without radioactive toys and toxic computers (feel free to point out the obvious) and strip-mined material? Why would they be for a fundamental change in the system? And, if they weren't for it, might they not have the science with which to seize power? Techno-industrial capitalism IS technocracy and technicians ARE workers. How do I know that "worker controlled" governments would engage in genocide and biocide? Because the means of production would still be infernal machines with not healthy use. Because some power hungry workers would manipulate the system to seize power and become just as corrupt as any other non-worker controlled government. Let me ask you this, what constitutes work and what is a worker? Maybe we disagree on these definitions. How do workers differ from slaves?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 04, 2005 22:03 PM
"(W)orker control just sounds like a feel good buzzword that wouldn't necessarily change anything if implemented." rallybird, How do you know that worker controlled govts. would engage in genocide and biocide?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 04, 2005 21:02 PM
"Happy 4th July everyone! God Bless America!" Take your holiday greeting and shove it up your ass. There is nothing to celebrate here: America is a criminal state that poses a threat to civilization itself. It's obscene to make merry while scores of innocent people are dying and being maimed everyday in Iraq. God help us.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 04, 2005 18:02 PM
RA wrote: "You have been given an alternative: worker control of the MOPs, eliminating exploitation and alienation. Now the onus is on you, louse, to show why this would not be a TREMENDOUS improvement." I'll give it a go... Take the recent comet crashing spectacle. Suppose the workers were in control of that mission (they seemed enthusiastic enough to be), it would still be horribly expensive and the components would still have to be strip-mined. The system would still be promoting this as a worthwhile experiment, therefore promoting and perpetuating the type of sciences needed to make similiar things happen. This despite the fact that while humanity is busy crashing satellites into comets they are also causing mass extinction (biocide) here on Earth (nevermind the genocides due to war and famine). This being the case, "worker control" just sounds like a feel good buzzword that wouldn't necessarily change anything if implemented.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 04, 2005 17:50 PM
"If the far Left intends for (relatively prosperous) mainstream Americans to abandon their own system of gov. for something else, they need not a laundry list of all the bad things that are going on, but a full description of what an alternative would look like and how it would be better." You have been given an alternative: worker control of the MOPs, eliminating exploitation and alienation. Now the onus is on you, louse, to show why this would not be a TREMENDOUS improvement.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 04, 2005 16:45 PM
This is in response to Greame's left wing reading list. Here are a few books that I would recommend some of you guys read, if nothing else, for balance and to hear a different point of view: "Democracy in America" by Alexis de Tocqueville (Highly Recommended) "What's So Great About America" by Dinesh D'Souza "Radical Son" by David Horowitz "The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Eliot" by Russell Kirk "1984" by George Orwell "Capitalism and Freedom" by Milton Friedman "History of the American People" by Paul Johnson "The Closing of the American Mind" by Allan Bloom "Slouching Towards Gommarrah" by Robert Bork "God and Man at Yale" by William F. Buckley "The Clash of Civilizations" by Samuel P. Huntington "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley and last but certainly not least The Bible Happy 4th July everyone! God Bless America!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 04, 2005 16:38 PM
"What a drama queen! Someone give this man an Oscar! Buddy, I don't know where you live but go to your local mall. Look around you. Do you see oppressed workers?" As a matter of fact I do, you heartless motherfucker. I see dispirited people who have been robbed of the opportunity to flourish, seeking to fill that void with gadgets and trinkets off which their masters grow wealthier. You would see the same thing, if you weren't warped.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 04, 2005 08:29 AM
"But this is not about me; it's about the plight of my fellow workers." What a drama queen! Someone give this man an Oscar! Buddy, I don't know where you live but go to your local mall. Look around you. Do you see oppressed workers? The very fact that you have the time to sit around your computer and type away at a blog on the internet tells me that you are better off than 90% of your 'fellow workers.' So be a little grateful to the liberal Western capitalist nation you live in. Don't get me wrong, I view capitalism as an extremely unfair system. However, it is the very best system that I know of, particularly when one compares it to every other economic system. I also realize that the capitalism of Marx' time is VERY different than the capitalism of today. And just telling me to abandon capitalism carte blanche without any detailed alternative is like reading me a list of all the problems in my neighborhood, problems which may be perfectly valid, and then asking me to abandon my neighborhood and move somewhere else without telling me where that somewhere else is and how exactly it would be better. Same logic applies. If the far Left intends for (relatively prosperous) mainstream Americans to abandon their own system of gov. for something else, they need not a laundry list of all the bad things that are going on, but a full description of what an alternative would look like and how it would be better.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 04, 2005 08:09 AM
Graeme wrote: "I'm not here to debate the economic policies of The Third Reich, but uncontroversially the Nazis accomplished much that (at the time at least) was widely considered to be very positive." Admittedly, I was trying to steer the discussion away from the banal discussion about the fact that the US government is guilty of atrocious crimes against humanity and into one about the fundamental basis of capitalism which is shared with the Nazis. And although some of their policies might be seen as good by the majority of capitalists, fascists, and communists, this promotion of techno-industrial society was undoubtedly questioned then, has been since, and ought to be now. The technological manifest destiny innate in all of these very similiar ideologies is highly destructive of nature and the human spirit (if not always the human flesh). As a critique of techno-industrialism (and capitalism) let my point you to a couple links for your consideration... http://www.usd.edu/~ssanto/ellul.html & http://cartoon.iguw.tuwien.ac.at/christian/marcuse/odm.html

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 04, 2005 07:49 AM
"But even if you were right, and things were better in El Salvador now than they were in 1980..." That is not what I am saying. I did not say that things were better in El Salvador today than they were in the 80s, I said that they were better than they had EVER been in Salvadoran history. "That it's okay to murder 200,000 people and completely destroy democracy.." Stop the propaganda please. There was a Civil War in El Salvador. People died on both sides. People committed atrocities on both sides. The guerillas were leading an armed insurgency, backed by Cuba. Democracy was not established yet and the guerillas sought to impose a Marxist dictatorship, similar to the one imposed on Cuba. Putting the blame for all the deaths and atrocities on the Salvadoran Army is like blaming the Union Armies (who undoubtedly committed atrocities) for every single atrocity committed in their Civil War. Despite these atrocities, the Union cause was still just and necessary. At the end of the day, you still wanted the Confederacy to be defeated. Again, it is not a simplistic matter of "black vs white" or "good vs evil" it's a matter of what can bring people the best possible result in a very imperfect world.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 04, 2005 07:06 AM
Graeme, You have landed a very telling blow against Roger the Reject (though you don't need me to tell you that).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 03, 2005 20:55 PM
Also Gram, speaking of "monolith" Don't you think that Chomsky often writes about the US as if it were one? The way he wrote his original post here about "we" did not stop it - as if there are many people working against it, every day, perhaps even harder than he is. And the way he speaks of what happened with the US and Central America in the 80: the US did this and the US did that. What about the fierce debates in Congress over these issues? Particularly over Nicaragua? He makes it seem as if there were unanity instead of hotly contested votes throughout the 1980s. In fact, did not Congress vote to ban all military aid to Nicargua; thus resulting in the Iran-Contra Scandal? See, this is my point. Not only does Chomsky not provide balance in the traditional sense, but he narrows down extremely complex issues into these simplistic "us vs them" analysis. "Or better yet, you will quote one sentence of my post and completely disregard the rest or simply not answer." Listen, I would love to stay on and address each and every point but the problem is that I am only allowed 1500 words per post and only allowed to post every 20 minutes. I simply do not have the time to respond to each and every line in a 40+ page thread. Also notice please, that not everyone responds to my points as well.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 03, 2005 20:29 PM
"I especially like the part about "brute force," i.e., the collective will of the overwhelming majority of the people." As I have now said more than once now, the guerillas did not represent "the overwhelming majority of the people." Quite the opposite. As much as Chomsky and you seek to hide this, it cannot be ignored. The FMLN (pro-guerilla party) has LOST EVERY SINGLE ELECTION in El Salvador TO THIS DAY! Every single one. Almost always by overwhelming numbers: Defeated by 15-20 or more points. And again I ask you Graeme: Is it not true that El Salvador is currently enjoying the freest and most democratic gov. it has ever known? Did the US not put pressure on the far-right parties and side with the more centrist ones? Are Salvadorans not better under a liberal democratic gov. than they would be under a Marxist dictatorship?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 03, 2005 20:27 PM
"RA, do speak like this ('I'll beat the intellectual shit out of you') to all those who disagree with you or do you still have cartilage left in your nose? Or, do you only talk shit when there is little chance of repercussions?" BJ, No, only to assholes who defend Capitalism and other forms of evil. I want to make it clear as possible, as I've advised others to do, that I hold them and their ideas in contempt. Notice, though, that I said "intellectual shit," not shit simpliciter. My cockiness not withstanding, I deplore violence. But this is not about me; it's about the plight of my fellow workers.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Davis_brock, Bjwd at Jul 03, 2005 17:27 PM
"I'll beat the intellectual shit out of you and the other asshole anytime," RA, do speak like this to all those who disagree with you or do you still have cartilage left in your nose? Or, do you only talk shit when there is little chance of repercussions? The Internet is a safe place for little men to act big. I enjoy reading Chomsky because he challenges me, I enjoy reading the forum because RA is just so darn cocky.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 03, 2005 15:56 PM
"What exactly did Hitler accomplish for Germany before 1938 that was so great?" The Volkswagon. Still some of the best cars in the world.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 03, 2005 11:37 AM
Graeme wrote: "...there was a reason Hitler was so popular." Many techniques of propaganda were invented and perfected during his time of rule and this probably had a lot to do with Hitler's popularity. And this is probably relevant to capitalism in so much as the Nazi's sold everyone a bill of goods while appealing to their lower natures -- which is still happening today (war in Iraq, oh yeah sure, oil is an just unconsidered benefit). But before direct war on other humans is the war on nature (and it's connection with the soul [if I may be so bold]). These things you've written about favorably "(with the construction of dozens of dams, autobahns, railroads and other civil works)" are horribly destructive both directly and indirectly as they promote other aspects of destructive, materialistic, techno-industrial mass-society. I realise that the Americans themselves believe otherwise and that they killed millions of aboriginals who disagreed, but just because americans have gone farther down the path, wreaking further havoc, does not justify the capitalist position along with it's favoring of these grand Nazi projects you tout.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 03, 2005 08:05 AM
I don't think I did miss the point because even the things you suggested were good about Hitler weren't. Capitalism (or fascism, or communism) has an innately destructive technological materialism at it's base. Because of this, I wonder what nation you would cite as NOT being grotesquely criminal. I suspect you'll find the that even some of the small "progressive" european states are almost as proportionally corrupt as the US when it comes to exploiting the natural world and 3rd world sweatshops. How about Japan? How progressive are their pro-consumption policies? And if you want to say they're still not as bad as the US, don't they really benefit from the policies of the US and do they do much more than give lip-service when they superficially disapprove? I'm not saying all the people in these nations are "grotesquely criminal" but I don't see populations really doing enought to stop the grotesque policies of the governments which rule in their names. It seems that many governments would like to be criminally grotesque if only the US would stop trying to corner that market.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Hellnation76, Hellnation at Jul 03, 2005 07:13 AM
This quote from you is pure gold: "I don't mind the criticisms, I mind the gross imbalance of focusing ONLY on its alleged crimes without giving a single word to any positive attributes that might have resulted from it." Ahh, I see now! America is committing crimes for the greater good of humanity! This is America's way of spreading Peace and Freedom accross the globle! Ahh, that's what they mean when they say "Crimes Against Humanity", it's actually a good thing, isn't it? Dude, we need more Crimes Against Humanity! ... Roger, how you can excuse such crimes is beyond me. Don't you have any morals?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Hellnation76, Hellnation at Jul 03, 2005 06:43 AM
Roger, Nowhere have I ever read Chomsky claim that his views were "fair and balanced". Chomsky stick to what he is good at, analysing data and putting it together in a framework. He's effectively "reverse engineering" the US foreign policies/local policies with the documents we have access to. He provide conclusions which are based on his interpretation of facts. That's pretty much what his books are all about, I never read Chomsky to find "solutions", it merely provide ammunitions to push for change. In this regard, his work is remarkable. Your problem is that you are frustrated Chomsky is not providing the solution(s) which you could then dissect and ridicule. If you are willing to engage individuals here on the merit of Chomsky's analysises and conclusions, go for it. But treat his work for what it is, don't try and fault it for what it is not. (And never claimed to be) And yes, of course, you'll reply that I did not understand what you meant, that "you never said that", etc. Or better yet, you will quote one sentence of my post and completely disregard the rest or simply not answer.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Hellnation76, Hellnation at Jul 03, 2005 06:00 AM
Roger, I agree with Graeme, you have some rather interesting logic going there. Let's look at an example here, for example, take a criminal. Denis Rader, who was recently aprehended, who admitted to being BTK (Bind Torture Kill), a serial killer who killed 10+ persons. This guy is obviously a psychopath and shall we say.. a scumbag. This guy had a job, was married, has 2 kids, was going to church and overall appeared to be a good citizen/father/husband (by American standard). (see: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,161145,00.html) Now, what does these "positive" elements do to change the fact that he's a "rotting corpse of an humanity" as one of his victim's family member put it? In fact, I would say that his seemingly "good" behavior is what enabled him to not get caught earlier. I'm not sure, what is your point Roger? If you are a criminal, I'm sorry, but you need to be treated as such and face the music. In your world, that doesn't seem to be the case.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Hellnation76, Hellnation at Jul 03, 2005 04:51 AM
Anyway, you get my point, some new features could be added to help the discussion go forward. Those who want to "discuss" would get the visibility and those who want to troll/flame would be redelegated to the bottom of the thread list. That's a solution, not perfect but would definitely be better than the current system.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 03, 2005 04:06 AM
Graeme, you worte: "Again, Hitler accomplished much for Germany before 1938. Does that mitigate, even one iota, what he did later? Does anybody give a damn what else he did? Why then the special treatment for the US (arguably the worst criminal state since the Third Reich)?" What exactly did Hitler accomplish for Germany before 1938 that was so great? It seems that he primarily promoted western techno-industrial materialism and the results of that can easily be called into question. Even if the science of eugenics never had ties to the camps, the products might still be genetically engineered "food". The autobahn has already been discussed... What other "good" things did Hitler accomplish? As for the legacy of Germany and what the US has accomplished since... don't forget that many of the reich's scientist went to work for the US after the war (I guess so they could "accomplish" more "good" things).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Hellnation76, Hellnation at Jul 03, 2005 03:51 AM
Hi Guys, I'm at work, bored, I read this thread. A few observations: - Some members seems to have communication problems. By that, I mean, they cannot convey their ideas properly in writting. Either that, or some of you are "trolling", which is the bane of forums like these and should be moderated at all costs. For example, RealPC is the king of one liners, all he does is make phoney statements that are answered with 2-3 page posts which he replies to with another one liner. And this goes on.. and on, and on. Typical troll tactic. Personally, I don't think he does it intentionally. I think he just has communication problems. So tell us RealPC, where are you from? What do you do in life? How old are you? I'm sure there is a reason why you behave like this, please tell us your problem, we might be able to assist. Also, this comment system is pretty poor and basic. This system would never work on a high traffic blog, it would get cluttered with trolls/flames/spam. A "filter" or "ignore list" feature should definitely be added. This would make it easy to simply disregard troll. Or at least, they wouldn't get them the level of attention they seek. Anyone ever visited "http://slashdot.org"? Their comment system is interesting, trolls are instantly "modded down" and interesting comments usually are at the top.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 02, 2005 23:44 PM
"Robert Allen: For someone that calls himself an "intellectual" and brags about his so-called intellectual superiority, it seems awfully strange that you must constantly resort to kiddie-like name calling such as "Roger the Scumbag" or "PC Idiot." Such is the mark of a wannabe (psuedo) intellectual. Roger the Asshole, I never once called myself an intellectual. What I said is, "I'll beat the intellectual shit out of you and the other asshole anytime," which I stand behind. Besides, where does it say that intelllectuals can't curse those who apologize for evil?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 02, 2005 21:16 PM
Robert Allen: For someone that calls himself an "intellectual" and brags about his so-called intellectual superiority, it seems awfully strange that you must constantly resort to kiddie-like name calling such as "Roger the Scumbag" or "PC Idiot." Such is the mark of a wannabe (psuedo) intellectual. For example, I disagree with Chomsky greatly as you probably can tell, but I can admit that he is an intellectual. Notice that Chomsky never calls those that disagree with him "scumbags" or "idiots" nor does he advise ignoring them as well. Perhaps you should take a lesson from him. It might make your whole "I'm Robert Allen the Intellectual" gimmick a little more plausible.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 02, 2005 16:57 PM
"If the US was so bad, they would not even bother with "strings attached" aid to begin with." Roger the Scumbag, No, that shows just how wicked they really are, taking advantage of an EPIDEMIC to make money. That's the capitalist way: never pass up an opportunity to make money. Or, as businessman I knew used to say, "always kick a man when he's down- you'll never get a better chance." The fact that you don't recognize this not so suble point of moral psychology shows how morally bankrupt YOU ARE.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 02, 2005 07:52 AM
"The millions that U.S sent to Africa to combat AIDS has string attached." If the US was so bad, they would not even bother with "strings attached" aid to begin with. Ditto with the UN: it's obvious by now that the UN is certainly not our puppet and arguably our enemy, so what would stop the US from withdrawing all its funds today if it were out to dominate the world? On El Salvador: A US ally was being violently attacked by a band of guerillas who seeked to overthrow it by force. The US sent military and economic aid as a response to this.The US pressured El Sal. to reign in on the death squads and usher in elections as soon as possible (which it did) Furthermore, there was evidence that the guerillas were being supplied by Cuba, an unfriendly, repressive state. All this in the middle of the Cold War. Again, I ask, what would you (or Chomsky) do instead? Your ally is attacked violently. You do nothing? OK, if that is your position then please explain how such a position would have worked out in WWII when Poland, France, etc were being invaded by the Nazis? I do not accept that the US resorted to a "terrorist" war. The US assisted an ally that was in the middle of a brutal fight against armed insurgents that seeked to overthrow it militarily. They were not interested in elections and did not have the backing of the people as every single election that has ever been held in El Sal. (to this day) has resulted in defeat for the pro-guerilla party.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jul 02, 2005 06:20 AM
The Anti-Chomsky said: “I notice no one has addressed my MLK comparison “ According to your logic I should find fault with anyone who criticizes Saddam Hussain without accompanying such criticisms with an equal number or praises for the tyrant, because even he had done some good deeds. I see no point to self-congratulation as an American. There is no shortage of praise for America in popular discourse. We can pat ourselves on the back for our success if we want to but there is little practical value in this, other than making ourselves feel good. The very practical reason for discussing what is wrong with US and capitalism is to raise awareness about problems that need to be addressed and to formulate solutions. We are all on the same side if we can agree that our goals are the same: the make America better. If we disagree on how to go about making it better that is at least negotiable. Your assertion that the “problem with Chomsky is that constant negative spin of each and every thing the US does ” I disagree with. He points out specific crimes perpetrated by the US government and does not accompany them with equal portions of praise for other good deeds. There is nothing wrong with this and it's not spin or any other type of trickery, it's just disturbing information that you don't want to hear. Frankly I don't like knowing it either, but just like a fatal, curable disease you need to know about it regardless.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 02, 2005 00:40 AM
"What do you think would happen to the UN and most international organizations if the US were to withdraw all its funding?" What happens to the deliquent fees the U.s still owes the U.N? The evidence shows that the U.S is merely using its money as an leverage to control international institutions. The U.S tries to turn international institutions such as the U.N into its puppets. The fact that this is not a complete success is not a proof of U.S good intentions.This is not even a secret and you don't have to read Chomsky to know that. I am not familiar enough with Elsavador today to debate your specific claims. Let's assume you're right for argument's sake indeed it is "enjoying the freest and most democratic government it has ever known"(which I doubt) But even if that is true I can't see how it can be used teleologically to justify the U.S sponsored white terror in the 80's. Even IF the U.S.S.R turned into a powerful and prosperous nation (which actually was true in a sense), Stalin was no less a criminal. Following your line of reasoning, any horror can be justified if eventually the outcome somehow turns out favourably. This is the logic of the fanatical idealogue. Realpc's favourite strawman is the Utopian socialist who thinks that the end of the worker paradise justify whatever brutal means it takes to achieve it. Now you're the only one here on znet who uses this perverse logic and you're surly not a leftist. Realpc would be delighted.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 02, 2005 00:15 AM
"The problem with Chomsky is that constant negative spin of each and every thing the US does." Could it be that you're so used to positive spin from the dominant media that any objective apraisal of U.s policies would appear as negative spin? "Reading Chomsky..One would not hear about the millions we send to AIDS relief in Africa..humanitarian efforts all over the world." The millions that U.S sent to Africa to combat AIDS has string attached. Recipients are required to sign away their rights to manufacture generic drugs and instead purchase patented drugs at humougous costs from mostly U.S based big pharma(the condition may be changed now because of internatioonal condemnations,-I'm not sure,-- but that was the original term, maybe still is)Can you explain such a condition in "positive" light? Is it a "negative spin" to point out with facts and figures, as Chomsky does, that the economical benefits the West get from Africa through exploiting cheap resources far outweigh than the "aid" they put back? The bulk of U.S aid to foreign countries are "tied". That means, among other things, recipients are required to spend the money on U.S goods and service even though they may not be appropiate, or there are less costly alternatives. Is it "negative spin" to point out U.S "generosity" is just an underhanded way to subsidize U.s business in these instances?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 01, 2005 23:42 PM
It's not just that Chomsky does not offer any "recipe", (which is a natural reaction because again, if one criticizes something, they are implying that they know a better way. Someone as vociferous and as consistent a critic as Chomsky is should not be shy in saying what that is) it's also that Chomsky is very ambigous on what he actually advocates and what he opposes. As I said before, just saying "Country X has done bad, bad bad" tells us very little (unless we were seeking that answer in the first place) for as I already mentioned, ANYONE can look up ANY country's history, focus in ONLY on the negatives, and come up with a grossly unbalanced but extremely negative picture of that country. Without any coherent explanation of should be done differently, what exactly does that prove? That states are imperfect? That powerful states act selfishly and hypocritcally at times? If the US were HALF as bad as Chomsky says (or implies) it is, then Western Europe would be under US control today. We would have just split up Europe with Stalin and never allowed any independence whatsoever. And Cuba? Please! If we really wanted to, we could be in Havana in 30 minutes.If Chomsky can talk about achievements in Communist Cuba (which he does) and Vietnam (ditto) two repressive states, then certainly he can say a word or two about US achievements. For that matter, has Chomsky EVER specifically complimented an action taken by a Western country?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 01, 2005 23:20 PM
I don't think you guys are getting our point. It's not that Chomsky criticizes America, that's not a problem and there are many critics on the Right as well, let's not forget. The problem with Chomsky is that constant negative spin of each and every thing the US does. It cannot be that the US does all wrong. It cannot be that the US does no good. Reading Chomsky however, one would not draw that conclusion. One would not hear about the millions we send to AIDS relief in Africa, tsunami relief in SE Asia, humanitarian efforts all over the world. What do you think would happen to the UN and most international organizations if the US were to withdraw all its funding? (Think "toilet flushing in bathroom" sound) The problem is not the critique, the problem is the lack of balance, lack of a counter-argument, and any admission that US actions might be for the better. I notice no one has addressed my MLK comparison or my El Salvador analysis. Is it not true that El Salvador is enjoying the freest and most democratic government it has ever known?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 01, 2005 22:38 PM
One additional point: Marxism, whether you hate it or love it, is very much a "Western tradition", perhaps even more so than capitalism and mercantilism. The greatness of the Western civilization precisely lies in its great diversity.It contains the best as well as the worst. it is this contradiction and perpetual restlessness that give it great vitality, creativity and vibrancy. People who look at the Western tradition as a monolith completely miss the point. It is ridiculous to fault Chomsky for alledgely not giving any "recipe" for creating a better world, after pointing out what is wrong with the existing system.Whether this accusation is true is completly irrelevant and in no way diminsihes what he did do. Diagnosing economic and social ill is in itself a very important function, especially at a point when most people are not even aware of the problems. To dismiss the social critic for not offering alternatives makes as much sense as saying health check up is useless because it is just a diagnosis, not a treatment(should there be a problem). The doctor who orders the tests and interpretes the results may not be the specialist who eventually prescribes the treatments. But only a fool would dismiss the diagnosing physican because he doesn't prescribe treatments.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 01, 2005 22:31 PM
"Well what is the point of having the freedom of speech if you're not supposed to use it? Note that Chomsky and people like him are attacked not because of the details of their arguments, but because they dare to raise certain questions. "Critiques" like "Chomsky hates Western civilization" are indicative. It's not about his arguments.These "critics" don't even know what the arguments are!Some people just don't like certain conclusions he arrives at." Which again begs the question, why are we discussing such matters with people like the 2 assholes? They have demonstrated over and over that they come to this forum in bad faith, how much longer before they are told once and for all to crawl back under the rocks whence they came?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jul 01, 2005 21:55 PM
Anyone who claims to have read Chomsky and concludes that "Chomsky hates Western civilization" should enrol in a remedial reading comprehension course. Whether you agree with him or not, Chomsky on many occasions presents himself as an adimirer and torch bearer of the enlightenment and argues passionately for its ideals.The enlightenment was a high climax of "Western civilization" by ANY definition. I wonder what does "Western civilization" means to Roger and realpc if embracing the enligtenment represents hatred of Western civilization. It is further ironic that while right wingers emphasize what makes our system political system special and superior is its tolerence of dissent. Yet they repeatedly attack people such as Chomsky for precisely exercising this right to dissent, which they so cherish. Well what is the point of having the freedom of speech if you're not supposed to use it? Note that Chomsky and people like him are attacked not because of the details of their arguments, but because they dare to raise certain questions. "Critiques" like "Chomsky hates Western civilization" are indicative. It's not about his arguments.These "critics" don't even know what the arguments are!Some people just don't like certain conclusions he arrives at.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 01, 2005 16:13 PM
"The fact that the wilfully ignorant realpc can't tell what Chomsky means when he speaks in perfectly lucid and deliberately easy to understand terms speaks more to realpc's obstinacy (or stupidity) than it does to anything about Chomsky." Then why in the name of God do you continue to talk to him?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matrix4, Appleman at Jul 01, 2005 07:21 AM
Appleman here. As irritating as Real and Roger are and as stupid as they may be, they do make a valid point about Chomsky. Chomsky does not take about strategy or theory but he does not intentionally; not because he doesn't know any, it's hard to believe someone who has been one of the Left's foremost intellectuals of the last 50 years hasn't, it's that he refuses to state them publicly because of his Anarchist principles. As an anarchist, Chomsky does not really believe in parties or leadership. Thus he refuses to take a role which might make him into a leader by detailing his personal strategy and tactics; that he feels, should be left up to the individual. That's Chomsky's position in a nutshell, it's one of a traditional anarchist. The problem with such a position is that radical change, overthrowing capitalism cannot come at all once. Nor can it come spontaneously by some magical process. People, workers need leadership and need political parties to guide them to power. Without a well-thought out program for achieving and maintaining power, the workers of the world will never be able to achieve it. Some food for thought: "However, without a correct program, theory, strategy, tactics, methods, and organization, the working class will be unable to sieze, hold and extend their power globally and end the nightmare of capitalism once and for all. The ideas of anarchism serve only to "abolish" the state and "authority" in the mind of the individual"

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 01, 2005 06:57 AM
Chomsky expresses outrage at things that are, very often, outrageous. But just as often what outrages him is the fact that life seems to be far from perfect. And in either case, there is no coherent analysis of underlying causes, and never (that I have seen) any constructive proposals." This is an excuse for doing nothing. How's this for an alternative: free the slaves; allow workers to control the MOPs. Economy of the workers, by the workers, for the workers. You tell me, asshole, why this wouldn't be an improvement over Capitalism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jul 01, 2005 06:07 AM
rallybird, Don't even get me started on how much I HATE cars. It was a poorly chosen example, I admit. But you take my point, sometimes bad people manage to do good things by accident.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jul 01, 2005 05:50 AM
RealPC: I have read most of it (Chomsky's works) and I could not tell you exactly what he opposed or advocated in the past. And even if I could, I can't assume his opinions are exactly the same now. Chomsky expects his followers to read an awful lot between the lines. The gist is that things are really bad and have been for a long time, and the villain is western civilization. The followers are expected to infer that things could be improved greatly just by over-turning the existing villainous system. It isn't clear precisely where this system begins or ends, how it can be over-turned or what could replace it. Chomsky expresses outrage at things that are, very often, outrageous. But just as often what outrages him is the fact that life seems to be far from perfect. And in either case, there is no coherent analysis of underlying causes, and never (that I have seen) any constructive proposals. " Excellent point RealPC. I concur completely.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jul 01, 2005 02:02 AM
"The Nazis built the Autobahn. Anything good that occurs as the result of US policies is wholly accidental, as their main purpose is to advance the cause of the capitalists." I hope your not suggesting that the autobahn was a good thing! Anything that benefits car culture can't be. Better highways mainly promote consumerism (of petrol and junk products period). One is reminded of Henry Ford (with is ties to Hitler) and the way he helped shut down early mass-transit systems. And as for cars promoting freedom of movement... what about the freedom of pedestrians or bicyclists (they weren't freed up). Don't forget about traffic jams, smog, global warming, urban sprawl,and the roadway death toll, etc. The "liberating" aspects of technology (capitalist or socialist) often just leads to hardship (even death), and often ends up enslaving rather than liberating. One aspect of capitalism is it's technological manifest destiny, and that's another reason why it must go.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 30, 2005 23:36 PM
"You can point to any country in the world, look at its negatives and come up with an extremely negative picture of it. The point is to keep it in context and also talk about America's achievements, of which there are many." The Nazis built the Autobahn. Anything good that occurs as the result of US policies is wholly accidental, as their main purpose is to advance the cause of the capitalists. The working people of this country have many acchievements of which to be proud; for the rest, it's evil, evil, evil- Iraq being just the latest case in point.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 30, 2005 22:25 PM
Let me put it another way, if I were to write a biography on Martin Luther King and I only brought up the most negative, harshest aspects of his life, while ignoring anything remotely positive; always spinning his life and his actions in the most sinister way imaginable, never giving him any credit for anything good, always seeking a cynical/hypocritical/selfish reason to explain anything remotely decent he may have done, would you say that I am being fair and honest and just want good ol MLK "to be better"? I don't think so. You'd probably yell, scream, call me a racist, one-sided, completely unfair, extreme right winger..etc. Same logic here. It's ok to criticize America just like it's ok to criticize MLK, BUT you need to keep it in the proper context, and at least acknowledge some of the more positive attributes, at least attempt to be somewhat reasonable, fair and balanced. If not, you will only be be preaching to the choir and your message will only be taken seriously by those who wanted to believe it in the first place.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 30, 2005 22:04 PM
"I am sick and tired of people claiming that if you criticize anything about the US or capitalism that means you hate the US or think it's evil." That is not what I'm saying. Critisize America all you want, BUT keep in the proper context. Case in point: El Salvador. It's fine to argue that the US should not have supported a militaristic regime against armed guerillas seeking to overthrow it, that's an argument you can make, no problem. BUT to critisize for this WITHOUT mentioning the obvious fact, the elephant in the room that as a result of US actions, El Salvador currently is enjoying the freest, most democratic government it has ever known. Furthermore, in every single election that has taken place, the FMLN (pro-guerilla party) has been overwhelmingly defeated at the polls. Without mentioning this, it becomes not a reasoned attack weighing BOTH the positives and the negatives, but a one-sided smear campaign. I don't mind the criticisms, I mind the gross imbalance of focusing ONLY on its alleged crimes without giving a single word to any positive attributes that might have resulted from it. You can point to any country in the world, look at its negatives and come up with an extremely negative picture of it. The point is to keep it in context and also talk about America's achievements, of which there are many. In fact, I would challenge anyone here to name a country where its people are more free, more prosperous or a country that has done more good in the world.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 30, 2005 22:00 PM
Just wanted people to be aware that a message I wrote elsewhere was hijacked by an agent provocateur so that it appeared as his message and people would got to his page for follow-up. This is just more low-level harassment that I've faced for years as an activist and I'd just like people to be aware that it happens. It wouldn't be surprising if some agents trolled these boards and occasionally put in their two cents for whatever reason. Anyway... I'll wear this as another badge of honor but BE AWARE -- if you organise in any effective manner YOU WILL BE TARGETED. It's happened time and again, didn't Chomsky just write another blog about cointelpro?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 30, 2005 19:54 PM
"Chomsky has never once suggested that Western civilization is the root of all evil." from Roger the Anti-Chomsky : "By constantly focusing only on the negative, as Chomsky does, and never mentioning any positive attributes of US/West Civ. or of capitalism, yes he does give that impression." I am sick and tired of people claiming that if you criticize anything about the US or capitalism that means you hate the US or think it's evil. That is fascist, nationalist nonsense! Should we love our beloved country like a four year old child loves his mommy and lash out at any suggestion that mommy might have flaws that could be addressed and perhapses improved, or shouldn't we love our country the way an adult loves his mother, seeing her as a human being that is not perfect and has faults like anyone else but we love her anyway? Has it occurred to you that we who criticize the US do so BECUASE WE DO LOVE IT AND WANT IT TO BE BETTER????? Sorry for the "shouting" but this really gets to me because I can't help thinking that Anti-Chomsky and his peers know this fact and ignore it because it's such an easy tactic to try to discredit people who raise disturbing truths that you don't want to accept.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 30, 2005 15:41 PM
"The medicine can be worse than the cure"- That's an old saying, but I think it applies in this situation. Look, I see some merit in what Chomsky writes. I would not be here otherwise. I agree that the US has made mistakes in its foreign policy (like every other nation) and at times, can be hypocritical in the decisions it makes (again,not unlike every other nation that I know of) My point is that while I agree mistakes do happen, radical change needs to substantiated. The world IS a complex place. The US has its role in the world and it will always be concerned with what happens in other countries, especially if what appears to be going on is the overthrow of a US ally by brute force, as what (almost) happened in El Salvador. And look at El Salvador now. It is without question the most free and democratic it has ever been. With the people in the elections consistently rejecting the FMLN. Is this ever mentioned by Chomsky? No. Only the supporting the violence part. However, as William F. Buckley points out, sometimes states must ally with unsavory characters (a la Stalin in WWII) to bring about a greater good (the liberation of Europe from Germany or in El Salvador's case:the most free and democratic gov. it has ever known) If Chomsky wishes to be taken more seriously, he needs to be clear about what his plans, strategies and ideas are; for it is not at all obvious that just anything would be better or an improvement, indeed, often the medicine is worse than the cure.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 30, 2005 15:08 PM
"US and Western POLICY has caused immense evil over the years, yes" They also have causes an immense amount of good in the world as well. Have created the freest societies the world has ever seen with generally much more freedom with regards to women's rights, gay rights, minority rights etc. "Chomsky has never once suggested that Western civilization is the root of all evil." By constantly focusing only on the negative, as Chomsky does, and never mentionting any positive attributes of US/West Civ. or of capitalism, yes he does give that impression. "...but there is a big difference between choosing not to talk to people who are being purposefully distracting (not just politely disagreeing) and a systematic state tendency to ignore alternative viewpoints." Can you name me one poster that has consistently and STRONGLY disagreed with Chomsky that has not been called names and either is ignored or was called upon to be ignored by other posters? The only three that I am aware of: myself, RealPC, and The Abyss all have been called names and all have been subject to other people clamoring for us to be ignored. What this says for the Left's supposed tolerance for "dissident" points of view is left for others to decide I guess.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 30, 2005 10:52 AM
"This I just don't agree with. I don't see how engaging with people legitimizes their position; if anything it shows how weak some positions are (as Roger proves again above). Chomsky never refrains from debate, for instance, no matter how weak or ridiculous his opponents are." Actually that's not true... I just saw a back and forth "debate" that Chomsky engaged in with Hitchens (I believe is his name) very reluctantly and only after some others had prodded (maybe even goaded) him into it. He realised the guy didn't have a leg to stand on and hated having to deal with him because he was an ignorant sensationalist. Some people are willfully ignorant, some are morally corrupt, and others are simply retarded. But, if you like arguing the obvious with them... more power to you.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 30, 2005 07:15 AM
"The fact is, that Chomsky is VERY light when it comes to elaborating on changing things for the better (as he sees it) Extremely vague on what would take its place, what system he believes is best, and in-depth alternative decisions to the one he so vehemently disagrees with. Remember that it is always very, very easy to critisize something - much more difficult (and much more brave) to offer a constructive solution." It is disingenuous to attempt to discredit social criticism in this way: as if you agree with it and are just concerned with debating alternatives. As Graeme points out, the other asshole does not believe that capitalism is unjust to begin with. So, we must attempt to show that it is, which we have done over and over again. When you defenders of capitalism have accepted that, then and only then would discussing alternatives with you be dialectically appropriate. Until such time our debate is over capitalism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 30, 2005 05:49 AM
"You know, it seems awfully ironic people like Robert Allen constantly whine about ignoring people who disagree with the standard "Chomsky Line" even though the Left bitterly complains about it when it happens to them." Roger the Asshole (as distinguished from Real the Asshole) I'll kick the intellectual shit out of you and that other asshole anytime.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 30, 2005 04:14 AM
"and (Cuba, Vietnam, China, USSR, etc) are only "left-wing" in the same sense that you must be a Nazi since you are "right wing." How can you deny that Fidel Castro and Cuba are left wing? How can you say that Castro's speeches are not filled with leftist rhetoric? Castro's latest book is called, "Capitalism in Crisis" and was written in the mid-90s no less.... Need I say more? Ditto with Mao Tse-Tung, Lenin, Ho Chi Minh etc. All their speeches, all their propaganda is filled with leftist arguments, leftist phrases, leftist For you to deny that any of these people were left-wing, that their speeches were not filled with leftist rhetoric, that they were not supported by American leftists for YEARS (some still are) is just beyond me. I wish I could go back and show you the propaganda leaflets made by Communist China during the great Korean War, urging US soldiers to surrender and calling the war, "Wall Street's War" and a "Rich Man's War"...sound familar? Propaganda that could have been written by a dozen American lefties. Have you ever read "State and Revolution" by Lenin? Are you going to honestly tell me that that book was not written by a (far) left of center mind? Come on Grame, I thought you were more honest than that.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 30, 2005 03:53 AM
"All very good questions which we need to debate and think about and discuss..." So in other words, there is no solution and there will never be any solution. Because people will argue about these questions FOREVER. Do you think one day everyone on the Left will just yell out in unison, "YES I AGREE! LET'S DO IT THIS WAY!" That will never happen. There will never be unamity. Besides, your arch-enemies the corporate CEO and the elites all have their goals, their agenda and their strategy down cold...it's time for the Left (and thinkers like Chomsky) to do the same. If not, the Left will be reduced to...well..just about what they are right now: meaningless. But I guess that will never happen since it's far easier to write books, sell books (among other things Chomsky also sells tapes, DVDs,pamphlets etc)and make money off them. It sure must be real swell to whine and moan about how horrible the US is while making (at least) a 6 figure salary over at MIT, a notoriously elitist school. Why not work at a public university? Why not join with Zinn and other intellectuals and make a FREE college? Surely they have the money after all these years of being tenured professors and bestselling authors? Notice Greame! I am not just critisizing Chomsky:I am offering alternatives as to what Chomsky might do instead. Now we can have a real debate, a real argument.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 30, 2005 03:23 AM
"Give me a break. Not one of the examples you list was formed by popular "organization;" all were/are ruled by elites of one kind or another, and are only "left-wing" in the same sense that you must be a Nazi since you are "right wing." Even with this in mind, most of the examples you give all saw dramatic improvements in living standards for most of their people upon adoption of their "hated" socioeconomic systems, but that is no doubt completely irrelevant to someone like you." Classic Chomsky technique here. You see what he's doing? First, he (again) criticizes and denounces these governments. BUT THEN, compliments their "dramatic improvements in living standards." So you can't say he beliefs these gov's represenated a positive alternative model, YET you can't say he dismisses them either. It's classic Chomsky. Intentionally vague and confusing when speaking of left-wing totalitarian states such as Cuba and Vietnam, both praising and denouncing them at the same time while not saying what he actually sees as being an alternative model that he would support. By the way, it's funny you keep on using that "Nazi" reference, did you know that Chomsky was once endorsed by the British Nazi Party? In part, because of his own vagueness on what he actually supports?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 30, 2005 02:55 AM
Grame: "Why on earth should it be up to Chomsky to tell everyone how to think? Don't you have a brain? Can't you possibly envision any alternative without having one man tell you how to go about everything?" Ah yes, Roger has returned. Much to your (and Chomsky's) chagrin I imagine. Isn't it funny how I never hear you say anything that Chomsky himself would disagree with? Eh, but I digress... Who was asking Chomsky to tell other people how to think? I'm simply asking for Chomsky to illustrate and elaborate on his solutions; how to make a better world (again, in his mind), what would replace it, how would it be replaced etc. When he critisizes US foreign policy, instead of just critisizing it (which again, is extremely easy to do) why not offer a alternative plan? Instead of saying the US should not have supported the El Salvadorean gov., why doesn't he say "INSTEAD, they should have done...xyz" NOW, you can have a debate! Now you can discuss and people can COMPARE it for themselves which plan they feel is best! This idea that laying out such a comparison would be "telling other people how to think" is ludicrous and speaks of your own low opinion of the general public. Are you that arrogant to believe that if ever Chomsky were to go in detail about how a better society would take place and what would it be like, people would just believe it unquestioningly? That they would not scrutinize it, compare it, debate it, discuss it, just like everything else?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 29, 2005 23:59 PM
The "Organize - Just Do It" line. That's the standard line that Chomsky followers will respond with. However, that hardly gives one any clue about strategy or achieving one's goals on how to take power/change the society. The main question, as RealPC noted, was HOW? HOW to organize? Where to organize? What strategies are best? Many people have been organizing for years, what should we be doing differently? What of the political system? Chomsky disagrees with both Democrats and Republicans..fine. So now what? Should we not bother voting? Just be happy with the Democrats? Go for a third party? Start a new party? Should the Far Left even seek ways of winning power electorally? Does that even matter? Unfortunately, that has been the Leftists "style" of writing nowadays; critisize, critisize, critisize, bitch bitch bitch while not offering any solutions. There are literally hundreds of questions Chomsky should be addressing instead of the same tired regurgiations about the US/Western Civilization being the root of all evil. Chomsky appears to be obsessed with this and completely ignores the history of people who "organized for the better" (whether truly "Communist" or not; certainly they were Left-wing) and in which the result was a complete disaster! (Mao's China, Vietnam, Cuba, Cambodia, USSR, Libya all come to mind) The idea here is not to compare the United States to some utopian entity that has existed only in the minds of Leftists, but real-world examples.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The, Roger at Jun 29, 2005 23:29 PM
realPC: Thank you for being here. I agree with much of what you say and I am thankful someone else is here to give an alternative belief to the Chomsky followers. You know, it seems awfully ironic people like Robert Allen constantly whine about ignoring people who disagree with the standard "Chomsky Line" even though the Left bitterly complains about it when it happens to them. The fact is, that Chomsky is VERY light when it comes to elaborating on changing things for the better (as he sees it) Extremely vague on what would take its place, what system he believes is best, and in-depth alternative decisions to the one he so vehemently disagrees with. Remember that it is always very, very easy to critisize something - much more difficult (and much more brave) to offer a constructive solution. Which by the way, Chomsky should know he is clearly implying for one does not (or should not) criticize something without having something better in mind. What is that something Prof. Chomsky? Do tell.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 29, 2005 18:58 PM
Graeme: Thank you for your though provoking responses. I want to comment on the following: "Realpc is right in that you cannot "force" fairness and equality" I agree, and that is what I saying. If there is no collective will of the people to achieve equality, then no one can force us to change our system to make it fair. If we collectively agree that we want equality then we will go about making it happen regardless of systematic change. The system will have to be changed to reflect the will of the majority or it will simply become irrelevant. Isn't that what happened with alcohol prohibition? When prohibition was forced on a majority by a minority, people simply refused to follow the rules to the point that the rules had to be thrown out in embarrassment. “It is not "man's inhumanity to man" in the abstract sense that is to blame but the inertia created by our socioeconomic structures “ I agree that part of the problem is social inertia but when I said “man's inhumanity to man” I did not mean that in an abstract sense. I meant that we can claim to be held hostage by an unjust system against our will, but in a society like America where we enjoy relatively high degrees of freedom and privilege, this excuse does not hold out for long, and in the end we are responsible for not changing the system or working outside of it to achieve justice.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 29, 2005 01:46 AM
"Maybe I'm just being naive and stubborn in thinking that I can reach people like realpc through logic and persuasion but for some reason I keep trying." Graeme, It's not just that any further attempts are likely to prove futile; they also legitimize a position you and I both know is wicked. To make them is to risk becoming complicitous in the very injustices we seek to eradicate. Thus, in the immortal words of James Brown, let's say it loud and say it proud: REALPC IS AN ASSHOLE.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 28, 2005 20:03 PM
I realpc said: "get info mostly from public radio or TV" 20 years ago I would have agreed that PBS was a good source of information, but it has become so beholden to corporate interest, it's been corrupted. When the commercials came, the integrity left. NPR has become so docile that I have become unable to listen to it lately without getting angry. As for PBS, recently it's gotten much worse. I urge you to listen to what Bill Moyers has been talking about since he ended his PBS show "Now". http://www.freepress.net/conference/audio05/moyers.mp3 Private ownership of our country is becoming so complete that even our public school, TV and radio are at the disposal of them.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 28, 2005 17:55 PM
rallybird is hitting the nail on the head, folks.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 28, 2005 14:12 PM
" no powerful interests to represent, no money to make, and no conflicts of interest to hide" I hate cable and network TV news and get info mostly from public radio or TV, and various web sites an books. So I don't think my sources can be considered mainstream. I like book tv on CSPAN2, which does not seem to be under the control of any mainstream ideologues. ZNet is one of the least balanced of my sources. The main reason I come here is to study bias.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 28, 2005 09:37 AM
"...blog commentary systems are by their nature rather dispersed and anonoymous; the actions you are talking about require local planning and organizing. I'm not sure this forum will be particularly useful in this effort; how can all of us plan anything together when we all live in different cities?" Admittedly there may be some logistical problems, but we can share links, ideas, and commit informally to "the cause" we're speaking of noting any potentialities or progress in our area. Local indymedia sites would probably be the best places to organise with activists in our immediate locales.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 28, 2005 09:07 AM
My point about the obvious was that you shouldn't waste your time with the willfully ignorant. As for vanguardism... I'd suggest that "avante garde" might be a friendlier description. It seems to me that the Bolsheviks hijacked the vanguardist positions of the anarchists, who have been largely been written out of that revolutionary history, and who had a great deal of respect for the people (arguably too much). Anyway, my idea is that you should convince the man on the street, who maybe hasn't heard these ideas at all (rather than the willfully ignorant that I referred to above). I think (inter)national days of action against specific corporations are a good idea and laying a protest siege for weeks locally is an even better idea. I think if there is a movement that this idea of ongoing protests can be arranged (perhaps in larger more progressive cities first, and foremostly, but elsewhere too).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 28, 2005 07:32 AM
This is really starting to get off topic. Are we talking about An End to Capitalism or not? If so, I don't think the system will eat itself fast enough and needs a little push. And, like Chomksy suggests, I think the push needs to come from activists on the streets educating through protests. No one commented on my original post though (a few pages back) and I'm starting to think this is just another forum for ivory-tower windbags who want to show-off their intellectual prowess by talking in circles with people who don't even dislike capitalism to begin with! If you have a point to be made, let's work on organising and moving past this forum so that your points can effectively be heard.

Reply this comment

Person

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 28, 2005 06:22 AM
Realpc: "To me, the prevailing ZNet ideologies tend to be outdated, narrow and not very insightful." You are projecting.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 28, 2005 05:48 AM
"Geostrategic concerns have much to do with the successes of the countries you are talking about: all are key regional US allies, and all rely on heavily subsidized state intervention in their economies.." Just to add to that, all the successful "Asian miracles" were quasi planned economies protected by heavy trade barriers. They follow the Japanese model which is in many ways the exact opposite to text book "free market capitalism" which the U.S forces on other other countries. The only exception which resembles most closely the ideal "free market" is Hong Kong. But that is a very unigue society benefited by geography, the cold war and other incidental factors one cannot duplicate elsewhere.Also, it is a tiny, yet very densely populated place. It is probably the only place in the world where you actually make a profit by runing public transit system. A "real country" in Asia that follows the U.S gospel of "free market, free trade" capitalism most closely is the Philipines. It has "free trade zones" since the 1970's. It was and still is a basket case.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 28, 2005 05:31 AM
I think maybe these folks might be able to offer a better perspective on why (and how much) capitalism is hated... Palo Alto, CA 6-25-05 Medium Resolution (42.5 MB) http://www.indybay.org/uploads/paloalto_6-25-05.mov (download torrent) http://www.indybay.org/uploads/torrents/paloalto_6-25-05.mov.torrent Quicker Download, Lower Resolution (20.2 MB) http://www.indybay.org/uploads/paloalto_6-25-05_low.mov (download torrent) http://www.indybay.org/uploads/torrents/paloalto_6-25-05_low.mov.torrent

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 28, 2005 02:11 AM
"it's strength lies in uncovering hidden truths and providing counter-analyses to the dominant discourses of our times." All sources of info are slanted, and ZNet is just another ideologically biased source. You perceive it as "true" because you agree with its bias. To me, the prevailing ZNet ideologies tend to be outdated, narrow and not very insightful.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 28, 2005 02:06 AM
I am going to pull rank on you here. As a philosophy instructor, I have dealt with his type before. He is in the grips of a false theory, which neither you nor anyone else, except God Almighty, can persuade him to abdicate. And that is because, unlike you and I, he can't reason. He simply does not understand how to philosophize. You can see for yourself what he does: when pressed to back up some claim, he either produces a red herring- runs his mouth- or dismisses our request out of hand. We are going around in circles with him and are, thus, legitimizing his position. That is why I recommend ostracizing him; he may then see the error of his ways.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 28, 2005 00:33 AM
"How are we going to change people's minds if we aren't even willing to talk to those people with whom we disagree (a large percentage of the population, I'm sure you'll admit)? ... "Either way, participation in our discussions is of course completely voluntary, and I feel it is a useful exercise in sharpening my arguments." Graeme, I take your point about sharpening arguments; I have done the same myself. Nevertheless, had you been an abolitionist, how long would you have debated slavery with a slaveholder or his apologist? To go on too long is to legitimize their position. Your arguments are as sharp as they are going to get; you have established beyond a reasonable doubt that capitalism entails TREMENDOUS injustice. So are mine. Asshole has failed to respond to our basic contention that workers under capitalism are slaves. Further, he has no intention of doing so. Further still, he can't (nor can anyone else), since we are in possession of the truth here. contd. below

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 27, 2005 14:15 PM
"one of my main problems with people is that they don't question authority." Graeme, That is my criticism too, I guess. But I have to acknowledge that without some faith in authority none of us would get anything done. We would spend all our waking hours trying to find out everything for ourselves, which of course is impossible. We all must depend to some extent on experts and journalists for information, and we cannot question every single thing. The solution for me is to take in information from diverse sources. When I see "facts" coming into stark contrast I know to question one or more of the sources. Also, I have never trusted mainstream authorities, whether for news or academic ideas, and have always looked to alternative sources for political and scientific information. I have often been amazed at how narrow and biased the mainstream information can be. That's why I read ZNet, because it's as far as possible from mainstream news. But if I ONLY got my ideas from ZNet and other far left sources I would be completely brainwashed and self-righteous. Instead of being self-righteous, since I consider various perspectives, I am amazed by the complexity and by the incredible distortions on every side.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Tootankamon_2, Sailom at Jun 27, 2005 14:06 PM
Rallybird, I actually agree with you even though you are using terms that are not quite right. I am not American, and I hope that more and more Americans will think that either the Iraq war or the denials of environmental threats are wrong. You also call the current US policies "fascist" policies. The brand of American conservatism that took over the country is definitely a form of American nationalism. However, the emphasis on religious imagery is not "fascist", it's more theocratic. Anyway, it leads to the same conclusions: the Bush administration has damaged the traditional American values of "freedom" and "tolerance". My criticism of most debates in this blog is that by targeting the "capitalist system", you are alienating many potential friends around the world. Sailom

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 27, 2005 13:16 PM
"Because, the people around me are not nazis, their employees are not slaves. That's it. When I think about current cases of slavery, I can't help thinking about these poor employees of state university who had to work over-time without any benefits until 3.00 am!!!" Americans are not Nazi's, but the argument could be made that they are fascists (along the lines of Mussolini's description of fascism). They aren't trying to destroy judaism, but tens of thousands of totally innocent Iraqis have been killed in the war on terrorism (which had little to do with Iraq). One might also argue that the environmental harm caused by american consumers is a biocidal ecocide which is like (and will lead to) genocide. As for slavery... the sweatshops that Americans get their products from seem related to slavery. Nazi's no, fascists... yes. You're not in favor of fascism are you?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Tootankamon_2, Sailom at Jun 27, 2005 12:41 PM
"Individual responsibility only goes so far in an inherently unjust and oppressive system. Corruption and individual unethical behaviour are only to capitalism what hair loss is to cancer; they are only symptoms of much deeper, systemic problems. Addressing these problems while ignoring the deeper issues would be like giving a cancer patient a wig; he might look better, but the underlying disease would still be there." Well, then, I can only say that I have met enough business owners to refute your analysis of an “inherently unjust and oppressive system”. What else can I say? Are we the devils for making a living? For selling goods and services? Hiring employees? Making a profit? Off-course, I definitely met unethical business owners too. Those kind of guys who would cheat you for any reasons. Are they the main symptoms of the cancer? What about all the other ones? Is Capitalism a "social cancer" just like democracy was one in Plato's republic? Oh yes, sure, we are definitely unhealthy people, maybe I drink too much coffee. I'm thinking that I work too hard too but I have no choice, if I don't, my business will become bankrupt. I can imagine many people are part of this social cancer though. That would explain all these health concerns of people around me. I will mention it next time I'll go to hospital. Sailom

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Tootankamon_2, Sailom at Jun 27, 2005 12:30 PM
Global economics represent a lot of decision-makers and I guess they won't come to refute your point of view! This point of views is actually not refutable as you are talking about “global economics”. Nobody can pretend to understand fully the complexity of global economics, can you? If you were specifically talking about particular events that could illustrate your views, that would help me. I will try to follow your logic and "think globally". The most advanced countries in the world follow some sorts of capitalist model. East Asia has experienced an incredible economic development for the past 30 years (China included). The results were a drastic fall in poverty levels. Capitalism didn't prevent these improvements from taking place, to say the least. Off-course you may mention that the "Least Developed Countries" are poor because they are too opened to capitalism? I would reply that the "capitalist system" is not the main cause of their troubles just like capitalism is not the only reason for the wealth of rich countries. Sailom

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Tootankamon_2, Sailom at Jun 27, 2005 12:03 PM
"Come now, surely you have the intelligence to be for or against something as enormous as Nazism or slavery? Why not then extend your analysis into the current socioeconomic sphere? Give yourself some credit; these things aren't that difficult to understand." Oh yes, I disagree with Nazism and slavery! Why can't I extend my analysis to the current (evil) socioeconomic sphere? Because, the people around me are not nazis, their employees are not slaves. That's it. When I think about current cases of slavery, I can't help thinking about these poor employees of state university who had to work over-time without any benefits until 3.00 am!!! They were very low-paid and threatened to be fired without any employement benefits if they refused to work over-time. (This university is not an American one). Sailom

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Tootankamon_2, Sailom at Jun 27, 2005 11:35 AM
Graeme, Thanks for your reply. I'm not sure we can convince one another, but it's definitely worth trying. First of all, I should mention that debating is for me is about acknowledging our own ignorance of the world's issues. We can only experience a few events in our own lives and they are billions of events taking place every second around the world. Some of them are reported in the media and we may be lucky to read an “unbiased” report of these events. Even if most of the world's significant events were reported in the media, we would probably miss 99% of them as we only have a few hours to read the news every day. This awareness of our own ignorance is not a “downer”, it's more like a urge to learn and understand all these events with an open-mind. That's why debating is important. I definitely don't know anything of all the small events happening in the street where you live and neither do you know much about all my personal experiences. This introduction is important as I am extremely sceptic of “systematic flaws”. Sailom

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 26, 2005 20:46 PM
"I know it'a hard to be a leftist, always angry and depressed, looking down disdainfully at Joe six pack. I don't watch Oprah, or any popular TV, but there would be absolutely nothing wrong with it if I did." Wrong again, asshole. I have nothing but respect for my fellow workers and, by the grace of God, have never known sadness. I knew, though, that he would seize on that one point; but the fact remains that truly erudite people don't bother with the simpletons shilling on television- especially when others are suffering tremendously at the hands of the very people doing the programming. It should disturb one's conscience to do so; make one feel slimy. Those who don't, like this guy, are morally bankrupt. But this is really a side issue. The main concern here still has not been addressed: workers under capitalism are slaves.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 26, 2005 19:08 PM
As much as I hate our current economic system, I acknowledge that economic injustice is not necessarily an unavoidable consequence of it. The kind of inequity we see today in the USA could not be possible without the collective will to allow it to continue. I think this is best acknowledged or we critics run the risk of scapegoating "the system" and ascribing all the blame to it, thus allowing us to deny that we are responsible for not voluntarily, of our own free will, acting to correct this economic injustice. Better to blame an abstract concept for man's inhumanity to man, rather that look inward. My point is that we could probably achieve fairness easily if we wanted to without changing any rules of the system. People point to corruption in capitalism and communism and cite this as proof that these systems cause the injustice we suffer, when in either case justice can be done by ethical behavior of the participants, particularly the ruling/owning class. In other words, we can tinker with our system or have a revolution and try something else entirely, and the economic justice we seek will still depend on whomever the exploiters are, having a change of heart. By the way, this is NOT a critique of "human nature".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 26, 2005 16:49 PM
"someone who knows so much about a TV talk show host" The Oprah story was on the news yesterday. Yes, I can't help knowing who Oprah is, and even you know she is a talk show host. I know it'a hard to be a leftist, always angry and depressed, looking down disdainfully at Joe six pack. I don't watch Oprah, or any popular TV, but there would be absolutely nothing wrong with it if I did. And of course your literal little brain missed the whole point.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 26, 2005 08:51 AM
Well said Robert! It seems that nobody wants to organize against exploitation when they can pontificate about how well they know the obvious. Not only do we need to stop supporting the system of exploitation but we need to stop it period. Like I suggested a few pages ago, we need to present a constant voice against corporate crimes against humanity at the street level. If you have any faith in people (in general, as opposed to some dolts posting here) you need to present them with information and appeal to their conscience and also to their angst about living in a shallow materialistic society. I'm posting here because it's possible that someone else here might care enough to help organize and ACTually do some legwork for what they seem to understand and claim to care about. But who knows?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 26, 2005 07:45 AM
bwong and greame- "What can be done? There are no simple answers. There may be complex answers, though, but they require patience and thought. But a "perfect" world will never be created, because each time we solve a problem we create several more. It keeps life interesting." What sort of detachment from one's fellow men must one achieve to find their suffering "interesting." And yet you guys continue conversing with him as if he we were a decent human being. Doesn't it make you feel slimy as budding intellectuals to discourse with someone who knows so much about a TV talk show host? Blow him off and get on with your scholarship!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 25, 2005 23:25 PM
"You frequently use the U.S.S.R to make your point is also telling. This is a caricature quite understandable for the six pack Joe who listens to Rush Limbaugh. But it is embarassing for someone who claim to be so well read and informed as yourself." I have read enough about the USSR to know that Marxism is not the simple solution leftists crave. Neither is parecon. I do not think the world has problems because human nature is evil. I think problems are inherent in a complex system, and our system grows more complex by the minute. As a very simple example of what I mean: Oprah Winfrey is famous because of intelligence, talent, motivation, modern technology, good luck. etc. Millions of people love her, and for good reason. Therefore, any shop owner who insults Oprah can be closed down immediately and permanently. Hardly any of us have that kind of power. What if Oprah were not a perfectly fair and compassionate person? What if she had an occasional bad mood? She can still shut down anyone, any one of us, if we insult her, even by accident. Whose fault is that? No one's. You can't blame Oprah for her success, or people for loving her. Love creates as many problems as hate. What can be done? There are no simple answers. There may be complex answers, though, but they require patience and thought. But a "perfect" world will never be created, because each time we solve a problem we create several more. It keeps life interesting.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 25, 2005 22:16 PM
"your confusion of democracy, and capitalism. This illustrates a complete ignorance of history in general and the history of capitalism in particular." Bullshit. I said "our current system." I have never said our current system is capitalist. I said it's a mixed economy. You criticize me without even trying to read or understand what I said.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 25, 2005 21:14 PM
"At least some politicians must realize that a chaotic and dangerous world is bad for everyone" But the economy is tied to a destructive system emphasizing short term gain and short term survival. Corporations don't look beyond the profit of the next quarter. The system has built in disincentives against foresight. Everyone knows about the possible consequences of enviromental disasters. But far too little is done. The U.S walks away even from moderate measures such as Kyoto. The ground of objection to conservation and lower pollution us "costs". It is as if deforestation, mass extinctions, health toll and death toll from climatic anamolies and a livable enviroment are all costfree. This should tell you something about the calculus of capitalism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 25, 2005 20:50 PM
"Maybe you took some courses and they laid it all out for you. You don't want to question your academic authority figures." It is quite patronizing of you to say that about Graeme. It seems that you're the one who doesn't question authority. You claim you're an independent thinker but you posts are all cliche's from newspaper and the media. You keep repeating the same mantra without a shred of evidence to back it up and never look beneath the serface, as is evident in your confusion of democracy, and capitalism. This illustrates a complete ignorance of history in general and the history of capitalism in particular. You frequently use the U.S.S.R to make your point is also telling. This is a caricature quite understandable for the six pack Joe who listens to Rush Limbaugh. But it is embarassing for someone who claim to be so well read and informed as yourself. It is also interesting that you failed to(or didn't bother to) engage Graeme on any of the subtstantial points he raise in his 5 part messages. All you did was repeating the same pyschobable about the "extreme left".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 25, 2005 20:28 PM
"But the basic goals of our current system -- balancing competition and cooperation, maximizing individual freedom without sacrificing community values -- these are very sound and sensible." You must be at sleep for the last 100 years if you think these are the goals of capitalism. Capitalist "freedom"simply means the fredom to invest and consume(if you have $), no more, no less. Just because competing values exist in a nominally capitalist society does not mean they are the result of capitalist dynamics. Quite the contrary, these ideas emerge as resistence to the market imperative. With "globalozation", raw capitalism is making a come back with a vengence and once again theratens to undermine the gain of popular struggles in nominally democratic countries.Many French and Ducth who voted "no" to the European consititution understand this perfectly.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 25, 2005 19:56 PM
You constantly confuse structural problems with individual motives. The third world is systematically kept down through a set of policies imposed by institutions such as the IMF, world bank and WTO. These policies are implemented not out of malice. They are the natural consequences of the way capitalist economy functions. It requires a world hospitable to capital, investments, repatriation of profits and facilitate the exploitation of cheap resources and labour. It requires dumping ground for surplus and various mechanism to externalize costs. Individuals who occupy powerful positions must obey that imperative to stay in office. They are accountable to various stake holders(corporation lobbies, citizens who demand jobs, etc). Not surprisingly the weak and voiceless(especially foreigners) end up disavantaged and exploited. Former officials often talk very sensibly and frankly as private citizens. But being "responsible" means they have to seperate their private views from their institutional functions. I heard Loyld Axworthy, a former Canadian foreign minister on a CBC phone in show. I was surprised that he sounded almost like Chomsky on foreign policies. A caller asked him if he would express such opinions when he was in thecabinet. He said,"Of course not, you cannot atagonize people".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 25, 2005 19:30 PM
"You don't know that. At least some politicians must realize that a chaotic and dangerous world is bad for everyone. It would not be possible for every single world leader to miss this obvious fact." No doubt some do, to various degrees. But what kind of policies emerge from such "genuine good will" to help? Consider foreign aid, which exemplify first world generosity to most people.But here is the caveat. Most "aid" are "tied". That means aid recieveing countries are required to spent the aid money on expensive (and probably uselsss) export from the aid giving countries. A case in point is Bush's contribution to fight AIDs in Africa. The U.S insists that to qualify for the assistance the recipients MUST agree to buy patented drugs from U.S manfactureres which are several times more expensive than the generics. It should be transparant to anyone that "charity" of the sorts are nothing but a round about way to subsidize the domestic economy. The aid recipients in turn become captive markets. Only the most brain washed would interprete such self serving undertakings as failed, noble attempts to do good.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 25, 2005 14:52 PM
"There is no "desire to help" at the highest levels." You don't know that. At least some politicians must realize that a chaotic and dangerous world is bad for everyone. It would not be possible for every single world leader to miss this obvious fact. "Again, none of this is especially controversial. Take any first year course in development studies and it'll all be laid out for you." Maybe that's the problem -- you took some courses and they laid it all out for you. You don't want to question your academic authority figures. There is no simple answer for creating order and justice in the world. The neocons think capitalism will ultimately create happiness everywhere, but I don't agree. That's just another simple-minded ideological fantasy. On the other hand, the neocons are not merely a bunch of dopes. Their faith in capitalism (which goes too far, I admit) has some basis in reason. Similarly, the far left's hatred of capitalism is not entirely insane. It's too easy to take advantage, especially on the global level. But the basic goals of our current system -- balancing competition and cooperation, maximizing individual freedom without sacrificing community values -- these are very sound and sensible. Most American citizens and politicians share these goals and most see absolutely no reason to get rid of free enterprise.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 25, 2005 04:32 AM
Yeah you can always fall back on slavery and Indians. The current prosperity of the US does not result from slavery. Freedom of speech, education and prosperity allowed Americans to question the morality of slavery and genocide, things that had been accepted by most civilizations since the dawn of history.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 25, 2005 04:19 AM
"within the US we have some degree of order and justice, and it would be hard for you to prove that the US economic system could not survive without a third world to prey on." Not hard at all, realpc. How prosperous would we be today without having benefited from slavery (blacks from Africa) and genocide (native Americans)? Are we suppose to forget that there were millions of people living on this continent that were virtually wiped out so that we could prosper here? Are we suppose to disregard the contribution to our economy from African slaves and just attribute our wealth to our clever economic system?? Get real, realpc.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 25, 2005 03:42 AM
Graeme, Yes I think your comparison of world power to organized crime is accurate. We have no world government after all, and it's impossible to maintain fairness without govenment and law enforcement. But within the US we have some degree of order and justice, and it would be hard for you to prove that the US economic system could not survive without a third world to prey on. The lawlessness of the global economy could more easily be blamed on lack of any powerful world government than on capitalism. Capitalism is an abstract concept. You have to decide what its defining features are and then determine whether problems like global crime and injustice result from these defining features. If it is possible to have a capitalist system with low crime levels, or a non-capitalist system with high crime levels, then your assumption that crime and capitalism are necessarily related must be questioned.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Lewis, RA at Jun 25, 2005 01:24 AM
Against corporatism, Noam Chomsky suggests getting active to make the world a better place. The thing is... I think activism seems too low brow for comfortable academics (who may or may not be able to politically [or financially] afford to engage in meaningful activism at the street level). As W would say, activism is hard work. Still, I think it can be fun, rewarding, and effective. The idea that I've tried to promote involves bringing all the various types of activists in your area around one actual business. McDonald's is my favored choice. You could bring together the environmentalist, the animal rights/vegan eactivists, the labor activists, etc. and lay siege to one particular store -- day in, day out, with a constant presence. If a couple were always out front they would educate some people and simply make others eat elsewhere to avoid any type of confrontation. On some days many activists could be present and maybe occasionally at a different store just to change things up. Stickers and stencils could go up everywhere and Big Mac could become synonymous with spitburger. Then, after one McDonalds is shut down they could move to the next or go after The GAP or an EXXON/Mobil. Choosing the best storefront would be of key importance. A McDonalds without a drive-thru on a pedestrian route would be ideal. And although this ongoing protest wouldn't have to involve rowdiness or illegality, creative pranks along the lines of the yippies would be most useful.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 25, 2005 00:39 AM
I read the article from your link. It described how the "greening" of the third world tried to replace a self-sufficient agricultural system with a new one that would make these self-sustaining farmers dependent on patented hybrids and chemical fertilizers. Who would be the financial beneficiary then? Follow the money. After reading this article I am left wondering if it not you who have had your assumptions challenged.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 24, 2005 22:09 PM
http://www.rps.psu.edu/jun96/poverty.html This is an interesting article showing how most attempts to improve conditions in the third world actually create new problems and make things worse. The assumption that modern scientific methods are always better than traditional ways has been disastrous for many third world inhabitants. The assumption that a traditional farmer is poor just because he can't afford modern gadgets is wrong, since the traditional farmer may have all he needs to feed his family and stay healthy. According to this article it is the desire to help, rather than capitalist greed, which has been most damaging to the third world. This is just one example that should cause you to question some of your leftist assumptions.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 24, 2005 21:22 PM
In Columbia, for example, the US military is dusting crops with toxic chemicals that kill crops and poison the soil so that no new crops can be planted. This is being done in the name of "the war on drugs" supposedly to wipe out cocaine imports (I won't even bother to laugh at anyone who suggests that this strategy has had any impact of illegal drug business). Though it has not even put a dent in drug trade, it has been hugely successful in putting peasant farmers out of business for good, thus leaving them no choice but to abandon their family farms and move to the city to seek employment from capitalist in their factories. This model works worldwide, as in Africa and elsewhere.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 24, 2005 20:51 PM
Us corporations benefit from povery anywhere in the world. Impoverished people are cheap labor. Plus if they can't afford to farm, they leave thier farms for the citites to work in the factories. So now there is access to cheap labor and abandoned land that can be bought and profited from.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 24, 2005 20:11 PM
Graeme, I am already aware of criticisms of capitalism. The information you provided does not answer my question, which I will try asking again, in a more specific form. Let's say the US is prosperous, compared to most African nations. Exactly how does the relative prosperity of the US depend on African poverty? How does US capitalism create and maintain poverty in Africa? You should be able to summarize the answer in a short paragraph, without ramblings on the high cost of health insurance and college in the US, or the history of European colonialism. How is the US economy currently dependent on keeping Africans poor? Why would US leaders be opposed to helping Africa escape poverty? I am not asking whether you think the US does enough to help Africa. I am asking why you think the US wants to keep Africa poor. That is the question I have asked repeatedly here and it has not been answered.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 24, 2005 07:54 AM
Thank you Graeme for the helpful info.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 23, 2005 22:12 PM
Here is what Schopehauer thought of people like asshole: "[A]nonymity, that shield of all literary rascality, ... was introduced under the pretext of protecting the honest critic, who warned the public, against the resentment of the author and his friends. But where there is one case of this sort, there will be a hundred where it merely serves to take all responsibility from the man who cannot stand by what he has said […]. Often enough it is only a cloak for covering the obscurity, incompetence and insignificance of the critic. It is incredible what impudence these fellows will show, and what literary trickery they will venture to commit, as soon as they know they are safe under the shadow of anonymity. Let me recommend a general Anti-criticism, a universal medicine or panacea, to put a stop to all anonymous reviewing, whether it praises the bad or blames the good: Rascal! your name! For a man to wrap himself up and draw his hat over his face, and then fall upon people who are walking about without any disguise—this is not the part of a gentleman, it is the part of a scoundrel and a knave."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Bauerly, Mtbrad at Jun 23, 2005 22:03 PM
"You missed the point. Population in Africa increased dramatically, which made it impossible for the people to continue in traditional ways of life." Others explain it a little different. They contend that the colonization of Africa and the forced switch to export orientated crops and an increased dependancy on foreign markets for food lead to the collapse of the local agricultural markets and starvation. By forcing them into a global market, capitalists replaced long standing traditional agriculture with: a)export oriented crops and green revolution technologies which created a labor surplus and subsequent wage decrease, b) concurently their was a switch to export food reliance and the high prices, relative to past systems of lacalized trade, which the people could not afford on the newly depreciated wages. This is how the system works, it replicates it self over and over in the modern globalization era (substitue colonialism with new-colonial multilaterals such as the IMF and world Bank). It is marx's theories of capitalist explotation on a global scale.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 23, 2005 16:50 PM
asshole: The goal of capitalism is to create capital for capitalists (those who own the MOPs). It is achieved by exploiting labor; capitalists could not increase their capital if they returned to workers ALL of the wealth they produced. Such is the logic of the system. The capitalists themselves see it this way; they just think it's morally justified. Here is your necessary truth (you piece of shit). As for a "causal relationship," which is a wholly different thing, (but you wouldn't know that, dilettante that you are), the studies Graeme cites establish it. What more do you need, you louse?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 23, 2005 14:28 PM
"Why would Africa have to dramatically increase its population? Africa is under-populated, as far as that goes. But in any case it should be up to Africans to choose their economic system, "ancient" or not" You missed the point. Population in Africa increased dramatically, which made it impossible for the people to continue in traditional ways of life. In industrial economies people can live crowded together in cities, but in agrararian economies crowding results in extreme poverty. African might be under-populated for an industrial society (that's your claim anyway) but it is severely over-populated for agriculture and herding. Africa did not make a transition from ancient to modern economic system, although its population increased. "we claim that elite wealth creation depends on exploitation and oppression (and if you haven't seen evidence for this, you have your eyes permanently closed). " Then most economists are completely unaware of your special knowledge. "There are literally thousands of books, studies, UN and government reports, essays, " Ok, show me something that provides convincing evidence that capitalism creates prosperity for some by exploiting many. I mean something that shows this is a general and necessary truth about the way capitalism must function. Show that there is a causal relationship, not just that there is capitalism in the world and there is poverty, so capitalism must be causing the poverty.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Tootankamon_2, Sailom at Jun 23, 2005 11:22 AM
When I read most of the comments on this blog, I really wonder why an "evil capitalist system" should be blamed for all that is wrong in the world. As far as I'm concerned, being an entrepreneur, owning a business is something to be encouraged. What is wrong with this? I'd rather lay the emphasis on individual responsabilities on things that go wrong. I'd rather blame corruption and unethical practices. I would never pretend to understand such a complex world in terms of being in favor of "capitalism" or against "capitalism". That being said, I enjoy reading Znet Blogs from time to time as there is always a lot of alternative opinions about the mainstream media. Sailom

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Bauerly, Mtbrad at Jun 22, 2005 23:15 PM
"if parecon is so unrealistic for China, what would you recommend?" They could try Marxism again. " Here you go again REal, when did chna ever try Marxism? Are you talking about that Maoist stuff. Mao said himself that he never even read marx (if he had he would have noticed the parts about democracy and equality). Your constant attempts to tell everyone else what marx said shows you fear of it. Why are you so afraid of people being in charge of their own means of sustinance? As for evidance of the way the global north takes from the global south, this is rampant in all types of lititure. The way in which the plight of the global south has only increase in the last 20 years since neo-liberalism has spread is an obvious one.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 22, 2005 22:31 PM
What is prosperity? Who is really prospering in the good old US besides capitalists? Certainly not working families, who must work 80+ hours/wk just to make ends meet at jobs that could be shipped overseas next week. And, of course, capitalists are not going to accept responsibility for the extreme poverty that exists elsewhere. Why should they with apologists like asshole? And who are the so-called experts whose studies he mentions? Mentioning such things is bullshit unless the provides the details are provided. The fact is, however, that the problem we are discussing has occurred on the capitalists' watch. Prospertiy for all would only be a by-product of their system, even if were to exist, since its only goal, as Marx noted, is to increase capital. It would, thus, be suprising if there were not great poverty entailed by it. Moreover, the fundamental question here is: does capitalism entail slavery? It can be answered by good old-fashioned philosophizing. We don't need to argue over the living conditions in the 3rd world and how they got to be so abysmal.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 22, 2005 12:59 PM
"Actually, the gap was what caused the communist revolution in the first place. " Yes there was a rich-poor gap in the Chinese culture that existed since ancient times, as there is in every established social system. The communist revolution sure didn't fix things. China is a mess now but at least is going towards something better. bwong, you have not said anything to convince me that world poverty results from and is maintained by the capitalist system, or that US prosperity depends on world misery. Even leftists admit that advanced countries have reached unprecedented levels of prosperity, and most advanced economies include some degree of capitalism. You maintain your hatred of capitalism by claiming this prosperity depends on oppressing and exploiting the third world and keeping it in poverty. I have not seen evidence for this. Africa, for example, suffered from the exploitation of European colonialism. It also suffered from disruptions of traditional ways of life. You cannot maintain ancient economies while dramatically increasing population. Determining the causes of world poverty is not simple. People who hate capitalism will blame it entirely on capitalism. Those who like capitalism blame it entirely on the lack of free enterprise and personal freedom in these areas. Even experts don't agree so I doubt we amateurs can figure it all out. I am just asking you to question your assumptions once in a while.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 22, 2005 03:45 AM
But his latest attack on my character, which, I trust, none of you believe- one more instance of him being wrong- reveals what he fears the most: being ostracized. This little man craves the attention we are giving him. Obviously we have better things to do than feeding his ego. Thus, I implore you to ignore his comments, except to throw an insult his way every now and again. Withdrawing our attention is exactly what he deserves and exactly what will free us up to attend to the crucial matter at hand: defeating the capitalists.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 22, 2005 03:11 AM
Gentlemen: You are wasting your brainpower conversing with asshole. He will never concede when he's wrong, which is a necessary condition of rational discourse. He has yet to acknowledge, e.g., that there is a difference between profit and hard-earned possessions such as a house and savings. We are being kept by him from developing a strategy to defeat our common enemy: the capitalists who, in bwong's apt phrase, have created "inequality that is so massive and obscene by ANY measure(inequality of opportunities, outcome, or whatever you care to pick)that the (it) is not working even by (...) MINIMAL standard(s) of decency and fairness." (For all we know, as some have suggsted, that may be his objective.) Notice, also, how he is big on dropping names and labels, but grossly deficient when it comes to defending his attacks on our ideas, while claiming not to have any of his own. That is the mark of a dilettante. contd. below

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 22, 2005 02:39 AM
"You know bwong, you complain bitterly about world poverty without ever showing how American-style capitalism (rather than generic corruption) is the cause." The third world hardly have a monopoly to corruption if you follow the myraid of government and corporate scandels in your own country. Morover, corruption involves two parties. Who are bribing those African dictators to ensure access to cheap resources? Who are arming these thugs to supress local popular movement which, if in power may want to set their own terms for accessing their resources? Corrupt dictators serve a useful functions in the web of global capitalism. American style capitalism "successes" because a lot of costs, both in monetary and human terms are swept under the rug. It can only strives in a world "friendly to American investors" often at the expense of people.A corollary is that by definition it prevents other countries from developing. IMF "structural reformed" are forced on the third world to ensure their continued dependency. It has nothing to do with "generic corruption". They work exactly as intended. These measures force developing country to adopt a kind of raw capitalism and opening their economies for foreign take over. The developed countries would not adopted these policies themselves. This has nothing to do with "generic corruption".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 22, 2005 02:10 AM
"Before, almost everyone in China was poor. Now some are becoming successful because of capitalism...Maybe you can figure out a way for them to all escape poverty at exactly the same rate." Actually, the gap was what caused the communist revolution in the first place. You claim you're against "exploitations". But exploitations are rempant in China's new Capitalist pardise.I am not talking about abstract explotation in the sense of Robert Allen. I am talking about sweatshops, Dickens style exploitation. In China, there is no health care even comparable to the band aid stuffs for the very poor in the U.S. Workers who have their hands cut off because of faulty machinery are laied off with $50. Now you think this is the only alternative to "everyone being poor"? Incidentally, the problem with China even before the "reform" wasn't so much poverty. There was a misallocation of resources which can be traced back to its history of development. But in terms of concrete measure of well being the people were not that bad off comparing to similar countrise such as India. BTW in China today there is neither equality nor freedom. The government presiding over the capitalist economy is still a dictatorship, in case you don't know.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 22, 2005 01:53 AM
"China's growing gap between the rich and the poor" Before, almost everyone in China was poor. Now some are becoming successful because of capitalism. But of course many are still poor so you have a gap. If they all stayed poor you wouldn't have to worry about a gap, and your ideal of equality would be maintained. Maybe you can figure out a way for them to all escape poverty at exactly the same rate. You know bwong, you complain bitterly about world poverty without ever showing how American-style capitalism (rather than generic corruption) is the cause. "if parecon is so unrealistic for China, what would you recommend?" They could try Marxism again.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 22, 2005 01:50 AM
"EQUAL OPPORTUNITY DOES NOT EQUAL EQUALITY" True, however preferring a system of economic feudalism "sink or swim" is the moral equivalent to letting a fellow citizen sink and drown in a flood because he uses a wheelchair and it's not your fault that he can't swim. That amorality is enshrined in our system. We are directed to take care of ourselves and not only to disregard our neighbors but to consider our peers as competitor that represent a threat to our success. Since we need a certain amount of money to survive, it's literally a question of life or death for millions of people here in America.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 22, 2005 01:47 AM
"but still, if parecon is so unrealistic for China, what would you recommend? " Honestly, I don't know enough to give concrete recomendations, at least in the global sense. One can talk about specific areas, such as wealth care, developement and farm income, etc. But that would require a lot of detail work. However, not knowing the right answer does not mean you can't tell if some answers are clearly whacked out. Going back to an earlier post, Socrates didn't claim he had all the answers, he just showed that the others had the wrong answers. Perhaps you're right that they shouldn't have asked Albert in the first place. But then again, if I were Albert I would simply say I don't know.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 22, 2005 01:27 AM
What I meant to say is that you don't have to be some wide eye Utopian to find the current sytem tremendously f^^ked up.The inequality is so massive and obscene by ANY meausre(inequality of opportunities, outcome, or whatever you care to pick)that the system is not working even by the MINIMAL standard of decency and fairness. On the other hand, I don't think Utopian grand schemes are realistic and useful in tackling real problems in the real world. Utopian visions may serve as some vague guideline but they should not be confused with concrete goals and actions. I recently read an interview with Albert. He was asked about China's growing gap between the rich and the poor and the social unrest it fermanted. Without missing a beat the guy jumped on his soapbox and made a long winded speech on parecon. It was as if that was a realistic option for China and that it had anything to do with reality. I passed out without finishing the article.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 22, 2005 01:03 AM
"If you give everyone a reasonably fair and equal start, they will not all turn out the same" We can discuss whether equal outcome is attainable or desirable AFTER everyone enjoys more or less equal opportunities. Otherwise it is just pointless nitpicking. The global asymetry of power and wealth is so staggering that it's urealistic to even debate about equality of opportunity. Many people simply have next to zero opportunity, peroid. For example, the G8 are getting a lot of fanfare for cancelling the debts of some African countries. The facts are 1)the people didn't incure the debt and the loans have done them little good 2)they have already paid back their debt many times over, the outstanding payments are all interests.3)Debt cancellation comes with the IMF conditions which permanatly lock these countries in poverty and dependency: more privatization; open up economies for westren plundering; cutting back on public spending such as health and education; divert more resources for export. This is real capitalism at work. Now tell me about opportunity if you have been born in the wrong continent.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 21, 2005 23:38 PM
"I believe in equal opportunity for everyone… No, I don't think equality is possible and if it were I would hate it…" EQUAL OPPORTUNITY DOES NOT EQUAL EQUALITY

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 21, 2005 22:54 PM
It's typical to hear detractors tell you to "grow up" when you talk seriously about global justice and that seems to be your attitude here. The cover argument is that it's foolish to take such notions seriously. This is an attempt to persude the idealist to give up on something that cannot be accomplished. This is the first reaction because if successful, i allows you to avoid admitting the truth. But when it becomes clear that there is no logical argument to prove what is or is not possible, we finally can get past that smoke screen and see the real point: You find the idea of universal justice-equality to be loathsome. I think Graeme had it right. Fear of loss of privilege has got to be the reason.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 21, 2005 21:26 PM
You can have fairness without somehow forcing everyone to be equal. If you give everyone a reasonably fair and equal start, they will not all turn out the same. Some will be admired and envied more than others because for some reason they have more qualities the culture happens to value.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 21, 2005 19:43 PM
realpc said: "I believe in equal opportunity for everyone." and: "The Soviet Union managed to de-motivate almost everyone, and that did help create an equality of medicrity." I don't can't believe for a second you think the former Soviet union represents an example of an honest attempt at universal equality. Finally: " No, I don't think equality is possible and if it were I would hate it. I don't really know what you mean by it anyway." When I say universal equality I am referring to the Utopian ideal of global justice. If you think equality is not possible then by logical extension you also think justice is not possible since you cannot have one without the other. I'm willing to bet that you think human nature is the reason once again. You seem to have difficulty envisioning such an event, which is understandable, but what you don't explain is why you hate global justice (equality).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 21, 2005 19:37 PM
"Oh come on now yourself. It is possible to think outside any pre-fabricated belief system. It is possible to have ideas without being a follower of any particular leader." That is very true. But it is also possible that you THINK you're an independent thinker while in fact you are comfortably in the grip of dominant ideologies without even knowing it. A lot of your points on human nature, freedom and equality etc sound like unthinking regurgitations or worn out cliches.The way you argue suggests you don't arrive at your conclusions(right or wrong) through independent thinking as you claim. "I am not priviledged or powerful. I just really appreciate the freedom to be myself and have goals for improvement. No, I don't think equality is possible and if it were I would hate it.." Why would you hate equality per se? That is odd even for liberals. If you have the freedom "to be yourself" and have the means of attaining your goals you're incredibly privileged. You should look beyond your immediate social peers and see how the rest of humanity struggle. I wouldn't say "Capitalism"(which requires better definition) is the sole source of inequality and oppressions but the global capitalist system as it is certainly is reposnsible for a lot, if not most deprivations around the world. This is not a speculation. You can actually track its destructive wake in many concrete settings(say, starvations in Africa)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 21, 2005 19:12 PM
"Try asking the "workers" to hand over their homes and possessions, the money they saved for retirement and their kids' college. You're a brainwashed dope Allen. No one here listens to you." The workers achieved those things ON THEIR OWN- Marx makes it perfectly clear that he is not opposed to private property in this sense. It is the fruits, so to speak, of EXPLOITED labor that do not belong to the capitalists who lay claim to them. Now all you folks who believe in conversing with this louse- I want you to observe his failure to concede that he's overlooked an important distinction (between capital and the sorts of possessions he mentions in his "clever" retort). Graeme and Mc: he's bullshitting you. You are right to be suspicious of anyone who claims not to have an ideology- at some point a person should have to say what exactly he/she is FOR. And, despite his obfuscating, the question is very simple: are workers slaves or not? He has given us no reason to think that workers are not slaves. Thus, in defending Capitalism, which he is doing no matter what he says, he is defending slavery.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 21, 2005 19:09 PM
"The Soviet Union managed to de-motivate almost everyone, and that did help create an equality of medicrity." Yes, but why? Is it because there was too much "equality" in the Soviet union that it demotivated everyone?Are you suggesting the Russians were upset because Joe Stalin was just as equal than any other "Joe"? No socialist who is worth his salt would advocate that "equality" perse is the sole goal to strive for, or prison would be the model of an ideal world, at least when you're only considering the inmates(but not the guards): everyone has the same food, wears the same cloths,has next to no posession. Leftists believe in freedom and autonomy. But the caveat is that freedom should not just be the privilege of the few and that a state of freedom for the majority cannot be attained without relative equality.Relative equality is a necessary, but insufficient condition for freedom. One can imagine specific scenarios where freedom and equality may be in conflict with each other. But I have not heard of good argument that the two are inherently and fundamentally at odds as you insist. As far as I know the statement that freedom and equality are in competition, that increasing one INEVITABLY diminishes the other originated from Gothe.But he apparantly didn't supply any argument either(his definitions may be different as he was going off some abstract metaphysical tangent) You're setting up a strawman again.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 21, 2005 17:40 PM
"Oh come on now. You don't have "a relatively coherent system of values, beliefs, or ideas?" How do you think? Do you rely on a completely random series of thoughts?" Oh come on now yourself. It is possible to think outside any pre-fabricated belief system. It is possible to have ideas without being a follower of any particular leader. I read a lot of varied stuff, have for many years, and draw my own conclusions. I have my own personal "ideology" if you want to call it that. But I don't claim it as a recipe for a perfect fair world.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 21, 2005 14:20 PM
"assuming that the capitalists are the only ones who worked for the MOPs- that workers are not just as much entitled to the wealth producing mechanisms they have helped to create." Try asking the "workers" to hand over their homes and possessions, the money they saved for retirement and their kids' college. You're a brainwashed dope Allen. No one here listens to you. "whether you are opposed to universal equality or whether you are in favor of it but just feel that it is not possible to achieve" I believe in equal opportunity for everyone. You can't force everyone to remain equal all their lives. The biggest difference between individuals is motivatation and will power. The Soviet Union managed to de-motivate almost everyone, and that did help create an equality of medicrity. I am not priviledged or powerful. I just really appreciate the freedom to be myself and have goals for improvement. No, I don't think equality is possible and if it were I would hate it. I don't really know what you mean by it anyway. What in the world is "radical centrism?" Maybe you should read something outside your narrow leftist spectrum once in a while.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 21, 2005 04:57 AM
realpc said: "I know that idealistic Utopian movements must be authoritarian or no one joins, or those who join soon leave. " I find it interesting that there seems to be a very blurry line between criticism of Utopian ideals and an attitude of repulsion at the idea itself. Would you share for us, realpc, whether you are opposed to universal equality or whether you are in favor of it but just feel that it is not possible to achieve? If so how can you know what is or is not possible? I have a sneaking suspicion that you find the very idea itself to be somehow distasteful.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 21, 2005 03:44 AM
"You cannot abolish capitalism by hoping everyone will kindly volunteer to hand over everything they have worked for." Here asshole reveal his bias against workers, assuming that the capitalists are the only ones who worked for the MOPs- that workers are not just as much entitled to the wealth producing mechanisms they have helped to create.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 21, 2005 02:26 AM
"I'm not saying parecon is perfect, but close-minded, reflexive responses to it are not legitimate criticisms." I read about parecon and expressed my criticisms, in other posts. "try to get rid of your ideology and look at things with an open mind." I don't have an ideology! I think I have said that repeatedly. I sympathize somewhat with some third way and radical centrist ideas. I have very little sympathy with outdated ideologies like Marxism, or old-fashioned varieties of conservatism. My thinking is more or less "new age" holistic. My dislike of parecon has nothing to do with narrow-mindedness. I dislike it, and leftist thought in general, because of its arrogant reductionism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 20, 2005 20:33 PM
"most people over 30 have stopped thinking." No, most people over 30 stopped believing in simple solutions. If they ever did believe life could be made fair for all and free of suffering, they traded in that belief for something more rational. Most Americans want fairness maximized and suffering minimized, but they know it requires trade-offs and compromise. "It just got too mentally taxing" I'm sure you know I never said it was mentally taxing.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 20, 2005 14:36 PM
"I objected to your reflexive tendency to assume parecon must be violent and totalitarian, just because other "left" movements in the past sometimes tended to be violent and totalitarian." It is not reflexive. I know that idealistic utopian movements must be authoritarian or no one joins, or those who join soon leave. Most people over 30 know better. I read enough about parecon to identify it as idealistic utopian nonsense and got bored and stopped. I am willing to read more, if there is anything more concise and less ego-inflated than what I have seen already. "Try thinking outside your narrow ideological constraints for once." Oh come on. I have been outside the narrow ideological constraints of leftism for many years now. "Bush is not "consciously in favor of control and domination," no one is, but he clearly acts to further those goals; Chomsky acts to further other goals. " Chomsky does not have to deal with the real world. He can moan about how everything sucks and capitalism is mean and unfair -- but he has no responsibility for real-world solutions and compromises. I think Iraq was a big mistake. I also think Bush faced enormous challenges and that Gore or Kerry might not have done any better. But we can't possibly know.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 20, 2005 02:14 AM
"Calling the Nazis "right wing" is not some kind of radical reinterpretation on my part. The Nazis believed in total control and domination of the state, and in eliminating millions of people who were of the 'wrong' ethnicity." Are you sure that's what the American right believes in?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 19, 2005 15:33 PM
Graeme, you are so wrong about so many things I will only respond to a couple. First, calling "Hitler" "right" is just a leftist trick. Anything we all agree is evil, such as Hitler, is labeled "right." Actually the Nazis were socialist, sort of, and believed passionately in solidarity. The only difference is their solidarity was national rather than universal. Recently somebody here suggested that Stalinism was a form of right-wing capitalism. You do not know how you are twisting things because everyone you know and everything you read makes the same slanted assumptions. And saying that parecon would be voluntary is absurd. Everyone in the US is perfectly free to start or join one, but they don't. You cannot abolish capitalism by hoping everyone will kindly volunteer to hand over everything they have worked for. Parecon will not transform the society unless there is a violent revolution and an enlightened committee decrees the end of money and slavery, the dawn of justice and equality for all. And forces everyone into their system, which after several decades everyone will agree cannot be made to function, no matter how many dissidents are executed. "he is biased towards peace and freedom instead of control and domination." Do you honestly think any sane person is consciously in favor of control and domination? EVERYONE thinks they are for peace and freedom. Real life is not a movie with good guys and bad guys.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 19, 2005 01:27 AM
"You would have to prove that Chomsky (or any other individual) specifically ignores or avoids available evidence to reach his conclusions, and that he does so because he is arrogant, in order to prove your claim." My conclusion from reading lots of Chomsky's writings is that he is extremely biased and arrogant. I do not think he, or similar others, have made the slightest attempt to understand contrasting view points. This is because he, and others of his type (which I can describe if you don't know what type I mean) have too much confidence in their own thinking process. "great freedom for all, but in a society with a great deal of solidarity and willful collaboration and cooperation between its people." Freedom and solidarity cannot both be maximized. As one increases the other decreases, so the goal should be balance. Reductionists seldom understand the idea of contrasting values. "great freedom for all, but in a society with a great deal of solidarity and willful collaboration and cooperation between its people." As I have said here before, our survival is threatened more by our creativity and cleverness than by our wickedness. That is why every improvement brings new and unexpected problems, and why I am not very hopeful for our long-term survival. Of course I hope we can find a way and I would certainly be interested in ideas. But I have not heard anything convincing here. From what I read about parecon so far, I hope I never am forced to live in one.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 18, 2005 16:06 PM
I never said I was using the Socratic method or compare myself to Socrates. I meant that I have been trying to express the idea that it is not so easy to design a social system that everyone will like. I do not think that I or others are perfectly ignorant. Of course we all have some knowledge. But each of us thnks we understand much more than we actually do. This arrogance is probably more common in educated people, causing them to see all who disagree as assholes. A person such as Chomsky is sure of his intellectual and moral superiority, so if anyone sees things differently it's because they are bad, stupid and/or crazy. I am not a defender of capitalism, or any particular system. But I am very skeptical of socialism and other utopian ideas, such as parecon, and I prefer any system that tries to maximize individual freedom. However I am not a libertarian, since we obviously need laws and regulations. I think extreme and over-simplified views usually grow out of arrogance. Each of us, however intelligent and educated we may be, should try to acknowledge our own limitations. We are all relatively ignorant. I believe the system as a whole is infinitely more intelligent than any one of us, and no one person has the answer. That does not mean I want to defend the status quo, and I see lots of problems with modern society. But I do not think the cause or cure for these problems is simple.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 17, 2005 18:42 PM
Lest you accuse me of the same thing, which it looks like you have anyway, I'm not comparing myself to Socrates in respect of any virtue. I'm merely out to make someone else look like he made Meletus look. (And doing a pretty damn good job of it, if I do say so myself.) Asshole, on the other hand, wouldn't know intellectual humility if it jumped up and kicked him in the balls.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 17, 2005 18:00 PM
bwong, We don't KNOW that slavery is evil? Isn't that a no brainer for everyone here, except asshole, whose brain is full of shit? (Re. Socrates, there are Platonic scholars who don't take seriously his profession of TOTAL ignorance. The point is, unlike Meletus and others, he knew when did not know and did not try to conceal his ignorance with bs.) Asshole has some nerve comparing himself to Socrates; he who is CONSTANTLY making unsubstantiated claims about human nature. And he's not trying to defend Capitalism? Yeah right. Just like Bush, an even bigger asshole, if that's possible, wasn't planning on invading Iraq from day one in office.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 17, 2005 14:25 PM
"In fact he did not seem to have a system of belief to promote other than the contention that everyone is ignorant, including himself." That is exactly what I have been trying to express on this blog. Thanks bwong.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 17, 2005 06:02 AM
"Socrates humiliated Meletus for presuming, in condemning his philosophizing, to know more than he did..." Base on my admittedly limited knowledge of philosophy it seems Socrates was wiser than the others exactly because his was aware of his own ignorance whereas everyone else thought they knew the answers. The "Socratic method", at least as practiced by Socrates himself, was a dialectical way to expose the flaws of conventional beliefs and reasoning. I don't think the purpose was to defend any system of ideas held by Socrates himself. In fact he did not seem to have a system of belief to promote other than the contention that everyone is ignorant, including himself. It seems that the Socratic comparison in the current context is not very appropiate as Robert obviously thinks he knows what the right answers are(and he can be right). That's just my opinion and of course I can be wrong about Socrates. Sorry for digressing.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 16, 2005 18:02 PM
Jacob I give up. You are deliberately being obtuse. You know darn well that my problem with asshole is that he DEFENDS SLAVERY AND IS IRRATIONAL, not that he actually exploits (although for all I know he does). You have not shown me how isolating such an individual is unwise; you just keep saying it is. And the burden of proof is on you, since you are the one raising the red flag.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 16, 2005 07:13 AM
Concerning your main point, you say that by alienating your opponents, you make them "impotent," since they're driven "far away" from you and your clique. Which reminds me of an old public service announcement from New Brunswick. A kid is on a boat with his grandfather, and sees him throw some garbage into the sea. So the kid asks his grandfather, "Grandpa, when you throw garbage overboard, where does it go?" The grandfather just shrugs and says, "Away." Out of sight, out of mind? Maybe for a while, but that's not a very wise approach.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 16, 2005 06:46 AM
Wait a second - name one occasion when realpc exploited a worker. This sounds interesting.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 16, 2005 04:16 AM
Jacob, Now you demonstrate that you don't even understand your own argument: you DID say I would not be doing workers a favor by alienating their oppressors, such as asshole. I am saying how can humilating the latter NOT be doing the former a favor, even if the latter are alienated, driven far away- the whole point is to make them impotent, which those seen as ridiculuous tend to be. I didn't say Socrates humiliated Meletus in the same ways I've humiliated asshole; but humiliate him he did. And I've used more than invective, poking holes in his "arguments" as well.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 16, 2005 03:14 AM
I never argued that alienating opponents entails alienating open-minded readers, as you claim. You're debating a point I never made. My point, again, is that ridiculing and marginalizing an opponent because of his point of view will tend to drive him further from your point of view. Either you care or you don't, but don't pretend you're doing "future workers" a favor by strengthening the resolve of those who oppose worker ownership. You brought up Socrates' invective towards Meletus to show me "where you were going" with your abuse of realpc. Calling people names like "asshole" is good practice when they disagree with your opinion, you appear to be saying, because Socrates does it too. But Socrates doesn't do this anywhere. Naturally, I can't retract an argument I never made, so don't expect me to.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 16, 2005 01:10 AM
Jacob, Alientating irrational opponents does not entail alienating open-minded readers, who are the only folks I care about. Your argument here is simply invalid, which I expect you to acknowledge. Socrates humiliated Meletus for presuming, in condemning his philosophizing, to know more than he did. (The affidavit read: "Socrates is an evildoer, and a curious person, who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear the better cause; and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines to others," as if Meletus knew all that needed to be known about morality and Socrates' method. It's clearly the presumptuousness here that Socrates is keen to point up. So, again, you owe me a retraction.) Asshole is also ripe for such treatment, living proof of the maxim that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 16, 2005 00:23 AM
Robert said, "You have given no support to either one of these claims." You even quoted part of my support for the first claim back to me. I'll repeat myself. Claim 1: "It's important to stop ... dogma like [insert "evildoer" dogma here, i.e. capitalism] from gaining new adherents. But we will more likely achieve this aim with persuasion than humiliation, since we can expect humiliation to alienate opponents even further from our point of view." What happens when we drive people from our point of view? "They find each other out, seek reassurance with each other, and have every right to do so," thus strengthening their resolve against our opinions. As for Claim 2, fair enough. I thought how you perverted Socrates' trial was obvious: Socrates didn't call Meletus "reckless and impudent" because of his opinions, but because of his actions: Meletus had entered false charges into an affidavit to get Socrates killed. Nothing wrong with aping Socrates, of course. All the power to you. But you'll fare better after you get the details straight.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 15, 2005 20:42 PM
Chomsky obscures this reality behind his waffle about the media. It's all the media's fault, he says. No, it's the American people's fault! America is a religion, and the world must pay homage to it. In “times of crisis”, the president MUST be supported, no matter how many foreigners will die and suffer as a result. America and the American people come first. Chomsky is too selfish and too in love with his own country to give people the ugly truth, so he muddies the waters with his talk about the media. As Chomsky said: America is the greatest country in the world, which is why I live here. Chomsky had the option to say “one of the greatest countries in the world”, but he chose to say “THE greatest country in the world”. More egalitarianism in action! EVERYONE, line up behind America, and follow it!! When will you dummies on this "blog" wake up? Chomsky is as elitist as they come. Forget Chomsky. There are plenty of other people out there who will give you the facts - and do so without being so condescending.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 15, 2005 20:20 PM
The cameras were rolling when Chomsky said he wished the world would go away (see Manufacturing Consent DVD). He was politely telling everyone to f**k off. A bit rich from a man who's craved attention and debate most of his life. It's been all about Chomsky. Chomsky this, Chomsky that, Chomsky, Chomsky, Chomsky. What has Chomsky created that will outlive the man? Nothing! Has he set up a media empire to take on the right wing? No! Has he created a searchable database for people who want to find out the facts? No! Has he done anything besides turn the spotlight on himself? No! And the magnitude of his failure comes into full view on this “blog”. Posters like Graeme are Chomsky's worst creation - a callous creature that doesn't care about anyone or anything except his own life and Chomsky's. Egalitarianism in action! All men are born equal, except some men are more equal than others; namely, Chomsky! This, I'm afraid, shows why Chomsky is so very wrong about changing the system. People are not egalitarian by nature; they look for others to follow, and however destructive the path they are led down, they follow it, regardless of how many people die and suffer along the way.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 15, 2005 18:29 PM
Jacob, You tell me how intellectually humiliating someone who defends their enslavement is not going to do future workers a favor. The more people who see how foolish people like asshole are the more people will flock to my (our?) side. He and his ilk can resolve all they want to then. The #s will be against them doing anything but grinding their teeth.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 15, 2005 17:41 PM
PS As you all know, I'm a 78-year-old struggling author searching for recognition (thank you, Graeme, for pointing that out to everyone). Life is hard. At night, I sleep badly, not knowing where the next penny will be coming from. But I struggle courageously on, moving from one underground cave to another, skillfully outmaneuvering the six billion people of the world who all want a piece of me. Donations are, therefore, welcome. Send your checks and cash to me, c/o Zmag. To all my fans: I love you all! Keep up the fight. We will be victorious.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 15, 2005 17:05 PM
A message from the Almighty: Hi, little people. I'm Noam Chomsky, speaking from a secret underground bunker, and I wish the world would go away. So could everyone just f**k off and leave this blog and me alone. Particularly Graeme, as obsequious creeps like him really scare the life out of me.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 15, 2005 16:52 PM
"As I said, if you strengthen the resolve of people who oppose worker ownership, don't think you're doing any "future workers" a favor. Your comparison between what you're doing to realpc and how Socrates defended himself at his trial is just a little perverted, btw." You have given no support to either one of these claims. You are starting to sound just a little like asshole himself.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 15, 2005 08:55 AM
Robert, As I said, if you strengthen the resolve of people who oppose worker ownership, don't think you're doing any "future workers" a favor. Your comparison between what you're doing to realpc and how Socrates defended himself at his trial is just a little perverted, btw.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 15, 2005 07:39 AM
"In other words, I refuse to agree with him 100% on everything. Robert Allen will never be happy until he is a dictator." Nice strawman, asshole: as if you agree with me 90% of the time and I just can't live without that additional 10%. You won't even concede when it's shown that an analogy of yours fails to hold. (Remember the housepainter setting his price vs. the capitalist setting the worker's wage?) Not to mention your failure to address my claim (made by others) that your position amounts to the contention that if we stop doing things the capitalists' way, there will be no more capitalism. (No one will hire workers- i.e., they will no longer be wage-slaves- unless it's permissible to profit from their labor.) You would have made one heckuva whipping boy.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 15, 2005 06:28 AM
"You know the likely consequences of ridiculing and marginalizing another person for his point of view, and you're responsible for the predictable outcomes of your actions." Jacob, Not just any old person, as I said, but an irrational one defending evil. I don't see the downside of marginalizing and ridiculing such an individual. One of the likely consequences is that the future generations of workers for whom I write- in addition to the readers of this blog- will see asshole for what he is: an apologist for slavery, a Stephen Douglas (sans eloquence), which is a highly desirable outcome. (Sometimes, I can almost hear their derision.) Look at what Socrates did to Meletus in the Apology and you'll understand where I'm going with asshole. And I can tell from some of the feedback I'm getting here that it's working. I live for this.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 15, 2005 05:10 AM
This is to me a familiar sight: a discussion beginning with a debate about the merits of Chomsky's arguments that has devolved into a debate about Chomsky's personal qualities. In any serious debate, personal characterizations serve no purpose. It is in fact a sign that those who change the subject from issues to personality have given up the debate altogether. If realpc or anyone else still thinks our economic system (call it capitalism if you want) is the best we can do, I ask my question again: If we favor democracy in America in all other aspects of our lives, how can we not be in favor of extending democracy to such an important and integral part of our lives, our economy?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 15, 2005 04:16 AM
"He simply refuses to take correction." In other words, I refuse to agree with him 100% on everything. Robert Allen will never be happy until he is a dictator.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 15, 2005 03:09 AM
Robert, So what, you ask? Either you care or you don't. You know the likely consequences of ridiculing and marginalizing another person for his point of view, and you're responsible for the predictable outcomes of your actions.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 14, 2005 23:21 PM
"Now, it's important to stop racist dogma like white supremacism from gaining new adherents. But we will more likely achieve this aim with persuasion than humiliation, since we can expect humiliation to alienate opponents even further from our point of view." Jacob, So what, as long as they stay away from the rest of us, we are less likely to suffer because of their wickedness. And I wouldn't feel one bit sorry for them (although I would continue to pray for their souls). At some point, you have to say enough is enough. I have tried and tried to reason with the individual in question and, you know what, he has alienated himself from me by being irrational. He simply refuses to take correction. Thus, we either allow him to go on thinking that his point of view and way of defending it are acceptable or call an asshole an asshole, letting the chips fall where they might.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 23:04 PM
Anyone who has heard of Ken Livingstone (Mayor of London) and George Galloway, both British left-wing politicians may or may not be surprised to know that they rake in hundreds of thousands of pounds (dollars) each year from the articles they write for newspapers, and other activities. Both are self-serving individuals: Vote us into power, they say, and everything will be all right. Chomsky also writes articles for newspapers, including British newspapers. Given that Chomsky is encouraging people to make sacrifices (possibly ones that will impoverish them for many years, if not for life!) to bring about change, it is only fair to ask that guy how much he has earned from all his writings, books, TV appearances, etc. I should not have to tolerate abuse from clowns like Graeme who thinks Chomsky is a hungry, penniless author who would die from starvation if he didn't receive royalties from his writing. Nor should I have to listen to others who think Chomsky is Jesus Christ incarnate. If it were me, I would be happy for someone to ask me such a question. What makes Chomsky so special he can ignore people - people whose lives he may possibly wreck by encouraging them to bring about change.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 14, 2005 22:46 PM
I'm willing to bet that no one wants to hear personal attacks on Chomsky or anyone else who is not here to defend his or herself from such characterizations. If you want to debate the merits of his arguments by all means do so, this site seems to have a few people who have listen to and read enough Chomsky to help clarify some pints, but why waste time with personal attacks that have no possibility of persuading any rational, logical thinker?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 21:50 PM
If Chomsky can ignore people, refuse to answer questions, then what's good enough for Chomsky is good enough for George W. Bush and Tony Blair. Both those leaders are entitled to ignore public opinion, and refuse to answer questions about their actions. Like Chomsky, both men are too busy with more important things than to waste precious time talking to the dumb public. --- At the end of "Manufacturing Consent" (DVD version), Chomsky is interviewed. He says he wishes "the world would go away". If you want the world to go away Chomsky, YOU must go away first. Get rid of your farcical "blog", shut your mouth, and stop pretending to care. If you don't like attention, write anonymously, you pillock - and acquire a better writing style. Try to make an effort - consider your audience and think about what you want to explain - instead of writing off the top of your head. Methinks thou dost complain too much.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 14, 2005 19:01 PM
When you consider that most of your waking life is spent at work, your best energy is spent earning a living, it seems logical that it should be as rewarding as possible. To have a private party own and dictate such a central and far-reaching aspect of our lives is essentially non-democratic. You cannot be on the one hand, in favor of our current economic arrangements and on the other hand be supposedly if favor of democracy and equality. Some will say quite frankly that they do think that some people deserve the special privelages they enjoy and that others deserve to be poor for whatever reasons. I will not attempt to debate that point of view at all, I am only concerned with persuading those who claim to favor equality the problems with our current system.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 14, 2005 16:42 PM
Its kind of funny, we praise democracy as being the answer to all our problems, yet we live in what amounts to an economic dictatorship. Economic production is essentially organized in a top down manner. The notion of democracy in the workplace is a very good one and I think a viable starting point for at least imagining an alternative society based on human needs and solidarity.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 11:46 AM
Jacobro writes, selfishly and egotistically: >Take it easy, the-abyss. Sheesh. No, I won't take it easy; Graeme thought it was clever to provoke me. How about telling the dirty, filthy, ignorant Americans to stop butchering people instead of you bullying me - hey, Jacobro? Chomsky and his obsequious followers are the biggest hypocrites alive. It's all an intellectual game, massive egos f***ing with other people's lives. Chomsky is 78, an old man. He's had his life. Time for him to become a bit more humble, and talk to people like human beings. What a pathetic creature he is, secreting himself away like a movie star. If Chomsky doesn't like the "fame", doesn't want a "blog", then it's time he retires and shuts his mouth for good. You're going to die, Chomsky. You're mortal, not a bloody god. And what are his followers going to do once Chomsky is dead and buried? Who will do their thinking for them, then?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 11:24 AM
Chomsky wants others to be scrutinised - particularly political leaders - but refuses to open himself up to scrutiny. Chomsky is the perfect human being; he's working to make the world a better place. You'll have to take his word for that, but his word is his bond - just ask his "supporters"! To them, he's a pop star. The Chomsky blog (a misnomer if ever there was one) is nothing but a farce.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 14, 2005 11:07 AM
Take it easy, the-abyss. Sheesh.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 10:35 AM
All this "blog" attracts is old, married men who are too senile to have sex, so the only way they can get orgasms is by coming here (literally and figuratively!) and mocking others. And when they're not doing that, they're talking nonsense for hour on end, kidding themselves they're saying such clever things to each other. To Graeme, all that matters are the lives of Americans. Hence, he would happily drive me to suicide to protect his beloved Chomsky. Chomsky has set a very bad example, instilling no compassion or humility in any of his supporters. Rather than let one post go by, Graeme chooses to attack me, creating a dozen or more posts completely off topic. How's that for intelligence? Chomsky's simplistic speeches, coupled with his poor writing style, have created a small group of people who cannot think for themselves any longer.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 14, 2005 08:42 AM
np - enjoy. To be honest, the idea of employees voting on business policy never crossed my mind until I read Radical Priorities early this year. I've wondered how receptive people would be to the idea ever since, but haven't really talked to anyone about it. I brought it up with a friend a week ago, who was telling me stories about his tyrannical bosses of yore that nobody liked. "Imagine if you could just vote her out," I said. His response was a bewildered gaze - and he's a Chomsky fan. lol I don't know about you, but when I first heard the idea, it was instantly appealing--I just thought back to some of the totally unethical things I've seen managers do to their employees. Since most people have stories like my friend's, why wouldn't they like the idea?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 14, 2005 08:08 AM
Thanks for the link Jacobro, I will read it later. Realpc's defense of, and apparent admiration for our current economic system is a point of view that I have encountered many times before, and it always frustrates me that they appear not willing or able to see that it is democracy itself that they are rejecting in the process. It's painfully obvious to me that to defend the status quo is to abandon all hope for a livable democracy. Simply put, democracy is not possible without economic justice which can only be accomplished through democratic processes. Therefor I conclude that without economic justice, our so-called democracy is just an abstract idea.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 14, 2005 07:14 AM
MCorbin, Last night I came across something about economic democracy you might find interesting. Here's a taste: "Chávez has also spoken of a system of employee ownership in which capitalists would control a maximum of 30 percent of company stocks." The quote caught my eye, because in an earlier post, I had brought up a similar suggestion by New England activists 150 years ago. I've been thinking about what a good idea that is for months, and now it looks like someone's finally interested in trying it again. Find the article here: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1476 It's well written, btw. :)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 06:09 AM
NOAM CHOMSKY THE CULT! NOAM CHOMSKY ON A MISSION FROM GOD TO SAVE THE WORLD! This blog attracts nothing but weirdos. Graeme being the worst. A semi-literate moron, who considers everyone's life expendable except Chomsky's. Let's deal with reality instead of fantasy shall we: Noam Chomsky does nothing but regurgitate facts obtained from the hard research of others. Some who've risked their lives to obtain the data. As for my childish pop musician story: I don't call asking someone I thought would save the life of a street kid, childish. Sniffing petrol causes irreparable brain damage. But as far as Graeme is concerned, that street kid can go die, suffer and die, because his name isn't NOAM CHOMSKY.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 14, 2005 05:49 AM
Robert, You're saying, basically, that if an idea is morally wrong, the person speaking that idea should be ridiculed and marginalized, in the hopes that he'll either go away or change his point of view out of sheer humiliation. That's how you suggest we confront a morally repugnant opinion. I disagree. Let's set aside just how "morally repugnant" realpc's views are, and talk about someone with a view that we can both easily agree is repugnant, say, someone who believes black people are inferior to white people. So we've got someone making racist claims. Easy to not take the claims seriously, and easy to marginalize and ridicule the person, since so few people share his view (where I live, anyway). But what happens when other marginalized and ridiculed people share his view? They find each other out, seek reassurance with each other, and have every right to do so. Now, it's important to stop racist dogma like white supremacism from gaining new adherents. But we will more likely achieve this aim with persuasion than humiliation, since we can expect humiliation to alienate opponents even further from our point of view. So even if realpc's views were worse than racist, it wouldn't matter: this approach is best. BTW, Graeme, I think it's about time you stop torturing the-abyss. He's going a little crazy up there. We get your point(s).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 05:44 AM
Graeme writes: "No, he is so busy actually trying to change things and help people that he doesn't care about this little blog, nor should he." Trying to change things? Like wasting time criticising George Monbiot, a British journalist, writing letters to the Financial Times. Chomsky doesn't care about anyone but HIMSELF. You've turned Chomsky into JESUS CHRIST. The most perfect human that ever lived. No one is more important than NOAM CHOMSKY. No one is kinder than NOAM CHOMSKY. No one has a more pure heart than NOAM CHOMSKY. NOAM CHOMSKY. EVERYONE SHOUT, NOAM CHOMSKY! COME ON. LOUDER!! NOAM CHOMSKY! NOAM CHOMSKY! NOAM CHOMSKY! NOAM CHOMSKY = JESUS CHRIST, SAVING THE WORLD. NOAM CHOMSKY IS BETTER THAN JESUS CHRIST. NOAM CHOMSKY IS MORE FAMOUS THAN JESUS CHRIST. NOAM CHOMSKY WILL SUCCEED WHERE JESUS CHRIST FAILED. Chomsky has changed nothing, done nothing. He's a nobody. 99% of people don't know who the hell he is. He's made no attempt at publishing anything for the masses. His books are badly written. He doesn't know what plain English is, makes no attempt to explain things clearly for anyone. No one listens to the guy except a small minority of people, mainly fanatics like you. Where did you come from? Michael Jackson's fan club? To MJ fans, Jackson is also JESUS CHRIST, the most perfect human alive.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 14, 2005 04:51 AM
Realpc, if you are still with us, I want to know why you favor economic feudalism over economic democracy.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 14, 2005 03:54 AM
lol - riotous. To defend your claim that Chomsky is some greedy huckster, you tell us he charges speaking fees at universities. Name one such talk he delivered for personal profit, and tell me how you got the information. I get the feeling you're just making up this stuff about Chomsky to support your argument. (Again, are you a Bill O'Reilly fan?)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 14, 2005 03:54 AM
"At least four posters here see no harm in allowing dissenters to speak their minds, and actually see harm in limiting the range of opinion. You have suggested that "marginalizing" the opinions of certain "kinds" of people is a good thing. No doubt folks in the public relations industry agree with you, but not me, and not most of us here, from what I can tell." Jacob, You don't get it. This is not a purely academic matter being discussed here, like Prof. C's linguistic theories. Lives are being ruined by exploitation, as we speak. Asshole is defending this practice, a form of SLAVERY. Now he can post all he wants; but we persons of good will should make it clear in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS that what he is saying is morally repugnant. In fact, anyone defending what he is evil should be marginalized. You would agree to doing that, I will assume, in the case of neo-Nazis. Why not to someone defending slavery? Or maybe you would care to debate my claim that exploitation is a form of slavery? Moreover, anyone who argues the way asshole does is, well, an asshole. There's no other way of putting it that conveys the disgust he engenders. Even 'jerk' is too mild.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 03:24 AM
Graeme, can we get you a leash so Chomsky can take you for a walk? >For the last time, I'm not a "Chomsky >worshipper," as you would immediately see if >you had an ounce of cognitive processing >abilities. You speak like one. Have you heard of plain English, Graeme? >Wrong. He doesn't charge exorbitant speaking >fees to well-off students at top >universities, or anybody else. Let Chomsky come on here and tell people how much he charges (has charged over the years) and to whom. Yes, I'm aware he waives his fee from time to time. Means nothing. He does speak at top universities. For starters, what the hell do you think MIT and Oxford are? >He gets paid for his books of course (like >all authors; or would you have him starve Starve? Chomsky was/is a tenured professor. That means his job at MIT has been secure for all the time he's been there. No risk of him starving. It pays well. You talk rubbish, Graeme. >For the last time, nobody cares about your >childish pop star story, which has precisely >ZERO reference to anything we are talking >about here. No one cares about me. I have no one. I am penniless. Maybe I will just go kill myself. I would be happier.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 14, 2005 03:17 AM
Chomsky came to Toronto last November to speak at a benefit for an independent magazine called Canadian Dissent. I talked to two of the organizers about his visit. Chomsky charged zero speaking fees. The only thing that Canadian Dissent paid for was his airplane ticket. He didn't even stay at a hotel--one of the editors of the magazine's editors put him (and his wife) up at his place for the night. Canadian Dissent filled Massey Hall to capacity (3,000 seats?). Tickets were $12 each. Except for Chomsky's airfare, all the proceeds went directly to the magazine. So just to corroborate what Graeme's saying, Chomsky donates a lot of his time to help activists with fundraising all over the world. Hardly a selfish act. It seems to me, the-abyss, that you're just making this stuff about Chomsky up off the top of your head. Are you a Bill O'Reilly fan? lol

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 02:58 AM
But at least the guy gave me a chance to confront him personally, even though it did take some prodding. Chomsky is so bloody rude he has a blog and doesn't even visit it, it seems, let alone respond to anyone. It should NOT be called the Chomsky blog; it should be called "a Zmag blog with content licensed from Noam Chomsky". Blogs are meant to be personal things; but Chomsky's blog is like a manufactured product, marketed by Zmag Inc. So my advice: don't listen to Chomsky. If you follow his recommendations, you'll destroy your life, while he enjoys his. Think for yourself! Let your conscience do the speaking, not some man you've never met before in your life, who thinks he's a genuis and, hence, doesn't need to bother with "ordinary" people. I won't be back on this board for a while, maybe not at all. So anyone who wants to attack me (can you hear me, Graeme?), save your breath!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 14, 2005 02:44 AM
Robert, You do us no benefit by insulting others. It usually distracts us from whatever it is we were talking about. At least four posters here see no harm in allowing dissenters to speak their minds, and actually see harm in limiting the range of opinion. You have suggested that "marginalizing" the opinions of certain "kinds" of people is a good thing. No doubt folks in the public relations industry agree with you, but not me, and not most of us here, from what I can tell. Anyway, for you to say you'll stop insulting others--except when you feel like it--isn't exactly reassuring.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 02:33 AM
Anyway, this pop musician had my phone number, and rang me, annoyed at what I had said in my letter. After a short, meaningless "chat", I wrote a letter back (as I couldn't ring the guy) saying I don't think it's right for you to encourage others to give what little money they have to charity when you, with your tremendous wealth, give hardly anything. I was critical, but polite. His personal assistant read the letter and left a message on my answerphone. She was FURIOUS! She said she was going to throw the letter in the bin and not even give it to the guy to read. After listening to her angry voice, I made no further contact with the pop musician. I was dejected and thoroughly beaten. And all I was trying to do was help a street kid, to do what this pop musician had told me - and others! - to do. Incidentally, I had gone overdrawn at the bank to help these street kids, so don't accuse me of using the rich for their money. The rich should be forced to pull their weight, like the rest of us have to. However, this guy is an utter hypocrite. He wants the poor taxed heavily so he can enjoy even more of his excessive wealth.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 14, 2005 02:11 AM
And because of the Michael Jackson trial, I must clarify some details regarding my contact with this British pop musician, before I get accused of being a money-grabbing fanatic. The rich and famous can do no wrong! I merely wrote a letter to the guy, and his personal assistant passed it on. I had no association with the pop musician in any way, business or personal. I didn't know where he lived, and I didn't have his phone number. As for the street kid. Again, I had no contact or association with him whatsoever. The pop musician, if he wanted to help, would have to do so through a charity. I would not be involved. I had no connections with the charity. Government authorities would have been involved, though. It was all legal and above board. Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers about the poor trying to screw the rich at every opportunity.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 14, 2005 02:04 AM
"I mean, doesn't anybody see this as a waste of time? What exactly is the goal this discussion? To convince realpc that he's wrong?...(doesn't look like it's about to happen) To tickle your ego & show off your erudition by finding flows in a weak argument which nobody posting here believes anyway, other than the one person stating it?..." Triangular, I for one will stop responding to him- except to note every now and again that he is an asshole, for the benefit of those just tuning in- when others ignore him as well. I want his kind marginalized. And don't be taken in by his "civility;" it's the last refuge to which an intellectually bankrupt person flees. Moreover, as I explained above, he's earned every insult I've thrown his way and more. I would love nothing better than to discuss here how to overthrow the capitalists. So send in your suggestions; there's nothing saying we can't discuss them and beat up on asshole at the same time.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 13, 2005 23:31 PM
Graeme claims: "It is a useful system for people to comment on issues they are interested in" No, it isn't. We are not allowed to create our own threads; you have to wait 20 minutes before making another post; and you're limited to 1200 characters, including spaces and punctuation marks. Do you know how frustrating this is? Zmag and Chomsky can't even be polite enough to apologise for these restrictions, and explain the reasons behind them. If it's because of limited resources - though I doubt it! - then Zmag could simply say become a sustainer of the board and you'll get these restrictions lifted. Finally, we are only allowed to comment on issues Chomsky raises, or a pack of dogs is set on us. This board is virtually deserted - is it surprising? Zmag and Chomsky treat people who've given them money like filth. But that's really all the U.S. (and its partner in crime, Britain) is good at, isn't it? Making money and stealing from others.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 13, 2005 23:07 PM
She didn't do enough to pierce Graeme's thoughts because she lacked Chomsky's so-called "intelligence", and took an interest in the common people. Chomsky, a thoroughly lazy intellectual, merely has a pack of lapdogs (Graeme being one of them) to worship him for doing sod all, but living a life of Riley - along with the rest of the elite! Graeme goes on to say: >How you interpret this as some kind of >dictatorial control is simply beyond me. Basic comprehension skills are beyond most Chomsky sycophants, it seems. It's simple Graeme: Chomsky writes his piece, then anyone who doesn't discuss the words uttered by this "genius" gets vilified. It's a hierarchical, authoritarian structure. Hence, it needs to be demolished. Graeme, you asked me why I come to this board if it bothers me so much. I'll leave as soon as Chomsky stops being a self-serving hypocrite and leaves America for the blood his country and his people spill. Time Chomsky puts his money where his mouth is. Graeme writes: "Why do you want [this board] "abolished?" Because it's time for Chomsky to live up to his words. Unnecessary authoritarian structures MUST be abolished - they're his words!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 13, 2005 22:32 PM
I wrote: "Chomsky, the anarchist, the man who detests unnecessary authoritarian structures, is going to dictate to others what they discuss…” Graeme replied, miscomprehending what I wrote (are all Chomsky worshippers this thick?): "For the last time, NC has nothing whatsoever to do with the format of…[the] board/blog” So Chomsky is a hypocrite, a man who merely charges speaking fees to well-off students at top universities, and writes books and pieces for Zmag for still more money. In other words, Chomsky is like that rich British pop musician whom I contacted to help a petrol-sniffing street kid. The musician turned out to be a conceited fool. I'm too poor, he said. He "earned" over £30 million the year before last. After I criticized him, he changed his tune, claiming he'd done enough. He later threatened to leave Britain if "New Labour" increased the tax on the wealthy. Chomsky, the so-called champion of the common people, in reality, wants nothing whatsoever to do with “the herd”. Marla Ruzicka, a 28-year-old woman, was blown up in Iraq while trying to discover the full extent of the deaths and injuries caused by the invasion and subsequent occupation of that country.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Slackorback, Triangular at Jun 13, 2005 21:34 PM
I can't believe you people. I started reading this blog because there were some interesting points brought up in some of the posts earlier on, but it's starting to look to me like this whole thread has degenerated into a string of personal insults & displays of intellectual superiority. And all of this just to beat up on the one black sheep (who to his credit remains one of the few still maintaining a civil discourse). And anybody who stands up on his behalf in any way. I mean, doesn't anybody see this as a waste of time? What exactly is the goal this discussion? To convince realpc that he's wrong?...(doesn't look like it's about to happen) To tickle your ego & show off your erudition by finding flows in a weak argument which nobody posting here believes anyway, other than the one person stating it?... If this is your idea of starting a "proletarian revolution", you have a long way to go.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 13, 2005 18:47 PM
Realpc said: "(Chomsky) -- uses his intellect as a weapon. Not a weapon for uncovering truth but for defeating his opponents" and: "And the same lack of skepticism is found in his political followers. People are not dumb. It's just that most of us crave certainty and strong leadership." You must not have read or listened much to Chomsky, because anyone who has would know that never attempts to lead anyone or offer certainty to his listeners. Almost completely the opposite in fact. You seem to be looking for it though, like when you insinuated that Chomsky was "lame" for pointing out "the obvious" that people need to organize without saying what should be done with our collective will. Over and over again afterhis speeches people ask that question "what should I do about..." and the answer is invariably "only you can answer that". You critiques of Chomsky are typical. You second-guess his motives (he politically motivated, not scientific) and make character judgments (he is not seeking truth) but offer nothing to support any of this. I'm not suggesting that we digress into a discussion about the value of Chomsky's linguistics theories, but I wanted to point out that your complaints about Chomsky are not persuasive as they stand: pure opinion with no rationale put fourth.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 13, 2005 16:36 PM
Of course intellectual progress depends on debate and dissent. But personality power inevitably gets involved as well. Einstein was not, as far as I know, a forceful personality. But his contributions to physics did not have to be sold and were verified by experiment. Things are seldom that clear in the social and cognitive sciences, and marketing is often involved. Whether an intellectual is driven by more a craving for truth or fame is hard to decide -- almost everyone wants both. And in deciding which famous intellectual we are going to follow (if we are the sort of person who likes to follow) it's hard to separate great ideas from PR and charisma. I don't claim to be wise, but I have always been anti-authoritarian and skeptical.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 13, 2005 16:09 PM
"This sort of person -- and Chomsky and Freud are typical examples -- uses his intellect as a weapon. Not a weapon for uncovering truth but for defeating his opponents and winning followers." In contrast to you, oh wise one, searching serenely for the Truth. Now I'm certain you are a pseudointellectual- a joke: philosophers, linguists, even scientists ROUTINELY attempt to refute their opponents views. It's an absolutley essential part of their disciplines.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 13, 2005 14:15 PM
"If you want to completely dismiss Chomsky (along with both Skinner and Freud no less)" I did not dismiss any of them. I meant to say most of their ideas are over-rated. Linguistics and psychology, and probably most academic fields for that matter, are very political. "Most people are dumb and will tend to flock to any charismatic leader who most likely has nothing of any substance to offer. " I do not think most people are dumb. But we are a social animal and therefore most people are followers. It's normal and natural to admire charismatic personalities. But this has nothing to do with scientific truth, and forceful personalities are more likely to obscure truth than reveal it. This sort of person -- and Chomsky and Freud are typical examples -- uses his intellect as a weapon. Not a weapon for uncovering truth but for defeating his opponents and winning followers. They are not intentionally spreading lies. They have a fanatical belief in their own ideas, with no tendencies for self-doubt. Crowds of admirers reinforce their already inflated self-confidence. It will be decades before American linguistics begins to recover from Chomsky's domination. And the same lack of skepticism is found in his political followers. People are not dumb. It's just that most of us crave certainty and strong leadership.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 12, 2005 23:51 PM
lol - thanks for the posts Graeme. I also admire intelligence in others, whatever cats think. Chomsky had something very interesting to say about revolution. The gist was that to improve social equality, revolution is necessary only when all other means have been exhausted. It's partly a tactical idea, in that it's easier to legislate measures which improve social equality than it is to rewrite a constitution. Consider that a bloody revolution was needed to free black American slaves, but not to pass the sweeping reforms of 1964's Civil Rights Act. It's also partly an acknowledgement that the more radical the revolution, the more violent it tends to be. What's worse, such revolutions tend to leave violent people in power, who protect their power with further violence. Just compare the aftermath of the French Revolution with that of Czechoslovakia's "Velvet" Revolution in 1989. Where needed reforms are too radical, reaching them in small steps can save lives and avoid totalitarianism. In changing to the system of total worker ownership that Robert suggests, we have a choice. To wrest, outright, oil in Texas from the capitalists who claim ownership of it would require a bloody revolution; not so giving men and women who work in the oil fields the power to vote on budgets and who their bosses are. Capitalists would still have some control, but not all of it. Bringing democracy to the workforce would significantly reduce exploitation of employees by owners.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Mjc7373, Mcorbin at Jun 12, 2005 21:48 PM
Realpc, after reading your posts on this subject I see a theme: Most people are dumb and will tend to flock to any charismatic leader who most likely has nothing of any substance to offer. I think there is some truth to that, but I also think you're underestimating most people's ability to detect bullshit when they see/hear it. I find that there is a direct connection between that opinion and your defending of our economic system. Most people are dumb, so they deserve to serve the upper classes in dead-end minimum wage jobs. I'm willing to bet you are not in favor of poverty, right? So if I point out that we, the richest nation in the world, "can't afford" health care for it's citizens, and there is still rampant poverty and unemployment, that leads to the obvious question: How much more fabulously wealthy must we become before we ALL enjoy the benefits? I expect you will, as may others have, argue that while you don't want poverty to continue, we must not throw out of economic system because it's so great. Isn't this rationale simply that the means justifies the ends?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 12, 2005 19:49 PM
"I just want to eliminate their mindset from the face of this earth." "That's probably what Stalin was thinking when he murdered millions." I knew that he would say something like that; I really did. But notice that I said 'mindset', not person. And people should NOT think like the homeowner in this greedy fool's analogy, trying to get more from someone than he intends to give in return. As Kant maintained, a person should always be treated as an end in himself, not as a means to an end. A point of logic Graeme: an ad hominen argument is when you try to discredit someone's position by appealing to putative flaws in their character. I discredit realfoolish's positions by finding flaws in his "reasoning." THEN I call him an 'asshole', because that's what he is. Notice how I took apart his painter analogy point by point, doing him and others here a favor. What's my thanks? He doesn't even have the decency to concede that a housepainter is able to set the price for his labor, unlike employees of Capitalists, the most obvious way in which his analogy fails to hold. Where I come from- good old Wayne State University- that's an asshole.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 12, 2005 15:24 PM
"I just want to eliminate their mindset from the face of this earth." That's probably what Stalin was thinking when he murdered millions. About Chomsky: He did not found modern linguistics, that was De Saussure, a much better linguist. Chomsky hijacked American linguistics with personality power. He is a natural cult leader. His citation count has nothing to do with superior intelligence. American psychology had been dominated by Skinner, another forceful personality, who had taken things to an irrational extreme. Chomsky won a debate with Skinner in which Comsky was obviously right. Being right about one thing can make you famous. A forceful personality plus a little common sense, and coming along at the right time, is more important than intelligence. Freud was similar. He had one good idea which he actually stole -- most of our thinking is subconscious. But he was great at PR. Similar for Chomsky. He conquered American linguistics forcefully until no other approaches were allowed in the universities. Basically, Amerian linguistics became totalitarian. After that he could say anything no matter how nonsensical, and gullible hordes would buy it. After all, he is the most quoted of all linguists, so he must be right about everything.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 12, 2005 09:26 AM
Having attacked me, Graeme attacks Robert: >Robert: while I often agree with your points >I must say the ad hominems are getting >tiresome. I probably disagree with realpc as >much as anyone here but I don't deny for a >second his right to post whatever he wants, >be it genius or gibberish. If he annoys you >so much maybe you should just ignore him. realpc resorts to dirty tactics, labelling anyone who criticises the way the economy and our lives are run as Marxists, in order to discredit them. I suggest, Graeme, you read some of Robert Parry's articles about the right-wing media infrastructure, and how relentless - and successful! - it is in attacking its opponents. It's time for the left to be equally relentless and unforgiving, or is this all just a game to you Graeme? Either you want change or you don't. I am behind Robert Allen 100%. Robert just has to try not to let realpc get under his skin - because none of us make good posts when we're fuming. Articles by Robert Parry on his Web site here: http://www.consortiumnews.com Here are a couple of sample articles: "It's The Media, Stupid!": http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/010505.html "Money, Media & the Mess in America": http://www.consortiumnews.com/2005/012805.html -- Graeme writes: "If you hate it so much why do you keep coming back?" To annoy you, of course!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 12, 2005 08:16 AM
Graeme writes: >No one is asking you to give Chomsky a >"character reference," That is not what I implied. What has happened to common sense? Does everyone nowadays take everything so literally? Or is it just the Americans and Canadians? >but to debate his points on their merits I see. Chomsky, the anarchist, the man who detests unnecessary authoritarian structures, is going to dictate to others what they discuss and when they discuss it. How democratic!! Time for the Chomsky blog - an unnecessary authoritarian structure! - to be demolished. >Admiration and awe of his personal >intelligence is deserved but irrelevant. What a load of b****cks! No, it is not deserved, and that comment does Chomsky no favors at all. Chomsky is a human being. He gets praise from me ONLY if he's a decent person (and that doesn't require being a saint!), not because of his "God given" intelligence. That's like me demanding that my pet cat admire and worship me for my evidently superior intelligence. What I like about cats is they don't grovel to humans. If they get annoyed with you, they show you their displeasure. Graeme, you really are wrapped up in the material world. >you have a truly bizarre attitude about some >things. They seem bizarre to you because your massive ego is acting as a distorting lens. I suggest you visit the link below. There are people out there who have similar views to me regarding this blog. http://www.liliputianlilith.com/archives/000048.html

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 12, 2005 06:51 AM
Blair, having murdered innocent Iraqis (including many babies and children), having encouraged - and been complicit in! - the looting of Iraq; having sold weapons to Suharto (Indonesia's former dictator), having armed Islam Karimov, Blair, this grown man, now wants to destroy the lives of as many Europeans as he can. realpc, develop a conscience or leave this board for good. The same goes for individuals like Graeme who deny me my right to question Chomsky's integrity, by wondering whether that guy is merely a hard-nosed capitalist, charging speaking fees to feather his own nest. As I said before: Chomsky would refuse to give me a character reference - because he doesn't know me! - and for the same reason, I must do the same. At least people now know that when I defend Chomsky, I do so because I think he's right, not because I admire him or am in awe of his intelligence. For those interested in the crimes of the barbarians running the British government visit: http://www.markcurtis.info The Ghost.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 12, 2005 06:45 AM
"Why do something if there is no reward involved? Basically, we don't do anything if there is no motivation whatsoever. The motivation does not have to be money. But we must profit in some way from an action or we will not waste the energy." You just said it, asshole. We have to profit- BUT NOT NECESSARILY FINANCIALLY. Doctors practicing medicine, because they find it fulfilling. Teachers teaching because .... Carpenters .... Etc. Each one of us doing his/her share of the unpleasant tasks. (Which may mean, to answer an earlier objection, that neurosurgeons don't do any.) Everyone receiving in return what he or she needs, free to earn more by utilizing his/her talents so long as exploitation is not involved. Does everyone see what this obstinate fool is saying here? If we don't do things the Capitalists way, there will be no more Capitalism. Geez I never realized that. Calling your opponent who is kicking your ass 'immature'- the last refuge to which a scoundrel flees. But I don't care what his type thinks of me; I just want to eliminate their mindset from the face of this earth.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 12, 2005 06:22 AM
realpc writes: >"Again, I've kicked your ass." > >Is that how adults win arguments? Realpc, why don't you act like a man and take your grievances directly to Bush and Blair, march in the street, cause trouble for the elite, instead of being a perennial clown. George W. Bush and Tony Blair are supposedly adults. And what have these adults been up to whilst us "children" have been playing? Well, Blair has given Islam Karimov, the tyrant of Uzbekistan, a license to purchase whatever weapons he wants from the U.K. (yes, you read that right!). And Bush, almost as big a liar as Blair, has strengthened the Uzbekistan regime by giving it "aid". The result: the recent bloodbath. Actually, there were three massacres: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1622286_1,00.html The deaths of these Uzbeks - who merely wanted democracy and a better life - Blair has on his conscience. No sooner had the French rejected the EU constitution, saying NO as loudly as they could to corporate globalization, than Blair was up to his usual tricks, appearing before the cameras berating the French for turning their noses up at such "sensible policies".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 12, 2005 02:28 AM
"Again, I've kicked your ass." Is that how adults win arguments?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 12, 2005 01:03 AM
"You are just buying into the notion that labor MUST be profitable." Why do something if there is no reward involved? Basically, we don't do anything if there is no motivation whatsoever. The motivation does not have to be money. But we must profit in some way from an action or we will not waste the energy. "The worth of Picasso's paintings has NOTHING to do with their market value." The market value is determined by demand. And, for whatever combination of reasons, Picasso's paintings are in demand. " Just because someone gets a lot of people to buy his/her paintings or recordings, or sculptures etc. does not mean he/she is a great artist." They buy the paintings or records, etc., because they have the opinion they are worth something. This opinion may have any number of sources. Marketing has a lot to do with it. You might think you are elevated above popular culture and not influenced by marketing. But people who go for classical or serious art and music are just as conditioned by marketing -- "if you can appreciate great art, you are above the common rabble." I have a degree in art history and I can tell the difference. But as a child, before studying, any pretty picture looked great to me. Adults with no art education look at pictures the way I used to.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 12, 2005 00:08 AM
realobstinate, You are just buying into the notion that labor MUST be profitable. You are, as we say, in the grips of a false theory. First, you may still have a reason to hire a painter: you can't paint and he can. Secondly, you have not shown that labor's value must be the "market value minus a reasonable (by whose standards?) share for the owner." Because of your addiction, you can't envision alternatives; and, like Graeme says, you only DESCRIBE capitalism, instead of justifying it. You are begging the very question we have been "debating": why should there be "owners" of the MOPs? (I could sketch some alternatives for you but it would be pointless.) Lastly, you don't know the first thing about artistic merit. The worth of Picasso's paintings has NOTHING to do with their market value. Just because someone gets a lot of people to buy his/her paintings or recordings, or sculptures etc. does not mean he/she is a great artist. Again, I've kicked your ass.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 11, 2005 21:24 PM
It's impossible to know how much a person's labor is worth, outside the context of a market. (A painting by Picasso may be worth a million if buyers can be found. Joe Shmoe might paint a picture and not even be able to give it away.) If I hire a house painter and pay him the exact amount that I estimate his work increased the value of the house, I had no reason to hire him. And if I own a hundred houses and hire a hundred painters, the same is true. The value of the painters' labor is not the same as the increase in market value of the house, because then the labor would have NO value. As the owner, I would then have no reason to hire painters. The value of labor must be determined by market value minus a reasonable share for the owner. If owners have little motivation to hire anyone, the value of labor in general declines, ultimately to nothing. This is one of the reasons too much socialism can kill an economy.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 11, 2005 17:49 PM
Contd. So we are all capitalists now, but the operative distinction held in Marx's time (as if people did not hire housepainters then). Anyway, I'll bite the bullet here anytime: if you hire someone, knowing full well how much his labor is worth and pay him something less, then you are a thief. The only thing that gets your homeowner off the hook is that it's not certain what his house will sell for. Moreover, the painter sets the price of his labor, unlike the typical worker and may be working ‘on the side', the sort of economic activity Marx does not have a problem with. It's when individuals must earn a living by accepting wages that they themselves (as well as their employers) know is worth less then their labor that Marx rightly objects. Now I have absolutely destroyed your little analogy; are you man enough to admit it or are you going to earn the above appellation again?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 11, 2005 17:20 PM
"Allen loves to use words like "asshole." It makes me concerned that he might have serious problems, aside from being a devout Marxist." I'm only saying what several other bloggers here have intimated. It is ABSOLUTELY ridiculous to compare a homeowner who hires a painter to an employer of thousands of people.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 11, 2005 16:32 PM
Allen loves to use words like "asshole." It makes me concerned that he might have serious problems, aside from being a devout Marxist. Anyway, he obviously understands very little about semantics and the importance of defining words before using them. In Marx's time it may have been obvious what the word "capitalist" referred to, but it is not obvious now. We all hire workers for one thing or another. They benefit us in someway that might directly or indirectly improve our finances. Are we exploiting them if we benefit from their labor and do not pass 100% of this benefit along in their wages? If I hire someone to paint my house and that increases the profit I make from selling the house, have I exploited the painter if his fee was less than the additional profit? And why bother hiring a painter if I have to pay him %100 of the additional profit? I could just sell the house for less, unpainted. Some workers do get a share of the profits, especially in creative fields. Authors and artists may get royalties. Of course if their work does not sell they make very little. Would you like all workers to have their wages fluctuate depending on the success of the enterprise? As I said before, workers don't get negative paychecks. They seldom even get a negative raise, even if the business is going bankrupt.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 11, 2005 07:43 AM
bwong, Following up on what Graeme just said, philosophy of the sort I practice is supposed to make such matters as we are discussing clearer. That is what Marx's analysis allows me to do for working people, to whom my heart goes out. They are the revolutionary class. And every member of it whose suspicion we can confirm-that he/she is being ripped off by his/her employer is one more ally in our fight against the capitalists. That is why it is so important to be clear and precise in describing what the latter are up to. Put aside the LTV, the essential point is that a capitalist INTENDS to get those who don't own MOPs to create more wealth than he/she gives them in return. All parties to the debate- even asshole- concede that a capitalist is out to get working people to create wealth for him/her. It's just that only some of them are bright enough to see that that makes a capitalist a slaveholder.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 10, 2005 23:16 PM
And last, another problem with surplus value critique is that by that standard, the unemployed would be in a neutral state, neither exploited nor exploiting. One can hardly consider mass unemployment a more "just" situation than full employemnt even though there would be less "expliotations" in the abstract sense while under full employement everyone is "exploited". Sorry for veering off some philosphical tangent. Utlimately the real question should be whether "capitalism" "works" for the majority in some concrete terms, such as material well being, opportunities for fulfillment, etc. The curent system fails massively based on these concrete criteria. I think the dynamics of capitalism is largely, though not completely, responsible for a lot marginalization, the massive misallocation of resources to serve the market instead of basic human needs,etc. There will be disagreements on cupability (for example. I strongly disagree with one poster who attributes everything from sexism to religious fundamentalism to capitalism, that is ridiculous)There will also be disagreements on what constitue the core features of capitalism, to what degree economics is bound up with politics etc.But this is natural for any thougtful discussion.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 10, 2005 23:08 PM
Might as well be dead! :(

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 10, 2005 22:48 PM
The key point is that *economical* value of labour cannot be assigned intrinsically, independent of the nexus of capitalism in the fisrt place! A widget is worthless( in the sense of economics since we are talking about compensation)if it is not for sale!Once it is for sale its "value" is bound up with a host of factors which have nothing to do with "labour". I agree with triangular that most people don't care about being abtractly "exploitated" as long as they are living a good life and have the opportunties to persue their aspirations. Unfortunately too many people, especially outside the developed world, are denied these (and even the most basic diginity) because of neoliberal("capitalist") onslaught. This lead to the next point. Is an unexploited" worker always better off in concerte terms than the "exploited" one? The answer is not obvious. People normally don't quit well paid, secure jobs and go into debt(becoming "capitalists")just for economical reasons. There are many angles from which one can give devastating critiques to the current system(as I and others have done here). But I wouldn't go the route of surplus value. I don't mean to pick fight with Robert.I am only stating my opinion as I see things. My apologies if my rendering is inaccurate.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 10, 2005 22:23 PM
"Mr Allen calls the practice of people at the bottom not getting a share proportional to the value of their labor "exploitation"" Actually, I think Robert makes an even stronger point. It is not just the people at the bottom who are "exploited". Ditto C.E.O's and anyone who recieves a paycheque. The ownership of MOP allows the capitalist to extract the "surplus value" created by the worker according to the theory. For example, the capitalist charges a customer $5 for an item and pays the worker $2, pocketing the remaining $3(in reality $2 of that may go to rent, paying for another "parasite", the landlord) In Robert's system of calculus the "value" invested in the item is $5 and it is SOLELY the result of labour.The worker therefore has $3 "stolen" by the capitalist. I have problems with this way of thinking because it is far too simplistic. For example, who is to say that the "value" of the item should worth $5? May be it would fetch only $2 in the market had it not because the capitalist has driven out the competitors?In this scenario BOTH the worker and the Capitalist collude to rip off the consummer. How about the "value" of works which service capital? For example, the service of a lawyer working in a large corporate law firm. What would be the "value" of his work without the capitalist who are willing to pay for it? One can think of numerous other situations where the logic of surplus value theory does not hold up. (continued)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 10, 2005 21:48 PM
goffchile writes: >If folks can't imagine substantive change >without catastrophe, it makes struggling for >change seem rather self-defeating, doesn't >it? The tens of thousands slaughtered in Iraq was a catastrophe. The massacre in Uzbekistan was a catastrophe. Where's the substantive change in U.S. and British foreign policy? Where's the substantive change in people's thinking? Where are the huge street protests? Humans like to take risks, to wait for catastrophe to strike. How else do you explain why people smoke heavily, drink excessively, or eat like there's no tomorrow - all these habits put a person's health at risk, but disaster is a long way off, and might never come at all, so why the hell worry about it? We're not wired to feel the pain of others. Until large majorities suffer, what incentive is there for people to demand change, or to find out what is really going on? People will just sit and wait till disaster strikes - IF it strikes. A pint of beer, a packet of cigarettes, and the biggest, juiciest, greasiest hamburger you've got! What do you mean it's bad for my health? Don't I know it! :)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Slackorback, Triangular at Jun 10, 2005 21:31 PM
(...cont, sorry it cut my msg before) I think the goal of bettering the conditions of people at the low economic end to a level where they can pursue their asprations freely and have good lives, is not only more attainable than the ideal of having everybody getting an equal share, but also I think addresses what makes exploitation abhorent. When everybody, who's willing to put a reasonable amount of effort, can get economic/health security and enough time to spend outside of work in ways that they like, I think it would probably no longer matter that the rest of the wealth is distributed unjustly. At that point, the fight for perfect equality would no longer be worth fighting -- one only really needs so much material wealth to be happy. (my 2 cents)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Slackorback, Triangular at Jun 10, 2005 21:03 PM
I'm new to this blog, I wanted to make a comment on the exploitation debate between realpc & Robert Allen. It seems to me like a lot of this debate can be reduced to a question of semantics: Mr Allen calls the practice of people at the bottom not getting a share proportional to the value of their labor "exploitation". I think nobody would disagree that this practice exists. However, it is only abhorent to the degree that it stands between people and whatever gives meaning to their lives (family, going on vacation, reading a good book, keeping up friendships, etc.) realpc calls only the abhorant degree of this practice "exploitation", and hence claims that some workers are exploited and some are not. There are certainly a lot of people that the current social order prevents from pursuing meaningful lives beyond whatever it takes to make ends meet -- or creates conditions that make it very difficult for them to do so. So the system is unjust to the degree that there are people in this situation. But in the end, the "unjust"-ness is really a matter of degrees, not all black and white. (And people DO have a lot more opportunities here in the US for having a good life than in many other places)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Ssaffari, Ssaffari at Jun 10, 2005 20:47 PM
an interesting addition to the issue raised by Dr. Chomsky is that this unleased evolution of corporate-state system will result in an unlikely marriage between the right and the left, both of whom see themselves and their values threatened by these neo-liberal policies. I guess a good example of such reaction can be seen in the recent refrendums in France and the Netherlands where the rejection vote came out of this unlikely marriage between the leftist organizations and the right wing nationalists.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 10, 2005 20:24 PM
The reason I respoded as such is basically because I see a lot of cynicism among today's youth, which I find frustrating. The notion that things have to get worse before they get better fits neatly into your "stability thesis." If folks can't imagine substantive change without catastrophe, it makes struggling for change seem rather self-defeating, doesn't it?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 10, 2005 20:13 PM
goffchile writes: >I don't buy that logic-I would like to >think that capitalist "evolution" will make >it increasingly possible to imagine an >alternative. Maybe science will rescue us. >Also, I wouldn't overstate capitalism's >stability. You misunderstand me; it's not capitalism as such that I'm saying is stable, it's the way people think. Many people believe there isn't much that needs changing or can be changed, that "capitalism" has, indeed, triumphed. In other words, let's stick with this strategy and see where it takes us because it's a winning one. Yup, we're destined to ride this train until it derails. I going to jump - what about you? >The depression was pretty de-stabilizing and >it only really solved through a world wide >conflagration and deep reforms. Now 50 years >later, many of those same problems have re- >emerged, but on a much larger scale. That's what I meant by a cataclysm. We have an economic system that is based on endless growth, and corporations running rampant. So it looks like we ARE on a collision course - with what, I don't know. But, who knows, maybe the future is extremely bright for everyone; and maybe I've turned into a commercial.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 10, 2005 19:08 PM
And let's not forget this mouthful of drivel: "You can be successful, IF YOU REALLY WANT TO BE. YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO BE!" Cough, choke - really?? To discover the truth takes a lot of time and effort, which most people don't have. Hence, a simple rationale to justify the current criminal set-up is all that's needed to keep most people on board. Add to that the sacrifices people must make to switch strategies, and it becomes clear why change is not forthcoming. Evolutionarily stable strategies are very hard to defeat. Just ask anyone who's studied game theory. Article here on ES Strategies: http://www.urticator.net/essay/2/217.html Don't over analyse what I said; I just thought I'd use the idea of an evolutionarily stable strategy to make my post more interesting :-)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 10, 2005 19:06 PM
Regarding the potential for cataclysm and capitalism's stability. You may be right, but I hope you are wrong. Simply because, given the destructive power that humans have created, and our growing economic interdependence, a cataclysmic disaster which seriously disrupted world soical relations would be assuredly be disasterous at scale that would make WWII look like a tea party. I suppose, that this is part of the argument that keeps capitalism going--i. e.--things would have to get much worse before they got better, and therefore, to struggle for something better is really to hope for the worst. I don't buy that logic--I would like to think that capitalist "evolution" will make it increasingly possible to imagine an alternative. Right now, in the age of Capitalilsm Triumphant, it doesn't seem that way, but things do change. Also, I wouldn't overstate capitalism's stability. The depression was pretty de-stabilizing and it only really solved through a world wide conflagration and deep reforms. Now 50 years later, many of those same problems have re-emerged, but on a much larger scale.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 10, 2005 18:46 PM
Here's why I think capitalism - or rather the current economic set-up - is not going to change, not without a cataclysmic disaster. Cut through all the academic analysis and what you have is an evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS). No matter how much we huff and puff, it's not going to change a thing. That's not because the current strategy for running the economy is the best one, just that it's very stable, stable in the sense of hard to get others to fight against it. Decades pass by, and the same strategy is still with us - it's evolutionarily stable! To understand why, you just have to look at realpc's arguments - they're so simple even a complete idiot can understand them. "Look," realpc says, "it's not capitalism, it's a few bad employers, a handful of corrupt people at the top. The system is not great, but it's the best we have. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater." Simple, a lie, but PERSUASIVE!! So, too, is this nonsense about "the invisible hand" keeping capitalism on the straight and narrow, working for the people.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 10, 2005 18:31 PM
cont. Now by all accounts, you are taking a terrible beating. If this were a boxing match, it would have been stopped a long time ago. Have the good sense to gracefully concede defeat, or at least that you need to rethink your position. There is no shame in that; on the contrary, it is a sign of intelligence and may, thus, earn you some respect here. What is shameful is your insistence that you have met the key objection to Capitalism. You have not. Nor can you. (I dare anyone else to tell me he has.) As bwong pointed out, in your personal relationships, things are (probably) quid pro quo- and rightly so. There is no reason why this principle should be abrogated in compensating workers.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 10, 2005 17:27 PM
realslimy, I asked you on behalf of the readers of this blog for an example of a business owner who does not exploit. As usual, you ignored my request, responding with a dodge (that only you think is clever) and an ad hominen. More to the point, you yourself conceded that workers receive less than the value of their labor in compensation for it. That is the practice- call it what you want, ripping off, expropriating, exploiting- you lamely tried to defend by citing the capitalist's risk and hard work. So you know damn well it exists. And you have said nothing that justifies it. Not a thing; just the above and a few unsupported claims about human nature, which wouldn't justify exploitation even if they were true.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 10, 2005 15:12 PM
"YOU defined "exploitation" that way. I do not agree with your definition. But you can't stand it if anyeone disagrees with you. No wonder you prefer totalitarianism" It does not matter what you call it, asshole, the practice exists- workers must receive less than the value of their labor, otherwise it is not profitable to their employers. We have covered this point over and over. For you to deny it at this stage of the discussion is disingenuous. You are not attending to the question at hand, which is why should such a practice exist? You are here only to obfuscate.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 10, 2005 14:28 PM
"exploitation as we have defined it (over and over and over again) is of the essence of every single employer/employee relationship" YOU defined "exploitation" that way. I do not agree with your definition. But you can't stand it if anyeone disagrees with you. No wonder you prefer totalitarianism

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 10, 2005 07:29 AM
Scrub the above!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 10, 2005 07:01 AM
"There are many business owners who exploit their workers, but there are also many who do not.' You lousy obfuscating bastard. You know damn well by now that exploitation as we have defined it (over and over and over again) is of the essence of every single employer/employee relationship in our miserable society. Show me a business owner who does not pay his workers something whose value is less than the value of what they have produced and I will show you someone heading in a hurry to Ch. 11. Now I beg you people, please stop taking this scumbag seriously. Allow me to heap scorn upon him and leave it at that. That way new readers of this blog will see him as the contemptible figure he is, putting us a small step closer to overcoming his kind- which should be our ultimate goal.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 10, 2005 06:45 AM
bwong quoted this, saying it was not far off the mark: "...Chomsky...is a master polemicist with an apparently irresistible thirst for combat, and his particular brand of rhetoric, which begins with cleverly unsympathetic caricatures of the opposition, and proceeds to heights of howling ridicule, has been adoringly aped by many of his followers" (Review of Jackendoff/Pinker in The London Review of Books, 23 June 1994, vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 10-11) ---

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 10, 2005 03:57 AM
bwong, Your point that there were (and still are) some "good kings" is a good one. The question is not whether another economic system can do away with exploitation entirely, but whether we can come up with one that reduces exploitation, and I'm sure realpc agrees. State-corporatism gives investors the power to divvy up profits at their discretion. This allows investors to pay employees a lesser share of revenues than they deserve, and whenever that occurs (which, as realpc says, is only sometimes), it's exploitation. So who can divvy up the profits fairly if not the investors? Not market forces, since in a job market where much exploitation occurs, employers will tend to pay their employees a lesser share of revenues. I can think of only one fair way to divvy up profits: by democratic consensus. We should legally grant employees the right to vote on business policies. Imagine how much less exploitation is possible in a business where employees vote for who manages it and how revenues are budgeted.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 10, 2005 03:44 AM
'We have conflicting responsibilities; thus exploitation is just' I never put those two statements together. I said we have conflicting responsibilities, therefore even people with the best intentions cannot treat everyone with perfect compassion and consideration. This does not mean people are naturally bad or that we exploit each other at every opportunity. But some degree of unfairness is impossible to avoid. So you can accuse anyone of exploiting someone, depending on how carelessly you define "exploit." There are many business owners who exploit their workers, but there are also many who do not. We hire people all the time to help us with things we don't have time for, or don't know how to do. How can you determine whether you are exploiting someone you have hired? Business owners hire workers to help them, just as individuals hire people when they need their car fixed or their house painted, or their brain needs surgery. We could trade services, but it's much easier to use money. Business owners either make or lose money, but their hired workers never get a negative pay check.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 10, 2005 03:08 AM
"Saw the people standin' thousand years in chains. Somebody said it's diff'rent now, look, it's just the same. Pharoahs spin the message, round and round the truth. They could have saved a million people, How can I tell you?" Fogerty had people like realdespicable in mind when he wrote these lyrics (from "Wrote a Song for Everyone") bwong, Let's not get bogged down in a terminological dispute. The value of a worker's labor is greater than the value of its compensation; whatever you want to call the difference and however you want to measure it. All parties to the dispute agree on that. The question is what justifies the capitalist in pocketing that difference? I say nothing and nobody has proven me wrong.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 09, 2005 22:00 PM
"You have misunderstood. I did not mean to say that people are "bad." My point is that we have conflicting priorities, especially since our society has become too complex for our limted intelligence. We have a primary responsibility to ourselves to survive. We also are responsible for our families, then our community, nation and world." Jacob, Here it is for you: a classic case of obfuscating. Not one sentence above justifies exploitation. Not one; it's just BS. But the louse did respond. He strung together several coherent sentences. BFD. But the less than discerning reader would think he has performed the required task. I could mock his reasoning again- what the heck, I will- 'We have conflicting responsibilities; thus exploitation is just'- but it will only produce another piece of obfuscation. And what's more, he knows he can't defend the practice in question. But if he and others keep running their mouths, the inevitable can be put off until they have met their Maker.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 09, 2005 19:46 PM
Why are directors called directors and workers, workers? Directors are so-called because they DIRECT the work of others. But not just the work, they also decide how our nation's resources are used - what gets allocated where. However, without workers, directors would have nothing to direct; they would be like a conductor without an orchestra. No one in their right minds would say a conductor is of more value than the orchestra, and therefore deserves the majority of the profits from the group's performances. Directors play a role in running corporations, but it's merely a different role to their workers, not a more important one. As Bill Gates said: I have scientists working for Microsoft who are far more intelligent than me. If anyone doubts the expendability of someone like Gates, just look at the success of Linux, a far more stable operating system than Windows, developed without the help of - or, should I say, without interference from - corporate executives. (www.xandros.com for a very user-friendly version of Linux). Hence, directors are not authorities on how to run the world or the economy. They are merely a different brand of worker, albeit one with a huge conflict of interest.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matthew_ss, Mattss at Jun 09, 2005 19:05 PM
I think most of us can agree that Capitalism is an ideological superstructure within which human agency plays a huge role. Whether the Elitism which fostered Capitalism and Imperialism (the coercive power that makes Capitalism possible) is 'natural' to humanity is up for grabs... I don't think anyone on this post can actually answer that. The question we CAN answer is whether we agree with Elitism and want to live our lives believing that discrepencies in income are our right, rewarding our effort: representing our contribution to the social good: a sign of divine providence and our general goodness. Capitalism does not, however, describe human nature or the natural state of human society; it can't, because we don't know what these things actually are. Once Capitalism starts professing to know these things, like some liberal Economists will, it's claims to 'objectivity' and the 'science of constrained choice' become very misleading. Since Capitalism is built, as has been mentioned already, on assumptions of Private Property and homo economicus, a special type of human who acts only on the market; these two features are implied by every Capitalist litterature and I believe that they both justify and naturalize the inequality which is a result of systematic Elitism.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 09, 2005 18:45 PM
Human nature is a tricky subject and I grow weary of the knee-jerk reaction that many folks have when tries to introduce the idea of a better society. "It can't work because people are inherently greedy and self-centered." Not saying anyone on this board has made that argument--just saying its oft heard and typically is followed by no evidence whatsoever. If its true, it would be impossible for even capitalism to exist because people would constantly be violating the law, particularly property law, and most voluntary civil institutions, like churches or fraternal organizations would have never been created. And of course, no one would give to charity, volunteer their time, or even share at a pot luck. People give of themselves all the time. As to whether exploitation is inevitble--I disagree. Capitalist exploitation certainly isn't inevitable because for most of history, people did without out it. In any society that requires human labor (its difficult to imagine any society that doesn't require at least some labor) there needs to be some mechanism of labor control/compensation. Does it need to be exploitive, oppressive, or based on a class relationship? I really don't think so--again people are quite capable of self-organization based on relative egalitarian arrangements--they do it all the time, and they get things done.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 09, 2005 15:47 PM
"even if he were right that given the chance one would inevitably take advantage of others" You have misunderstood. I did not mean to say that people are "bad." My point is that we have conflicting priorities, especially since our society has become too complex for our limted intelligence. We have a primary responsibility to ourselves to survive. We also are responsible for our families, then our community, nation and world. These responsibilities inevitably conflict and we inevitably neglect some of them, at least partially. We can't help "taking advantage" of someone sometime. We let others take up the things we have missed, usually without even knowing it. People are also great at self-justification and avoidance of guilt, but this is to some extent healthy. If you try to be perfectly altruistic you will drive yourself crazy.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 09, 2005 09:00 AM
I doubt that it is the way realpc operates with his friends and family, but even if he were right that given the chance one would inevitably take advantage of others,-human nature,-- it does not follow that this behaviour should be institutionalized and, actually celebrated. Many believe agression is human nature. It is probably more true than the eco101 caricature of humans being just walking greed.But no one would agrue that war lordism is therefore the only politcial system compatible with human nature. Instead society seeks other ways to diffuse/channelized pinned up aggressions like competitive sports.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 09, 2005 08:29 AM
"I think realpc was basically saying that exploitation is a trait of human nature that won't be got rid of by a different economic system, which I think is reasonable." Jacobro Yes, realpc has been talking about "human nature" for quite some times and I think he is missing the point. We cannot observe bare "human nature" in action for obvious reasons. We can only observe its manifestations in concrete context. For example, if I put someone in a war zone with a gun and say:"kill or be killed". Chances are most people will pull the trigger. But this doesn't prove that killing is a human instinct, only that killing is the manifestation of a deeper, survival instinct in the enviroment where killing is necessary to survive. In another context the same survival instinct may lead to cooperation. One objection to capitalism posted here is that it creates the corrosive enviroment where one is compelled to compete with others and exploit(whatever it means) others.In fact, all arguments are about "capitalism" the macro insititution , not about individuals.Whether one agrees or not, one should at least acknowledge the points being made. Realpc, on the other hand, arguing almost exclusively at the individual level. It's like saying not all absolute monarchs are tyrants and there were good kings. This is true but it is not a defense for absolute monarchy as an insititution.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 09, 2005 06:18 AM
"No one . . . has proven that exploitation is inevitable." True, in fact I doubt the claim can be proven at all. Just to be clear, I think realpc was basically saying that exploitation is a trait of human nature that won't be got rid of by a different economic system, which I think is reasonable. Elsewhere, realpc argued that business owners and their employees have a fair relationship. He disavows the myth that all business owners buy stock, then sit on their laurels while rented slaves do the real work, and he points out that very frequently business owners put in much longer, more tedious hours than nine-to-fivers commonly do. Furthermore, investment is risky and can bankrupt you, whereas employees enjoy the relative security of never having to put the clothes on their backs up as collateral. Yet we allow the investor to claim ownership not only over the product of his labor, but also that of his employees. Perhaps he deserves a larger share of profits than his employees, relative to the work he does and the risks he takes, but if we agree that everyone has a right to own the products of his or her labor, an employee's share of the revenue they generate should not be set by someone who would otherwise collect the profits himself, i.e. the business owner. It invites exploitation.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 09, 2005 04:59 AM
"Or at least it's a wrong on top of another wrong; if you rob a bank and I rob you on the way out the door, we're both wrong" No, I didn't say two wrongs cancel. I said if private property is wrong, theft is not a wrong(now keeping stolen goods as your provate property is, from the same premise). Sorry about the silly word games. I am taking a break from doing math :) Speaking of academic cock fight and Chomsky, here is an interesting obsevation by the philosopher Daniel Dennett(and not an unfair one IMO): "The relations between the linguists and the others in cognitive science, which started off so well, have not been cordial in recent years...Chomsky himself should be held partly responsible for what went sour in the relations between linguistics and its neighbors. He is a master polemicist with an apparently irresistible thirst for combat, and his particular brand of rhetoric, which begins with cleverly unsympathetic caricatures of the opposition, and proceeds to heights of howling ridicule, has been adoringly aped by many of his followers" (Review of Jackendoff/Pinker in The London Review of Books, 23 June 1994, vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 10-11)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 09, 2005 04:36 AM
"I had always imagined that capitalism could infintely regenerate itself, so long as people tolerated it--but Wallerstein (and I think Chomsky) seem to think no." I think the problem is "Capitalism" is hard to pin down. It is a remarkably flexible system very good at adapting and remaking itself. This "robustness" is utlimately its strength comparing to other(proposed) alternatives that are very rigidly defined (parecon comes to mind).There are many variants and mutations of "capitalism" since Marx's days. A run of the mill "Capitalist" today is probably some guy who takes out a huge bank loan to open a small business and would much rather be "exploited" as waged slave if he could find a well paid job with benefits. It is easy to argue against "capitalism" in specific context(e.g, corporate capitalism, globalization etc) But "an end of capitalism" is a far reaching, overaching philosophical statement. One has to agree on some core, defining features of "capitalism" before one can meaningfully answer the question posted by this blog.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Gammon101, Bwong at Jun 09, 2005 04:05 AM
"His point was to demonstate that profit is the product of labor, not the labor of the capitalist" Actually his(Marx's)point was that VALUE was derived from labour. "Profit", however, is an entirely different notion. If you go by Marx's logic profit itself is theft from the consummers(by the workers and the capitalists) One can give meaningful critique to capitalism without getting into surplus value theory, which I think is on shaky ground if you try to look into it closely(i.e beyond sloganeering) For example,how do you quantify "value"? It is at least to a large degree context sensitive, thus cannot be simply equated with labour input(which itself is hard to quantify) without reference to marketing venue, etc. Most economists reject surplus value, not without some sound reasons. Moreover, ECONOMICAL value should not be confused with "value" in the broad sense. "Exploitation" is strictly a technical jargon if one agrues from surplus value. It may or may not be congruent with the moral connotation the word usually carries. I think it is confusion of catagories to exploit this dual meaning of "exploitation" in the same argument. Also, the notion of "theft" presumes property right. If private property is immoral(as Rousseau argued) one cannot say theft is wrong.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 09, 2005 03:02 AM
"While capitalism results in exploitation, so will any system which replaces it, and at least exploitation in this system is mitigated by the right of "laborers" to themselves exploit or collectively fight exploitation." No one, least of all realimafraidtogobymyrealnamepc, has proven that exploitation is inevitable. If workers own the MOPs and are using them solely to produce the goods and services that they need, there is is no exploitation. If capitalist wanabes were to upset this arrangement, then you would have time theft all over again. But that is not inevitable. If you read ancient history, you will see that people were saying the same thing about revenge killings when laws against them were established. Our baser instincts can be overcome, or at least suppressed sufficiently to lessen human suffering. Anyway, Mr. Pseudonym doesn't even want to try, he's all about defending wealth and privelege.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 09, 2005 01:47 AM
Ohdear, Yes, Chomsky is great at sticking to his point and dismissing trivialities. And no doubt all of us share your feelings about "academic cock-fights." However, we should all expect inflammatory attacks to stifle dissent and distract meaningful discussion, while contributing nothing more to it than bad feelings. Knowing this, it makes sense to discourage them if we think of open discussion as something other than a triviality. If it takes an "academic cock-fight," which isn't necessarily the case, I'll get into one. Robert and realpc, I agree with points both of you are making. Firstly, Robert's point, that capitalism naturally entails exploitation of labor (Marx's definition of exploitation was illuminating--ty, goffchile); secondly, realpc's, that while capitalism results in exploitation, so will any system which replaces it, and at least exploitation in this system is mitigated by the right of "laborers" to themselves exploit or collectively fight exploitation. The question seems to be whether a less exploitative system than "state-corporatism" is possible. One I like is the suggestion by New England activists 150 years ago that company ownership be legally distributed 7:6:5 between investors, management, and labor. Allowing everyone in a company the right to vote on business policy and to collect a return on dividends should diminish whatever authoritarian power investors currently have over employees without destroying the profit motive.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 09, 2005 01:26 AM
"I'm not going to be thanked for this, but I would also like to make the point that academic cock-fights like the one we've had here on the meaning of "obscurantist" are a massive turn off for even relatively well-educated readers of these forums." Jake the smartaleck challenged me and, thus, got what he had coming.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 09, 2005 00:06 AM
cont. Regardless, I still don't see why those who (under some plausible definition) are entitled to their wealth should be allowed to exploit the labor of those who, through no fault of their own, have only that labor to sell. By the grace of God I'm born with business acumen and am fortunate enough come into possession of capital to which (we will assume) I'm entitled. Taking a risk, I purchase some MOP and even show up to oversee its operation. That alone would justify me in taking more from my workers more than I give them in return, paying them only what it takes to keep them alive and fit for labor? (And in perpetuity. How long on your view does the supposed obligation of the workers to their capitalist master exist? What would it take in the way of profits to wipe out their debt?) I thank God that I don't get it and never will.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 08, 2005 23:28 PM
Who doesn't love a good academic cock-fight? ;-) But point taken, and back to the issue at hand. I just read one of Wallerstein's recent books (he writes about 1 a week) and he is pushing the issue that capitalism is rapidly approaching its final crisis point. I am reluctant to accept this at face value since capitalism has been in "crisis" for 100 years. Imperialism, the Depression, Nazism, all supposedly heralded the end of the system--but capitalism lives on. But his argument is based on a few key points-- Deruralization, the exhaustion of non-renewable (fossil) fuels, deforestation, increased tax rates, and the exhaustion of untapped labor markets are squeezing profits to point where it may be difficult capitalism to reproduce itself. Wallerstein makes no prediction about where this will lead us--but he sees a post-capitalist future on the horizon. I had always imagined that capitalism could infintely regenerate itself, so long as people tolerated it--but Wallerstein (and I think Chomsky) seem to think no.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 08, 2005 23:09 PM
cont. Not even as staunch a defender of capitalism as Nozick would agree with your justification. A business owner who stole his capital would not, acc. to N., be entitled to his profits. Is a Mafioso who has built a sweatshop to launder money entitled to a greater share of his company's profits than his peasant laborers? Of course not. So, what else is required? That he be entitled to his capital, acc. to Nozick. But, then, to avoid the sort of objection that I've just raised, you would have to show that it's possible to raise capital without stealing, (including exploiting labor lest your definition be circular). Maybe it is, although historians have shown that theft was involved in the building of the first capitalist enterprises.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 08, 2005 22:44 PM
There is no doubt that many capitalists do their share of work--planning, coordinating, and sometimes physical labor--but the difference is that since they own the enterprise, they control the surplus value and therefore aren't exploited. Regarding managers and lower level coordinators, there is nothing that says that labor can't be mental and I would say that most lower level managers are primarily functionaries who are exploited in a way similar to an entry level employee. The line can be fuzzy sometimes as you climb the ladder but its a gross overstatement to say a majority stockholder and a worker are partners that simply perform different roles. As far as capitalists and risk taking--yes, it is the capitalist that takes the risk (at least theoretically). Of course in reality, most "good" capitalists do everything they can to reduce risks--through externalizing costs, transferring risk to the public sector or to their employees, using their political influence to modify the tax code or get a gov't bailout, which is just another form of class struggle.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 08, 2005 22:31 PM
"The business owner, who takes a risk and organizes the enterprise and connects it with the larger network of supply and demand, DESERVES more reward than workers who did not go into debt and who only have to do their own jobs. Ok Marx defined it as exploitation, but his definition is misleading and illogical." No he does not; nothing justifies theft, not even risk-taking and/or hard work. Moreover, where did those skills and capital come from? If exploitation or some other form of theft, which is historically the case, the gains therefrom are ill-gotten. You are also presupposing that "attracting customers, marketing, and sales" are necessary. But only under capitalism are such sordid practices required. Were the MOPs used solely to produce the good and services workers need, instead of for private gain, they would be entirely superfluous.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Morph_1005, Ohdear at Jun 08, 2005 22:08 PM
I'm not going to be thanked for this, but I would also like to make the point that academic cock-fights like the one we've had here on the meaning of "obscurantist" are a massive turn off for even relatively well-educated readers of these forums. I'm always impressed by Chomsky's ability to stick to the point and convey relatively complex concepts in simple and concise language accessible to all.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Kreuzberg_anto, Moderne at Jun 08, 2005 21:54 PM
Ohdear: I would suggest reading Michael Albert's ParEcon if you're interested in fleshing out some of the differences between management and workers as far as class membership goes. One of his arguments is precisely that Marxism overlooks an existent third class ("coordinator"), who, while they do not own the means of production such as capitalists, have rights/power/lifestyles which elevate and empower them considerably above the "working class".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Morph_1005, Ohdear at Jun 08, 2005 21:48 PM
I should start by declaring my lack of knowledge on all of this. I haven't read Marx, so apologies to all if I'm missing the point. However, there seems to be a confusing conflation of the "capitalists" who own the business, risk their capital, but contribute no labour, and the managers, who clearly do contribute significant labour and don't necessarily own a material amount of capital. The managers are surely most usefully thought of as "workers" in this debate. Similarly, limiting "means of production" to manufacturing equipment seems bizarre. Surely all the tangible and intangible assets of a business are MOPs? Otherwise why would the business have invested in them? realpc himself effectively made the manager = worker point in his last post. I was a little surprised by this, as it seems to negate the main thrust of his fundamental argument. Apart from risking capital, all of the capitalists' contributions to the business which realpc lists are actually contributions of the managers = workers. There is clearly some overlap where workers own some capital, but it seems disingenuous to talk of a "spectrum of inter-connected roles".

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 08, 2005 21:47 PM
"All ad hominem attacks are obscurantist: one form of obscurantism opposes enlightenment, a necessary part of which is open discussion; it's reasonable to assume that an ad hominem attack will disrupt open discussion; that makes ad hominem attacks obscurantist." He is here defending the indefensible; moreover (and others have noticed this well) he won't address the issue at hand: what gives anyone the right to profit from another person's labor against his/her will? His responses are red herrings (like the bit about sexism and racism). Thus, since I take this issue to a very serious matter- theft of time- I must call a spade a spade. If we were high school debaters things would be different. But I have no qualms about denouncing evildoers and their apologists in this forum.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 08, 2005 21:17 PM
"profit is the product of labor, not the labor of the capitalist" And my point was that this definition of "labor" is much too narrow. The capitalist must define the purpose of the enterprise, integrate it within the network of supply and demand, organize various kinds of workers. How can you claim all that work is not "labor?" Furthermore, the capitalist takes the risk. The capitalist and the managers he/she hires are not less important than the "workers." And who are the workers anyway? The "coordinators" work at least as hard as the low-level employees. It is not a question of two competing classes, but a spectrum of inter-connnected roles.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 08, 2005 19:43 PM
I don't think Marx's definition is misleading--its very precise in fact, more precise than any moral definition of the term. As far as being illogical, its based on the labor theory of value, which was more or less accepted by nearly all classical economists, including Adam Smith, as being valid marker for the value of any commodity. His point was to demonstate that profit is the product of labor, not the labor of the capitalist, but the labor of those who work for the capitalist. Thus, class struggle--i. e. the struggle over what to do with the surplus value--is endemic to capitalism. It seems pretty straitforward to me.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 08, 2005 17:58 PM
The business owner, who takes a risk and organizes the enterprise and connects it with the larger network of supply and demand, DESERVES more reward than workers who did not go into debt and who only have to do their own jobs. Ok Marx defined it as exploitation, but his definition is misleading and illogical.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 08, 2005 17:33 PM
Regarding exploitation--its seems to me that realpc is using the word in a different way most socialists/Marxists would use the term. For Marx, exploitation was a technical term meaning the difference between the surplus value created and the wage required to reproduce the worker. The larger the gap, the greater the rate of exploitation. Therefore, exploitation is the basis of private profit and the capitalist system, generally. All capitalists exploit their workers (or at least must try to) and all workers are exploited to some degree, even if they are paid well, are in unions, and like their jobs. Realpc is using it as a moral term--i. e. capital only exploits workers that are treated "unfairly." Who decides what is fair is unclear.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 08, 2005 16:32 PM
And workers in the US are free to organize and form unions, and to lobby for pro-worker legislation. Employers are NOT free to exploit workers. Of course, there are many non-union workers and many illegal aliens, and the system is, as I always say, very far from perfect. And the US does not control labor laws in other nations. Yes, we should stop buying products made by exploited foreign workers, but that won't solve their problem. The US should try to promote human rights, but that is difficult and error-prone. The US has often taken the wrong side, as we all know.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 08, 2005 14:24 PM
"The Capitalist supply the workers with more than just MOPs, thus exploiting their labor is just????" A business owner's income varies depending on the success of his business, while the workers' incomes are relatively stable. If things go badly, the business may fail and the owner may lose everything -- and the workers will of course lose their jobs. If the business becomes increasingly successful the owner's income, which is related to profits, will increase. Whether each worker's salary increases, and to what degree, is determined by the owner (and/or his managers depending on the size of the company). The owner and highest level workers or managers, in a successful business, will earn more than the lower level, unskilled or inexperienced workers. Workers will not remain in an unfair situation if they have a choice to go elsewhere. Workers can be exploited if their owner is unfair and if there is nowhere else to go. Yes, that is a real possibility. But workers can become owners, if they want, and take on the responsibility and uncertainty. I know you would like to define "exploit" in a simple-minded way. People take advantage of each other all the time, often without even realizing it. The employer-worker relationship is complex and varied. In many or most cases, no one is being taken advantage of. Many workers prefer the stability of being part of a company. Not everyone wants to take big loans and risk everything by owning a business.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Isjoel, Apples at Jun 08, 2005 06:27 AM
(continued) The placement of these stories as top news or secondary is good evidence for showing the difference between corporate and non-corporate media, but I wanted to find more. Having briefly looked at all of the stories there are a few clear differences worth noting. Znet is the only news provider offering a link to fund the movement. Democracy Now included all of the demands (new constitution, new election, nationalization), but so did yahoo and CBS. Google's story was a link to the NY Times story. All of the providers used AP stories except for Democracy Now, NY times, and Znet. Perhaps this is the most important thing and should be studied further. Who controls the AP? How is it organized? I must admit I know nothing about it. So, I have found some differences, but probably overlooked more. I'm sure there are important nuances that would take time to uncover. Time that I don't have. Hope someone got something out of this and maybe you guys can add to it

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Jemstein, Greenjazz at Jun 08, 2005 05:51 AM
Just a note on words. I like to use the terms "hypercapitalism" or "savage capitalism" (after the French). Perhaps consumer-capitalism would define something, but it's tautological. Capitalism, by definition, even from its earliest days, was bound to its markets as much as to its resources, labour, plant, management etc.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Isjoel, Apples at Jun 08, 2005 05:33 AM
This comment has nothing to do with this entry or any of the comments, but due to the structure of this website I am relegated to using the margins (everywhere we find archos). A lot of official bloggers at Znet are very concerned with a skewed corporate media in the US and the situation in Bolivia today provides a good case study. The movement in Bolivia is an indigenous movement against privatization and they are demanding a new constitution that better represents the majority of the country. This sounds like the type of movement the US gov't/corporations would want to destroy. Let's see how the media is handling it. Bolivia is one of the top stories on the websites of yahoo znet and democracy now It appears on the home page under international stories on ABC, CBS, and google . It does not appear on the home page of MSNBC or CNN So already we have a disparity in coverage. Simply put, the non-corporate news sources are placing more importance and paying more attention to the story. Now, let's take a closer look at what they are reporting. -to be continued due to web site archos who says only 1500 words!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 08, 2005 05:17 AM
Robert, The example you just brought up is certainly a case of obscurantism, namely, misleading a reader intentionally by using words you don't think he knows the meaning of. Because (as you rightly assumed, at least in my case) we know what the word "obscurantist" means, we can't possibly call its very use obscurantist. You're absolutely right. Earlier, you wrote, "he should be treated as the obscurantist that he is." It was an ad hominem attack, adding nothing more to your argument than would a statement like "he should be treated as the [expletive] he is." All ad hominem attacks are obscurantist: one form of obscurantism opposes enlightenment, a necessary part of which is open discussion; it's reasonable to assume that an ad hominem attack will disrupt open discussion; that makes ad hominem attacks obscurantist. In other words, the statement was obscurantist not because it included an obscure word--ironically, yes, the word "obscurantist"--but because it was an ad hominem attack. It seemed obvious to me, though I now see it wasn't obvious to everyone. If nothing else, I at least hope folks are satisfied that I know what the word means. And even after our tangent, my point still stands: until you show us a convincing example of realpc's obscurantism, I simply have no reason to take your denunciations seriously. To the contrary, I've found his arguments quite straightforward so far.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 08, 2005 04:13 AM
"Our employers supply a lot more than the means of production. They connect us with the network of supply and demand and provide our whole reason for producing anything. All I need for my job is a computer and internet connection, and this is true for many workers. I don't need an employer to supply that. You are thinking only of factory work which requires expensive equipment." Ok, now those of you who are impressed by this "writer"- watch me beat the intellectual crap out of him. First, none of this justifies EXPLOITATION, which is what he is supposed to be defending. His argument, if he is giving one and not just (as usual) dodging my request, i.e., grunting (see my last comment) is: The Capitalist supply the workers with more than just MOPs, thus exploiting their labor is just????

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 08, 2005 01:29 AM
Sexism, racism and religious intolerance increased as civilzation advanced, as population increased and competition intensified. The US and capitalism coincided with gradually increasing awareness of human rights and the ideal of equal opportunity. That does not mean capitalism caused the increase in human rights awareness, but there may be some relationship. Freedom of speech and anti-authoritarianism may have played a role.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 08, 2005 01:27 AM
"You were right to assume that I know what obscurantist means, since I do. I even found a great example of it (see my previous post)." No, Jacob, my boy, you are simply wrong: by your own admission you understand what the term means; thus someone like me who uses the term in a discussion with you is not being obscure. In contrast, Heidegger's lectures and writings, according to Kaufman were jargon laden, which led to the charge of obscurantism. Now you have lost this battle, be a good boy- i.e, rational, and admit defeat. It's either that or get lumped in with the 'grunters' along with your boy realwhatever. (Grunter =def. someone who argues by shooting his mouth off without considering his opponent's arguments.)

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 07, 2005 22:33 PM
So before capitalism, there was no sexism or ethnic hatred? Your offering a very reductionist analysis which I don't think conforms to the facts. Men oppressed women, people enslaved one another, people killed each other because they spoke different languages had different religions or because they were competing for the same resources long before capitalism came along. According to your story, the world was one happy place under feudalism until capitalism mucked it up--its just simply not true. For most, life was short and brutal. All these things take historically specific and capitalistic forms today, but they predated the system. The question is whether we can expect these things to end within the structure of capitalism. The answer seems like a resounding "No."

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By K, Mr at Jun 07, 2005 22:16 PM
yo regarding-There is no doubt that Capitalism has not created every problem on the face of the planet (sexism or ethnic hatred for example)-- Capitalism defined those two concepts. In a sexist capitalist world the male hominid seeks a dominant place in the tyrannical psychotic order. Ethnic hatred is based upon inequalities in regions which compete for resources. Like the resources in 'characters' i'm allowed to type on here before the character nazi tells me i'm all used up. Both terms are entrenched within capitalism look up the statistics.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 07, 2005 20:31 PM
Robert, You were right to assume that I know what obscurantist means, since I do. I even found a great example of it (see my previous post).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 07, 2005 18:34 PM
Regarding the problems of capitalism--Even Marx acknowledged the power of capitalism to transform society, and he seemed to find it progressive when compared to the systems that come before it. But with this progress came a myriad of new problems, problems which are arguably "terminal," to use the cancer analogy, so long as capitalism remains. There is no doubt that Capitalism has not created every problem on the face of the planet (sexism or ethnic hatred for example)--regarding these problems, the indictment of capitalism is its inability to solve them within the structure of the system. Does abolishing capitalism guarantee that these problems will also be abolished? Of course not, but keeping capitalism guarantees that these problems will remain.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 07, 2005 17:52 PM
"I overlooked no "obscurantism." As just one example, earlier I noticed somebody call someone else an "obscurantist" without giving a clear example of it. That is itself a form of obscurantism." Jacob, If you don't know what that term means you shouldn't be participating in an academic debate. I learned what it meant as an undergraduate reading Walter Kaufman's discussion of Heidegger's philosophical MO. I have a right to assume that the readers of my comments are reasonably well-educated.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 07, 2005 12:47 PM
"Does a 3 hour workday sound good to anyone? Because that's how long we would have to work were our means of production being used solely to supply us with the goods and services we need." Our employers supply a lot more than the means of production. They connect us with the network of supply and demand and provide our whole reason for producing anything. All I need for my job is a computer and internet connection, and this is true for many workers. I don't need an employer to supply that. You are thinking only of factory work which requires expensive equipment. But even in the case of factories, much more is needed than the machinery. A company needs customers, first of all, and ways of attracting and keeping them -- in other words, sales and marketing. It also needs suppliers of materials. All this requires organization and strategy. Companies must have a place within the larger society. So the means of production, even the whole production process, are nowhere near the whole story.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Jaltea, Uptime at Jun 07, 2005 10:44 AM
I acknowledge the difficulty to predict any particular action that will occur. But I know that if the psychological security at anytime of the collective people becomes to "fearful" of some percieved threat then the "We" will usually act. I feel that the corporate propaganda is the soothing sounds of goodness they want us to hear as they slowly tie the noose around our democractic and social programs "necks". It is the sounds of capitalism works and since it works so well for the rich that are in power then they are on a selling spree of doing what they can as they now have power to insure that their money and investement interests will be taken care of and profitible. The problem is that it is comming at perhaps the expense of the rest of us working folks and the plans seem to favor all the control into the corporations and the governments will become subserviant as they already have become under Bush. Unless we develop micro systems to test out as experiments other types of social interaction and resource management systems then I think we will know very little about what alternatives could or would work as we will have but theories or ideas and no facts from social systems we can create and test under mini cities or test sites which could try out other systems to ensure a smooth transition to something else that will make us all feel better about how we treat each other and manage the earths resources. =peace to all==

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 07, 2005 09:25 AM
Robert, I overlooked no "obscurantism." As just one example, earlier I noticed somebody call someone else an "obscurantist" without giving a clear example of it. That is itself a form of obscurantism. See? I'm paying attention. You'll excuse me if I don't take your denunciations too seriously.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By K, Mr at Jun 07, 2005 08:05 AM
Ten years of cod fishing off of the west coast of british columbia spared me from the corporate brainwashing of the new world order. God has chosen me to speak out against corporate tyranny and to use discourse analysis on everything i read and hear. God has given me a gift of being able to walk through this corporate reality without being effected by it's alluring glare. The bottom line is the ozone is going and we need it. Unless the neo-cons decide to live in a bio-dome we need solutions IBM style otherwise this planet is doomed. As for everything i say its being used as material for my broadway show 'my life as a wageslave'. Ghandi style revolution and it starts with the service industry. Global service industry strike. I'll make soup for the crowds.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 07, 2005 04:06 AM
apples, Cf. Juliet Schor's The Overworked American: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/046505434X/qid=1118106011/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-8784086-3293511

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Isjoel, Apples at Jun 07, 2005 03:16 AM
R. Allen: I've always claimed we should be working 4 hours a day without any real numbers to prove it. Where do you get the "3 hour day" from? So, yes, everyone is tired of working for someone else, but at least we're not being forced to work in a field 12 hours a day. Everything must be put in perspective. Yes, realpc is not the fruit that I would pick, but why shake him off the tree. Finally, capitalism is an extension of greed, which is the root of many of our problems. The world would be a much better place without it. Impeach Bush at http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 07, 2005 02:45 AM
"I said that capitalism is not the source of the problems so getting rid of it will not help." Yeah, realmoronic has been saying this ad nauseam- but without a shred of proof, nor has he been able to rebut my claim that capitalism is the source of at least one major problem- EXPLOITATION. No one is saying it's the source of ALL our problems and there are some trials we will always have to endure. (It's typical of this moron to set up straw men.) But our lives would be a helluva lot better were were freed from the burden of having to create wealth for greedy strangers. Does a 3 hour workday sound good to anyone? Because that's how long we would have to work were our means of production being used solely to supply us with the goods and services we need. Those of you who are impressed by the fact that realstupid reads Chomsky and responds to his posts have obviously overlooked his obscurantism, which I have pointed out along with others.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Isjoel, Apples at Jun 07, 2005 00:41 AM
Wow, that was a lot of religious rhetoric Mr. K. As for realpc, I'm going to side with Jacobro and give you props for showing up. Chomsky this, chomsky that.. I guess I'll add a little to the mess. It seems to me he is a realist who wants change. He understands that real change can not come through elections because of violence and capital flight. He understands that real revolutions can not simply be turned on. So what are the options? The only option is to promote slow change that will eventually build into a great revolution. I see many recent movements as part of this chain (suffrage, civil rights, feminism...) I have no doubt that these events help to build a collective consciousness that will continue to grow and lead to a better future. The only problem is that other events have effects too. Somebody's brother just got shot in Iraq. The most important thing is to stop these negative events, and allow the positive movements to carry us to a place where any person who is shot is the sister of all of us.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By K, Mr at Jun 06, 2005 04:37 AM
yeah well why those 12 minute men and that declaration of independence started up? Revolution created this dysfunction system and another one is needed to fix it. Rally the troops cause the enemy is within. Corporate democracy is not democracy. The tyranny of the plurity of special interest groups who manipulate the people and create this global mess that we all live in today. What's needed is the bolt from heaven to strike down the real evil doers and then lets start fresh. Times change this aint 1776 anymore. New dynamics, new metrics, means a new system. This aint the 1900's anymore. Corporate tyranny needs to be gutted. Call me on my cellphone and i'll fax you the details. With this new technology comes more innovative ways to curb this growing trend of individualism and divine right of governmental psychosis. God save the human from the tyranny of the majority. Time to piss in the soup. Go Chavez!!

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 06, 2005 03:47 AM
the-abyss I never claimed 1) that Chomsky's God or 2) that he's always right. I mean, if you want to have a debate with yourself against points you make up, that's fine. But if that's the case, why quote me? No idea where you're coming from. As for realpc being a "piece of worthless junk," he's here, interested, reading Chomsky's blogs, engaging in discussion, unlike those "thoughtless" Americans you describe. And for you to joke that someone be murdered for not sharing your point of view shows us how seriously you take the idea of frank, open discussion--a pillar of democracy in my opinion, though evidently not in yours. It's beside the point, really; it just indicates that you need to give a little deeper thought to democracy before lecturing anyone else about it.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 06, 2005 01:32 AM
I never said anything like that. I said the US has a lot of problems, but there are many positives as well. I said that capitalism is not the source of the problems so getting rid of it will not help. I said mixed economies seem like a good compromise between free enterprise and social welfare. I said that life will always be a challenge even under the best possible system, so we should try to have realistic goals. I said that many of our worst problems result from idealism, good intentions and inventiveness. These are things we cannot get rid of, and wouldn't even if we could. Human life will always be problematic and paradoxical. Of course we should try to find solutions for problems. But seething with rage and planning to smash the system is wrong and stupid and evil.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 06, 2005 01:31 AM
If any Iraqi is reading this, and is considering making a dirty bomb (in retaliation for the U.S. government's terrorist assault on Fallujah, and for the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people) may I suggest you strap bombs around realpc's waist and detonate HIM - because realpc is as DIRTY AS THEY COME! PS Feel free to do the same to jrxyz. Neither individual will be mourned.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By The-abyss, The-abyss at Jun 06, 2005 01:01 AM
>realpc, > >Now I think understand. You're faulting >Chomsky NOT because he isn't offering a >solution to the problems he discusses, but >because his solution isn't enough. First, Chomsky is not "God", and what Chomsky says does not necessarily go. Society must collectively make an effort to think for itself, and then take responsibility for its actions. The current absence of thinking in America is another reason (to add to the many I've already given) why I believe U.S. citizens are complicit in the atrocities committed by their government. Americans prefer to be entertained and managed, rather than run a democracy. As for realpc, this is what he's effectively saying: you people have diagnosed society as having cancer, but there's no cure for cancer, is there? So accept it, and don't even try to find a remedy. Every time you try an antidote and it fails, I'm going to laugh at you all. Great thinking, realpc. You really are a piece of worthless junk.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Sillanpaa, Mikko at Jun 04, 2005 23:01 PM
Aids hasn't done a big deal to the population explosion, man will be the last species on earth before end, with rat and cockroach. And so what, if few low-consuming people are died, when we in so called developed countries consume earth's scarce raw-materials tens of times more than one in take Vietnam. And no one will have the guts to press The red button. For example paper industry does much more damage to the ecosystem than weapon-industry, paper industrys materialflows are so huge that even in small country like Finland which has only some 38 papermills, the paperworkers strike has stopped the mills and 1400 truck-companies as well. Gasoline consumption decreases, roads won't wear so fast, two ports have quieted, 40000 well-paid workers are not paid at the moment and cannot consume as much as before, etc. Because of our paper usage, bralizian rainforests are being clear-cut, as well as there is not anymore real forests in Finland, just planted tree-fields.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By K, Mr at Jun 04, 2005 22:03 PM
The cumulative 'bunker busters' and the increased level of depleted uranium will make our planet a radioactive wasteland in no time. Capitalists are too brainwashed and deluded to understand the effects of large amounts of radioactive waste has upon ecosystems. This planet will either burn or burn. Radical changes need to be made. Population studies are things human geographers do. You can brainwash hominids through propaganda and educate them to use condoms to decrease birth rates. Aids does wonders too. The increased population will have to fight in the global market to survive in the new millennium. If they can't make it in the market then they die. Nature has its ways even in the new world order.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Sillanpaa, Mikko at Jun 04, 2005 13:16 PM
The ongoing ecocatasthrophe is going to wipe this consumer species to extinction, in my opinion, rather than nuclear bombs. Actually few nuclear bombs in 100 largest cities in world could give us and other animals and plants just a little more time to live on this overpopulated planet.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matthew_ss, Mattss at Jun 04, 2005 11:25 AM
So my question right now is whether or not it is merely a matter of the intent of those in Government: can there be a truly Socialist nation state. I guess I'm still stuck in some Marxist/Anarchist sinkhole, wondering whether or not the State needs to be taken over, or made irrelevant. Are national governments merely instruments of extracting surplus value? Or can they tend to the real needs of the people? Do we need national institutions to manage material scarcity? The question is not whether or not these should be Democratic institutions, but what should be the scope and power of any institution? "If all the world were of one opinion, and one man another, they would have no right over his life, just as he, if he had the power, would have no right over theirs..." JS Mill I think, probably misquoted, but its getting late.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matthew_ss, Mattss at Jun 04, 2005 10:59 AM
Goffchile, I think you would be making a mistake in believing that transnational corporations are above the power of nation states. The nation state is what makes the existence of TNCs legitimate and, in the end, possible. Without the coercive power of the State, I don't know if we would have the national currencies we see today: monopolized by an Elite with entrenched ties to Big Business. The idea of a 'global' economy wouldn't even exist without the brute force of Colonization and Imperialism, both extensions of the European nation state. I understand that Capitalism depicts a theoretical notion of social relations. It does not actually exist. And while it changes, and does so based on its theoretical assumptions of Private Property and univerally legitimate currency, the true secret of Capitalism is that its proponents can carry out the Elitism which they propose theoretically.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By K, Mr at Jun 04, 2005 09:08 AM
I suggest you read Ayn Rand 'Capitalism: the unknown ideal'. Where's the global profit sharing program? What's the deal with peak oil theory? I just studied a year of physical geography. I think this oil crisis is a manufactured lie. an unlimited supply of hydrocarbons exists, which could fuel the world forever until the atmosphere burns. Capitalists manipulate truths until it suits its best interests. Go Chavez!! God bless the internet. the revolution can begin anytime.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 04, 2005 09:00 AM
realpc, Now I think understand. You're faulting Chomsky NOT because he isn't offering a solution to the problems he discusses, but because his solution isn't enough. Not only should he suggest that you join with others in some cause you care about, but he should also be coming up with some compelling new cause for you to join. So let me just say this: if the causes of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Red Cross, the World Social Forum, or your local soup kitchen do not already compel you to participate, nothing Noam Chomsky can dream up will either.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 04, 2005 05:35 AM
"it's hardly "lame", since it works ... And for you to now call it obvious is baffling," It's a lame suggestion because everyone knows you get power by organizing, by getting people behind your ideas. It is not a helpful suggestion because, although it's obvious you have to organize to get things changed, it is not at all obvious how to come up with compelling and practical ideas that will attract followers and result in positive changes. And I tried to point out that people who are skilled in gathering followers are just as likely to be evil as good. Charismatic leaders often have huge egos and easily become addicted to personal power. So the irony is that the best organizers are more interested in increasing their own power than increasing the power of ordinary citizens. This is one of the sad ironies of politics.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 03, 2005 23:18 PM
As an addendum, the issue of the end of capitalism is another issue altogether. At one level, Chomsky is reformulating the socialism or barbarism slogan of Luxemburg—except with him its something besides capitalism or destruction of the species. Nuclear destruction is one possibility, widespread hunger and civil strife, ecological disaster are all also on the table. I suppose he is right, ultimately, it is a matter of will, but also a matter of coming up with strategies that will be effective against this new regime of capital. So far, it seems like the old tactics aren't working as effectively as they once did.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 03, 2005 22:37 PM
realpc said, "Chomsky's suggestion is lame and obvious" It's hardly "lame", since it works (the opposite of "lame"), whether in the hands of big business or Rosa Parks. And for you to now call it obvious is baffling, since you were the one who at first asked, "Who is it [Chomsky] thinks has the secret to creating a "decent world?" If the answer's obvious, but you ask the question anyway, expect the obvious answer. Common sense. Anyway, you made several points, and your point about big business wasn't one I addressed (since I agree, if I understand it correctly). So, no, I didn't miss your point--you did. terence, I've studied formal logic, but I don't have a clue what you're talking about (filling in syllogistic vacuums...?). Seems beside the point.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Goffchile, Goffchile at Jun 03, 2005 22:17 PM
There are number of interesting things in this statement. First, I don't totally agree with the notion that our current system isn't capitalism. I think it is, but just in a different form from what was initially described in Adam Smith's or even Karl Marx's time. Capitalism is a historical phenomenon, changing and adapting over time while retaining its essential character (based on private property ownership, oriented to private profit based on the commodification and mass exploitation of labor and widespread commodity production). And, has been indicated by its proponents and detractors, it is a very dynamic system, which constantly batters down older social/cultural/economic forms and replaces them with new ones. It's possible to periodize capitalist development over large sweeps of time. The “primitive period” from roughly c. 1450-1830s, the laissez faire period, 1830s-1930s, nationalist period, 1930s-1980s, and now the cosmopolitan period. (The dates are very rough and these periods overlap and entertwine depending on locale). We are living through a sea change in capitalism that has been underway for the past few decades as Chomsky describes. Namely the elevation of TNCs, multinational trade agreements, above the nation-state, which has (unfortunately for elites) become more democratized over the course of the twentieth century in some parts of the world and therefore must occasionally bend to the popular will.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 03, 2005 21:18 PM
"Can't you see what realpc doe? He presents a syllogism with a missing term. It makes sense, if only. . . Nature abhors a vacuum, so your brain wants to fix the hole. You respond. It goes on forever. He does it very well. It's his job. For clarity's sake stop taking the bait. His motive is not only to get the whole discussion to trail off into interminable claptrap, but to show the casual observer (who may really want to learn something or say something important) that these blogs are just a waste of time." Exactly, I couldn't have said it better myself. My only concern is- and I've said this before to other advocates of the 'ignore him' strategy- is that the causal observers you mention- whose support we need to overthrow the evil system under which we live- will take him seriously unless we denounce his posts. Thus, I've opted for the middle way of ridicule, which is very easy to apply to folks who think like him.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Rastafarianrobot, Noherosnomasters at Jun 03, 2005 21:06 PM
In reference to Capitalism throughout history (and Chomsky's findings) is since the beginning of industry in Europe the protectionist state used tariffs to stifle competition. An example I always enjoy is the British forcing colonists two purchase tea from the dutch east india company. Another related point is how extreme the british were in keeping industrial techonology to themselves. Passing technology secrets on to say the French was an offense deemed worthy of death. Even the first American factories were established on technology that was "stolen" from the British. The important message to extract here is the entire modern economy is predicated on elitism and statist intervention. It has very little to do with "life" persay and a whole lot to do with a wealth entitlement paradigm.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 03, 2005 14:02 PM
"Yup, you tend to need a lot of people to conduct effective activism. But that's not "bad news"--it's just hard to do, like you said. Countless examples of successful activism show that Chomsky's got the right idea. But at least you now appreciate that his suggestion to organize isn't a frivolous one, or a "secret" for that matter." Looks like you missed my point. Big organizations can have power, whether you like what they stand for or not. Chomsky's suggestion is lame and obvious. Of course if you want people to go along with your idea you have to convince them to go along. That's what organizing is.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matthew_ss, Mattss at Jun 03, 2005 09:31 AM
These are already such loaded terms that I won't elaborate on the problems that face any 'scientific' analysis of the problem that the 'discipline' of Economics is attempting to adress: material scarcity in the face of human needs and wants. It may be that Elitism and material Inequality - the ideology and the ensuing reality that both impels and sustains Empire, - are unavoidable features of humanity's social existence. Thomas Hobbes wrote in 1651 that the 'natural' state of mankind was a savage 'State of War', where Man ruthlessly sought to satisfy his own interests, exploiting and killing others until order and peace was instituted by the Leviathan (necessarily at once the most brutal and the most benevolent of them all). I do not think this is the case. To truly understand the constructed nature of Capitalism (remember, it is a 'social' science, not a 'natural' one like Physics or Chemistry) I suggest reading something like A History of Capitalism by Michel Beaud or Capitalism and its Economics by Douglas Dowd. If someone is truly interested in what makes Capitalism the very real and frightening phenomenon that it is, they might also want to read Edward Said's Culture and Imperialism. I was wondering if anyone saw the Daily Show with Jon Stewart's 'moment of Zen' Thursday night; Bush actually used the word 'propaganda' regarding what he was doing: what he was physically doing at that actual moment: speaking to a crowd of Republican supporters.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Matthew_ss, Mattss at Jun 03, 2005 08:55 AM
I'd like to say that it is important to remember that Capitalism is just an idea. It does not actually exist, what exists are the conditions which allow Capitalism to be talked about relevantly and taken seriously by a large number of people. These are the paramaters within which Capitalism operates: Private Property, monopolized and centralized Currency, 'Production' only considered relevant when it contributes to the 'market' (another idea, creation, invention) and only when it is 'invested' in, financed by holders of Capitl. The nation state is the obvious and essential ingredient to Capitalism's relevance. Prof. Chomsky, in an interview with Zmag Germany said, "In the course of creating modern nation states, Europe developed a culture of savagery and a technology of violence which enabled it to conquer the world, and as it conquered the world it attempted to impose nation state systems wherever it went, also artificial and violent. If you look at today's major conflicts around the world, most of them are the residue of European efforts to impose nation state systems where it doesn't make any sense, which is almost everywhere." It is definitely a thought worth considering, and it brings up something that is necessarily omitted from any discussion of Capitalism: culture. That is, culture that isnt described by the 'Consumer' and 'Producer' of Economics discourse; 'market actors' who 'rationally' seek to maximize 'utility'.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 03, 2005 03:43 AM
realpc said, "People do organize. The good news is that if you can get enough of a crowd on your side, you have power. That's also the bad news." Yup, you tend to need a lot of people to conduct effective activism. But that's not "bad news"--it's just hard to do, like you said. Countless examples of successful activism show that Chomsky's got the right idea. But at least you now appreciate that his suggestion to organize isn't a frivolous one, or a "secret" for that matter.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 03, 2005 02:25 AM
"No one says public spending caused the depression, only that it prolonged the cycle. It is not unusual for economists to think that too much social welfare and government regulation stifles the economy. On the other hand, certain kinds of government spending can stimulate it." In other words, the govt. should have done less to relieve the suffering of the millions of workers who lost their livelihoods because of the wickedness of their employers. That way, the latter would have gotten back sooner to making money hand over fist. How dare the Roosevelt administration create public works projects! Didn't they realize that only capitalists have the right to exploit labor?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 03, 2005 01:17 AM
"Social programs were tiny and under severe attack by the business class throughout the 1930s. It is simply propaganda to claim they prolonged the Depression. " I did not claim that -- I said that's the view of free market advocates. "If public spending were the cause of Depression, then how do you explain what ended it?" No one says public spending caused the depression, only that it prolonged the cycle. It is not unusual for economists to think that too much social welfare and government regulation stifles the economy. On the other hand, certain kinds of government spending can stimulate it. Saying you should always increase government spending is as wrong as saying you should always decrease it.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 02, 2005 22:22 PM
"Social programs were tiny and under severe attack by the business class throughout the 1930s. It is simply propaganda to claim they prolonged the Depression. If public spending were the cause of Depression, then how do you explain what ended it?" Mike, Your interlocutor here has no plausible explanation for anything. He is merely throwing sand in the eyes of unsuspecting readers, so as to keep them from seeing just how evil the status quo is.

Reply this comment

Mcd

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Dawson, Michael at Jun 02, 2005 20:38 PM
So, realpc, your argument is that wherever there are opposing interpretations, then reality must somehow be too complex for either explanation to be better? That's plain sophistry. Social programs were tiny and under severe attack by the business class throughout the 1930s. It is simply propaganda to claim they prolonged the Depression. If public spending were the cause of Depression, then how do you explain what ended it?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 02, 2005 20:18 PM
"how can the public gain more influence over government policy ... by organizing" People do organize. The good news is that if you can get enough of a crowd on your side, you have power. That's also the bad news. "Chomsky writes in Understanding Power that unbridled capitalism led to the Great Depression of the 1930s." Socialists blame the depression on capitalism, while capitalists claim that social programs prolonged it. We should not draw simple conclusions based on ideological preferences. The economic cycles are determined by extremely complex and ever-changing factors, so we need to apply some humility when trying to decide what caused what.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 02, 2005 09:57 AM
realpc said, "Chomsky expects his followers to read an awful lot between the lines." Only if you misunderstood his argument. People in these strong concentrations of private power (not simply "western civilization," as you put it) wield significantly greater influence over government policy than does the rest of the public. If popular opinion held greater sway over government policy, it's highly unlikely that this non-proliferation treaty review would have collapsed, to use Chomsky's example, since most Americans abhor the idea of another arms race. That's common sense--not reading "between the lines." So how can the public gain more influence over government policy (i.e., make their government more democratic)? The same way corporations do: by organizing. Read my previous post if you didn't already.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By K, Mr at Jun 02, 2005 07:21 AM
What's the problem is the integrity of the capitalist system itself as a viable social condition in the new millennium or a new world order of destruction due to unrestrained power without adequate knowledge of 'systems' in its entirety. Spaceship earth people this planet has a life expectancy of about 100 years or less due to the continued decrease in ozone. no ozone no planet. I make instructors depressed. reality is something that has to be fully grasped and the reality is the economy is not as important as ecology. I'd like to see this whole planet slow down a bit and walk. think eco cause it's already too late. big bunkers underground. living like cavemen in all our splendour. bank up on the student loans cause the system is crashing one way or another. don't forget to use sunscreen. and make sure you wear good sunglasses when you watch those 'depleted uranium' sunsets on a point on some polluted coastline somewhere in gagsville USA. hey who gets to live in those bunkers? Wait now i know why they made those 'eco-self-contained' yadda. When the planet's eco-systems completely collapse the elites will live in little 'domes' and all the poor people on the planet will finally be eradicated. Elitism is killing us all.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Tolsen1, R4d20 at Jun 02, 2005 05:17 AM
"He doesn't say because he expects people to do their own research and come to their own conclusions." Apart from, I assume, the conclusion that capitalism works fine :).

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Alp2k2, Superstring at Jun 02, 2005 03:56 AM
'In fact, needless to say, the unbridled greed crushed capitalism almost as soon as the applied system got going right after Napoleon.' I agree with this, in my opinion the original capitalism has long been dead and we have been living under this corporatist capitalism for well over a hundred years. I call this the second tyranny which we must liberate ourselves from, the first being the monarchy of course. Curious that Adam Smith came out with Wealth of Nations in same year of America's liberation from England, 1776.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 02, 2005 03:37 AM
"But just as often what outrages him is the fact that life seems to be far from perfect." You are supposed to infer from this that anyone who attempts to overthrow capitalism is wasting his/her time because, of course, LIFE MUST BE UNFAIR. It's not the fault of capitalists, oh no, it's LIFE ITSELF that is to blame. You people who long for justice might just as well beat your heads against the wall- it aint happening, not in this world brother.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 02, 2005 02:54 AM
"what is written here is supplemental to many things he's written and spoken about in the past on the subject." I have read most of it and I could not tell you exactly what he opposed or advocated in the past. And even if I could, I can't assume his opinions are exactly the same now. Chomsky expects his followers to read an awful lot between the lines. The gist is that things are really bad and have been for a long time, and the villain is western civilization. The followers are expected to infer that things could be improved greatly just by over-turning the existing villainous system. It isn't clear precisely where this system begins or ends, how it can be over-turned or what could replace it. Chomsky expresses outrage at things that are, very often, outrageous. But just as often what outrages him is the fact that life seems to be far from perfect. And in either case, there is no coherent analysis of underlying causes, and never (that I have seen) any constructive proposals.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Allen, Robert at Jun 02, 2005 02:28 AM
As I have argued here at length, capitalism of any sort is unjust because it entails exploitation- theft of workers' time. Thus, we can at least say that a just alternative to capitalism would not involve this practice. Until realpc (pc = pseudo-intellectual conceit) concedes this point, he should be treated as the obscurantist that he is.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Bernal, Ruben at Jun 02, 2005 01:23 AM
This was the original question: "if we had a genuinely capitalist system - no corporate protectionism etc -, would that serve well?" Chomsky actually has mentioned before that free market capitalism was tried a while back, a couple of hundred years ago I believe, but that it could not sustain itself. Due to that, we got the rise of the corporate state. He has never gone into detail whenever he brings that up (that I have read in his interviews or articles), but maybe someone here knows what he's talking about. Anybody???

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Charlie_55, Inspector71 at Jun 01, 2005 23:53 PM
the problem is that so much of our somewhat empirical system is outside democratic control..finance and industry the backbone of our economies are in the hands of autocrats who rely on the tax payer to keep them in the land of milk and honey they are so used to..no man should be allowed to exploit another for financial gain..they sell us dreams of "trickle down" theories..if we give the great and the good free reign they will make us all rich but this is a lie..the money in our system is flowing upward in greater amounts than is flowing down..the ruling corporate elites are parasites on our backs, leeching our lifes for their freedoms and i'm quite sure that the "halfs" will use every trick in the book to keep it this way. I've grown tired of marches and demos, i'm quite sure now that only direct action will bring the situation to a more democratic society. I'd be interested to know what chomsky's thoughts on how a third emancipation can come about and if he thinks our racing technologies will play any place in this..if all industry becomes automated will this free us from our bonds?

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Johnny12345, Jacobro at Jun 01, 2005 23:52 PM
Who is it he thinks has the secret to creating a "decent world?" I bet it's harder than it sounds. It's no secret. A question Chomsky's commonly asked in Q&A's at his talks is "You've talked about a lot of problems, but not solutions. What do you suggest we do?" His answer is activism: find a cause you care about, then organize with others sympathetic to your cause to make a change. If such organizations exist already, it may just be a matter of choosing one you're interested in, then contacting someone in it and volunteering your time. There are thousands, from your local soup kitchen to much more prominent ones, like the American Civil Liberties Union or Amnesty International. If none exist that address your concerns, start your own. He never said it was easy to do, especially for us westerners who luxuriate in (relative) wealth, health, and security. And it can often be quite thankless. For example, I had never heard of Peggy Duff until Chomsky brought her up in a talk, article, or book (can't remember which). She was an activist and the secretary general of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament from 1958 to 1967, and Chomsky called her "one of the people who really changed modern history." Not exactly a household name, but no secret either.

Reply this comment

Mcd

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Dawson, Michael at Jun 01, 2005 23:26 PM
RealPC: Personally, I'd say making a better world is extremely easy in terms of what policies to pursue. The difficulty lies mostly in the near impossibility of cracking through the capitalist media and political arrangement. Meanwhile, remember that Chomsky uses irony in his writings. His point about capitalism is that corporate capitalists fear capitalism of the classic, Adam Smith variety. Unrestricted price competition, for example, is anathema to the powers that be. So is something like unsubsidized transportation.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Fromke, Excelsior at Jun 01, 2005 22:36 PM
A book by Jane Jacobs, Systems of Survival,(A Dialogue on the Moarl Foundations of Commerce and Politics)explains a lot of the type of interactions that result in the difficulties our society faces. Books in Review has a good summary of her analysis. www.lederu.com.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Yurallnuts, Realpc at Jun 01, 2005 22:02 PM
He says the state-corporate system is very different from free enterprise or capitalism, and then he implies it is the state-corporate system which threatens our survival. So we cannot conclude from his statement that Chomsky believes capitalism is the danger, only that the state-corporate system is. But we really don't know what kind of economic system that is, because he doesn't say. Another implication is that the threat is not nuclear weapons per se, but nuclear weapons in the hands of the state-corporate system. He does not seem concerned with nuclear weapons owned by terrorists, or communist states such as N Korea. It is very hard to know exactly what Chomsky is actually opposing or advocating in this statement. "can we make the choice and exert the will to avert the disasters you describe and create a decent world." Who is it he thinks has the secret to creating a "decent world?" I bet it's harder than it sounds.

Reply this comment

Person

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Cihanb, Cosmicparoxysms at Jun 01, 2005 22:00 PM
Chomsky usually claims that there isn't "real capitalism" - but a catastrophic version. Corporate interests are protected at the expense of the public. (I don't know the details on this - anyone shed some light?) My question is that if we had a genuinely capitalist system - no corporate protectionism etc -, would that serve well? Chomsky writes in Understanding Power that unbridled capitalism led to the Great Depression of the 1930ies. But he doesn't really tackle the issue deeply there. Anyone that can give links to back up/disagree with this hypothesis? Another question is that if we had capitalism in which the labor owned the capital (that's to say factories/corporations are owned by the workers despite being private companies), would that work well?

Reply this comment

Mcd

Re: An End to Capitalism?

By Dawson, Michael at Jun 01, 2005 19:59 PM
With all due respect, Terence, the problem is bigger than the Bush Gang. The Democrats are not making a peep about the impending militarization of space. I haven't looked carefully, but I'd wager a lot that a great many of them support it in Congressional votes, for reasons of "helping our economy" (meaning more public cash for arms corporations).

Reply this comment

Comment On This Blog Post  See All Comments (546)

Loading_border