Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:29 No.9437623

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:29 No.9437623

yes.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:29 No.9437630

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:29 No.9437630

Replies: >>9437698

If Capitalism is a pyramid scheme, then Communism/Socialism is a ponsi scheme.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:31 No.9437690

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:31 No.9437690

>>9437547 (OP)
well yea, of course not everyone can be rich
you have to compare the wealth of one person to another, and the ones with the least will always be the poor no matter how much they have

the idea is that everyone, even the poor, will make enough that they can live comfortably. may never actually each that goal though

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:31 No.9437693

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:31 No.9437693

Replies: >>9437751 >>9437753 >>9437771 >>9437964 >>9437966

File: 1358807474667.png-(174 KB, 812x531, commisar Jamal and Cletus.png)

>>9437547 (OP)

>2013
>Still complaining about income disparity

Honestly, if the the top 1% of people can earn enough to buy themselves 5 nice cars each and the bottom 99% can only afford 1 nice car, the bottom 99% shouldn't complain about being "kept down" and "oppressed".

If you live in America you're already in the top 10% of the world in terms of wealth.

Also pic fucking related OP

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:31 No.9437698

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:31 No.9437698

>>9437630

Correct.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:32 No.9437723

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:32 No.9437723

Replies: >>9437848

>Capitalism is a pyramid scheme
No it isn't.
>A pyramid scheme is a non-sustainable business model that involves promising participants payment or services, primarily for enrolling other people into the scheme, rather than supplying any real investment or sale of products or services to the public.
Then by your definition it is not a pyramid scheme. Capitalism is the trade of goods and services for goods and services.
>Capitalism promises that you can all work your way to the top of the pyramid if you are willing to work for it but not everyone can be at the top of the pyramid and not everyone can get a well payed job.
Capitalism cannot talk, and hasn't promised you anything

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:32 No.9437731

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:32 No.9437731

Replies: >>9437775 >>9437848

This pyramid scheme was more sustainable than communism and socialism.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:33 No.9437751

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:33 No.9437751

>>9437693

I never said anything about income disparity I was just commenting on how people make money not what money they make

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:33 No.9437753

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:33 No.9437753

Replies: >>9437798 >>9437926

>>9437693

But the top 1% can buy as many cars as the bottom 99%. Income disparity like this isn't a sign of a healthy economy.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:33 No.9437771

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:33 No.9437771

Replies: >>9437814 >>9437896 >>9437966

>>9437693
>Honestly, if the the top 1% of people can earn enough to buy themselves 5 nice cars each and the bottom 99% can only afford 1 nice car, the bottom 99% shouldn't complain about being "kept down" and "oppressed".
>Implying the bottom 1% can afford cars
Ignorance this profound deserves the death penalty.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:34 No.9437775

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:34 No.9437775

Replies: >>9437826 >>9442585

>>9437731
tell that to china.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:34 No.9437798

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:34 No.9437798

Replies: >>9437839 >>9438046

>>9437753
And yet it absolutely is. Living standards, real wages and disposable income rise under Capitalism, and collapse or are non existant under communism.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:35 No.9437814

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:35 No.9437814

Replies: >>9438628 >>9439576

>>9437771
Oops. Didn't mean bottom 1%. Meant poor in general. And lumping the "bottom 99%" together is fucking laughable.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:35 No.9437826

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:35 No.9437826

File: 1358807744864.jpg-(15 KB, 293x245, 1340132451331.jpg)

>>9437775
>Thinks China is communist

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:35 No.9437833

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:35 No.9437833

It's a better description of a welfare state.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:36 No.9437839

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:36 No.9437839

Replies: >>9437934

>>9437798
>Capitalism and Communism are literally the only options.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:36 No.9437848

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:36 No.9437848

Replies: >>9437892 >>9437934

>>9437723
saying no it isn't doesn't make it false.
>Capitalism is the trade of goods and services for goods and services.
No that's a market, or a free market or whatever. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production and so on.

>>9437731
Why do people think that the only alternative to capitalism is automatically communism/socialism?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:36 No.9437862

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:36 No.9437862

That picture makes more sense if it was shown as what you get out of different career paths.
protip: the tiers are not staggered on top of each other.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:37 No.9437892

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:37 No.9437892

>>9437848

Because that is the political leaning of most anti-capitalists

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:37 No.9437896

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:37 No.9437896

>>9437771
You cannot read can you?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:38 No.9437926

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:38 No.9437926

>>9437753

If everyone is happy with how much they make, they shouldn't be complaining someone is making 1000x more than they are, its just jealousy and envy.

If one is so pissed off at millionaires that they want to take 90% of their income, their no less greedy than the millionaires they themselves loathe.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:38 No.9437934

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:38 No.9437934

Replies: >>9438034 >>9438044 >>9438111

>>9437839
>>9437848
The only logically consistent ones.
>>9437848
>Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production
Oh look some kiddies read the Communist Manifesto and think they can into Economics

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:39 No.9437964

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:39 No.9437964

Replies: >>9438571

>>9437693
>implying the bottom 99% can even afford 1 shit car

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:39 No.9437966

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:39 No.9437966

Replies: >>9439576

>>9437771

Poster of this>>9437693

By cars, I mean living standards. I don't actually mean physical cars.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:40 No.9438002

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:40 No.9438002

Replies: >>9438130

File: 1358808052752.jpg-(55 KB, 329x384, 1357000349954.jpg)

is OP a marxist, because there is no marxism behind
>waahh capitalism sucks

capitalism doesn't suck, nothing suck. capitalism is a system of bourgeoisie control over the means of production, marxist do not want less shitty conditions. if marxists were about being less shitty they would be liberals who belive minimum wage increases and free cllege tuition will end class conflict. marxists want working class power and the end of the class system through the elimination of private property.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:41 No.9438034

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:41 No.9438034

Replies: >>9438166

>>9437934
>The only logically consistent ones.
You mean the only ones you're aware of.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:42 No.9438044

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:42 No.9438044

Replies: >>9438166

>>9437934
[sarcasm]nice logical rebuttals.[/sarcasm]

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:42 No.9438046

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:42 No.9438046

Replies: >>9438139

>>9437798

And under real capitalism, income rises for every class, not only for the rich. If you go by annual increases in wages against inflation, real capitalism ended in America forty years ago.

The top 1% would always be rich. Real capitalism would have a smoother progression down, with more rich people, more well-off people, but fewer super-rich people.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:44 No.9438111

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:44 No.9438111

Replies: >>9438166

>>9437934
oh look some faggot got into his first economics class at uni and read friedman.

Are you stupid? That's the dictionary definition, dumb fuck.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:45 No.9438130

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:45 No.9438130

Replies: >>9438302 >>9438343

>>9438002
>Elimination of private property
>Thinks Society could function at all
Karl Marx was a loser who never worked a day in his life, frivveled away money on the stock market never making profits and became begrudged. He lived off the money of Engels, who received it from the Capitalist ventures of his father.

Literally only children and Liberal Arts majors could read anything of his and not cringe.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:45 No.9438139

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:45 No.9438139

Replies: >>9438298

>>9438046
>real capitalism

just like real communism, right?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:46 No.9438142

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:46 No.9438142

Replies: >>9438276 >>9438340 >>9438794

>tfw i am in med school and will be near the top of the pyramid according to that pic

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:47 No.9438166

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:47 No.9438166

Replies: >>9438230

>>9438034
No, as in the only logically consistent ones.
>>9438044
>Fail to make a point
>Expect a rebuttal
>>9438111
>Obvious butthurt Communist.
Your ideology is the Big Bang Theory of Economics

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:49 No.9438230

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:49 No.9438230

Replies: >>9438446

>>9438166
not a communist, actually.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:49 No.9438245

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:49 No.9438245

Replies: >>9438349 >>9438365 >>9438469 >>9438511

>tfw you realise that capitalism, socialism, communism, anarchism etc. don't work since all of them have tons of unfixable flaws

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:50 No.9438276

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:50 No.9438276

>>9438142
If you survive 9001 hour weeks as a junior.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:51 No.9438298

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:51 No.9438298

Replies: >>9438421

>>9438139

Whatever it was that allowed living standards to rise consistently for a hundred years (excepting the Great Depression), and whatever changed around forty years ago to allow all the increased productivity, and so wealth, go to the top few percent of earners. So whatever was really happening to cause the real American dream is what I like, and whatever changed so it stopped happening is what I don't like.

>wow, I sound like a politician

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:51 No.9438302

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:51 No.9438302

Replies: >>9438399

>>9438130
a functional society is one in which people cooperate to meet their needs, without the need of the power-concentrating provate property system. social property is the way of the future.

>dat personal attacks on marx, have really caused me to reconsider marxism as invalid

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:52 No.9438340

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:52 No.9438340

>>9438142
>tfw i am in med school and will be near the top of the pyramid according to that pic

Please do 1 of 2 things before graduating:

1: Vow to revolutionize the Medical System in America (if you are here), so it's cheaper and the god damned incompetents actually are REQUIRED TO FUCKING KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE DOING

or

2: Kill Yourself.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:53 No.9438343

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:53 No.9438343

Replies: >>9438376 >>9438431

>>9438130
Ad hominem.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:53 No.9438349

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:53 No.9438349

Replies: >>9438413

>>9438245
>Tfw you are absolutely incorrect

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:53 No.9438365

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:53 No.9438365

>>9438245
>tfw when you have the mind of an edgy teen
are you also a nihilist, atheist and a hedonist.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:54 No.9438376

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:54 No.9438376

Replies: >>9438424

>>9438343

No, YOU'RE an ad hominem.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:54 No.9438399

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:54 No.9438399

Replies: >>9438431 >>9438510

>>9438302
We have the problem of the commons now, which if you knew the first thing about philosophy you would understand. Your solution is to make everything the commons? It's delusional, communism was debunked centuries ago, assets cannot be distributed or destroyed in a society with no private property, and so society cannot function without property.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438413

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438413

Replies: >>9438462 >>9438479 >>9438499 >>9438552 >>9438595

>>9438349
Every single economic system has unfixable flaws, so none of them work.

>proof that capitalism didn't work: the entire world right now, poverty in africa, sweatshops etc.
>proof that communism didn't work: collapse of the USSR and all the post-commie shitholes
>proof that anarchism didn't work: some parts of spain before the civil war

What do we have left? Motherfucking primitivism?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438416

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438416

Replies: >>9438529

The only thing wrong with capitalism is that it’s too successful. America is so rich that the people have become lazy, spoiled, self entitled assholes. But you don't have to take my word on it.

Just look at the OWS protesters. "Poor" people wearing hipster clothes and carrying the latest Apple product. These parasites aren't angry about being poor. They are angry that people are richer than they are. Nothing more. Nothing less.

History repeats itself. Good times breed weak people. Weak people create tough times. Tough times breed strong people. Strong people create good times. Capitalism brought good times and these lazy, weak liberals are the result. Now we have to prepare for the tough times and become strong people.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438421

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438421

Replies: >>9438556

>>9438298
most people who talk about "real" capitalism is capitalism that is free and unregulated or removed from the state.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438424

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438424

>>9438376
no you.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438431

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:55 No.9438431

>>9438343
see
>>9438399

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:56 No.9438446

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:56 No.9438446

Replies: >>9438580

>>9438230
There is a spectrum.

Full private property rights and no property rights.

There is no third way.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:56 No.9438462

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:56 No.9438462

Replies: >>9438700

>>9438413
>Sporadic Historical examples are proof
omg Physics doesn't work because we used to think the world was flat!!!1!

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:56 No.9438469

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:56 No.9438469

>>9438245

The trick is to go with one until it runs out of steam and collapses, let a generation or two deal with the revolutions, and then go with another one. Democracy lasts longest, and so has fewer revolutionary periods, replacing it instead with a kind of slowly rising frustration being misdirected by politicians. But it doesn't actually explode for generations.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:57 No.9438479

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:57 No.9438479

Replies: >>9438526

>>9438413
Fascism.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:57 No.9438499

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:57 No.9438499

Replies: >>9438717

>>9438413
Let's all fucking kill ourselves. We're too flawed and too stupid for this shit.

Who's with me? Come on.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:57 No.9438510

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:57 No.9438510

Replies: >>9438567

>>9438399
>implying the problem of the commons wasn't caused by individuals taking unclaimerd un-socially administered property and turning it into private property, for private gain.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:58 No.9438511

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:58 No.9438511

Replies: >>9438580 >>9438623

>>9438245
Finally. Someone fucking gets it. Expecting perfection from imperfect systems is insanity.

We're not even doing that. We're expecting Perfection from systems no sane person would be stupid enough to believe in at all.

Capitalism/Libertarianism: "If we just make profit and material gain the utmost virtue, everything will be perfect! What could go wrong? Why are you calling me a sociopath??"
Communism: Honestly, I can't even put together a coherent argument for it here, because the various parts of Communist thought are contradictory. Only through double-think could anyone believe in it. And only until they get the power to implement it, and, well, whaddya know? It never turns out to be pure Communism! Gee, I fucking wonder why? Couldn't be because Communism is so conflicted that the system is impossible to implement. No, it must be someone else's fault!
Anarchism: "No real government or Laws will be the perfect system to govern a species of multiple billions of people even if they colonize other planets."

Nobody sees how fucking retarded all of this is??

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:58 No.9438516

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:58 No.9438516

>>9437547 (OP)
You think the banks are under the president? The banks put your president in power same with Hitler and Mao. The british created communism and the banking cartels used it to dissolve their cousins.
On record banks and wall street put Tortsky and Mao into power. Jesus man.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:58 No.9438526

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:58 No.9438526

>>9438479
>totalitarianism
>good

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:58 No.9438529

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:58 No.9438529

Replies: >>9438585

>>9438416
>materialism = rich

Anyone can buy a fucking phone.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:59 No.9438552

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:59 No.9438552

>>9438413
>hates everything
>proposes nothing
why do you post?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)17:59 No.9438556

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)17:59 No.9438556

>>9438421

Unregulated, yes, I would mean that. But I'd expect a more aggressive and effective courts system to make sure businesses don't cause people to incur costs. This would be more effective than using regulations, not least because corporations get to write their own regulations today. And some stronger unions as well.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438567

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438567

Replies: >>9438735

>>9438510
>implying if you abolish private property in the means of production there can be exchange in those means
>implying without those free floating prices one can rationally calculate

Get fucked

!!m44MbCreZ8T
01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438571

!!m44MbCreZ8T 01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438571

>>9437964
dat flag

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438580

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438580

Replies: >>9439310

>>9438446
define property.

>>9438511
Notice how anarchism is the most justifiable?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438585

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438585

>>9438529
>Anyone can buy a fucking phone.

Thank you for proving my point.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438587

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:00 No.9438587

We only need less persons

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:01 No.9438595

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:01 No.9438595

>>9438413
Singularitarianism

>Friend Computer is wise. Friend Computer wants Alpha Complex to be happy. Happiness Is Mandatory. Failure to be happy is treason. Treason is punishable by summary execution. Have a nice daycycle!

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:02 No.9438623

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:02 No.9438623

Replies: >>9438812

>>9438511
strawman fucking everywhere.

do you even understand class conflict, the declining rate of profit, the system of private property and exchange?

you are one of those people who seek their own special way in the world and are afraid to follow any mainstream ideology, because you are so unique. please stop and choose capitalism or communism.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:02 No.9438628

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:02 No.9438628

>>9437814

>And lumping the "bottom 99%" together is fucking laughable.

True.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:04 No.9438700

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:04 No.9438700

Replies: >>9438773

>>9438462
>History is not to be learned from

Kill Yourself.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:05 No.9438717

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:05 No.9438717

>>9438499
I agree.

Proceed.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:06 No.9438735

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:06 No.9438735

Replies: >>9438781 >>9438824

>>9438567
>implying prices in communism, and exchanges.
in communism property is administered by different entitites from municipal level to global level. there are no exchanges if a village needs a well, it asks the municipal council for the resources to build a well, it does not trade what it has with another village for well building materials.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:07 No.9438773

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:07 No.9438773

Replies: >>9438926 >>9439255

>>9438700
>progress is to be abandoned, because the past is shitty.
get a life

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:07 No.9438781

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:07 No.9438781

Replies: >>9438888

>>9438735
So government bureaucrats get to distribute all resources? Sounds like an awesome fair system.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:08 No.9438794

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:08 No.9438794

>>9438142
>yfw obongo care fucks you over to the point where you will want to leave the country

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:08 No.9438812

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:08 No.9438812

Replies: >>9439024

>>9438623
Afraid? What I am afraid of is that you have radically misjudged me. What I am is too sane to accept obviously objectionable horseshit. I am not so selfish/sociopathic I can accept Capitalism/Libertarianism, I am not so credulous that I can ignore history and accept Communism. Anarchism is laughable on its face.

The wise should be ruling the foolish.
The strong should be ruling the weak.
The intelligent should be ruling the stupid.

Anything else is service to chaos.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:09 No.9438824

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:09 No.9438824

Replies: >>9439029

>>9438735
>implying that changes anything

It actually makes it worse.

L2EconomicCalculationProblem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_communism

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:11 No.9438888

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:11 No.9438888

Replies: >>9438921 >>9439062

>>9438781
fuck yeah, I rather have a worker's council in which i have a voice make decisions, than the "free-market."

if you are rich the "free" market will provide, look at the hammacher schlemmer catalog. but if you have little to no private property you are fucked.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:12 No.9438921

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:12 No.9438921

Replies: >>9439385

>>9438888
>but if you have little to no private property you are fucked.

As he typed from his comfy home with his internet.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:12 No.9438926

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:12 No.9438926

Replies: >>9438975

File: 1358809948539.jpg-(37 KB, 960x403, matrix10.jpg)

>>9438773
What is progress? How do you define progress?

If progress is simply more apps for you telephone and more fat in your mid-section then progress is simply whatever somebody else tells you it to be.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:13 No.9438975

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:13 No.9438975

File: 1358810028991.jpg-(24 KB, 400x298, fat-person-sitting.jpg)

>>9438926
This is the progress that we see today.

Welcome to the world of the progress

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:15 No.9439024

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:15 No.9439024

Replies: >>9439387

>>9438812
Spoken like a true fascist. I guess you should be ruled as well.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:15 No.9439029

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:15 No.9439029

>>9438824
tell me what is the economic calculation problem?
that communist products won't be the most profitable per cost ?

of they won't be profitable, there is not profit or market system. you don't need a market system to know that children should be taught to read.
human/social need =/= profit.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:17 No.9439062

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:17 No.9439062

Replies: >>9439657

>>9438888
Holy fuck you are naive. Your "workers council" inevitably becomes corrupt and massively favors some people. Do you even history? The funny thing about communism is that the higher ranking government officials become the new rich people, except now they can send black vans to your house and send you and your entire family to a labor camp while they eat caviar in their government mansions.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:23 No.9439255

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:23 No.9439255

Replies: >>9439295 >>9439698

>>9438773

>http://conservationreport.com/2012/01/09/maps-history-of-deforestation-in-the-united-states/

>http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/assets_c/2012/02/white%20racism-thumb-550x252.jpg

>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/feb/04/columbia.spaceexploration2
>http://www.amazon.com/Challenger-Launch-Decision-Technology-Deviance/dp/0226851761
>http://www.iandeweerd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/challenger-1024x688.jpg
>http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Science/Images/shuttle-columbia-destruction.jpg

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truck_system
>http://amptoons.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/labor_history.png

>http://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=1191

BEHOLD! PROGRESS!!

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:25 No.9439295

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:25 No.9439295

Replies: >>9439443

>>9439255
>linking to images
>on an imageboard

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:25 No.9439310

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:25 No.9439310

Replies: >>9439349 >>9439431 >>9439631

>>9438580
>Notice how anarchism is the most justifiable?
No.

I'm the one who wrote that, by the way. Anarchism is the LEAST sensical of the three. It's so laughable, I imagine most children could immediately see the glaring flaw in it.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:26 No.9439349

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:26 No.9439349

Replies: >>9439460

>>9439310
You're full of shit!!!!

Post ONE bit of proof. A pay-stub with EVERYTHING redacted save for the JIDF info, "for your safety".

A fucking SHRED of evidence would be great.

"WORK JUST CALLED, I'LL TELL ERBODY WUT DEY SAID INA SEC I HAEV TO CALL FREIND"

Do you think we're all morons?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:28 No.9439385

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:28 No.9439385

Replies: >>9439500

File: 1358810882702.jpg-(99 KB, 333x480, 29.jpg)

>>9438921
>implying there is no poverty and unemployment, people who have no future, because their parents weren't rich.
shit wages and part-time jobs for life right.

capitalist like to blame the poor for being, do they realize that if poverty was a choice no one would choose it, if poverty was a choise why are there so many poor? to explain this the capitalist have to go into metaphysics, such as the poor have bad karma, or the rich have good karma, that souls or non-physical personality decide wealth e.g "entrepenurial spirit, personality, right attitude, work ethic, persistence." if possesing such qualities made you rich and were a choice, then everybody would be rich. to counter this they accuse the poor of being "lazy." if being l;azy made you poor and was a choice, nobody would be lazy. so that means people either have inherently poor "souls or personalities" which cause them to be poor, too bad they weren't born withrich "souls." in this capitalist analysis of poverty the one thing that is ignored and grounded in reality is private property and material conditions. cappies believe people choose who they are because the believe people have souls and free will. when the truth is people don't choose their birth parents and events taht happen to them, the psyche"personality" is formed by the world and an individual has no coice in what the world is or does to them, if they did it would mean they were god and can control the world by merely wishing it was different.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:28 No.9439387

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:28 No.9439387

>>9439024
Everyone should have their place and not deviate from it.

Though I am not technically a Fascist, it is not an insult.

Spoken like a true petulant child. Adult children such as yourself would never be tolerated in a sane society.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:29 No.9439431

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:29 No.9439431

Replies: >>9439574

>>9439310

>mfw the glaring flaw in anarchism is the founding principle of the other systems

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:29 No.9439443

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:29 No.9439443

>>9439295
Would you have preferred I link to them one at a time? Also, not just images.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:30 No.9439460

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:30 No.9439460

Replies: >>9439501

>>9439349
What the fuck is this dumbass Shitpasta?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:31 No.9439500

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:31 No.9439500

Replies: >>9439887

>>9439385

It's because there are too many workers and not enough jobs. Plain and simple. This wasn't the case in Russia and China, which is why socialism didn't work there.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:31 No.9439501

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:31 No.9439501

Replies: >>9439633

>>9439460
JIDF trying to spam the board. Ignore and keep posting. Mods might get around to dealing with it in 2 weeks from now.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:32 No.9439511

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:32 No.9439511

>>9437547 (OP)
>any real investment or sale of products or services to the public.

I can see how it can look like that when mummy cooks you dinner and daddy buys your itunes.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:34 No.9439574

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:34 No.9439574

Replies: >>9439654 >>9439694 >>9439731

>>9439431
The glaring flaw in Anarchism, since I have to sound it out for your retarded ass, is that it requires a population so small it makes the species readilly susceptible to extinction.

This is a bad thing.

Not to mention the fucking obvious to a half-retarded 3 year old fact that any Anarchist society will be EASILY conquered by a more highly ordered society almost immediately.

Anarchism would only work in an impenetrable bubble containing 15 people - and that's only if they all agreed to it for their entire lives, which isn't bloody likely. It's an obviously fucking retarded system.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:34 No.9439576

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:34 No.9439576

>>9437966
>>9437814
A good 2% of the USAs population cannot afford minimal "western" standards, that being water or food or anything like that without stealing.
I'm not talking about welfare faggots, I'm talking the people they don't even support.

As the OPs confusing image shows, it's under everyone else and unknown of.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:35 No.9439631

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:35 No.9439631

Replies: >>9439654

>>9439310
Are you even making an argument? You're just saying "lel anarchism is so retarded you have to be blind lelel I'm not even gonna say why".

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:35 No.9439633

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:35 No.9439633

>>9439501
Did we finally break what was left of their syphilitic brains??

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:36 No.9439654

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:36 No.9439654

>>9439631
See: >>9439574

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:36 No.9439657

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:36 No.9439657

Replies: >>9439752 >>9440116

>>9439062
>muh power corrupts
tell me how are worker's councils going to make anti-popular anti-workers rulings, if they are the working class.
also
>implying tieing the power of the people to private property creates a democracy
this is why chinese clothes factories produce clothes for americans. yes, this private property "democracy AKA "free-market," has benefited everybody by lowering working conditions and exporting jobs, to create unemployment in the country where the same goods the exported jobs produce, get sold. real great, and fucking amazing, the common working class person totally had a voice in the decision to drive themselves into unemployment and lower wages.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:37 No.9439694

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:37 No.9439694

Replies: >>9440146

>>9439574

I thought it was the gangs that would take over and turn it into a despotism.

The other systems say, what if we pretend we want the gang in charge?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:37 No.9439698

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:37 No.9439698

Replies: >>9440181

>>9439255
so progress does not exist?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:38 No.9439731

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:38 No.9439731

Replies: >>9439797 >>9439976

>>9439574
>Anarchism would only work in an impenetrable bubble containing 15 people - and that's only if they all agreed to it for their entire lives, which isn't bloody likely. It's an obviously fucking retarded system.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

>spain '36
>paris commune
>free territory

Also look up Mondragon and the CNT.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:39 No.9439752

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:39 No.9439752

Replies: >>9439965 >>9440036

>>9439657
>giving people absolute power to distribute resources

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:40 No.9439797

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:40 No.9439797

Replies: >>9440224

>>9439731
I also like how you just pull shit out of nowhere.

> it requires a population so small it makes the species readilly susceptible to extinction.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:42 No.9439887

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:42 No.9439887

>>9439500
lol, there is always enough workers, just lowers hours.

in capitalism if a new machine makes production more efficient and take less time, than workers get a reduction in hours and pay.

in socialism, a gain in efficiency leads to less work hours and no reduction in the compensation to the workers, because production has remained the same.

in capitalism machines put you out of work
in socialism/communism machines work for you

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:45 No.9439965

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:45 No.9439965

Replies: >>9440060

>>9439752
>cannot into democracy
>implying capitalism is democracy

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:45 No.9439976

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:45 No.9439976

Replies: >>9440308

>>9439731
>supporting his argument by listing short-lived anarchism

You are one dumb mother fucker

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:47 No.9440036

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:47 No.9440036

Replies: >>9440219

File: 1358812044150.jpg-(30 KB, 367x451, 123.jpg)

>>9439752
>giving people absolute power to distribute resources

what do you call it when a factory owner fires his workers and moves production to bangladesh, and then doesn't put fire escapes in said factory, and the worker's die in the factory.
democracy?
<mfw

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:48 No.9440060

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:48 No.9440060

Replies: >>9440219

>>9439965
Cause democratic systems have never been corrupt right?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:50 No.9440116

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:50 No.9440116

Replies: >>9440255

>>9439657
Power does not corrupt. This saying arises from a simple lack of discernment in most people (because they are fucking idiots and horrid judges of character). Good People are good with power. Bad People are bad with power. Bad People simply aren't as noticeably bad without power. They are revealed as monsters when they grip power to all the idiots, though the wise saw them as monsters when they were weak.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:50 No.9440146

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:50 No.9440146

>>9439694
Dat fucking brainwash. Oh my god.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:51 No.9440181

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:51 No.9440181

Replies: >>9440252

>>9439698
I am telling you you are an idiot for ignoring history and believing the lie of the "Present is always best!"

It isn't.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:53 No.9440219

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:53 No.9440219

>>9440060
see
>>9440036
capitalism is not democratic.

so calling corrupt private property practicing "democracies" democratic is a load of shit. democracy is the people having POWER, not a small group. The army and the intelligence services work for the people, the only reason it would be different is because the people have not been empowered. An empowered people can never be defeated from within.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:53 No.9440224

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:53 No.9440224

Replies: >>9440381

>>9439797
Oh, so you really are so revoltingly, inhumanly stupid you belive Anarchism is an okey-dokey system for governing billions of Humans?

My God, I cannot believe I'm saying this, but I think you're actually dumber than I gave you credit for.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:54 No.9440252

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:54 No.9440252

Replies: >>9440311

>>9440181
present isn't always best, but does that mean we should stop trying to make it better.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:54 No.9440255

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:54 No.9440255

Replies: >>9440394

>>9440116
>Power does not corrupt.
Lord Acton would like a word with you.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:56 No.9440308

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:56 No.9440308

Replies: >>9440569

>>9439976
>Mondragon
>CNT
>short-lived

far from it. Stop picking at straws. I won, faggot.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:56 No.9440311

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:56 No.9440311

Replies: >>9440600

>>9440252
What part of 'learn from the mistakes of history' is having such a hard fucking time penetrating that helmet of 'muh pet filosopee' of yours??

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:58 No.9440360

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:58 No.9440360

>roughnecks at the bottom of the pyramid
>they start at 20/hr with only a high school diploma required

Hey faggot, you forgot the part where resource extraction gigs pay white-collar tier salaries.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:58 No.9440381

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:58 No.9440381

Replies: >>9440635

>>9440224
Did I say billions? Nowhere did I infer that. Anarchism isn't an automatic transition nor is it a utopia, fucktard. I think I've given you too much credit.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:59 No.9440394

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:59 No.9440394

Replies: >>9440424 >>9440699

>>9440255
Oh, sorry. He said I was wrong.

He must be right.

No.

I didn't fucking stutter. Nor was I wrong. What I said is the absolute truth. 90% of the people of this planet could be killed and the world would only be better for it. We are simply letting too many bad people live and preventing the wise from ruling. Substituting, instead, demagogues who win fucking popularity contests and could find their own assholes with both hands and a search party.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)18:59 No.9440424

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)18:59 No.9440424

>>9440394
*couldn't

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:04 No.9440569

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:04 No.9440569

Replies: >>9440847

>>9440308
Not that anon, but limited in time or space is still limited. CNT is not a population center, it's just a group. Not only that, but I'm skeptical that ANY of these population centers wich lasted or were of any size were truly Anarchic.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:05 No.9440600

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:05 No.9440600

Replies: >>9440673

>>9440311
what you seem to be advocating is inaction and destruction, while being totally unaware of the progress humanity has made, and nitpicking at the trouble spots.
my ideology has the goal of making the world a better place, while yours is grounded in short sighted pessimism and has no reason of existing.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:06 No.9440635

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:06 No.9440635

Replies: >>9440847

>>9440381
What part of 'you are making my point for me' are you missing??

EXACTLY. It can't govern billions of people. So, unless you're arguing that a ridiculously small population (in constant danger of extinction) is desirable, you're agreeing with me.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:08 No.9440673

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:08 No.9440673

Replies: >>9440768

>>9440600
I am WELL aware of the failures and successes of Humanity's history. I am simply not so stupid I believe it's successes should be ignored, while it's failures are covered up or lauded, as you are, simply because it's my pet system.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:09 No.9440699

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:09 No.9440699

Replies: >>9441042

>>9440394
i one vote against this anon ever holding power, for he is a threat to humanity at large.

what is a bad person? demagogues only arise when people do not have power. in a democracy the people will not have the need for a demagogue, politics wouldn't even be a profession.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:11 No.9440768

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:11 No.9440768

Replies: >>9440970

>>9440673
what are you advocating? it seems like you advocate giving up, it that right?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:14 No.9440847

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:14 No.9440847

Replies: >>9441272

>>9440569
It's more than 15 people. Sadly most people haven't heard of Anarchism and its ideal so sorry it hasn't fucking sparked everywhere and shit.

>but I'm skeptical that ANY of these population centers wich lasted or were of any size were truly Anarchic.
You seem to think it can only be anarchic if people are out in the woods slinging shit, which is not what is.

>>9440635
>It can't govern billions of people
No it can. Probably not now, but you can't say indefinitely. Fuck off with that objective bullshit.

Anarchist forms of organization would not look anything like a state. That they would involve an endless variety of communities, associations, networks, projects, on every conceivable scale, overlapping and intersecting in any way we could imagine, and possibly many that we can’t. Some would be quite local, others global. Perhaps all they would have in common is that none would involve anyone showing up with weapons and telling everyone else to shut up and do what they were told. And that, since anarchists are not actually trying to seize power within any national territory, the process of one system replacing the other will not take the form of some sudden revolutionary cataclysm—the storming of a Bastille, the seizing of a Winter Palace—but will necessarily be gradual, the creation of alternative forms of organization on a world scale, new forms of communication, new, less alienated ways of organizing life, which will, eventually, make currently existing forms of power seem stupid and beside the point. That in turn would mean that there are endless examples of viable anarchism: pretty much any form of organization would count as one, so long as it was not imposed by some higher authority, from a klezmer band to the international postal service.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:18 No.9440970

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:18 No.9440970

Replies: >>9441392

>>9440768
No. I advocate the slaughter of the wicked. The rule of the wise. The abolition of currency of any kind. People should be tested to find their aptitudes and affinities. They should enter into education for their life's work at an early age, if specialized. If they are one of those people with no interests, no talents, no goals, they become a part of the general labor force. Massive mechanization to limit manual labor and increase free time so Mankind can focus on its evolution. Abolition of all liesure activities which do not advance this goal. ZERO tolerance for criminality.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:20 No.9441042

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:20 No.9441042

Replies: >>9441392

>>9440699
>he is a threat to humanity at large.
You are correct. But not a threat to the species. Quite the opposite.

>what is a bad person?
Oh, I don't know. How about someone who lies openly to the citizenry? Who takes money from organized crime? Who is a savage warmonger? Who is corrupt to the core? Who would gladly sacrifice his civilization for his own momentary pleasure? Who is obviously too incompetent for his station?

This is not difficult shit here. It's just that most people are Earth currently ARE THE BAD.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:27 No.9441272

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:27 No.9441272

Replies: >>9441570 >>9441689

>>9440847
>and its ideal
It's ideal is fucking retarded. 1: Humans are hierachical naturally. 2: Any system which gives the masses power is retarded and doomed to fail, since most people are retarded, and even if they weren't, there will always be a minority who are most intelligent, most competent among the species. THESE should be ruling. Not fucking Britney Spears and Honey fucking Boo-Boo.

>You seem to think it can only be anarchic if people are out in the woods slinging shit, which is not what is.
What I am skeptical of is that these population centers are not using other systems to butress the lunacy of Anarchism. I would imagine I was right.
>all they would have in common is that none would involve anyone showing up with weapons and telling everyone else to shut up and do what they were told.
This is why Anarchists are the most naive devotees of ANY system. This is just blatantly retarded. ALL civilizations require Laws. And Laws which are not enforced by shows of power are not Laws. If you can fail on this fundamental of a concept nothing you say should be taken seriously.
>All the other shit.
Sorry, I'm not a fucking hippie. I like Empire and glory. You can eat shit in a dung-heap if you like.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:28 No.9441285

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:28 No.9441285

You're full of shit!!!!

Post ONE bit of proof. A pay-stub with EVERYTHING redacted save for the JIDF info, "for your safety".

A fucking SHRED of evidence would be great.

"WORK JUST CALLED, I'LL TELL ERBODY WUT DEY SAID INA SEC I HAEV TO CALL FREIND"

Do you think we're all morons?

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:31 No.9441392

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:31 No.9441392

Replies: >>9442360

>>9441042
this civilization you hold so dear,is "wicked." civilization must be changed via the end of private proeprty leading to a decline in individualism.

>>9440970
this won't ever be popular and there is no ideological justification for undemocratic authoritarianism.

in your world wickedness is not a problem of society, but a problem of human nature. where doe th "wicked" originate, if not from a wicked environment then from some metaphysical source that will never be eliminated, meaning the system you advocate will never be able to defend itself from the "wicked."

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)19:36 No.9441570

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)19:36 No.9441570

Replies: >>9442694

File: 1358815006883.jpg-(14 KB, 275x183, 2.jpg)

>>9441272

>1: Humans are hierachical naturally

Wrong. Rigid hierarchical institutions only developed in recent history. Humans tend to willingly submit to the authority of others with expertise (see Bakunin's boot maker quote - "Does it follow that I reject all authority? Perish the thought. In the matter of boots, I defer to the authority of the boot-maker."), but that is not the same as living in a hierarchical system.

http://libcom.org/library/mutual-aid-peter-kropotkin

> 2: Any system which gives the masses power is retarded and doomed to fail

I wouldn't really say that Anarchism gives the masses power. Rather, it takes power away from any individual or group of individuals.

>there will always be a minority who are most intelligent, most competent among the species. THESE should be ruling. Not fucking Britney Spears and Honey fucking Boo-Boo.

Note Bakunin's boot maker quote. Voluntarily following the advice of people with intelligence and expertise is common. This manifested in early human social relations in which people would defer to the authority of the best hunter or what-have-you, but he or she was directly answerable, and as soon as he stopped being trustworthy or the people stopped liking him, he wasn't given any preferential treatment.

>ALL civilizations require Laws. And Laws which are not enforced by shows of power are not Laws. If you can fail on this fundamental of a concept nothing you say should be taken seriously.

Some of the most effective "laws" in history resulted not from concentrated power (which is always prone to abuse their position) but from social pressure. Are you a murderer, for example? Well, good luck making it in society. Nobody wants to be around somebody with a propensity to kill. This is why humans have such great facial recognition abilities - shunning and social ostracism were main crime deterrents for most of human history. Hell, even the Amish use it to astonishing affect today.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)19:40 No.9441689

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)19:40 No.9441689

Replies: >>9442694

>>9441272
I'm sick of this shit. You can't back up not one of your claims.

>1. Humans are hierachical naturally

>citation needed.

>2. Any system which gives the masses power is retarded and doomed to fail, since most people are retarded, and even if they weren't, there will always be a minority who are most intelligent, most competent among the species. THESE should be ruling. Not fucking Britney Spears and Honey fucking Boo-Boo.
Anarchism not tyranny of the majority, it's egalitarian and mutual. Anyone KNOWINGLY involved in an anarchist setting/project would know that. The fuck are you on about pop stars? It's not a meritocracy either. Most people are retarded, but that's probably the results of a certain system and culture.

>This is why Anarchists are the most naive devotees of ANY system. This is just blatantly retarded. ALL civilizations require Laws. And Laws which are not enforced by shows of power are not Laws. If you can fail on this fundamental of a concept nothing you say should be taken seriously.

>What I am skeptical of is that these population centers are not using other systems to butress the lunacy of Anarchism.
really now? Anarchism is not some half-assed ideology written in a journal in 10 minutes. Anarchists do believe in "systems" or ways to so call "buttress the lunancy". There's a lot to cover.

Are you retarded? There would "laws" and rules. Just no state or a concentrated, centralized initiation of force such as the state. It's not anti-society. Anarchism is not chaos for the last fucking time you piece of fucking shit.

Good day, fascist. Your time will come, faggot.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)20:01 No.9442360

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)20:01 No.9442360

>>9441392
>this civilization you hold so dear,is "wicked." civilization must be changed via the end of private proeprty leading to a decline in individualism.
You were so close, but then you just kept going. This is what is called a "Non Sequitur". Saying civilization in the modern era is corrupt (which it is) means we have to abolish private property is like saying, the sky is blue so all gerbils must die! One has nothing to do with the other. Anarchism is fucktarded. Period.
>there is no ideological justification for undemocratic authoritarianism.
What I think you mean is "Too many wicked people will baw when you don't acknowledge their special snowflake syndrome." The justification is clear, and I've already expounded upon it.
>in your world wickedness is not a problem of society, but a problem of human nature.
You're making a hell of a lot of assumptions here. No. Wickedness is inherent in most because our genestock has gone down the fucking toilet over the past few thousand years. Genetic diversity means some people are more agressive than others, less intelligent, more impulsive. This can be controlled. Correct social controls can also be efficacious in controlling disadvantageous behaviour (such as actually dealing with crime, rather than trying to 'treat' it).

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)20:08 No.9442585

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)20:08 No.9442585

File: 1358816882945.jpg-(21 KB, 412x396, 1355082716276.jpg)

>>9437775
Fuckign retard

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)20:11 No.9442694

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)20:11 No.9442694

Replies: >>9442880 >>9443054

>>9441570
>>9441689
Time to tear you filthy asshole(s) apart:
>Wrong.
History, nigger, do you read it?
>Rigid hierarchical institutions only developed in recent history.
HOLY SHIT. This is, and I say this with all honesty, one of the most ignorant statements I have EVER seen on /pol/ and that is quite a fucking accomplisment. What, precisely, do you consider recent? It can't be any less than several thousand years ago!
>I wouldn't really say that Anarchism gives the masses power. Rather, it takes power away from any individual or group of individuals.
So it puts the power in the hands of the masses. Glad that's clear now.
>Voluntarily following the advice of people with intelligence and expertise is common.
It should NOT be voluntary. This is the most obnoxious part of Anarchism/Libertarianism. This conceit that everything should be consensual. It's impossible. Humans are genetically diverse. They will NEVER agree on everything 100%. Someone has to enforce solutions. The most wise, the most competent, the most intelligent should be doing this. This is not really debatable. It should be self-evident. When you have a broken pipe do you call a fucking meeting of your neighbors to decide what should be done? Fuck no. You call an expert. You call a plumber. I never understood how we can live in such a fucking degenerate time that the majority of people are so stupid they value their toilets over their civlizations.
>Some of the most effective "laws"...
You seem to have entirely missed the point. ENFORCEMENT is what makes Law Law. Without enforcement of Law, it may as well not exist. Enforcement of Law recquires force. It's right in the fucking name.
>citation needed.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History
Learn it, faggot.
>Anarchism not tyranny of the majority, it's egalitarian and mutual.
Which is a fucking fantasy. You CANNOT get everyone to agree on everything 100% of the time. And what then? If you say voting is involved, then it IS Tyranny of the Bell Curve. (cont.)

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)20:16 No.9442880

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)20:16 No.9442880

Replies: >>9443131

>>9442694
(cont.)
If you say ANYTHING less than everyone agrees on everything 100% of the time, how are you arguing anything but what I am arguing (if more disingenuously)?
>It's not a meritocracy either.
That's fucking obvious. This is a bad thing, you realize?
>Most people are retarded, but that's probably the results of a certain system and culture.
1: Read.
2: Weep.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ
>Are you retarded? There would "laws" and rules. Just no state or a concentrated, centralized initiation of force such as the state.
So you have the same problem as Libertarians? You expect Laws to enforce themselves. Not only that, you somehow expect them to be perfectly consensual, which is impossible.
>Anarchism is not chaos
It trends to chaos, not Order. That is all that matters.
>Good day, fascist.
I am not a fascist, neither is that an insult.
>Your time will come, faggot.
You are correct. And when it does, ones such as you shall die.

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)20:24 No.9443054

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)20:24 No.9443054

Replies: >>9443076 >>9443242 >>9444726

File: 1358817849908.jpg-(131 KB, 701x509, 5.jpg)

>>9442694

>History, nigger, do you read it?

Yes. In fact, I provided an anthropological study to source my claim. You might try the same method of approach.

>What, precisely, do you consider recent? It can't be any less than several thousand years ago!

The rise of Feudalism. Although the State arose previous to that (in Egypt around 5500 years ago), it was never a very formal institution, and bands and tribes, along with mutual aid communities, dominated social interaction. Even in the Middle Ages, flat levels of voluntary association (the Guild) dominated everyday interaction.

>So it puts the power in the hands of the masses. Glad that's clear now.

If you're equating giving the masses power to no one group or individual having institutional power over another, than sure.

>Humans are genetically diverse. They will NEVER agree on everything 100%. Someone has to enforce solutions.

Definitely. You not only have the threat of an individual defending himself against aggression, but you also have the implementation of tort law and social pressures. I'm not claiming that aggression won't exist in a Stateless society. I am claiming that the State creates and perpetuates many conditions which lead to aggression, and that Anarchist theory has ways to deal with any aggressive action that may remain.

cont...

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)20:24 No.9443076

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)20:24 No.9443076

Replies: >>9444840

File: 1358817883995.jpg-(29 KB, 300x370, 6.jpg)

>>9443054

>The most wise, the most competent, the most intelligent should be doing this. This is not really debatable.

It is actually. Take a simple look to the Austrian implementation of public choice theory. Even if we were to assume that our leaders were all benevolent and acting in the interest of society (which they aren't), the structure of a State itself has such a propensity to cripple the flow of information and suffer from Hayekian impacted information, that these "benevolent" leaders would be acting on incomplete or incorrect knowledge, anyway.

>ENFORCEMENT is what makes Law Law. Without enforcement of Law, it may as well not exist. Enforcement of Law recquires force.

Anarchists aren't opposed to the use of force, simply its initiation. For example, I can certainly defend myself from an intruder. I can certainly sue the shit out of an intruder for everything he's worth. If he doesn't remunerate me, he's likely to face grave economic consequences (lack of employment, for example) along with other social ostracisms.

>citation needed

Here - because you seemed to miss it in my first post (http://libcom.org/library/mutual-aid-peter-kropotkin).

>Learn it, faggot.

I'm the one posting anthropological studies of human societies. Maybe you should peruse them. Or not. At least post something to back up your own argument.

>You CANNOT get everyone to agree on everything 100% of the time.

No Anarchist every said that you could.

>And what then?

Depends on the situation. Is my friend disagreeing on what movie to go to? Well, he might just not go to the movie. Is somebody trying to steal my car? Well, I'll defend it and then sue the shit out of him.

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)20:26 No.9443131

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)20:26 No.9443131

File: 1358817997222.gif-(94 KB, 400x301, 7.gif)

>>9442880

>If you say ANYTHING less than everyone agrees on everything 100% of the time, how are you arguing anything but what I am arguing (if more disingenuously)?

A State isn't necessary to deter and protect from criminality. In fact, as I've mentioned, the State directly contributes to many conditions which perpetuate crime and aggressive behavior.

>So you have the same problem as Libertarians? You expect Laws to enforce themselves. Not only that, you somehow expect them to be perfectly consensual, which is impossible.

I've covered this already.

>It trends to chaos, not Order. That is all that matters.

Demonstrate this.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)20:27 No.9443155

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)20:27 No.9443155

Replies: >>9444902

File: 1358818054542.jpg-(205 KB, 658x526, ps.jpg)

guess it's time for the daily reminder

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)20:30 No.9443242

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)20:30 No.9443242

Replies: >>9443417

>>9443054
>implying guilds were voluntary and not monopolistic unions

the teamsters are a prime example of voluntarism, apparently.

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)20:36 No.9443417

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)20:36 No.9443417

Replies: >>9443550

File: 1358818615329.jpg-(69 KB, 290x434, 8.jpg)

>>9443242

If you'd like, you could read the source I provided which demonstrates this.

>the teamsters are a prime example of voluntarism, apparently.

"The International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) is a labor union in the United States and Canada. Formed in 1903"

We're talking about Medieval guilds, here.

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)20:41 No.9443550

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)20:41 No.9443550

File: 1358818865108.jpg-(90 KB, 640x395, 9.jpg)

>>9443417

But the point was, more directly, that these guilds offered relatively flat levels of association based on mutual aid and camaraderie.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)21:19 No.9444726

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)21:19 No.9444726

Replies: >>9445586

>>9443054
>Yes. In fact, I provided an anthropological study to source my claim. You might try the same method of approach.
Excuse me. I didn't realize I had to provide a record of all agreed-upon Human History for as far back as we have records to counter your one example. Well, I guess I'll make a start, at least:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chieftain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt (Anarchists, clearly)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mesopotamia
(DUH FIRST ANARCHISTS!!)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List
(maybe not)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_China
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Rome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Japan

Clearly, Human History is repleat with Anarchies, not Hierarchical systems or anything like that.

>it was never a very formal institution
What in the explosive diarrhea fuck am I reading?? This is called delusion, children. It is a mental illness.
Oh fucking wow. I just now finally looked at the link you posted. Here's my answer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee
> that these "benevolent" leaders would be acting on incomplete or incorrect knowledge, anyway.
Oh look, it's the retarded Anarchist's version of almighty 'Invisible Hand'. Yes. Wise, competent individuals act foolishly on incomplete knowledge cause da ebul state! But individual idiots are fully versed in all the movements of the heavens. Am I fucking missing something here? No, wait I'm not. You're retarded. The proof is in the trip.
>Anarchists aren't opposed to the use of force, simply its initiation.
No, you just have the same view as Libertarians that the Laws will enforce themselves, Example:
>I can certainly sue the shit out of an intruder for everything he's worth.
And who governs the courts? How do they arrest anyone or pass sentence? How do they have power over anyone? And you realize that this is an admission of government, right?
(cont.)

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)21:24 No.9444840

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)21:24 No.9444840

>>9443076
>Here - because you seemed to miss it in my first post (http://libcom.org/library/mutual-aid-peter-kropotkin).
Um, "citation needed" was your comment. Mine was: >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History
>A State isn't necessary to deter and protect from criminality.
Yes, it absolutely is. What you are doing is setting up a small state, calling it 'not a state' and then saying "See! Stateless!" You're full of shit. If you have someone dictating Laws and passing sentences, I hate to have to be the one to tell you this, but you have a State. Sorry.
>I've covered this already.
Only by bullshitting. All you've done is admitted that a State (albeit one you think isn't a State) is necessary for civilization to exist.
>Demonstrate this.
I thought that was what I was doing. I'm sure there is no evidence great enough, since it's obvious your devotion to Anarchism is religious in nature.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)21:26 No.9444902

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)21:26 No.9444902

Replies: >>9445688

>>9443155
Which is why Capitalistic societies are AT LEAST decades behind where they should be, technologically. We can't automate factories or much of anything else because "JERBS!!"

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)21:48 No.9445586

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)21:48 No.9445586

Replies: >>9445603

File: 1358822903375.jpg-(101 KB, 1024x768, 11.jpg)

>>9444726

Clearly, Human History is repleat with Anarchies, not Hierarchical systems or anything like that.

Interesting - as most of those histories do indeed agree with my point that most of human history was spent in hunter-gathered bands and tribes. It also goes along with my statement that the first actual State arose in Egypt around 5500 years ago. I'm not denying that hierarchy existed within society. I'm noting that most of it was spent in egalitarian bands and tribes, that, for a time, history after this was composed of States, yes, but States that rarely had any major direct bearing on day to day activities, and after this period, the nation-State arose.

As I note in an essay I previously wrote, "As Murray Bookchin notes, “If we bear in mind the large number of municipal confederacies that existed in Europe during the 11th century and the centuries that followed it, the certainty so prevalent in modern-day historiography that the nation-state constitutes a ‘logical’ development in Europe out of feudalism can only be regarded as a bias.”

Indeed, although the formal State appeared nearly 5500 years ago in Egypt as a result of economic surplus, modern nation-states had not started to develop until the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries, not emerging in their present form until the end of the seventeenth century.

cont...

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)21:48 No.9445603

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)21:48 No.9445603

Replies: >>9445623 >>9446310

>>9445586

As Bookchin also notes, the idea of a ‘nation’ was completely foreign to the ancient mind. The strongest allegiances were owed to one’s kin, group, or community. For instance, a Greek ‘nation’ never developed among the Greek polei. Similarly, even the great empires of old could hardly be considered ‘nations.’ As April Carter argues, while some monarchies did have regional claims of sovereignty, these monarchies were just part of European Christendom, so that “there was little of a national state — indeed there was little of any sort of state — in the territorial regnum of the Middle Ages; it was a paradise of estates rather than the pattern of state.”"

Hierarchy existed on a sort of loosely present macro scale, but the most basic forms of social organization were often very flat.

>What in the explosive diarrhea fuck am I reading?

See above.

>Yes. Wise, competent individuals act foolishly on incomplete knowledge cause da ebul state! But individual idiots are fully versed in all the movements of the heavens.

This isn't what I'm saying. I'm saying that hierarchical institutions often result in slowed information flows or distorted/incomplete information reaching the top. I mean, a simple glance at the US government is a striking example of this. Actual legislation and executive power is caught up in bureaucracy and red tape. Inefficiencies abound (for example, 70c of every dollar that goes to welfare is spent on administration and doesn't actually make it the recipients). If you're arguing that a State is an efficient aggregator and distributor of information, well...I don't know what to tell you.

cont...

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)21:49 No.9445623

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)21:49 No.9445623

>>9445603

>And who governs the courts?

Arbitration agencies need not be operated by a government. They can be operated privately.

>How do they arrest

They likely wouldn't. You'd get a summons. If you decide not to show up, well, you're setting yourself up for social and economic ostracism. Good luck finding a job, or a loan, or a buyer of anything you might have. You're pretty much fucked.

>or pass sentence?

The Arbitration Agency would likely operate based on tort law, so remuneration rather than imprisonment is the main goal. If you steal my car, you would likely be sentenced to return/pay for it, pay court fees, and probably an additional fee to discourage the crime. If you don't pay it, good luck trying to ever get a job, a loan, or any other benefits that society might offer.

>And you realize that this is an admission of government, right?

I'm going by Tucker's definitions, here. Government is aggression and the State is the institutionalized, territorial form thereof.

>What you are doing is setting up a small state

See the above definition. As I'm an Anarchist, I will be using the Anarchist definition of a State. If you disagree, you can call it something else, but now you know what I mean when I reference a State.

>I thought that was what I was doing.

You haven't, really. You've posted histories that agreed with my statements and then displayed a profound lack of knowledge on implementation of dispute resolution in Anarchist theory.

>I'm sure there is no evidence great enough, since it's obvious your devotion to Anarchism is religious in nature.

Not really. I'm a consequentialist, so my "devotion" to Anarchism is based purely in egoism and self interest.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)21:51 No.9445688

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)21:51 No.9445688

>>9444902
exactly. it not only makes it hard to transition, but slows shit down

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf
01/21/13(Mon)22:06 No.9446172

Anteater !!VyIROBcMkwf 01/21/13(Mon)22:06 No.9446172

Replies: >>9446211

File: 1358824014183.jpg-(96 KB, 600x383, tumblr_mdzesh4liQ1rd2zp1o(...).jpg)

I'll be gone for a while, though, but I'll check back in an hour or two, maybe. If the thread is still alive, I'll answer a your rebuttal, assuming there is one.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)22:08 No.9446211

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)22:08 No.9446211

>>9446172
You've made me love anteaters.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)22:10 No.9446296

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)22:10 No.9446296

Replies: >>9446360

File: 1358824250419.jpg-(101 KB, 560x612, 1320570671217.jpg)

>people who don't understand capitalism criticizing capitalism
its like I'm watching Occupy all over again

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)22:11 No.9446310

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)22:11 No.9446310

>>9445603

Barack Obama has a twitter, he will tell you what you need to know.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)22:12 No.9446360

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)22:12 No.9446360

Replies: >>9446406

>>9446296
>implying you understand capitalism just because you support it

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)22:14 No.9446406

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)22:14 No.9446406

Replies: >>9446441

>>9446360
The implication is only in your head.

Anonymous
01/21/13(Mon)22:15 No.9446441

Anonymous 01/21/13(Mon)22:15 No.9446441

>>9446406
unconvincing