Death to Capitalism

[Luris Blear]

http://www.krdo.com/Global/story.asp?S=10110246&nav=menu552_1

Many of the protesters are wearing black masks. Some are carrying signs that say "Death to Capitalism," "Balls to the Banks," "Abolish Money" and "All You Fascists Are Bound to Lose."
I guess I would like some feedback on this.

There will always be believers in capitalism, trade, and money. What should be done with them? Should they be forced to adopt a belief system that they do not believe in (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theocracy)? One they even feel punishes them? Should the practice be abolished entirely?

Should the world's disbelievers provide areas for capitalists to live freely by their own beliefs? Maybe designate a country or two as "capitalist friendly"?

Should capitalism -- or buddhism or atheism or heter/homosexuality -- be forced out of existence because it is not popular?

What is the answer that allows for co-existence and peace between the different ideologies? Or is there one?

[WarBeast]

I believe in the principle of busting your ass, bettering yourself and climbing up to where you want to be... and that is the bright side of Capitalism. It is what makes a man strive to reach new heights, to create and improve that which is... I love it.

But there is a dark side to capitalism as well.. and it is governed and fueled by unfettered greed. It is one thing to want to strive for a better station in life, to keep reaching for a plateau of utter contentment, but just unabashed greed and hunger for power and opulence at the expense of everyone and everything is quite another.

It is a difficult situation... The goal of living well is the proverbial carrot at the end of the stick that drives us to get things done... but what happens when the drive is so important that it not only out-shadows the a desire for the betterment of the human condition but also crushes any caution against the detriment of the human condition?

It has been a long time since those with the power to truly make life better have had any desire to do so beyond what is profitable. This is the dark side of capitalism that I'm speaking of... What point is there in the dark side of capitalism to cure a disease when it makes more money to just make on-going treatments? What point is there to create a vehicle that never requires a fill-up, when you make billions of dollars by making vehicles that run on limited supplies of fuel?
There is a light bulb that has been burning non-stop for 108 years right here (http://www.centennialbulb.org/) , how long does your light bulbs last?

On the opposite side of the spectrum, if you don't have any chance of rising above your current station, why would you even put in the effort to invent or create or learn or bust your ass? Who would want to go through the years of schooling to be a doctor, if you get the same quality of life as a man who pumps gas? Who would want to bust their asses at any job if they aren't going to go up?

It's a catch 22...

Capitalism, in and of itself is a good idea... it gives those with drive a means and a reason to strive and create... BUT it is also a breeding ground for corruption and oppression as well.

In summation, I guess I have no answer to your question... just some thoughts to throw out there...

[cmurdur]

Communism seems like a good idea, but it failed in the U.S.S.R. Capitalism has worked, despite the greed-driven commanders of it. So yeah, working more and bettering yourself is the best way to go, but like the Beast stated, there are two sides to it.

[Sutter Kane]

Without capitalism we would still be riding around in a horse and buggy comrades. I don't understand this trend in thinking its a bad thing to make money. The desire to make money drives innovation, a poor man has never employed other poor men.

[Luris Blear]

Warbeast! :beerchug2:

You put it almost exactly as I have been thinking it. There is the bad side: the people who abuse it to the end of constant, senseless greed.

I also feel that there's this misconception: just because these people have done wrong by it then it must be all bad.

The co-existence angle was my most important question: why call for death instead of brotherhood. The frustration is understandable.

Warbeast, any system is a breeding ground for corruption and oppression. Capitalism, so far, has offered the choice of finding someone who can do it better and with less greed. Wal-Mart may have permeated a great deal of this country, but I can still drive three more minutes to shop at their competitor. The competitor sells my favorite beer and brand of playing cards.

The company store of the early 20th century was evil. The government store will be no less evil. Capitalism offers pockets where the worst of us can rise to do a great deal of harm. Yes. Government rule offers one pinnacle where the worst of us will strive to do greater harm. AIG does not control any branch of the armed forces. How many does our government hold? AIG can not pass a bill to decree that someone absolutely must turn over their money. What of our government?

Take away the chance to build their own empires, and how can we not expect those same people to plan new careers with our government?

Anyway, you guys understand. Capitalism is not perfect; it ranks between the lesser evil at worst, and as the most likely source of opportunity at best.

So is there co-existence?

[Grendel]

Wouldn't put it much different than WB, did.

Protesters like the ones in the videoclips linked to above make those sort of statements for one of two reasons: A.) shock value or B.) their understanding of their cause is so desperately blinkered that they actually believe the fringe, absolutist slogans they're chanting.

[Luris Blear]

Agreed again Grendel.

I've made the point before -- and at times regrettably caused more than a little anger in doing so. When other people march with "death to (some ideology)" signs, they tend to catch a whole lot of hell.

Kind of like protesting against and throwing rocks at Muslims after 9/11.

[Sutter Kane]

Grendel I rarely agree with you, but you make a good point.

[lunatic]

I'd like to write "What the fuck?". Actually, I just did.

I'll make a poll asking "Should Nuremberg-like trial happened against Communist/Marxist states and political organizations for the atrocities committed against humanity last century?" Why such a double standard? In a civilized world National Socialism/Fascism are illegal and forbidden. Why, for example, the communist party in Russia is not anymore? Not enough atrocities and genocides? If that trial would take place much more people could be less enthusiastic about socialist ideas.

Capitalism is not an issue. The issue is how you run the capitalist economy with statesmen, businessmen, CEOs, investors who believe the capitalism is evil and must be destroyed? Don't tell me Wall Street and Washington aren't full of george soroses and barak obamas. They need money to cnange the world, you know? The myth of only greedy rich conservatives running the show works for uneducated blind idiots. The idiots, fifth columns and thugs are the problem, not the capitalism itself.

[levil666]

War Beast... that was probably the best way to answer every facet of the proposed thread.

Re:lunatic

WTF indeed... wtf are you talking about? Capitalism is totally an issue, just as communism was an issue for the U.S.S.R. The issue is that as soon as an ideal like capitalism or communism begins to influence the legislation of a country, is when it becomes a problem. Take the last eight years of CEO insight, lobbyists, and private contracts that have left us in the middle eastern debacle and an economic crisis. Cry "liberal" all you want, and continue your fury driven hate speak about those faceless phantoms you refer to as "obamas" but in the end, it is the ugly side of capitalism and greed that has left us in this tail spin.

[lunatic]

Re:lunatic

WTF indeed... wtf are you talking about? Capitalism is totally an issue, just as communism was an issue for the U.S.S.R. The issue is that as soon as an ideal like capitalism or communism begins to influence the legislation of a country, is when it becomes a problem. Take the last eight years of CEO insight, lobbyists, and private contracts that have left us in the middle eastern debacle and an economic crisis. Cry "liberal" all you want, and continue your fury driven hate speak about those faceless phantoms you refer to as "obamas" but in the end, it is the ugly side of capitalism and greed that has left us in this tail spin.

What the fuck do you know about living under communists to equal capitalist and socialist economies (there's no such thing as communist economy - not possible)? "Hate speech": you pathologically can't accept reality, can you? You have a problem with the word "obamas" - big deal, nothing wrong with metaphors. Politicians who are for re-distribution of wealth and socialist economics, big government, blame games and apologies to the assholes are "obamas" in my lexicon from now on. I can't use Marx and Lenin all the time.

Once again: the best way to destroy capitalism and let the government to own you and let you know how much a slave you are is to use a power and money (as a statesman, businessman, investor, etc.) to create crises and blame the whole system. Ask Alinsky. Not by bloody revolutions, just from within. Mortgages, loans, credit cards - was it all about greed? Wasn't that a hidden re-distribution with a visible catastrophic outcome? Banks loan you money - great capitalism driven by their greed and political agenda of others, as well as your irresponsible greed; you can't pay your loan - bad capitalism with their greed and you crying like a bitch? Where did the political agenda go? Why are they so loud blaming capitalism and so quite with a social overtone of what happened? No regulations? How about a common sense and ability to say no to the dirty politics?
How about leftists running the big corporations (GE)? How about socialists in Congress and government? They don't exist? Did they stop their fight with the horrible system called capitalism and let evil Republicans and right-wingers to destroy the system themselves with their greed and conservative values?

Hell, I am not even a conservative but that simple poisonous propaganda among idiots makes me so angry: Leftists at their disgusting worst. And winning. Fuck it.

[levil666]

If there is no such thing as a "communist economy" then why are there communist nations of the past and present that have economies? Oh, yeah, they integrated capitalistic principles into their government. I do believe that I stated clearly that a problem arose when market ideals (such as capitalism and communism) influence the government, and whenever an ideology is forced on the populous, it has bad results.
I refer to your hate speech, lunatic, after reading several of your posts. You fill your opinion/arguement with such hatred focused on people like Obama, that it is incomprhensible to me. It has nothing to do with me being pathologically detached, it is the blunt fact that whoever is in power, regardless of Republican or Democrat, they are our elected official, chosen by the people, and we must support our leader. On that note, what was your political stance 5 years ago? Were you so admimantly opposed to Bush and his policies, as you are to the three months that Obama has spent in office? There is nothing wrong with metaphors, yet you do not use them. You assign labels, that in the most part of your arguments are ridiculous.


Politicians who are for re-distribution of wealth and socialist economics, big government, blame games and apologies to the assholes are "obamas" in my lexicon from now on. I can't use Marx and Lenin all the time.

So, would this be applicable to the Bush admin, since they were afterall, the ones who redistributed taxpayer funds to "assholes" like AIG? Or how about the expansion of their government through the Patriot Act? Or how about their "capitalist" tactics of auctioning off private contracts to companies like Haliburton and Black Water?


Once again: the best way to destroy capitalism and let the government to own you and let you know how much a slave you are is to use a power and money (as a statesman, businessman, investor, etc.) to create crises and blame the whole system.

So after the last eight years, the Bush admin destroyed capitalism? I mean, the crises that took place, whether it was the mismanagement of FEMA, the reckless disregard for our troops in Iraq (who were sent in to fight, and most of whom were poorly equipped for the situation), or the slurs of other crises that occured, and were pushed into the lap of Obama, only to have voices like Limbaugh blame him for what occured.


Not by bloody revolutions, just from within. Mortgages, loans, credit cards - was it all about greed? Wasn't that a hidden re-distribution with a visible catastrophic outcome? Banks loan you money - great capitalism driven by their greed and political agenda of others, as well as your irresponsible greed; you can't pay your loan - bad capitalism with their greed and you crying like a bitch? Where did the political agenda go? Why are they so loud blaming capitalism and so quite with a social overtone of what happened? No regulations? How about a common sense and ability to say no to the dirty politics?

Who was this mythical evil leftist that was pulling the strings of our neoconservative leaders over the past eight years, who were directly responsible for these problems? Also, where is this redistribution? All I see from this point is arguing about the evils of greed and inflation that occured when our economy had a bit of a spike, and people were living beyond their means, much as they tend to do, because people are self serving and wanted their escalades that they financed on a Bush stimulus check.


How about socialists in Congress and government? They don't exist? Did they stop their fight with the horrible system called capitalism and let evil Republicans and right-wingers to destroy the system themselves with their greed and conservative values?

:hmmm:
I wasn't aware that there were elected socialist leaders in America... this sounds like the baseless accusations reminiscent of the McCarthy era.
To the second part, how did they "stop their fight" if they weren't present to fight? I think that the country itself lost the fight, after reviewing the catastrophe that was the last eight years.


How about leftists running the big corporations (GE)?

:lol:
I'll see your GE, and raise you Disney and News Corp.


Hell, I am not even a conservative but that simple poisonous propaganda among idiots makes me so angry: Leftists at their disgusting worst. And winning. Fuck it.

It is pretty funny you state this. Being someone who is unaffiliated with either party, I can at least look at things dialectically. You, however, view everything as black and white with such animosity and that is what makes your entire argument so ridiculous. I hope our future responses can be a bit more civil lunatic. Peace.

[Grendel]

The issue is how you run the capitalist economy with statesmen, businessmen, CEOs, investors who believe the capitalism is evil and must be destroyed? Don't tell me Wall Street and Washington aren't full of george soroses and barak obamas. The contention that corporate America is somehow dedicated to the collapse of the capitalist system through which they survive is absolutely hallucinatory.

Please offer factual basis for any of these allegations.

[Sutter Kane]

:faint:

[lunatic]

If there is no such thing as a "communist economy" then why are there communist nations of the past and present that have economies? Oh, yeah, they integrated capitalistic principles into their government. I do believe that I stated clearly that a problem arose when market ideals (such as capitalism and communism) influence the government, and whenever an ideology is forced on the populous, it has bad results.
I refer to your hate speech, lunatic, after reading several of your posts. You fill your opinion/arguement with such hatred focused on people like Obama, that it is incomprhensible to me. It has nothing to do with me being pathologically detached, it is the blunt fact that whoever is in power, regardless of Republican or Democrat, they are our elected official, chosen by the people, and we must support our leader. On that note, what was your political stance 5 years ago? Were you so admimantly opposed to Bush and his policies, as you are to the three months that Obama has spent in office? There is nothing wrong with metaphors, yet you do not use them. You assign labels, that in the most part of your arguments are ridiculous.



So, would this be applicable to the Bush admin, since they were afterall, the ones who redistributed taxpayer funds to "assholes" like AIG? Or how about the expansion of their government through the Patriot Act? Or how about their "capitalist" tactics of auctioning off private contracts to companies like Haliburton and Black Water?



So after the last eight years, the Bush admin destroyed capitalism? I mean, the crises that took place, whether it was the mismanagement of FEMA, the reckless disregard for our troops in Iraq (who were sent in to fight, and most of whom were poorly equipped for the situation), or the slurs of other crises that occured, and were pushed into the lap of Obama, only to have voices like Limbaugh blame him for what occured.



Who was this mythical evil leftist that was pulling the strings of our neoconservative leaders over the past eight years, who were directly responsible for these problems? Also, where is this redistribution? All I see from this point is arguing about the evils of greed and inflation that occured when our economy had a bit of a spike, and people were living beyond their means, much as they tend to do, because people are self serving and wanted their escalades that they financed on a Bush stimulus check.



:hmmm:
I wasn't aware that there were elected socialist leaders in America... this sounds like the baseless accusations reminiscent of the McCarthy era.
To the second part, how did they "stop their fight" if they weren't present to fight? I think that the country itself lost the fight, after reviewing the catastrophe that was the last eight years.



:lol:
I'll see your GE, and raise you Disney and News Corp.



It is pretty funny you state this. Being someone who is unaffiliated with either party, I can at least look at things dialectically. You, however, view everything as black and white with such animosity and that is what makes your entire argument so ridiculous. I hope our future responses can be a bit more civil lunatic. Peace.

There's a lot of crap dropped on my fragile shoulders...
Hate speech? Anything that is not politically correct is a hate speech now. Or racist when it comes to the son of the Kenyan putz. I can't fix what's broken.
It's strange, however, how you contradict yourself and going all politically incorrect against Lunatic. Thank you.
People chose - we must support... Tell that to the Bush haters. Bush (answering your question) was too liberal for me. Open borders, globalization, etc. No wonder he's so popular in Africa and Albania. Didn't like he was so shy to rip Barney Frank (the Jewish shame) apart for Freddie and Fannie, even shared "compassion", and waited too long in Iraq (honestly, I believe that the majority of Arab Iraqis deserved Saddam and the region in general is hopeless).
Yes, I supported the fight against Islamic extremists and didn't like "relationship" with Putin. Didn't like "war on terror" phrase because terrorism is just a tactics. I am against the movement - don't convert me, don't tell me what gods to choose, don't ask me to treat women like a dirt, don't ask me to live in the bloody past, don't call me an animal name (because you aren't winning any Nobel Prizes and jealous), and if you do - don't cry when I **$#% you.
But Bush is gone.

We must support... I understand you are going to play he's too fresh in the office card for much longer. But that "we must support no matter what" idea is, as you would say, ridiculous. Not because I'd like to copy what I mentioned above about incorrigible Bush haters. But the whole idea of supporting anyone who was elected without considering their action is irresponsible and dangerous. By your logic the German did the right thing in 1930s, Allende was a good Moscow agent for Chile, Chamberlain was a good guy, Carter wasn't an anti-Semitic failure, as well as Arafat and Hamas. You don't believe in an idea that a majority of citizens could not be smart or gone bad themselves to choose lesser evil (in your case, it's latter and I answered any question about McCain). No I don't support a person whose the whole ideology and now actions define the word enemy for me. So I am in an opposition. I am not going to list all bullet points of logical, moral and practical confrontations with the Obama team - it's too long. But that team would be perfect to run the Soviet Union back in 1980s.

Another thing you wouldn't like: Red Scare was real. Just buy a ticket to Moscow and work in archives. Too many sympathizers here in America, even after Big Terror wasn't a secret anymore. Like Sean Penn's father. That guy liked anti-Semite Stalin so much I am not surprised his son is so morally damaged. And kissed another anti-Semites. What's wrong with some Jewish folks in America? Rhetorical.
So when you mention McCarthyism Lunatic would say: real danger with some wrong people doing it and a strategy that could be more effective. But not a witch hunt.

My co-worker brought me a doughnut. I am taking a brake.

[Luris Blear]

I'd like to write "What the fuck?". Actually, I just did.There seems to be a vocal group calling for the destruction of all capitalism. This sentiment is running all across the planet.

I am very much supporter of capitalism, done right.

My intention was to find out just how strong the sentiment ran against it, and how sympathetic people were toward this kind of intolerance.

Overall, things were a lot warmer than I had hoped.

[Tragicallyhip]

For myself, I don't see the situation being a clear-cut, black-and-white one.

Taken to an extreme, capitalism devolves into a every-man-for-himself, law-of-the-jungle system that inevitably results in a few people becoming inordinately wealthy and powerful while everybody else suffers. However, in the kind of moderate, accountable capitalism that most first world nations practice, this doesn't happen. There are checks and balances.

Me, I think it works, not least because it's balanced by other approaches. We've all seen the damage that socialism or communism (and fascism for that matter) can do when it's allowed to run to absurd extremes. However, in democratic countries (ones where the democratic process is allowed to function without interference, ie not Nazi Germany), it doesn't get to these extremes. There are elements of socialism that I feel are important (healthcare, a general consideration for the poor, and so on). I don't believe the ideal socialist or communist society discussed in the first half of the 20th century would work or should even be attempted.

Whether it's capitalism or socialism, I think they're both important and useful when accompanied by democracy and moderation. The idea of dismissing capitalism entirely is utterly pointless and (I believe) probably quite dangerous, much like the idea of founding a completely capitalist society.

To be honest, I doubt very much if capitalism will ever be abolished completely. There's always a place for morality, not to mention common sense, and there's certainly some lessons about the world of big finance that we could draw from the current economic crisis, but I wouldn't want to see it gone entirely any more than I would want to see my nation's welfare state dismantled.

Apologies for the rambling there...!