Will feudalism fall?

[chimx]

Because it is synonimous with human nature. Absolute Fact. It will last forever.

Tell me please, when will it fall? You guys have been predicting this for a while...

[Morag]

Ah, you and your "absolute facts," chimx! :P

[Zero]

Now we just have to find the reactionary to fit this post... hmm...

[somebodywhowantedtoleaveandnotcomeback]

Feudalism will be implemented in communism.

[JazzRemington]

Best. Thread. Ever.

[Janus]

Due to the way in which it revolutionizes the means of production, it will never last forever.

Copyright 2006.

:P :lol:

[ebeneezer]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 05:39 PM
Due to the way in which it revolutionizes the means of production, it will never last forever.

Copyright 2006.

:P :lol:
I'm not General Patton lol. In the trashed thread someone said im the Genreal. I aint.

BTW. Feudalism falling is absolute fact. Capitalism falling is not. It comes from someone's little imagination and you guys all think its real lol.

[chimx]

ebeneezer: my point was that to say this or that economic system is going to last forever is absurd. history is processive, not progressive. to assume our current paradigm is the end all, be all to history is absurd. thus the absurd thread.

[Yamashita]

ebeneezer: my point was that to say this or that economic system is going to last forever is absurd. history is processive, not progressive. to assume our current paradigm is the end all, be all to history is absurd. thus the absurd thread.

As far as im concerned, market economy has always existed.

[ebeneezer]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 04:45 AM
ebeneezer: my point was that to say this or that economic system is going to last forever is absurd. history is processive, not progressive. to assume our current paradigm is the end all, be all to history is absurd. thus the absurd thread.
I got the point but capitalism is an expression of human nature, which is why its are so long lasting.

I mean look at this:

*greed
*collecting property
*working for a buck.

Its all human nature. You are going to attempt to replace these. It won't happen. I for one will always want more. muahahahhahahahahahaha.

[chimx]

As far as im concerned, market economy has always existed.

as far as i'm concerned, pink unicorns wander the earth.


I got the point but capitalism is an expression of human nature, which is why its are so long lasting.

I mean look at this:

*greed
*collecting property
*working for a buck.

Its all human nature. You are going to attempt to replace these. It won't happen. I for one will always want more. muahahahhahahahahahaha.

i don't see how one can say what is "human nature". philosophers of all shades and colors cant even decide on it. maybe in your experience that is what you have noted, but I would be careful about stating it as fact.

as far as your points, i would argue that greed, property collection, working for a buck, etc. is more of a manifestation of any species inherent survival instint. we do what we have to for ones own survival. the materialism of marx agrees with it on a basic level. poor folk, acting as a majority, will inevitably do what is in their interest to survive, ie. seize property, etc. from the previous holders of it. morality is irrelavent to our "natures".

[red team]

*greed

Depends on what you mean by greed. I'm greedy too. I want to acquire things that would enhance my enjoyment of life, but so does everybody else. If you interfere with other people's greed by causing scarcity then naturally their greed would lead them to take your away your wealth by whatever means necessary. Homeless people and starving people are extremely greedy for securing both shelter and food. The only reason you've managed to keep in control of things (for the moment) is because of the balance of terror between those who like to slit your throats for your wealth and the mercenaries in your pay that "legally" defend your system of exploitation.

So is greed bad?

No, not necessarily. In an environment of abundance in which you are restricted and penalized for introducing artificial scarcity your greed is irrelevant to me. You can have all the materially wealth you can immediately access and use, but if I have access to things that you can't immediately use so that I can be just as hedonistic and selfish as you why should either of us care?

It's only when you have this irrational fetish where you "lift you leg" and mark your territory over material items you can never immediately use for practical utilitarian purposes that you get into trouble because then you'll be denying people just as greedy as you the hedonistic pleasure of selfish enjoyment for no good reason other than irrational ego satisfaction for "owning" more things than you can possibly use.


*collecting property

Collect all you want, but why do you have any good reason to leave things idle like farmland, factories and labour when leaving them idle means someone else can't use them to create wealth for themselves which means their only other alternative would be to collect it from you? The only reason why unemployment exist for people willing to work is that you can't profit enough for yourself from your greed so their greed becomes unsatisfied which means they'll be greedy for what you have instead of being greedy for what they can produce for themselves. Speaking to a greedy person like yourself who is greedy for your own safety it would seem a much better alternative if the similarly greedy workers be given access to productive assets so they can be greedy for things they can collectively produce rather than greedy for things already produced, but kept by the greedy rich which they can only get by collecting it from you.

Greedily it makes perfect sense, since equal access greediness seems like the best alternative to avoid having your safety greedily compromised.


*working for a buck.

That's the main pillar of the argument isn't it? To be able to work for a return of your labour because everybody thinks they deserve enjoyment for all that unpleasant hard work. But, here's the reason why you don't like work and would like to blackmail other people less fortunate in wealth into doing it for you. You're greedy. But, what makes you think other smart greedy people won't see through your game of passing off work to them so you don't have to work because you're in a position to greedily rip them off by selling what you paid them for more than what their work is worth? No, greedy people aren't really that dumb including greedy workers so the only alternative is to give up the game and think of other ways to be greedy like using automated machines instead of people because machines don't feel the need to be greedy since they don't have the minds to be greedy at all, but instead they fullfill all of our needs to be greedy while costing us nothing in terms of unpleasant manual work that we all greedily want to avoid.

[ebeneezer]

I agree with everything U say Redteam. But I still think greed manifests itself best under cpaitalism, because with greed comes the sub-desire to control others on a voluntary basis for financial compensation which I forgot to mention.

I dont know if you can do without this in greed. I mean dont we all want servants to look down upon? shouldnt we cultivate desires of omnipotence and be free to do so? I think many people do. Your system thus denies liberty. I mean you woudl force people to use robots which dont exist yet.

[Janus]

I mean dont we all want servants to look down upon?
You have one sick and elitst way of thinking. :angry:


shouldnt we cultivate desires of omnipotence and be free to do so?
Not enough with exploitation, now you wanna be omnipotent?


I mean you woudl force people to use robots which dont exist yet.
:blink: Seriously, get a grip before you go make wacko, self-indulgent posts next time.

[Tungsten]

red team

It's only when you have this irrational fetish
I don't think desiring property other than the clothes on your back constitutes irrational behaviour. But then, my ability to think extends beyond the next five minutes.

Collect all you want, but why do you have any good reason to leave things idle like farmland, factories and labour when leaving them idle means someone else can't use them to create wealth for themselves which means their only other alternative would be to collect it from you?
Nobody will ever think of abusing a system where they can just take what they want. Of course not. Not to mention the impossiblility of keeping track of everything even if they don't.

[Yamashita]

as far as i'm concerned, pink unicorns wander the earth.

Ok chexmix, this didn't disprove that market economies have always existed, good try though. It must feel bitter knowing this.

Now give me an example of an anarchist or communist society that actually has worked.

[More Fire for the People]

chimx, did I ever mention that you are my favourite member of RAAN :wub:

[MrDoom]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 04:47 AM
As far as im concerned, market economy has always existed.
Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

:rolleyes:

[Yamashita]

Oceania is at war with Eurasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.

Great! :D I see you have good knowledge of whats going on. I knew those dirty Indonesians and Malaysians were gonna get it from Australia, after they imprisioned Australian drug traffickers, it was about time Australia saved their citizens locked up abroad. So i see Australia has a "Coalition of the Willing" with Tahiti, Vanuatu, Fiji, Samoa..but which European nations are helping the Indonesians and Malaysians again?? I would really like to know.

[ColinH]

Everyone not familiar with the writings of George Orwell please step forward.

[Yamashita]

Everyone not familiar with the writings of George Orwell please step forward.

Buahahahahah!! Will everyone not familiar with World Geography please step foward.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 08:54 PM

Everyone not familiar with the writings of George Orwell please step forward.
*steps forward*
Fixed your quote, Yamashita.

[chimx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 05:31 PM

as far as i'm concerned, pink unicorns wander the earth.

Ok chexmix, this didn't disprove that market economies have always existed, good try though. It must feel bitter knowing this.

Now give me an example of an anarchist or communist society that actually has worked.
money was first pressed into coin form like 4000 years ago by what is present day turkey. you do the math.

[MrDoom]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 05:31 PM
Now give me an example of an anarchist or communist society that actually has worked.
Primitive man, by the fact that we are not extinct and not evolutionary degenerates (though this is in fact primitive-communism, not to be mistaken for post-industrial communism).

[Yamashita]

QUOTE (Yamashita @ Aug 9 2006, 08:54 PM)
QUOTE
Everyone not familiar with the writings of George Orwell please step forward.


*steps forward*


Fixed your quote, Yamashita

Well, at least your honest. So we have our first, who steps up for not familiar with World Geography, who's next?


money was first pressed into coin form like 4000 years ago by what is present day turkey. you do the math.

What math do i do? You think coins have been the only form of currency? Trade in bazaars for example , one product could buy you a whole bunch of others, because it's valued higher. Products had value, and they always have, and they still do. Will products have value in communism? NO! case closed.


Primitive man, by the fact that we are not extinct and not evolutionary degenerates (though this is in fact primitive-communism, not to be mistaken for post-industrial communism).

Primitive man? You man like cave man? And you think there weren't those who were better than others? You don't think that they fought eachother for a mamooth? You don't think that one tribe was wealthier than the other? You don't think they traded with eachother much like anywhere else? Even in "primitive" tribes in Africa and other places, for example cows are their form of currency, one tribe is richer than the other depending on how much cows they have, fighting eachother and stealing eachother's cows. And you don't think that there are class status in these tribes? Think again!

[red team]

I mean you woudl force people to use robots which dont exist yet.

A Robot (http://asimo.honda.com/index.asp?bhcp=1)

It walks it talks...

It slices it dices...

And if programmed by smart, talented people, like me for instance,

it could even do useful, but unpleasant work like taking out the trash for instance
(inorganic as well as organic like useless Capitalists for example)

I wonder if the slice and dice feature could be used for that job, hmmm... ;)

[MrDoom]

it could even do useful, but unpleasant work like taking out the trash for instance
(inorganic as well as organic like useless Capitalists for example)

I wonder if the slice and dice feature could be used for that job, hmmm...
roflmao

And laser beams.

[Yamashita]

Robots huh, do the Jetsons even come out on TV anymore?

Anyways, can we please hurry this process up so that communism can be in place , and everything will be automated so that i can be as lazy as i wanna be!! And we can all then start having promiscuous sex, huge massive orgies in the city plazas. :rolleyes:

[Tungsten]

red team

it could even do useful, but unpleasant work like taking out the trash for instance
(inorganic as well as organic like useless Capitalists for example)
But there's one problem: The capitalists will have their own robots - most likely a larger number than socialists. By this point, robotic soldiers will have long since (to paraphrase Marshall Brain) "removed the word 'revolution' from our vocabulary".

But that's not going to happen anyway. Regression to the mean is most likely, as it usually has been. 50/50 robots/humans.

[red team]

Since we're on the topic of why Feudalism fell, the question is why did it fall?

By all accounts, it should have been invincible with industrial technology like factories and railroads on it's side. With all those mass-produced weapons given out to the royal army, nothing could have stood in it's way. Like you have said "revolution" should have been made an obsolete word, but instead Feudalism and monarchies became obsolete.

Here's the summary of what you're facing:

If you produce robots for the consumer market, why would people even bother going to work. People, have robotic slaves to do all their work for them. Software can be mass developed for any conceivable task including food production. There goes your system.

If you produce robots for the capital market, you'll displace thousands of workers. A short recipe for a revolution. There goes your system.

If you produce robots as a means of property ownership enforcement, that's just a replacement for the police. Their even easier to defeat than the human police as they can easily be tricked or hacked. There's our robotic army and there goes your system.

If you don't use robotic technology, you'll lose your competitive edge to businesses who choose to use it. So robots in terms of productive potential for business is an inevitability. This means more bankrupt businesses and more unemployed and angry workers.

It seems you have a lose-lose-lose-lose situation.

[Tungsten]

red team

If you produce robots for the consumer market, why would people even bother going to work. People, have robotic slaves to do all their work for them. Software can be mass developed for any conceivable task including food production. There goes your system.

If you produce robots for the capital market, you'll displace thousands of workers. A short recipe for a revolution. There goes your system.

If you produce robots as a means of property ownership enforcement, that's just a replacement for the police. Their even easier to defeat than the human police as they can easily be tricked or hacked.
You think you or anyone else will be able to shoot quicker and more accurately than a robot? Now you're just rationalising.

There's our robotic army and there goes your system.
How are you going to go about hacking a computer that can blow your head off from a mile away? :lol:

If you don't use robotic technology, you'll lose your competitive edge to businesses who choose to use it. So robots in terms of productive potential for business is an inevitability. This means more bankrupt businesses and more unemployed and angry workers.

It seems you have a lose-lose-lose-lose situation.
I get it. Automisation will work for you, but not anyone else. :rolleyes:

[ZeroPain]

You think you or anyone else will be able to shoot quicker and more accurately than a robot? Now you're just rationalising.

EMP - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

I CAN DO SCIENCE ME!!!!



How are you going to go about hacking a computer that can blow your head off from a mile away? laugh.gif

The same way you can hack into anything from hundreds of miles away....



I get it. Automisation will work for you, but not anyone else. rolleyes.gif

Can you prove it will work for you?

NO!

Because capitalism is an economy of scarcity it can never advance to far into automation.

[red team]

Because capitalism is an economy of scarcity it can never advance to far into automation.

They can't pay machines to be consumers, so it will only worsen the economy for them.

Let's hope it does so it precipitate it's own collapse.

[red team]

I agree with everything U say Redteam. But I still think greed manifests itself best under cpaitalism, because with greed comes the sub-desire to control others on a voluntary basis for financial compensation which I forgot to mention.

I dont know if you can do without this in greed. I mean dont we all want servants to look down upon? shouldnt we cultivate desires of omnipotence and be free to do so? I think many people do. Your system thus denies liberty. I mean you woudl force people to use robots which dont exist yet.


The only reason for my response in which I take a jab at cappies is this garbage posted by Ebeneezer. How do respond to: "Your system thus denies liberty. I mean you would force people to use robots which dont exist yet." which is stating that freeing people from unnecessary labour by "forcing" businesses to use machines is denying liberty? It's an example of garbage in, garbage out. If someone were to state that replacement of human labour by machine labour is denying liberty which is obvious garbage then why shouldn't my response be similar garbage?

It's irrelevant though as my scenario of using robots to kill Capitalists is unlikely to happen as revolution would happen way before a roboticized society becomes a reality, but it's good to mess with cappies minds as well as provide some amusement and humour for leftist libertarian (who are the only honest libertarians) viewing this thread.

But it seems that an elitist megalomaniac like you agree with Ebeneezer to limit freedom by using people instead of machines. Whatever happened to "providing things for free when we have cybernetic socialism" as you seem to support in previous posts? I guess we see your true colors now as an elitist tyrant.

Another moral victory for me it seems.

[YSR]

This thread owns.

[RevolverNo9]

Chimx, thankyou for bringing that one up! It always helps to bring things into perspective.

Can you imagine - one knight to the other - developing crackpot, utopian theories of a society where you don't solve family disputes by killing your enemy's uncle and raiding the local monastery? And - what's that? - I'll buy all my goods in special, permenant markets, where provisions have been flown (in the air no less!) from the opposite edge of the world? Fuck, man, you crazy profit, what's got into you? That just wouldn't work. The only way to obtain your own provisions is to force other, lower men who work on your land to give it you... it won't work any other way, that's the natural way of things, God seperated men into Three Orders! And as for the morality you predict? A world where a man would dare never to go to their church? Man, next you'll tell me the priest will speak their own language...

[Tungsten]

ZeroPain

EMP - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

I CAN DO SCIENCE ME!!!!
Military electronic equipment is already protected against EMP. It has been for some years.

The same way you can hack into anything from hundreds of miles away....Do you think they're all going to be connected to the internet?

Can you prove it will work for you?

NO!
I'm not advocating 100% automization. Whatever the market decides will happen will happen, but it's unlikely.
red team

They can't pay machines to be consumers, so it will only worsen the economy for them.

Let's hope it does so it precipitate it's own collapse.
They wouldn't need consumers as there would be no workers to pay.

But it seems that an elitist megalomaniac like you agree with Ebeneezer to limit freedom by using people instead of machines.
The idea of libertarianism is "do whatever you want, as long as you don't harm anyone else". I don't remember him mentioning "using" people against their will.

Whatever happened to "providing things for free when we have cybernetic socialism" as you seem to support in previous posts? I guess we see your true colors now as an elitist tyrant.
As another elitist tryant once said:

"It's called Technocracy by the way and it's planned to be runned by scientists and technicians who are the most level-headed and rational people in the world.
As for it not ruling in the interest of the population, that's simply conjecture on your part as energy accounting has never been tried nor experimented with."

Ten points if you can give me his name. :lol:

Another moral victory for me it seems.
And for five bonus points, give the name of the person who said this :

"Justice is relative. Morality is irrelevant."