Greed!

[Lanky Wanker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ClCl7RmN8Y&feature=g-u&context=G2eaa9aeFUAAAAAAAAAA

At 1:30 he pulls out the "capitalism can cure poverty" card. :rolleyes: Anyway, thoughts on this? I'm sure he'll appreciate a whole thread full of answers more than just one.

[Sputnik_1]

Is he seriously using the "greed is our nature" excuse? How would the government know how to organize society?
People tend to have very poor vision on society, they see dogmas not alternatives. Of course if you don't overthrow the superstructure you can't free people from that kind of narrow minded thinking. So what, is he trying to say that if everyone is greedy than everyone automatically becomes rich? Come on, we all perfectly know that it's just bull shit. Only because people who are well-off in this system claim it's the only way doesn't mean that we have to put up with this till we completely ruin the planet. I personally believe in people, not in money.

[Lanky Wanker]

Is he seriously using the "greed is our nature" excuse?


Well, the username should explain it all. People who feel hardcore enough to call themselves atheistic satanists like to use that to back up their selfishness.

[Sputnik_1]

Well, the username should explain it all. People who feel hardcore enough to call themselves atheistic satanists like to use that to back up their selfishness.

good point...

[Comrade Hill]

Ask him why poverty rates have risen during times of economic GROWTH, like during the 80s and 90s.

The solution to poverty is to overthrow reactionary counter productive governments and replace them with a one-party working class technate. Capitalism does not cure poverty, it makes poverty worse.

With a deteriorating education system and stagnating wages (which accelerate the objective of capitalism, to make a profit by selling commodities as exchange) how can you claim capitalism cures poverty?

[NewLeft]

What! No! The video is gone.. :crying:

[Lanky Wanker]

What! No! The video is gone.. :crying:

Maybe he saw the light... :cool:

[Rafiq]

What the fuck does being greedy mean?

[hatzel]

The solution to poverty is to overthrow reactionary counter productive governments and replace them with a one-party working class technate.

Or how about - and you'd best brace yourself for this one, because it'll blow your mind like a cheap party balloon - a NO-party setup? Don't see why retaining the underlying structure of the current system, changing only the number of parties participating, would be at all beneficial. I would be infinitely surprised if merely polishing a failed system brought about the end of poverty. Your mysterious technates probably have a fair bit to answer to on that front, too, but I don't know what exactly because I don't know the details of what you're talking about...

[Comrade Hill]

Or how about - and you'd best brace yourself for this one, because it'll blow your mind like a cheap party balloon - a NO-party setup? Don't see why retaining the underlying structure of the current system, changing only the number of parties participating, would be at all beneficial. I would be infinitely surprised if merely polishing a failed system brought about the end of poverty. Your mysterious technates probably have a fair bit to answer to on that front, too, but I don't know what exactly because I don't know the details of what you're talking about...

Okay, I have braced myself.

:laugh:

Tendency wars are counter productive so I will not engage in this nonsense.

[Lanky Wanker]

What the fuck does being greedy mean?

According to my right-click dictionary:

having or showing an intense and selfish desire for something, esp. wealth or power:

...sound familiar?

[Lanky Wanker]

And check out this response I got from someone else before it got taken down:


There is no such thing as collective greed, only personal greed - it's human nature (unless you want to rewire the human brain). In a real socialist government, the personal greed of individual party/civil bureaucrats would come very apparent and, due to the intricacies of the socialist economy, would effect the collective as a whole. A socialist/planned economy leave the gateways open for abuses. Competition in a free market economy regulates greed, in a way.

Sounds like he's making it up as he goes along.

[Ocean Seal]

What the fuck does being greedy mean?
For the capitalists it means a great strawman that will turn people off from communism before they read about it.

[Rafiq]

According to my right-click dictionary:

having or showing an intense and selfish desire for something, esp. wealth or power:

...sound familiar?

So what does this have to do with abolishing capitalism?

[Rafiq]

And check out this response I got from someone else before it got taken down:



Sounds like he's making it up as he goes along.

We are selfish, but many times our selfishness includes the interest of a collective group of people. Capitalism never failed because of greed, nor did any other system. It was material conditions that gave people a reason to be greedy.

Read materialism.

[hatzel]

Tendency wars are counter productive so I will not engage in this nonsense.

So you've made a statement that you are wholly unwilling to defend, or even clarify the meaning of, claiming this would be engaging in a tendency war? Have you never in your life actually, you know, had a discussion that involved disagreement between two or more parties? Are you totally unfamiliar with this concept? Or are you just trying to weasel your way out of substantiating your claims?

So I'll ask again: what is a 'single-party working class technate,' how do you envisage it tackle poverty and why would it be better suited to this task than a non-single-party non-working class non-technate would be? What is inherently superior about your proposed form of political administration when it comes to tackling poverty? How can one say with certainty that this form of government, which (as far as I can tell) retains a structural similarity to contemporary systems of governance? Or will you demonstrate that these similarities are wholly illusionary, based on an incomplete picture of the system you advocate, given your refusal to express it fully?

[Comrade Hill]

So you've made a statement that you are wholly unwilling to defend, or even clarify the meaning of, claiming this would be engaging in a tendency war? Have you never in your life actually, you know, had a discussion that involved disagreement between two or more parties? Are you totally unfamiliar with this concept? Or are you just trying to weasel your way out of substantiating your claims?

So I'll ask again: what is a 'single-party working class technate,' how do you envisage it tackle poverty and why would it be better suited to this task than a non-single-party non-working class non-technate would be? What is inherently superior about your proposed form of political administration when it comes to tackling poverty? How can one say with certainty that this form of government, which (as far as I can tell) retains a structural similarity to contemporary systems of governance? Or will you demonstrate that these similarities are wholly illusionary, based on an incomplete picture of the system you advocate, given your refusal to express it fully?

There are times when I'm ready to go all out in a debate, and times when I feel debating is counter productive.

Right now, I am Christmas shopping and I have other things on my mind. I'm not a genius, so I can't focus on multiple things at a time.

I was not expecting someone to raise a debate question in such a tiny thread. Now if you excuse me while I'll get back to you later for this counter productive tendency war, when I feel like being counter productive.

[Enragé]

if capitalism can cure poverty why hasnt it done so already? If capitalism cures poverty then why are whole swathes of africa worse off now than in the early 80's? If capitalism cures poverty why has the average wage decreased in the US in the last 30 years, and stagnated in Europe?

[NewLeft]

if capitalism can cure poverty why hasnt it done so already? If capitalism cures poverty then why are whole swathes of africa worse off now than in the early 80's? If capitalism cures poverty why has the average wage decreased in the US in the last 30 years, and stagnated in Europe?

Damn socialist! Quit whining, you have to wait a couple years before reaping the benefits of the invisible hand. Once everyone works for a sweatshop, only then will the people be better off! Cause then wages will rise as the businesses compete! It's only common sense yo.