|Blogs > rm_misfit8882 > You got a problem with that?|
Response to last comment.
Response to last comment.
Thank you for your thoughts, I do appreciate them. However, I feel I should make some clarifications vis-à-vis some of your comments.
You make one mistake, it is not capitalism that is at fault it is human nature. You see whether you choose communism or socialism or capitalism in the end you will face greed, corruption and abuse
I agree with this. People are greedy. Neo-liberalism and its cherished Capitalism glorify greed. It is cause, symptom, and effect of the malaise.
Communism has been discredited as a serious contender. Socialism is only a step on the way to communism so it really leads no where. Most leftist are caught up in a utopian ideal that simply doesn't work when applied to reality.
The myth of the discreditation of communism is interesting as it is based on the collapse of the USSR. There is one and only reason for its demise; the Arms Race. The USA has been running a war economy since the Mexican-American War. It has always diverted a large share of its resources to military production. The USSR was just as afraid of the USA as the US was of it, and it too attempted to divert a large portion of its industrial output to keep up. In the end, the USA outproduced the USSR, that's all. Just like the allies outproduced Japan and the Nazis. The system itself did not fall apart; it was under incredible pressure. The final nail in the coffin was the US funded Islamic fundamentalists in the Afghan war; these were indoctrinated in the most virulent ant-communist rhetoric and the most negative aspects of their religion. Once the war over, these time bombs had nowhere to go. We are now paying the price for American short-sightedness.
FYI, Socialism predates Communism and does not depend on it or necessarily lead to it. Socialist-influenced governments have done quite well in providing an adequate standard of living for their citizens in EU and Canada.
People just don't like intellectuals who think they know better and think they are better.
Who is "people"? That's a bit like saying "Everybody" by which one can only infer you and your friends.
Once these intelectuals get control they find that they need to begin eliminate criticism and dessent because people are not lab rats and do not always appreciate the intelectuals social engineering experiments. In the end the intellectuals come to resent their subjects because they simply do not do as told by their wise leaders.
Well, interestingly enough it was middle class "non-intellectuals" (along with the army elite and big business) who put Mussolini and Hitler into power because they feared a loss of privileges when faced with rising left-wing workers movements, such as unions. This same middle-class are the people who are now bent on dismantling Roosevelt's New Deal initiatives (such as social security) in the US. The nonsense they spout is that one should be free to invest their own money, yet we both know how stable the stock market is, don't we? As for the lab rat comment, could you provide an example?
Look at Fidel what an a-hole! Is this the kind of utopia you would have us all live in!
I have been to cuba many times and I assure they far more literate than many americans. Compared to the rest of Latin America, they have far more physicians, skilled workers and access to education than ALL OTHER LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES COMBINED. I do not make this up; this comes straight from the UN in its annual reports on living conditions world-wide. The hardship that does exist in Cuba is largely a product of the US embargo imposed when Castro disobeyed Eisenhower and bought cheaper crude oil from the USSR in 1960. Prior to that, he had been buying it from the good ol' USA. The US gov't didn't give a shit about the revolution at first. Only after the embargo did Castro declare himself a Communist; what else could he do? He sought refuge with the only other power capable of defending him from a hostile USA.
Sure we enjoy our chocolate.....I suppose you eat tree bark? Yes conditions in the world are terrible.....yet were they better before? Exactly when were they better?
Does cheap chocolate justify enslavement? You must be either kidding or using sophistry. No, I do not eat tree bark; I do, however, purchase Fair Trade coffee, produce, etc. As for prior conditions, this argument is non sequitur. The transition to an industrial base from an agrarian one was brutal, and yes people in urban slums longed for the "good old days" back on the farm, before they had to sell their labour in factories.
The countries that had "controlled" economies durring world war II that you mentioned as proof of better systems, which countries were these exactly?
The Allies!!! Did you not learn about ration cards? Wage and price controls? The American example is one of the best: all production was regulated, so that an exact number of goods would be available each month. Therefore, there were neither shortages nor surplusses. The Gov't also sold bonds to get the surplus money out of its economy, thus avoiding inflation. Therefore, at the end of the war ( unlike WWI ) there was no devastating depression.
I personnaly think that for most people in the world life has improved. Life expectancies have increase world wide.
That is the result of medical advances by modern physicians and researchers ( i.e., "intellectuals" ), not economists coming out of business schools studying economic theories based on 18th century French philosophers.
Sure there are some serious problems but do you think anarchy is better. How long do you think anarchy would last before someone took control.
I am not advocating anarchy, but you seem to think so. The anarchic system is somewhat in place in Russia now; Anarcho-capitalists, gangster-capitalists, call them what you like. That's where you would lead us? Or back to the 1890's, with no social safety net for those unable to work? People are poor because they deserve to be, right?
If you prefer some centrally controlled system show me one successful model, not in books but in reality. I would really like to know because all the ones I know have been oppressive failures.
Centrally controlled systems? Did I not just mention the USA and its WWII allies? How's about US-sponsored dictatorships in the the third world for oppressive failures? When Chile DEMOCRATICALLY elected a socialist government, Nixon and the 40 Committee ordered the CIA to either prevent him from taking power or to get rid of him. Sure, Allende nationalised some large corporations and pissed of a few rich foreigners. But he never tortured, murdered or otherwise "disappeared" dissidents. Pinochet, installed by the USA was to do that. OH, incidentally, that info is from declassified CIA files available online at www.cia.gov look it up and see what else has been done to preserve YOUR right to liberty and the pursuit of YOUR happiness.
The problem is that an economic system must fit human nature and capitalism perhaps unfortunatly appeals to humans more than the systems leftists think we should want.
I somewhat agree with your point. Let me qualify that, however. People are taught that they should want an Escalade, a house in the suburbs, a dog, and the right to elect one of two parasites every four years. They are not to question this. Now, your logic leads us to this: if everyone was educated to exercise their intellectual faculties, the need to "have" more would be replaced by the need to "be" more. I am not a very religious man, but alot of the christian right would do well to look at how christ lived; don't recall him saying anything remotely close to the Social Darwinism they're on about these days.
For any economic system to work it must be based on the principle that people do what is in their own narrow personal interest. If your systems rejects this principle it is doomed to failure whether you approve or not.
So what is your point? If I am taught that all men are my brothers and that it is in my self interest that my brother not starve to death, then I will make sure this does not happen to him. If I am taught that "Greed is good" and that everyone is born equal, free and with the same opportunies, and that the poor are just lazy, that's what I'll believe. The truth is that some people are born the children of hotel and factory owners while others are born in slums; do you honestly think they will have the same opportunity? It all boils down to education; please don't think I'm being an intellectual, as you seem to attribute some negative connotations to that word. Intellectual just means educated, that's all and I, for one, do not think you are uneducated. Just misinformed. It is natural to think everything that isn't in line with what we're taught is just idiotic propaganda.
I really enjoyed your comments, take care and good luck.
5/28/2006 10:47 am
lets go for green & sustenance....so we can live together human n nature and share equally...|