Challenge

[vox]

Okay, capitalists. Here's the deal:

I think that capitalism is a terrible economic system that leads to poverty for the many and is anti-democratic in nature, for it consolidates capital into the hands of the few, and that buys power.

Now then, without simplistic "you stupid commie you don't get it" answers, I defy any capitalist lackey to show that I'm wrong. I sincerely believe you can't do it.

Prove me wrong or shut your holes.

Patiently waiting, but not expecting much,

vox

[Capitalist]

Why Capitalism Works.

Capital = Money for investment purposes.

Capitalism creates competition.

Competition brings out the best in people.

Investors/Business owners compete with one another to provide consumers with high quality products at decent prices.

Consumers have a variety of products to choose from (depending on quality versus price)

Workers have jobs

Investor/Business owner makes money or return on investment.

Example:
Medical Companies want to make large profits on new medicines. Medical Company invests large sums of money into new research (providing doctors, scientist, etc. with good paying jobs) to invent new medicine. New medicine is sucessfully invented and approved. Now patients have a cure for their disease or pain. Patient's insurance companies pay high prices for the medicine. Obviously most patented medicine is expensive - cost a lot to invent.

Better to have medicine at high prices or no medicine at all?

Doctors do not go to school for half their life so that they can make medicines for free.

[MJM]

Didn't cuba find a cure for menengitis recently?

[Imperial Power]

Vox looking at results what is the most succesful economic system in the world? Capitalism

What motivates people to work? Capitalism

What gurantees freedom? Capitalism

You can't say the whole system is bad for a few bad apples. Im not rich but I gurantee you a middle class citizen has a much higher quality of life here then almost anywhere else on the globe.

[Imperial Power]

Another thing about the US exploiting the third world. The US has more humantitariun aid than anyone else.
Lets say theres a natural desaster who is there to help first? Americans. I didn't see any Russians or Germans or what ever over here to help after 9/11. But whenever theres a disaster someplace the US is the first to show up. We have many volunteer agencies spreading education and helping people. We have doctors in Africa helping with the AIDS problem and all the other epidemics. The Americans are not bad people. I think were jsut scapegoats for those less fortunate. They see us as the enemy and look around them and think everything wrong is because of America. It's not from America or from capitalism. It's the whole worlds fault not just ours.

[Jurhael]

God, Capitalist. That was pathetic.



"Competition brings out the best in people. "

It also brings out the worst in people. In fact, it brings out the worst in enough people for relationships to disentigrate to duals, people backstabbing each other, people screwing each other over for some higher "spot" and people not trusting each other in fear of GETTING screwed over.

"Consumers have a variety of products to choose from (depending on quality versus price) "

Given that many businesses and coporations like to merge and buy out, that leaves more of the products in fewer hands and limits the choices. Pepsi or Coke anyone? Sure, there's alternative sodas, but most people go with products that are advertised because that's what they hear of.

This is not to say that mergers are inheirantly bad. The problem is keeping these things unfettered.

"Workers have jobs"

So? Since this system is based on "work or die" and jobs that work best for the tycoons(that is, make the most money for them), most people aren't able to do the jobs they want. Most of such "jobs" simply aren't available to most people. Don't give me this shit about "people aren't forced to do those jobs" because it's CIRCUMSTANCES that force people to GET jobs to begin with. Just as unemployment can be a problem, so it MISemploment.

Those who want to be artists, writers and musicians have an even HARDER time than the average worker because of what other people do to them and because they sometimes have to sacrifice their own styles for "what sells" at the time.

You'd be amazed at how many people are sick of their jobs. They can just quit, eh? *bzzzt* They have to be able to have some sort of backup, IE. ANOTHER JOB IF THERE'S A BETTER ONE AVAILABLE to even think of doing that.


Oh, but they can start their own businesses right? *bzzt* That doesn't work for everyone, so those who don't have the means or the ability to start their own business and KEEP IT end up having no freedom except to choose their bosses and choose either to work or die.

Some freedom that is.

"Better to have medicine at high prices or no medicine at all?"

You're shitting me right? Do you honestly believe that only those who can afford it should have medicine? Why should medicine be a privlage only for the well off?

Oh SUUUUURE people will DIE because they can't afford the medicine, but that OKAY because it's better than nothing? How utterly disgusting.

"Doctors do not go to school for half their life so that they can make medicines for free."

People do not go to the doctor so they can end up with a 40,000 dollar medical bill that can send people out in the streets and run families. People do not get medications so they end up paying $400 dollars a month for them.

You seem to think that money is more important than the lives of others and that is pathetic.

Capitalism works...suuure, if you're rich or own your own business that makes a lot of money or if you worship the market and business interests. Otherwise, you're nothing but an expendable little person that doesn't matter.

Works pretty well, doesn't it? *snort*



"The US has more humantitariun aid than anyone else."

Also has more instances of propping up dictatorships and torture regimes than anyone else. You know? For business interests. Some humanitarian "aid" that is.

(Edited by Jurhael at 5:24 am on Jan. 17, 2002)

[Imperial Power]

Jurhael there are over 250,000 million people in the US and they dont all own businesses. You know less then half of the US goes to college so they can't all be business owners. We can't all be rich. Theres not many places in the world where a plumber makes $75 dollars an hour or landscapers make over a $80,000 a year. Don't tell me that comes from exploiting anyone.

[peaccenicked]

Imperial have a look at some of your few bad apples
http://www.corpwatch.org/bulletins/PBD.jsp...?articleid=1188 (http://www.corpwatch.org/bulletins/PBD.jsp?articleid=1188)
Coke too Doh!
The more I listen the more insight I get into the fairy tale world you live in.

[DaNatural]

imperial you are even more pathetic than capitalist. You talk about america helping out in africa with aids, then why was america the only country to vote against lifting the debt africa has? lifting the debt that these people can start fresh, thats all they were asking. America on top of it can help out because that takes the eyes off of them for the years of oppression. They have constantly exploited the third world for their own gains. north america makes up 20% of the world population and yet we use 80 %of its resources does that make sense?
Furthermor how do u account for the many jobs that were lost due to supposed free trading? privitization of this sector and that sector. This topic is too large to discuss on here, but you are honestly living in some fantasy world. And one last point I remembered, lets not forget about putting drugs on the ghetto. Bringing drugs back from columbia and other latin countries in order to imprison or to get totally out of the political picture african americans. Not to mention that the monies from the drug trade helped fund the cia invasion of iran. Since they couldnt get funding from congress, they figured what the hell lets get african americans ,who are already oppressed, addicted to crack rock and cocaine, and with that money we can fund even more missions of destruction, yea, great country.

[Imperial Power]

DaNatural so your saying the US government sponsors drug trafficking from Columbia to remove African Americans from politics? give me a break.

[peaccenicked]

why are you are ignoring all the difficult questions.
Da Natural is primarly asking how is imperialism helping Africa. you must know it is not or you would have replied. or do you need to find out from a major TV network and come here and repeat their propaganda.

[vox]

Hello folks.

Sorry I've not answered sooner, but vox has things to do, but not that I'm here, let me answer some things:

First, Capitalist wrote:

"Why Capitalism Works.

"Capital = Money for investment purposes."

That seems like a rather limited definition, don't you think? After all, industrial machinery, such as in a factory, is capital as well, no? You've already limited your argument to investment capital, and therefore defeated your own purpose by defining capital far too narrowly, hence not really talking about capitalism but rather a limited aspect of capitalism which may or may not provide the results you seek.

"Capitalism creates competition."

True.

"Competition brings out the best in people."

Well that ain't necessarily so, is it? First off, "best" can only be defined in a given context. (I'll help you out here and tell you that, in a discussion like this, it would have to be a social context.) So, if we can agree, and I think we can, that "best" is highly subjective, then I think we can agree that "best" in a capitalist society can create an interesting dillema. For example, you go on to write about expensive medicine, without regard to the fact that price is related to capitalist relations, but that's not important here. If a man's wife is dying, and the drug that could cure her is beyond his means, then he may be driven to commit a crime, which, of course, would not be bringing out the "best" in someone, in a social context, but the worst, correct? So even on this superficial level, your statement is flawed, at best.

Beyond that, to define the "best" by judging how well a certain behavior serves capitalism is to turn over to the market our human facilities for reason and empathy. Perhaps you think that behavior should be determined by the Market God. I do not.

"Investors/Business owners compete with one another to provide consumers with high quality products at decent prices."

No no no. They compete to gain a greater profit, not to provide consumers. Sometimes consumers benefit, often they do not. Too, you're ignoring incentives, provided by city, state and the federal gov't to businesses, which cannot be done without sacrificing the credibility of your statement, but that's another issue.

Indeed, much money is spent by businesses each year to keep the consumer in the dark about their products (looking at the lobbying done by agribussiness may be a revealing experience for you), leading one to believe that the consumer is the last thought for a business.

Also, if a business cuts costs, and thereby increases profits, there is no reason to think (and historically this has been shown to be true) that those savings are passed on to the consumer, nor to the worker, but to the executive class and/or to shareholders.

"Consumers have a variety of products to choose from (depending on quality versus price)"

Again, this isn't really true. While I can go to the supermarket and find ten brands of corn flakes, I can't find ten brands of quinoa. You may say that is because the market has spoken and people have voted with their dollars, but I may counter that it's because of subsidized agribusiness, which, because of influence in the social arena, finds corn to be more profitable. Choice is limited, not expanded, by capitalist social relations.

Too, the price of a commodity determines its market, so we create a situation in which product distribution is determined not by availablility, but by wealth of consumers. It's a rather bizarre situation that has very much to do with capiatlist notions of class and status, and little to do with competition.

"Workers have jobs"

Profound insight, that. Allow me to responde with one equally as profound, "Workers have always had jobs." That's what makes them workers, right?

However, I believe that your point, feeble as it may be, is that capitalism provides for an income. However, capitalism, with it's boom and bust cycles, also demands that there be a reserve pool of labor, yes? Yes. Because of this, capitalism actually creates unemployment, not employment. Further, labor costs are high, and, as it is not a fixed cost, the first to be slashed, leaving workers, again, unemployed. We're seeing that in the States right now. Indeed, far from beig the worker's friend, capitalism is an enemy of the worker, and reduces human interaction to a mathematical equation, hardly the best of all possible worlds, I think.

"Investor/Business owner makes money or return on investment.

"Example:
"Medical Companies want to make large profits on new medicines. Medical Company invests large sums of money into new research (providing doctors, scientist, etc. with good paying jobs) to invent new medicine. New medicine is sucessfully invented and approved. Now patients have a cure for their disease or pain. Patient's insurance companies pay high prices for the medicine. Obviously most patented medicine is expensive - cost a lot to invent."

Ahh, but you're wrong here. Much R&D is done by the gov't. Surely you've heard of public-private cooperation (such a different word from the "competition" that capitalist apologists pretend to hold so dear). Government accounts for nearly 50% of R&D for the pharmaceutical industry, so that argument falls a bit flat.

Indeed, you may be interested in what Ken Silverstein found:

"Almost three times as many people, most of them in tropical countries of the Third World, die of preventable, curable diseases as die of AIDS. Malaria, tuberculosis, acute lower-respiratory infections--in 1998, these claimed 6.1 million lives. People died because the drugs to treat those illnesses are nonexistent or are no longer effective. They died because it doesn't pay to keep them alive.

"Only 1 percent of all new medicines brought to market by multinational pharmaceutical companies between 1975 and 1997 were designed specifically to treat tropical diseases plaguing the Third World. In numbers, that means thirteen out of 1,223 medications. Only four of those thirteen resulted from research by the industry that was designed specifically to combat tropical ailments. The others, according to a study by the French group Doctors Without Borders, were either updated versions of existing drugs, products of military research, accidental discoveries made during veterinary research or, in one case, a medical breakthrough in China."

So even the research that pharamceutical companies do is targeted, because of capitalist social relations, to the rich, and then marketed to the rich. (Full Article: http://past.thenation.com/cgi-bin/framizer...lverstein.shtml (http://past.thenation.com/cgi-bin/framizer.cgi?url=http://past.thenation.com/issue/990719/0719silverstein.shtml) )


"Better to have medicine at high prices or no medicine at all?"

And now you give, once again, the heart of the capitalist argument: the Logical Fallacy. Here you present us with my favorite--the fallacy of the excluded middle. You offer two choices as if they are the only possible choices, ignoring any other option.

We can, and have, had both low cost medicine and new mediines. Did you know that it wasn't until the Eighties that drugs could be patented? Big change in the law, there. What was patented was the process, not the actual drug, so (and this should please your competition-loving hear) if someone else found a better way to make that drug, they could. After all, isn't that what capitalism is about? Competition? The capitalists didn't think so, and they got the United States of Absurdities to pass a law saying just that. So much for capitalism, huh?

"Doctors do not go to school for half their life so that they can make medicines for free."

You're right, they don't. I would hope that they do it because they genuinely want to help people. It's a demanding profession, and I wouldn't expect medical workers to work for free. I don't expect anyone to work for free. What an absurd comment you've made.

Now that I've shown you how terribly misguided you are, you may want to apologize to the board. It's just good manners.

vox (open and shut)

(Edited by vox at 11:14 pm on Jan. 18, 2002)


(Edited by vox at 11:16 pm on Jan. 18, 2002)

[Imperial Power]

Vox you have to have patents or else companies would not do research and development. If there was no incentive it would just be a profit loose. Creating new medicines takes millions of dollars and if there were no patents companies that never did the R&D would be able to manufacture the drugs as well. All that competition would drive the company that created the drug out of business because they couldnt recoup their looses of making the drug.

[Imperial Power]

Africa is so behind the times technologically It's a problem for any government to help them. But the United States does a lot for Africa. I know that US doctors are helping to immunize children and keep the epidemics down. We try to send them birth control and condoms to keep AIDS and their population down. But it is so unlike the west, progress is hard to make.

[TheGranma]

Oh dear God! Imperial Power, Huge glaring Mistakes!!

"I didn't see any Russians or Germans or what ever over here to help after 9/11. But whenever theres a disaster someplace the US is the first to show up."

Two presently capitalist countries there. How is that an argument against Communism!? I'll have you know CUBA was one of the first countries to offer aid to USA!! That's right, your precious Capitalist countries didn't, but the COMMUNISTS DID!!!

HA HA HA HA!! You have no good arguments. Just face it, Capitalism treats the third world as a cheap whore.

[peaccenicked]

Africa is not behind the times technologically. Technology does not belong to one nation it belongs to the world. It is behind the times because it is generally poor. In Nigeria the country is tied hook and sink
to Shell oil, including its government and armed forces.
With every major resource you have a big western
coporate power in control and calling the shots.
the workers are paid buttons and the big companies extract super profits, and give nothing much to help pay off the third world debt. UN help which is relief and health work is a sickenly small return.
I think you think that people that are not happy and middle class american are nothing to you. You are completely ignorant of their real conditions. You are basically trying to convince us we are not people of worth. The best people are produced by competition.
you are trying to convince us you live in a democracy.
A democracy in which you need millions to stand for president. Is it your hobby to piss on people you consider nothing? Do you think you will get very far in trying to convince us we are nothing. By being here are you not contradicting yourself.

[vox]

imperialist,

Pharmaceutical companies did just fine before the change in the law. After all, both valium and birth control pills, two widely distributed drugs, were created before the change in the law. Indeed, they were developed back in the Sixties.

Too, you seem to forget the huge role of the public sector when talking about private profits, which makes your argument facile, at best.

I suggest you research the topic a bit more before you say anything else.

vox

[Imperial Power]

Peace I am a middle class American I dont put myself on a pedistal before anyone else.

Vox what I said is theory behind creating patents. To promote research and development. The argument can be applied to any new product you can think of not just pharmaceuticals, because I know the goverment subsidizes that industry heavily.

[vox]

imperialist,

You're ignoring the very specific point I made about patents in regard to pharamceuticals. Why is that? Surely you must realize the difference, right?

vox

[Imperial Power]

Whats your point, I've shown you why they issue patents to promote R&D.

[TheGranma]

Now answer to my point?

[Imperial Power]

Thegranma- I do happen to know that Russia and Germany are not communist. My point was to show you that other countries don't come to the United States to help us. As for Cuba they only offered help to say offered help. Trying to change the world opinion against US foreign policy on Cuba. By showing everyone how "caring and loving" they are for the US.

[Reuben]

Quote: from TheGranma on 9:50 pm on Jan. 19, 2002
Oh dear God! Imperial Power, Huge glaring Mistakes!!

"I didn't see any Russians or Germans or what ever over here to help after 9/11. But whenever theres a disaster someplace the US is the first to show up."

Two presently capitalist countries there. How is that an argument against Communism!? I'll have you know CUBA was one of the first countries to offer aid to USA!! That's right, your precious Capitalist countries didn't, but the COMMUNISTS DID!!!

HA HA HA HA!! You have no good arguments. Just face it, Capitalism treats the third world as a cheap whore.


Good Point. I pleased somebody pointed that one out. If I may add further to the point, when there was a meningitis outbreak in America, cuba offered them the meningitis B vaccine it had developed although America declined.




(Edited by Reuben at 7:29 pm on Jan. 20, 2002)

[peaccenicked]

That is terrible bad faith. Do you always suspect people of ulterior motives if they want to help in a humanatarian disaster.

[MJM]

Quote: from Imperial Power on 7:02 am on Jan. 21, 2002
Thegranma- I do happen to know that Russia and Germany are not communist. My point was to show you that other countries don't come to the United States to help us. As for Cuba they only offered help to say offered help. Trying to change the world opinion against US foreign policy on Cuba. By showing everyone how "caring and loving" they are for the US.


WTF??
You're either one cynical bastard or totally brainwashed.
I can't be certain but I'm quite sure some NZ people went to the US to help out after 911.
Are you saying no foriegners helped out after the attacks?

[libereco]

Quote: from Imperial Power on 7:02 pm on Jan. 20, 2002
Thegranma- I do happen to know that Russia and Germany are not communist. My point was to show you that other countries don't come to the United States to help us. As for Cuba they only offered help to say offered help. Trying to change the world opinion against US foreign policy on Cuba. By showing everyone how "caring and loving" they are for the US.


just for your information...there is no big need to change the worlds opinion.
Most of the world is opposed to the embargo and doesn't support the US. Except of course Israel...

[Capitalist]

Imperial Power is correct.

Castro offered aid only to look good. America never recieved a cent of aid from Cuba - no it is quite the other way around.

Germans and British would be all be wearing Nazi Armbands right now if it wasn't for the USA.

The Soviet Union would have perished without Capitalisitc American Machinery and Ammunition during world war 2. There is nothing Imperialisitc about America. We kick ass and bring democracy and then leave.

Capitalism is very simple, Vox - it does not represent the "complex-suppressive" definition that the far-left assigns to it.

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Capitalist on 12:06 am on Jan. 22, 2002
There is nothing Imperialisitc about America. We kick ass and bring democracy and then leave.
You kick ass, that's for sure. But bring democracy? Name a real democracy (and not a puppet government) that the US has set up for every dictatorship that the US has set up or currently supports.

There are actually quite a few cases (does the name "Allende" mean anything to you?) where the US kicked democracy's ass.

And when you leave (if you ever leave), you take all the natural resources and money (and sometimes slaves) that you can find with you.

[Jurhael]

BRING DEMOCRACY!?

AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH! BWHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! Pure comedy.

Course "democracy" in US speak means "All governments that are ass kissers for the business interests and the US government."

[vox]

I'm stunned by my opponent's want for an argument.

Let's narrow the focus. Answer the question about a real democracy being brought by the United States of Atrocities to another nation in the last 75 years. Okay? Name one.

How you right-wingers don't choke on your lies is beyond me.

vox

[vox]

I'm still waiting, you right-wings fools.

vox

[El Che]

My My... What futile efforts my comrades....

Imperial and Capitalist, this discution was about capitalism, and there is far to much to talk about right there... If u mix that with US interventions around the world, 2º world war and how the universe started, then this thread is going to be even more futile. Just shut up with your folishness concerning US military actions around the globe and focuss on capitalism.

I think its terribly desrespectfull for my comrades to write long posts covering many aspects with objective arguements and always repling to your points and to get answers like capitalism= blah or "
Capitalism is very simple, Vox - it does not represent the "complex-suppressive" definition that the far-left assigns to it.". This is actualy the reason why i dont participate in these S. vs C. discutions, u dont know how to discuss and u are wasting other peoples time. I wont make any points or adress any issues because there are already alot of answered pending ones here already. In this respect i think capitalist is worse then Imperial. While imperial is too superficial i think he tries to adress at least some points, i could maybe recomend keeping the discourse simple because is suspect that when they see a long post they just scroll over... Capitalist on the other hand is intentionaly vague and stupid, he disregrads everything said, every argument presented as if it was not even worth his consideration. His discourse is abominable and he is uncapable of articulating anything other than nationalist propaganda, both in favor of his wonderfull contry and against what he has bin thought are the enemies of the same. His contry is sinonimous to the universal values of freedom and democracy, this he knows very well. Therefore the enemies of his contry are the enemies of the entire world. This is the only logic present in his mind, he also equates capitalism both with his contry and with the universal values above mentioned. He will not question this structure of beliefs. And he will not answer your points. For Imperial maybe there is hope if u keep it simple...



Germans and British would be all be wearing Nazi Armbands right now if it wasn't for the USA.

The Soviet Union would have perished without Capitalisitc American Machinery and Ammunition during world war 2. There is nothing Imperialisitc about America. We kick ass and bring democracy and then leave.

[vox]

No answer for me yet, right-wingers? I didn't think you could do it. That you didn't even attempt is just icing on the cake.

HA!

vox

[Hayduke]

May I remidn youc appies with your quote competition brings out the best in people that the first downfall of America was about your FREAKING COMPETITION.............because of that companys didnt make a freaking dollar profit............and thanks to a few big bosses on the top fighting the shit out of each other bout who had the biggest company....the workers suffers...............and thanks to that economic downfall.........you say I can denie facts.....ok I wont check 1929 America's Crash......

[poncho]

If you take capitalism as applied to America outside its border than we are no longer talking about capitalism but imperialism wich only works for the ruling country.

In fact both systems are the same in there pure forms merely differant in application and approach. Both systems could benifit by looking at the weakness in each! Both fail when unbalanced the playing field is not level.

However capitalism overall is a stronger system for the majority of society because once balanced and level the foundation is stronger.

[vox]

"If you take capitalism as applied to America outside its border than we are no longer talking about capitalism but imperialism wich only works for the ruling country."

Exactly.

And still no response from the right-wingers. Hee!

vox (this board is good for me, it makes me laugh)

[reagan lives]

Self-serving logic and perceptions are one thing, but it takes a special kind of willing ignorance and evil arrogance to refer to four pages of discussion as "no response."

[peaccenicked]

here is vox
which response even tries to answer him?
Okay, capitalists. Here's the deal:

"I think that capitalism is a terrible economic system that leads to poverty for the many and is anti-democratic in nature, for it consolidates capital into the hands of the few, and that buys power.

Now then, without simplistic "you stupid commie you don't get it" answers, I defy any capitalist lackey to show that I'm wrong. I sincerely believe you can't do it."

(Edited by peaccenicked at 7:42 pm on Feb. 10, 2002)

[Imperial Power]

Capitalism is the only true system to preserve freedom and self. The capitalist system alows everyone to have a chance at becoming somthing great. The Socialist system denies them this chance. People believe in Socialism with good intentions at first; everyone is equal no poor people. But this is not reality. The socialist system is a way of control for the powerful. Socialism revolves around total government control. The more left a government it is the corrupt it is. This can be seen by any example of a leftist country in the last hundred years. Your common argument is that a communist country has never existed in it's true form. Do you know why? Because the ones who only care about power make it to the top. A communist state can not exist by laws of human nature. Capitalism is democratic in nature contrary to vox's statement. Capitalist society functions from democracy all over the world. It is clear to see these are no "you stupid commie" answers but reality.

[peaccenicked]

capitalism preserves freedom
but fundamentally freedom of the investor.
Investors are a minority. That means that the majority
are at their mercy. So where is the democracy. It is only the rich who can by airspace on the TV or Radio. Everybody does something great at points in time, helping another human being is a truly great deed.
In capitalism money is the friend that is unequally distributed. how can you give if you have next to nothing yourself. Capitalism is about massive inequalities. The only real freedom is for already mega rich investors to make even more money.
you say that stalinism is a necessary product of socialism.
This is one of our concerns too. We dont want Stalinism to re emerge. Instead of saying it is impossible, we say it is possible but not only that necessary.
For what remains is a barbarism which you are blind to,
a democracy which is corrupt.
Socialists too attract corrupt people but we have to struggle against allcorruption.
If we do not coruption wins and our planet will always be run by criminals. What you do by defending the
the sham democracy of criminals is inspire stalinists to bring forth their own sham democracy.
if you can be duped by capitalist dupers, stalinist will think people are easy to dupe. Corrupt people love the existence of dupes.
We are fighting stalinism, you are letting it happen,
We also believe that stalinists have no chance in a countries where the tradition of free thinking is strong and influential.
But how can a dupe be a free thinker.


(Edited by peaccenicked at 9:02 pm on Feb. 10, 2002)


(Edited by peaccenicked at 9:05 pm on Feb. 10, 2002)

[poncho]

"Haida spends two days a month with her parents and seven siblings, who live in a one bedroom shack made of concrete. Her father is un-employed. Her brothers ages 11 and 12 years old work in a factory. Over my visit I was uneasy about watching this servant girl of 9 years old working as a domestic labourer for a wealthy family on call 24 hours a day. But suddenly I realized that I was looking at the issue of child labour through western eyes without regard with the harsh realities of life in the third world. Working as a domestic is viewed as a privilage by the poor in the third world. It is preffered over work that may be harsher and more perilous, like labouring in a factory or mine. Overall though it places the children in a enviroment more favourable than their own. Haida and the other children like her have ready access to food and enjoy clothing and shelter. On a whole they are treated with dignity, kindness and respect. The employers are not ruthless child exploiters---they are just following common practice." --article another face of child labour author unknown

Cuba is not perfect but its the only third world country that does not exploit children but educates them. Capitalism as you think does not occurr in the third world as you know it!

[vox]

Actually, I was hoping for a response to the following:

I'm stunned by my opponent's want for an argument.

Let's narrow the focus. Answer the question about a real democracy being brought by the United States of Atrocities to another nation in the last 75 years. Okay? Name one.

How you right-wingers don't choke on your lies is beyond me.

vox

No one has yet tried to answer it.

Because, of course, they cannot do so honestly. Foul and filthy, they wish to hide behind slogans which proclaim "capitalism" somehow equal to "democracy," not recognizing that the State is always a part of the political economy which exists, in one form or another, in any given nation, and that the natural economic consequence of capitalism is to isolate the many from the power of the few.

vox

[reagan lives]

Interesting coming from you, vox, who has spent so very much time telling people that capitalism is an economic system, not a political one. When it suits your purposes, I suppose.

As for your question, I would ask you to name instances of "real democracy" being brought to nations by the USSR. How vox doesn't choke on his misplaced arrogance is beyond me. Hee.

[peaccenicked]

our civilised discussion did not even begin here http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...rum=22&topic=41 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=22&topic=41)

[El Che]

RL what does the USSR have to do with anything? if you can answer the question just admit it, intead you prefer to dance around like the village idiot, not answering the questions and proclaming flawed analogies. Pitifull indeed.

[Moskitto]

As for your question, I would ask you to name instances of "real democracy" being brought to nations by the USSR. How vox doesn't choke on his misplaced arrogance is beyond me. Hee.

Well, they did bring democracy somewhere on at least 1 occasion.

During WW2, Germany invaded Holland, When most of the mainland was Liberated by the Brits, Canadians and Americans, there was an island a bit off the coast where the Nazi's still held. Now what then happened was, the Russians sent a small (it was only a small island) army and liberated it. Although I don't think that counts really.

[vox]

"Interesting coming from you, vox, who has spent so very much time telling people that capitalism is an economic system, not a political one. When it suits your purposes, I suppose."

Actually, Reagan Lies, that's from the contradictions presented in imperialist coward's posts. It's unfortunate that you can't seem to follow a thread.

And, of course, I'm still awaiting your sure-to-be-profound answer.

Love on ya,

vox

[vox]

And still nothing fron the right-wingers.

How very pathetic, but then right-winger are normally pathetic, aren't they?

Hee|

At least they are laughable fun.

vox (can't believe how pathetic they are)