you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]soundsalad 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (89 children)

And how will you enforce socialism with people who don't want it?

FORCE and VIOLENCE.

[–]Questionable 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Don't worry, it will be slow, gradual and honest. First thing is to set up social security for all the people. And then gradually over the course of the next 70 years, they will rob us blind, murdering billions with drugs, viruses and illegal wars. Eventually turning to pure debauchery and hedonism, raping and murdering children, while smoking rock cocaine, drenched in the blood of the innocent in the basement of a pizzeria.

Hmm.. Something about that doesn't seem right, starting immediately after that whole safety net for the people thing. Though I can't quite put my finger on it.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (87 children)

I don't believe that forcing a system onto someone with violence is a bad thing. For example, we must force people to not kill each other, and use violence to do so.

The problem with Socialism is not that it's forced upon people, every system is, but rather that the system does not serve the People. It strips us of our freedoms, rights, and prosperity in the name of equality of outcome. This goal is never achieved, however, since in every instance Socialism has led to a small elite living in luxury while the rest of the population starves.

But you can't pretend like this doesn't happen in Capitalism. It does, just instead of bureaucracy and written rules it's adhocracy and unwritten rules. The only benefit of Capitalism is that it's harder to develop from an oligarchy into a monarchy — and inherently oligarchies are more free since each oligarch can balance-out the opinions of the rest. It's still not a Democracy, however.

When people care more about material wealth than each other, society will inevitably suffer. That is why Capitalism and Socialism always fail. What we need is not Materialism, but Populism.

[–]UnexpectedTransmissi 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

For example, we must force people to not kill each other, and use violence to do so.

Nobody is forcing me to not kill anyone. If there were no police I would not go on a rampage.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just because you don't do something doesn't mean nobody else will.

[–]soundsalad 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

No, you don't have to force most people to not kill. Mutual cooperation is human nature, not irrational mass murdering rampages.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just because you don't have to force most people to not kill, doesn't mean that you don't have to force anyone to not kill. You're assuming that because most people aren't criminals, that criminals don't exist, which is entirely wrong.

[–]Intuit 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I don't believe that forcing a system onto someone with violence is a bad thing. For example, we must force people to not kill each other, and use violence to do so.

The only justified force is self-defense. The aggressor can be met with potentially lethal force if he threatens you with serious harm. They are not at all the same thing, even though both involve deadly force.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're still violently enforcing self-defense.

[–]Intuit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

OK, I take it you're using violence in a neutral sense to describe force directed at causing bodily injury or death. Absolutely, self-defense is violence. If someone else has decided that it's either you or them, rather than peacefully solving whatever dispute they have, then they're basically asking you if you consider your values of non-aggression more worthy than theirs of aggression, your life over theirs.

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (78 children)

So what if it happens in Capitalism?

[–]DoubleReverse 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (65 children)

Corporations make you work away your life under terrible conditions in exchange for barely enough money to stay alive. Remind you of anything?

[–]Chipit 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (31 children)

Actually corporate workers are rather well paid. Far better paid than under socialism.

[–]DoubleReverse 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (30 children)

https://www.brookings.edu/research/meet-the-low-wage-workforce/

I'm sure the almost half of all employed Americans who make less than living wage will be thrilled to know that they're actually rather well paid. Thank you for being the one who has the heart to stand up for the wealthy elite, downtrodden as they are.

[–]Chipit 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

Those aren't corporate workers. Corporate jobs are white collar jobs.

And come on, you're a socialist. Don't even pretend you give a shit about the working class! It's all about identity politics now. The old-fashioned "we're on the side of the working class" got shitcanned a long time ago.

The left's visceral hatred of the working class overflowed like a broken sewer when John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate in 2008. It would be impossible, and disturbing, to attempt to identify the single most offensive comment that leftists lobbed at Palin. One can report that attacks on Palin were so egregious that leftists themselves publicly begged that they cease; after all, they gave the left a bad name. The Reclusive Leftist wrote that it was a "major shock" to discover "the extent to which so many self-described liberals actually despise working people."

The cultural distance between far left and working class people is now vast and I see little reason why that should change. Here's a really good explanation of why this happened, the best I've ever seen. Please read it: http://archive.is/QRJ6m

[–]DoubleReverse 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Those aren't corporate workers. Corporate jobs are white collar jobs.

They still need a living wage.

[–]Chipit 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Yeah, when you're making $75-150k, you got no problems.

I notice you didn't bother to address the working class issue, that one's a no-win for the left these days. Can't take back the years of ugly bigotry and punching down. Can't shake the devil's hand then say you're only kidding.

[–]DoubleReverse 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Yeah, when you're making $75-150k, you got no problems.

The issue is that most people aren't making 75-150k$.

I notice you didn't bother to address the working class issue

I'm the one advocating for higher working class wages, you're clearly just trying to change the subject.

[–]Druullus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (17 children)

Americans are extremely well paid.

[–]DoubleReverse 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

The poverty is just our imagination?

[–]Druullus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

There are about 7.8 billion, Americans are at the top.

[–]DoubleReverse 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

That's delightful, but our bosses should be paying us a living wage instead of maximizing their own personal profits.

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (32 children)

How do the Corporations do that?

[–]DoubleReverse 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (31 children)

By suppressing wages and pocketing the excess. By charging as much as they can for as little as possible. By running propaganda mills like the alt right to keep pro-corporate and anti-labor, anti-consumer conservatives in office.

[–]Druullus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (30 children)

What is stopping you/anyone else from outcompeting those corporations?

[–]DoubleReverse 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (29 children)

Easier said than done, but that's beside the point. All workers need a living wage, not just successful entrepreneurs.

[–]Druullus 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (28 children)

The point is that people who own/run corporations make to much money? What is stopping you/anyone else from outcompeting those corporations, while hiring the workers?

What is a living wage?

[–]DoubleReverse 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

The point is that they could afford not to underpay their employees, but they still do.

What is stopping you/anyone else from outcompeting those corporations, while hiring the workers?

I don't have the time, money, or risk capacity to start a business and even if I did I'd be outcompeted by giant corporations who have money, political influence, predatory business models, and a total lack of scruples. What's your point?

What is a living wage?

Enough to pay for your basic needs and still have enough left over for savings or discretionary.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

What is "it"?

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

But you can't pretend like this doesn't happen in Capitalism.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

This = force and violence.

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Private ownership, the price system, free trade, property rights, voluntary exchange and freedom of choice etc; is based on force and violence.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Yes. You cannot have anything without enforcing it through violence.

[–]Druullus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Then it's not Capitalism!

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Then Capitalism doesn't exist.