[Return]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
File
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 2048 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • Post only original content.
  • このサイトについて - 翻訳
  • Blotter updated: 01/01/09


  • img.4chan.org and zip.4chan.org are temporarily unavailable; we're working on it!

    Check status.4chan.org for updates...

    Updated @ 5:30PM on 5/6/09

    File :1241226739.jpg-(59 KB, 488x463, visual_marxism.jpg)
    59 KB Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)21:12:19 No.4139826  
    I've noticed an increasing number of vocal socialists/marxists on /r9k/ in the past few days, so I'm hoping one of you guys (comrades?) can answer some of my questions that I'm too embarrassed to ask my economics professor:

    - A socialist society as I understand it has people working fewer hours and producing more. I'm assuming this also means people will have more vacation time, but in a communist society do you have a choice where to vacation? Do you not have a choice?

    - As I understand it, Marxists say that a true socialist society is stateless, classless, and with more shit than anybody needs. With limited resources, is it possible for every household in the world to have the latest xbox/playstation/etc?

    -I know the argument is that human nature is dependent a lot on the surroundings, and that people growing up communist will be totally cool with it all just like people were when there were fiefdoms and stuff, but does that mean that nobody will have 50M super yachts?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)21:14:25 No.4139866
    PS. the image is unrelated, it's one of the first results for "Marxism", and I don't really agree with what I think the image is insinuating (that jesus and aristocrats own the proles? wat?)
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)21:28:12 No.4140048
    Once capitalism and imperialism are defeated, you can vacation anywhere. Until then, anyone associating with bourgeois / labour aristocrats / lumpen proletarians in foreign lands can be put to death.

    No, they won't have video games, because all of the old world bourgeois art will be destroyed.

    Nobody will own anything because property won't exist.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)21:38:31 No.4140167
    What's that Marxism for kids site? Some guy posted up to explain the Marxist view of human nature, and it was written in very plain language meant for high school students.

    Anyway all this talk about Marxist states is silly and incoherent. Don't ask questions about what will happen in Marxist states because there would never be a properly Marxist state, just as there have never been a proper classical liberal capitalist state. To go towards total abstractions like "capitalist states would be like this" or "Marxist states would be like this" would leave us with no understanding about society in general. Instead we should talk about ends and goals with Marxist bents, stuff that is actually tangible. And a real Marxist would agree with this more so than dreaming up utopias, like capitalism was supposed to be.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)21:55:18 No.4140364
    Vacation is important, but there will be no bourgeois luxuries. It might be hard to imagine life without video games, or expensive vacations to Aspen, or people buying ridiculously massive boats to remind everyone how much better they are, but that's because we currently live in a disgusting capitalistic society.

    >>4140167

    Probably this: http://newyouth.com/

    And yeah, Marxists don't believe in a Marxist utopia. Unless people somehow evolve into a perfect animal, any forced utopian attempt will most likely end with a totalitarian disaster.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:07:05 No.4140528
    What kind of world exists without video games?

    Communism is a descent into the dark ages?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:12:20 No.4140604
    Socialism/Communism/Marxism fails because it is human nature to want to (survive/propagate/be an alpha leader). It is why we are the top of the food chain: The animal drive to live.

    That's why people are afraid of death.
    That's why capitalism works and all attempts at totalitarian/100% command , marxist economies fail magnificently.

    It's also why birds sing, flowers flower, and animals can be domesticated.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:14:26 No.4140625
    What a subtle little monster you are, OP. I couldn't help but post in admiration.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:17:55 No.4140671
    >>4140604

    The human nature argument fails because a) it's fallacious and b) it can be easily debunked if you just think about it for a minute.

    In a Marxist society, there is more than enough to go around, you don't worry about having to supply shelter/food/clothing/education/health care, you just have to do what you can.

    We can't just make a Marxist society over night, but you can't say things never change. Morality evolves.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:19:00 No.4140688
    >>4140364
    So then what would people do on their vacations?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:19:40 No.4140695
    >>4140625
    A consummate sheepskin wolf.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:20:33 No.4140712
    I like my video games.
    If you want to live in a socialist society, go move to China or something.

    Just don't touch ma games, bro, I don't have anything else.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:20:58 No.4140718
    >b) it can be easily debunked if you just think about it for a minute.
    ok
    let me think
    are we ants?
    ...
    wait we're not?
    well guy sorry but I can come up with anything.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:21:40 No.4140724
    >>4140712

    >China doesn't have video games

    >WoW
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:22:54 No.4140737
    >>4140718

    Here you go bro http://www.newyouth.com/content/view/117/60/#humannature

    Thank me later.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:23:05 No.4140741
    >>4140671
    Yes, but we would still want better things than others to assert that we are better than them, to attract a better mate.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:24:49 No.4140763
         File :1241231089.jpg-(33 KB, 488x463, Untitled.jpg)
    33 KB
    I fucking hate it when I see men in bondage. It pisses me the fuck off...It's like seeing someone put the batteries in something BACKWARDS, and you're like "IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO GO LIKE THAT" but they don't care because they like it like that.

    Anyway, I fixed your faggy ass picture. Enjoy your faggy ass life, faggot nigger faggot.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:26:36 No.4140778
    >>4140741

    If all of our desires were the result of evolution, then we wouldn't have a society.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:28:45 No.4140803
    >>4140712
    China is almost no way a communist state.
    They have (GASP) McDonalds.
    They have a Starbucks in the Forbidden City!
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:29:24 No.4140807
    >>4140737
    so basically the only way for socialism to survive is for everyone to be miserably destitute with only enough to keep breathing.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:30:36 No.4140816
    >>4140763
    what if its a man putting another man in bondage?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:31:16 No.4140821
    >>4140741

    OP here, this is another good question that I'm sure has an equally excellent answer. How do you prevent classes from arising in a communist setting? Would doctors be marrying factory workers? Would women with a high level of education want to marry men that weren't able to obtain that level of education? It seems like there are a lot of factors we'd have to overcome, even if workers managed to seize the means of production and start a socialist revolution.

    How would you attract potential mates in communist society?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:36:22 No.4140882
    >>4140778
    How do you figure that?
    Obviously, we all prosper by working together.
    It started as pack mentality; The same that compels herds of cows or flocks of sheep to be herds or flocks.
    Strength in numbers. If they just happen to have extra of something that we lack, and vice versa, we both would like to trade. Capitalize on the situation.
    Basic physiology and economics, really.
    I learned this from no one; Observations drive my decisions, not some ancient ideology.

    Either you agree with me, or you are saying monkeys are big Marxist buffs. (As far as I can see, unless you have some other strange, propaganda-fueled argument.)
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:38:07 No.4140904
    >>4140821

    The problem is you are thinking about Marxism in a capitalist mindset. Keep in mind that people under communism would be as alien to you as people under feudalism. Asking us about their psychology because, in the first place, we live under a capitalistic cultural hegemony so our thinking is almost permanently under a capitalist mode, and in the second place, we have very little information on it. We could feasibly study, though, papers from the Paris commune, Anarchist Spain, Cuba before the revolution, May '68, and get just a feel of what communist-minded people were like, but it's almost nothing compared to the wealth of information we have about capitalist psychologies. And these psychologies are all anyone really cares about, since they matter to the world very much right now.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:40:11 No.4140924
    >>4140904

    *Asking us about their psychology is difficult because
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:43:35 No.4140961
    >>4140904

    Several groups of pacific islanders, before any outside interactions from "capitalist hegemonies", as you would call them, had a barter and monetary system. They had an excess, and upon realizing this assigned worth to iconic tokens.

    They started using money and capitalism on their own, with no outside influence.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:44:07 No.4140975
    >>4140821
    Everyone will belong to everyone.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:48:07 No.4141034
    >>4140975
    man that is one huge orgy.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:48:22 No.4141037
    >>4140882

    True, evolution drove us to work together and form tiny social groups that were eventually brought together to form real societies, but at that point we started to develop an entirely different mode of thought apart from basic evolutionary drives. At a certain point we started thinking in mythologies, and we started to understand the world through the gaze of mythology. And we still have not yet evolved past this: we are still very much mythological creatures, and view the world through the cultural myths and events that occur in our lives. These myths offer desires themselves. So when I talk about "those other desires" it's the type of desires we understand through society itself.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:49:43 No.4141050
         File :1241232583.png-(19 KB, 400x400, christianitycommunism1.png)
    19 KB
    Typical atheist marxists. I blame Marx for tying atheism and Marxism together. Jesus was a hero in the class struggle. Christian Communism FTW!
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:50:32 No.4141057
    >>4140961

    money=/=capitalism, and neither does trade or surpluses
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:52:07 No.4141077
    >>4141050
    I had a teacher in high school (Catholic school) who would call communism "atheistic Christianity).
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:52:14 No.4141082
    wtf is up with all these reasonable answers? Tits or GTFO!
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:53:04 No.4141090
    >>4141037
    Religion is taught and inherited, capitalism is natural.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/aug/26/animalbehaviour.medicalresearch
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:55:05 No.4141113
    >>4141037
    But you guys love myths. I mean, communism. Put that next to Egyptian mythology or something. Or as an expansion pack for AoM.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)22:58:55 No.4141158
    >>4141057
    It's capitalism when people industrialize themselves to specific niche roles and seek goods they do not normally acquire through capitalistic trade based on desire (as opposed to needs)

    And I don't know how you faggots got it into your mind that you can magically get more for doing less work. In the very least, that aspect is a pipe dream.
    TANSTAFL, guys.
    Have you ever even HAD an economics class?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:00:13 No.4141168
    >>4141077
    That is true. Capitalism is an extremely immoral economic system. It needs to be abolished and replaced with a more Christian system, like Communism.

    Also Capitalism has been responsible for the loss of Christian values seen in so many of our countries. "Sex sells" they say, and it does. But at what cost?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:02:23 No.4141191
    >>4141168
    >moral rant
    >communism
    I pray to Jesus that you're a troll.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:02:57 No.4141197
    >>4141090

    Funny you would use that, and not the bonobos, as an example.

    >>4141113

    How do we teach children when they are young? Do we just shove them out into the world and let them explore it for themselves? No, we tell them stories. We tell them that doing one thing is good and another thing is bad, and we beat (sometimes literally) this into them. These stories give our lives meaning and make the world understandable. It's possible that we "grow out" of those stories as we grow older, but in fact we only replace them with others. We are all still storytellers and storylisteners at heart.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:04:10 No.4141205
    >>4141168
    To be quite frank, morals are only a boundary that holds back, and if you hold no stock in it, it means nothing.

    I'm sure some Ayn Rand individualist idealist would be able to post it better.

    Also, I smell a troll.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:06:07 No.4141223
    >>4141158

    If more work for less time is impossible, how do you explain how we've managed to become more productive without really increasing the hours we spend working? Our productivity soars while our wages stagnate. In a socialist society, the idea is to decrease the workload of every individual, while managing the productivity levels to be able to have more than enough to provide for everyone.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:08:10 No.4141248
    >>4141223
    Technology dumbass,
    Technology that was mostly developed through companies trying to outdo each other.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:09:46 No.4141266
    >As I understand it, Marxists say that a true socialist society is stateless, classless, and with more shit than anybody needs

    This is basically the only part of OP's troll post that has a correct understanding of the most basic Socialist ideas.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:09:49 No.4141267
         File :1241233789.jpg-(35 KB, 290x409, CommunistJesus2.jpg)
    35 KB
    >>4141191
    >>4141205

    Morals are God given and are therefore inherent in all humans. I don't see how that idea contradicts Communism in any way.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:09:53 No.4141270
    "Under socialism, the incentive to come up with more efficient ways to do things is that we'd have to work less time to do the same amount of work! The amount of necessary labor needed to produce the things we need like food, housing, etc. would gradually decrease so that eventually we may only need to "work" for 2 hours a week or less! Of course as humans we would not be lazy and sit around - humans are curious, exploratory, and want to learn, invent, etc. Our "free" time would be spent creating ever better works of art, scientific research, cures for diseases, etc. After a period of time, the new generations will not even know what it was like under capitalism, and the productivity of labor will be tremendously high. The barrier between "work" and raw human exploration and mastery over its environment (in harmony with the environment!) will disappear also - no more coercive state, police, etc. No more chaos in the markets - the workers will plan what we need and then reinvest a portion to continually make even better things. Everyone will be "rich" so to speak - able to travel, to live comfortably, to eat what they wish, to continue their education throughout life. "
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:10:21 No.4141276
    >>4141197
    Do you fuck yourself with a totem pole dildo or something?

    Seriously, internet person, you can't make groundless statements on human character and throw in some romanticized shlop. (And you're arguing FOR communism! PAH!)

    Use some fucking commonly defined vernacular if you want anyone to put stock in whatever you are trying to say. Marx understood the importance of semantics. That's why the USSR happened in the first place, and why we're talking about this right here and now.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:12:18 No.4141294
    Best socialism = working class emancipated by mechanization

    Everyone is educated to a high standard
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:12:24 No.4141296
    >>4141050
    Don't envy what your neighbour has. Christianity is a false bourgeois religion that encourages slavery. Like all the rest.

    >>4141223
    By shifting the exploitation to third-worlder's you fucking labour aristocrat.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:15:12 No.4141324
    >>4141296
    Envy is a destructive force. Envy and theft harm all societies, communist and capitalist.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:16:02 No.4141338
    I don't know why but I always imagined that if aliens were ever to make contact, they'd be communists.

    >>4141270

    I don't see how we could all eat what we wish. Are there enough steak tartars to go around? How would we manage to feed people what they want without ruining the environment or exterminating species?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:17:21 No.4141355
    This thread has managed to be interesting an informative, please keep it up.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:17:23 No.4141356
    >>4141296
    If he was a labour aristocrat, he would never (EVER) go to any chan.

    Or probably do anything for himself, if he didn't feel like it.
    He'd be a millionaire with a net worth of probably roughly around 2-12 million U.S.D.

    He'd be eating albino Sturgeon caviar out of a male strippers ass (to get the taste of the cocaine and 65-year-old brandy out of his mouth)
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:17:53 No.4141366
    >>4141355

    How sad is it that that post wasn't muted...
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:19:14 No.4141384
    >>4141324
    My good sir, envy drives free markets (and I imagine it would drive a command market, as well).
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:19:23 No.4141386
    >>4141276

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythology#Functions_of_myth

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythology#20th-century_theories
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:21:37 No.4141403
    >>4141386
    >We are all still storytellers and storylisteners at heart.
    Way to fail and grasp my point, asshat.
    You are a credit to some other race.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:22:03 No.4141408
    People will never be successful governing other people.
    We need robot overlords.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:23:04 No.4141418
    >>4141324
    Private property does not exist in a Communist society. Therefore, theft does not exist. Enjoy your delusion bourgeois faggot
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:23:14 No.4141421
    >>4141356
    First-world "workers" collectively reap in the surplus value of third-worlders and lose all concern for the international proletariat. They are exploiters, they advance bourgeois interests and not worker's interests. First-worlders need to be purged.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:25:13 No.4141432
    >>4141403

    I made my point quite clear, and still you ask what I mean. Then I give you an explanation and say that I don't get it?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:25:26 No.4141434
    A human work force is unnecessary. Mechanize everything.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:26:08 No.4141442
    >>4141421
    Those factory workers make better wages doing what they consider preferable work. It happened in every "first world" country, and it creates a middle class where people can advance, grow, create, and accomplish the success stories which you are now trying to vilify for no other reason than that you want to overthrow some cliche fucking evil empire.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:26:23 No.4141444
    >>4141421
    God dammit not you again. Marxist 3rd Worldism or whatever it is called is stupid and counter productive to the world wide Marxist cause.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:27:54 No.4141460
    >>4141418
    private property doesn't
    but public property does,
    individuals can steal from the government, hoard ect..
    therefore theft is still possible
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:29:24 No.4141483
    >>4141444
    The only thing that is counter-productive to the Marxist cause is revisionism. First-worldism is a great example of revisionism.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:31:24 No.4141506
    >>4141483
    Every time a marxist revolution has occurred in the 3rd world, it has resulted in terrible totalitarian dictatorships. 3rd worlders are too stupid to not exploit eachother once capitalism is abolished.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:31:30 No.4141507
    >>4141460
    >ect.
    The red underline means it is wrong.
    Also, why would you do those things? Simply to be a cunt?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:33:56 No.4141525
    >>4141483

    DEATH TO ALL YOU PETULANT CHILDREN THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND THAT REVISIONISM IS IMPORTANT YOU'RE LIKE CONSTITUTIONALISTS OR FAGGOTS THAT THINK TIMES NEVER CHANGE OR THAT MARX WAS PERFECT AND GOT EVERYTHING RIGHT
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:34:02 No.4141526
    >>4141507
    Fear. A person might be afraid that the government will run out of food or that there may be a drought soon. In any case, they steal because they think they need it to survive. If the society were christian, they would not fear, because they would know that God would provide for them. Hoarding/Theft problem solved.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:35:11 No.4141536
    >>4141442

    You say that as if the people in power will allow that to happen. You realize those people are working in close to the same conditions as factory workers in the 1800's and early 1900's in the "first world"? Were THEY given a chance to get holding on their own land and become capitalists themselves? No. They had to FIGHT for that, and it was only after socialist policies were enacted did a full middle class really develop.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:36:25 No.4141549
    >>4141506
    When third world nations become communist, they are doinitwrong. communism can only be implemented after a fully developed, stable, capitalist society
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:36:55 No.4141554
    >>4141507
    >Simply to be a cunt
    yes that could be one reason, some people are simply unexplainingly(not a real word) pricks.
    but more likely people are greedy, they will take whats not theirs if they can get away with it.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:37:50 No.4141563
    >>4141526

    Religion won't exist in communist society. Not because everyone suddenly became angsty teenage rebels, but because society advanced beyond the need for it.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:38:08 No.4141566
    I bet that Marxist 3rd worldist faggot is a 19 year old college student who attends Berkley or some faggot liberal college.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:38:09 No.4141567
    OP: you're a brainless idiot. Remember, no matter what manner of government you live under, you still have some manner of economy to deal with. The type of government might affect the distribution of wealth, but it always affects the general level of wealth. E.G, "Everybody's equal in the glow of radiation."
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:38:21 No.4141569
    I'm tired of this bullshit.

    Can any pro-communism jackass here give a definitive example of any time communism has worked as advertised?

    If communism fails, and falls into a linear dictatorship set up, the people are stuck because the government was micromanaging everything. It hands people the tools to become cruel, iron-fisted overlords who are treated as an opiate to the masses.

    Capitalism works because if we fuck someone over, no one will do business with us any more.

    If anyone brings up Ponzi or other scammers: it is the duty of the buyer to investigate the seller. If you get yourself fucked, there's just so much others can do. Similar to outdoors activities: If you get bit by a snake, it's probably because you weren't acting correctly in the situation.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:38:26 No.4141570
    >>4141549
    no it can't
    people are too content.
    hell I don't remember who said it but some soviet communist once remarked that the united states was incapable of a revolution because of our middleclass aristocracy or some crap like that.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:40:05 No.4141585
    >>4141570
    >middleclass aristocracy


    My work is done here...
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:40:27 No.4141589
    Communism fails because it requires a HUGE FUCKING BUREAUCRACY to divide up all those resources. Huge bureaucracies are prone to corruption and delays, which is not good when they are supposed to be handing out food to prevent the populace from starving to death.

    Anarcho-Communism is the only way to go.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:42:34 No.4141610
    >>4141506
    Yes, the darkies are too dumb to rule themselves. Let's ignore how much better life was under Lenin, Stalin and Mao than under feudalism.

    Thanks for the reminder. But I'm not interested in socialism in one country, nor even only in third-world countries, so your racist point is irrelevant.

    >>4141525
    Not everything. His theory that a socialist revolution would begin in the most developed country was way off the mark. Bourgeois can't start revolutions, and neither can labour aristocrats.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:42:49 No.4141612
    >>4141569

    That would make sense if capitalism worked. But because of human nature it doesn't.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:43:37 No.4141621
    >>4141589
    Mechanize and automate everything. Take it out of human hands. Suddenly a sprawling bureaucracy is turned into a room full of boxes.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:44:05 No.4141627
    THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT THIS COMMIE BULLSHIT ARE POOR FUCKERS WHO FAIL AT REAL LIFE AND ARE JEALOUS THAT PEOPLE HAVE BETTER SHIT THAN THEY DO.

    /THREAD
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:44:25 No.4141629
    >>4141610
    Life was better under Capitalism than Feudalism too, which is why Europe had become Capitalist by the end of the beginning of the 20th century.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:44:28 No.4141630
    >>4141569
    h@@p://www.newyouth.com/content/view/120/60/#2

    This may help you understand why communism has failed so far.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:46:10 No.4141643
    >>4141610

    Socialist revolutions ALMOST happened in developed countries, including the US. Unfortunately random historical events and the concessions of socialist policies to calm down the angry rabble eventually quieted any movements.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:46:38 No.4141647
    >>4141570
    your failure to adequately study marxist ideology is showing
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:47:59 No.4141657
    >>4141630
    that site touted that under socialism we'll only need to work 2 hours a week, im really starting to suspect its a troll site.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:49:08 No.4141669
    >>4141621

    I hope those machines never fail.
    I hope those machines are never tampered with.

    We're already on the brink of having technology that's smarter than any person can hope to be, I'm sure it'd be possible to do such a thing. These robotic administrations would probably have hundreds if not thousands of back ups across the world, so I wouldn't worry too much about them all getting corrupted simultaneously.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:49:40 No.4141671
    What kind of teachers you have?
    Let's try this. You work 10 hours for your boss, and produces the equivalent of 1000 dollars. But you only get paid at the very best 10 dollars. The rest of the money, taking the price of raw materials and machinery and whatever, goes straight to the pockets of your boss, who owns the machines, buildings and stuff like that. The money that goes straight to your boss is called profit. He doesn't have to lift a finger to produce shit. Did you get this so far?
    So, let's assume that you didn't have to support your lazy boss. You'd get to keep all the money. And, in that case, would you work 10 hours a day? How many hours would you actually have to work if you didn't have to support a leech?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:50:02 No.4141676
    >>4141657

    If you consider how much we actually produce in 2hr/wk it can be clearly seen as possible
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:52:25 No.4141692
    >>4141669
    AI. Let it defend itself.
    Also, yes, spread it all across the world.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:55:43 No.4141716
    >>4141671
    Look at this:
    >boss, who owns the machines, buildings and stuff like that

    Do you own that shit? No. That's why jobs and contracts go to your boss instead of straight to you.

    How the fuck are you going to produce products or invent inventions without the proper equipment?
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:56:51 No.4141732
         File :1241236611.gif-(35 KB, 253x309, chejesus1.gif)
    35 KB
    >>4141563
    Why would I "advance" beyond religion? I can no more do that than I can "advance" past my need for air.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:59:12 No.4141759
    >>4141671
    Gawd I hate when comradefags say working for someone is them supporting a leech... When it is the worker suckling from the tit for milk. You as a worker do labor in exchange for money, the company can hope to make a profit from your production but it is not guarenteed. You have little risk compared to the company. Also it is the government that keeps wages lower than what they should be, you work at the burger joint for $10 an hour, but with insurance, employee taxes and unemployment it costs the place around $15 to employ you.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:59:30 No.4141764
    >>4139826
    you don't need x box to survive. Think about this, if you enjoyed working would you need mindless entertainment?
    For one you'd be concerned in doing a great job, because you like what you're doing and you'd get to keep all the money that people would pay for your work. You wouldn't have to work as many hours and you could spend your time with friends or doing other pleasant activities. Marx said that the ideal would be when we could work in the morning, fish in the afternoon and argue about Philosophy at night. But if you work 10 hours a day, you get home you will need half an hour of mindless entertainment before you fall dead asleep. You don't have time to argue or think, or do anything really pleasant. At the very best, you will insult your wife and beat your children to vent your frustration.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:59:34 No.4141765
    >>4141732

    You won't advance, people don't level up by becoming atheists. Society will advance in scientific knowledge and scientific education to the point where mythologies and superstitions won't be needed to explain things.
    >> Anonymous 05/01/09(Fri)23:59:52 No.4141769
    >>4141732

    oh man this posting style reminds me of stormfag chart dude
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:00:25 No.4141775
    >>4141671
    In addition, I wouldn't exactly call your boss lazy.

    He's the one who has to take the risk of starting the building the business in the first place. If the business does well, yes he does get a large share of the profits.

    But if it fails he may loss money or even go into bankruptcy. We are now in the worst recession in a decade or so. Look around you, how many businesses have closed up.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:02:16 No.4141796
    >>4141759
    Your not my comrade, stupid sell out. Go defend you capitalist crap in an Ayn Rand thread.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:02:44 No.4141805
    >>4141775
    none,
    my state already got fucked over by a housing bubble bust a long time ago,
    we've learned.
    plus relatively low regulations here.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:03:58 No.4141819
    >>4141775
    Go lick your boss balls somewhere else.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:05:15 No.4141835
    >>4141775
    Yeah, because when a business goes to the dogs is not the boss fault, it's the workers fault.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:05:39 No.4141838
    >>4141819
    LOL Just because he refuses to hate the successful for being successful does not mean that he is "licking his bosses balls." You commies and your hyperbole lol
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:05:49 No.4141840
    >>4141805
    Do you have a central bank that controls interest rates?

    ...thought so.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:08:32 No.4141867
    >>4141805
    Look at the state of the fucking world then.

    >>4141819
    My 'boss' would be the NHS in two years time.

    >>4141835
    THAT'S WHY HE'S THE ONE WHO LOSSES MONEY.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:09:59 No.4141882
    >>4141775
    That's the problem with capitalism and the half men who serve it. It disempowers people. Oh, you can never be your own boss. You're not smart enough. You can't invent anything, You have no brains. Workers have to work because they're stupid.But, above all, you don't capital to start a business. How can a worker accumulate money to start a business if all the hours he works are there to make profit to support a leech?
    All these lies are hammered into your skull since the day you were born. And idiots like this one believe them.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:10:37 No.4141892
    Communism does not work because humans are naturally greedy. We are not natural altruists, nor should we be. Altruism is for the religiously deluded and weak minded.
    >> AllHailtheNewFlesh !dqCTtkmrww 05/02/09(Sat)00:11:15 No.4141896
    Not all socialists are marxists you fucking idiot. Go learn about socialism some before you start asking idiotic questions. Even then, Classical marxism=/= Soviet union or any other communist state. Communism as it developed was produced in states that couldn't handle a communist economic system.

    etc etc etc
    >> AllHailtheNewFlesh !dqCTtkmrww 05/02/09(Sat)00:11:54 No.4141905
    >>4141892
    We're genetically programmed to be altruistic, true facts.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:12:09 No.4141911
    >>4141882
    Not in communism, where every man is his own master and any one can become premier! LOL
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:12:52 No.4141920
    >>4141882
    and how is that all that different from a communist state?
    you can't move up in a communist state unless you're shrewd enough to work your way up in the communist party.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:13:00 No.4141921
    >>4141892
    Anarcho-Capitalism does not work because humans are naturally greedy. We are not natural altruists, nor should we be. Altruism is for the religiously deluded and weak minded.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:13:32 No.4141928
    >>4141838
    I has been proven over and over again that your opinions are irrelevant. Why do you insist?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:13:43 No.4141929
    >>4141892

    Capitalism does not work because humans are naturally greedy. We are not natural altruists, nor should we be. Altruism is for the religiously deluded and weak minded.
    >> AllHailtheNewFlesh !dqCTtkmrww 05/02/09(Sat)00:13:59 No.4141931
    >>4141921
    ITT People don't know about my genetic predisposition towards altruism.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:14:21 No.4141935
    >>4141905
    to an extent yes,
    but it really does not work on a large scale.
    most people will never give a shit about the stranger who lives 5 miles away.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:15:09 No.4141945
    >>4141935

    That's why there is anarcho-communism. Decentralized state ftw
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:16:34 No.4141954
    In addition you commie faggots, look at professions that would only thrive under capitalism.

    For instance, modern surgery. 10+ years of training, studying and sheer hard work to even qualify as a surgical TRAINEE.

    Do you fuckers know how hard it is? Let me give it to you nice and simple: none of you dipshits would be able to even if you tried.

    More than a half of the people who try for a surgical training post get rejected, and these are QUALIFIED DOCTORS.

    The main motivators are money, respect and success. Yes, personal desire to help people is also a contributing factor, but this will only get a few people all the way.

    Most people would say fuck it, why try so hard if I'm only going to be paid the same fucking amount as a manual worker.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:16:48 No.4141960
    >>4141929
    When I was 12 I also believed that I knew everything about human nature, just like you. Still one can ope that one day you will reach puberty.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:17:54 No.4141968
    >>4141945
    Anarcho-Communism is stupid. LOL I'M FREE NOW I CAN GIVE AWAY ALL OF MY PRIVATE PROPERTY AND SHARE IT WITH EVERYONE LOL

    It's only saving grace is that it makes more sense than State Communism does, which isn't saying much.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:18:30 No.4141970
    >>4141954
    Your arguments are beyond pathetic.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:21:36 No.4141997
    >>4141968

    Makes more sense and has more organization then LOL EVERYONE CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT FUCK YEAH ANARCHO-CAPITALISM
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:21:45 No.4142001
    >>4141970
    Makes sense to me. Capitalist Person A wants to make money, and so becomes a surgeon. Communist Person A doesn't need to make money, so he becomes a farm laborer instead of being a surgeon because that would be too hard.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:22:10 No.4142006
    >>4141954
    Nobody would enjoy doing anything without being paid tons of money. Nobody studies Physics, for one. Everybody wants to be a lawyer or an insurance salesman, because that's where the money is. Doctors who feel good about healing people are unheard of.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:22:27 No.4142012
    >>4141954

    We wouldn't have astronauts and moon landings without Sputnik, a communist enterprise.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:23:06 No.4142022
    >>4141970

    I agree with you, but in a rare moment of honesty I feel compelled to admit that I do not know why. Care to explain for the rest of us why he is so wrong?

    I really don't think most doctors become doctors because they're going to make huge amounts of money, they become doctors because they like saving the lives of others. Being a doctor is almost like being God.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:23:12 No.4142025
    >>4141882
    >How can a worker accumulate money to start a business

    Yes you can fuck.

    Check these people out:

    Sir Alan Michael Sugar

    Li Ka-shing

    John D. Rockefeller

    And tons more. Coming from poverty is no excuse.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:23:17 No.4142027
    >>4141970
    Typical fucking socialist. Present him a valid argument, and he'll just dismiss the notion and scramble protect and justify his unbased beliefs.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:24:07 No.4142035
    >>4142012
    well said, comrade, well said.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:25:16 No.4142047
    >>4142012
    Sputnik was pathetic compared to the Capitalist Moon landing.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:26:02 No.4142060
    >>4141968
    Anarcho-capitalism makes no promises on charity.

    Anarcho-capitalism is the fairest of econo-political systems. No theft. No mob rule. No unwanted restrictions. It offers a world entirely of your own making, which is the only fair offer a system can make.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:26:38 No.4142067
    >>4142001

    Capitalist Surgeon realizes he can make more profit by pushing some drugs to his patients from a company he has stock in. He knows that those drugs are ineffective and in fact causes problems, but because he lives under anarcho-capitalism there are no regulations and those problems wouldn't be found long after he's retired and rich. He makes billions of dollars while people he treated later die from complications from the drug he treated them with.

    Anarcho-capitalism at its finest.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:27:57 No.4142082
    >>4142006
    >>4142022
    You can save lives in the medical profession as a goddamned Junior House Officer, or even a paramedic.

    >>4142025
    Also check out Warren Buffett. Net worth of 37 Billion dollars. He started out as a newpaper delivery boy.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:28:34 No.4142091
    >>4142047

    We wouldn't have wanted to do so if the commies set off the space race. Was there ANY profit in going into space? Were we expecting oil on the moon? Why bother going there under capitalism, then? No insta-profit, no fucking reason.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:28:37 No.4142092
    >>4142067
    Because the Soviet Union was the safest, most environmentally friendly place on the planet.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:30:11 No.4142109
    >>4142047

    >capitalist
    >The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is an agency of the United States government, responsible for the nation's public space program

    So NASA is a capitalist agency? The space program is not funded by the government?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:30:24 No.4142113
    in a communist society the government pretends to pay you

    so you pretend to work.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:32:07 No.4142134
    >>4142091
    Defeat of Communism is a pretty good pay off. I'm not trying to defend state Capitalism or anything, but it was definitely better than state communism.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:32:50 No.4142142
    >>4142067
    Lolwut.

    That's why the medical profession is one of the most heavily governed and regulated professions in the world.

    You don't just pull drug lists out of your ass. You are given a specific list of drugs that are prescribable. And now with the greater emphasis of Evidence-Based-Medicine, the types of drugs given are based are streamlined and standardized.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:34:22 No.4142171
    >>4142067
    Customer finds out what his doctor is doing, Customer's private law enforcement firm tracks Doctor down and punishes him. Problem solved.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:37:31 No.4142219
    >>4142171

    The rich doctor pays them off, and the law enforcement agency tells the customer that they killed the doctor. Rich doctor moves away from there and, because there is no state that holds official records, he can start a new life, with new patients. RICH DOCTOR WINS AGAIN.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:38:27 No.4142232
    >>4142060
    Of course. I agree wholeheartedly. Anarcho-Capitalism is as close to a utopia as we can get. It is also the only form of Anarchy that has been proven to work (see: Somalia.)
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:39:05 No.4142240
    >>4142067

    Tell me how the doctor gets caught in a statist system? Those drugs would slip under the eye of any regulator if, as you describe, they take decades to demonstrate negative effects. There's no way that the FDA runs lifetime trials on drugs.

    Suppose that you say that the drugs have a known carcinogen in them, one that state regulators could easily spot. Private regulators could use the exact same instruments as the state regulators to screen the drugs. Tools work the same for all people, whether they're owned by a government or a business.

    One anarcho-capitalist solution to the "unregulated doctor" problem is this: health care companies screen drugs in the same way the FDA does now. They can use the exact same tools and methods as the government. They have the built-in incentive to make sure you don't require expensive treatment; the government agencies have NO incentive to keep you well.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:40:33 No.4142264
    >>4142219
    What's to stop the insanely rich doctor from doing that in a state capitalist/communist society?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:42:13 No.4142283
    >>4142232
    Libertarianfag here. I can understand anarcho-capitalism, and see its merits... but I can't buy into the "privatization of law enforcement" concept, both morally (negative rights enforcement) and practically.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:44:17 No.4142309
    >>4142264
    >insanely rich
    >communist society

    My brain just exploded
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:47:14 No.4142344
    >>4142309
    Okay, replace "insanely rich" with "insanely well-connected with the Party" or some other powerful position.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:47:17 No.4142345
    >>4142283
    The police are where the rubber meets the road for a kleptocracy. The police are the goons of the biggest organized crime syndicate that ever stole anybody's paycheck.

    Anyway, the anarchistic system of policing would work towards the happy, long-run Nash equilibrium. Faced with the possibility of MAD, individuals would be forced to choose positive right enforcement by economic necessity.

    What's not to understand?
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)00:47:39 No.4142347
    >>4142309
    Party members got away with all sorts of shit in Communist countries.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:51:11 No.4142398
    >>4142347

    Lots of shit hits fans in communist countries because they've all been miserable failures.

    In the future, communist parties will be comprised of super powerful AI. If the AI robots become corrupt, I'd just say fuck it let's do whatever AnonAtheist wants because the entire world is shit anyway. Maybe murder/suicide if I had a family.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:52:01 No.4142411
    >>4142345

    I meant "negative rights" hurr durr I are smart
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:53:22 No.4142435
    >>4142345
    >The police are the goons of the biggest organized crime syndicate that ever stole anybody's paycheck.

    Hey like I said, I'm a libertarianfag, you don't have to tell me twice about statism.

    >Faced with the possibility of MAD, individuals would be forced to choose positive right enforcement by economic necessity.

    Specify what you mean by this. Voluntary states would engage in charity to placate the masses...?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:55:18 No.4142461
    >>4142398
    I say we develop an intrinsic system for selection of AI's. Make them evolve. Hopefully the system is set up in such a way that the selection rewards those that make humans happiest (assuming happiness is the goal here). A system of selection is the only way to guard against corruption.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)00:55:51 No.4142471
    1. Probably not.

    2. No, definitely not.

    3. In theory, yes. Nobody gets a yacht. In real life? No. Some fuckers will still have yachts. Criminals, most likely.

    Communism should be put to history. It has failed time and time again, and trial by error isn't really applicable anymore...
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:01:14 No.4142550
    >>4142411
    >>4142345

    Okay... still, what about killing hobos, or protecting against a very powerful outside state (e.g., hypothetically say Somalia became a happy anarcho-cap land... and then suddenly Iran sends in some bombers or something)?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:05:35 No.4142600
    >>4142435
    Sorry, I meant to say negative rights.

    Think of the anarcho-capitalist "police" system like a mexican standoff. Anybody can off anybody else at any time, but the same applies to them. That's the best damn motivation for cooperation that I can imagine.

    Mutually Assured Destruction prevented a nuclear war, didn't it? I promise you that if there were an international police body that was in charge of of preventing WW3, half of the world would be glass right now. Statist "rights" only serve to place people outside of the natural laws of action and reaction. Statist "rights" have been the cause of the greatest crimes in democratic-republican history (slavery, etc.), and these inequities are only tenable with the constant protection of the theiving class by the police.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:08:44 No.4142639
    My parents survived hardcore communist china.
    Everyone starves in Communism except the people at the top of the party.
    Every tree was stripped of its bark because people needed to eat.

    Communists, let me ask you some questions.
    Say you are living in communism and you thought the state was unfair.
    How would you fight the system?

    How do you share your opinion when every newspaper, tv channel, record label, book publisher, etc. is owned by the government?
    How do you sue the state when every lawyer and judge works for the government?

    I can safely say that under Communism, there is no free speech, and there is no justice.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:10:30 No.4142662
    >>4142232
    I got a question
    were you always using Somalia as an example before today?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:13:02 No.4142691
    >>4142232
    Dammit guy!
    Somalia works because of their tribal mindset,
    we don't have that!
    besides we are alot more comfortable with the way we do things.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:13:08 No.4142694
         File :1241241188.jpg-(153 KB, 1308x672, yhst-97394442678697_2042_68260(...).jpg)
    153 KB
    >>4142639
    Wait, so you're saying that not guaranteeing individual liberties can BACKFIRE???
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:14:48 No.4142707
    >>4142550
    1. Again ask yourself, why don't people kill hobos in a statist society? For anyone with an internet connection, it's easy to figure out how to commit the perfect hobo murder. At that class of people (face it, the cops work for the rich), you're effectively outside the law. So why don't nuts kill hobos all the time? The answer is that the costs don't outweigh the benefits. It's the same in a free society as it is in a statist society.

    2. Somalia doesn't get bombed by Iran because nation-states only fight other nation-states. What is Iran going to do, blow up the anarchist capital building? Demand surrender from the land of anarchy? And if Iran decided to invade, it would be met by the same tools of resistance that a state could provide. Guns don't fire just for flags. Anybody who had something to loose under an Iranian invasion would offer a proportional resistance. Iran, on the other hand, has soldiers who fight only because they run the risk of court-martial.
    >> AnonAtheist !!G9h1Zg7SzNq 05/02/09(Sat)01:16:14 No.4142727
    >>4142694
    Actually a terribly planned economy is what caused all of those famines. See: The Great Leap Forward.

    Even by communist standards, Mao was an idiot.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:18:57 No.4142751
    >>4142694
    That's bullshit. Nobody can ethically guarantee rights. If your rights are "guaranteed" by somebody else, then they're not rights, they're privileges given to pets.

    In reality, a "right" is whatever thing you're willing to fight for, indefinitely.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:19:43 No.4142759
    >>4142727
    Is there any political measure, in state communism, to prevent a terribly planned economy?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:21:17 No.4142774
    By definition, privately-owned business are not allowed under communism.

    So how can you have freedom of the press?
    if CNN, FOX NEWS, MSNBC, and every single source of information you had access to was produced from the state, then don't you think there would be a conflict of interest in their reporting?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:21:48 No.4142777
    >>4142759

    Don't you get it? We'll have ROBOTS do the hard stuff. Humans will just become doctors and engineers while others become artists and professional fun-havers for the same wages.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:23:41 No.4142794
    >>4142777
    That's not a political measure. What's to stop the robot-makers from making shitty robots, or the robots from making shitty EVARYTHANG???
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:23:53 No.4142800
    >>4142774
    BBC is touted as being impartial and its owned by the government,
    any britfags care to comment on this
    would you say BBC is impartial and unbiasd?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:24:22 No.4142806
    >>4141882

    This is a crock of shit. If you want money to start a company, save it or take out a loan with a water tight business plan. I read an article on mfg.com ~2 wks ago about a machinist who was sick of working for 'the man', purchased a building and rented a machining center. 2yrs later he is grossing ~$1M a year and is expanding. Welcome to capitalism. shit rocks.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:25:39 No.4142812
    >>4142794
    whats to stop the robots from rebelling and overthrowing their slavers?
    hell being robots they could make a workable communist state.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:29:52 No.4142854
    >>4142812
    >>4142794

    See here, the robots are advanced AI technology. We're already at the stage where if we make any more advanced computers, they'll be smarter than humans are. By 2020, no human will ever be as smart as the computer they own. If we can control these new intelligent computers, we can program them to be our benevolent dictators.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:30:28 No.4142862
    >>4142777
    As a guy that has set up robotic manufacturing systems, we are just not there yet. The only place that robotics make much sense these days is in a plant that is going to be cranking out a _shitload_ of identical stuff 24/7. This plant is going to take a year to setup and is going to cost millions and will not be able to be shifted to a different product without millions more in investment. If you need any sort of adaptivity, you need a human (unfortunately).

    The scary day will come when human labor will become irrelevant in most industries & businesses, then what will the 50% of utterly worthless people do? Work in restaurants? pfft.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:32:19 No.4142876
    >>4142777
    Idiot. Robots and Machines just make human labor cheaper. They increase productivity ten fold and reduce the numbers of human workers needed, so instead of 10 fuck ups competing for a job you have 1000 fuck ups. And the boss can pay one cent an hour because he knows that there are 99 fuck ups who'd do your job for half a cent an hour.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:33:45 No.4142885
    >>4142800

    NZfag here, watch BBC World News quite a bit. It's impartial compared to Faux and MSNBC, but it still represents the common world view, and common ideas, rather than challenging status quo stuff.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:33:51 No.4142888
    The BBC is kept in line on the world stage by criticisms made by millions of privately-owned news sources.

    In a communist country, there would be no system of cross-criticism.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:34:05 No.4142893
    >>4142854
    Why would an AI system be our master? What motivates it?

    Computers could use us as resources, sure, but we're pretty cheap ones.

    Realistically, this AI system won't have any internal direction other than its deep programming, so it won't face the evolutionary pressures of mate/survive. Instead, it will be a fertile new territory for memes. I predict that the only things that will motivate and drive AI are the most profligate memes. So we better start formulating an easy-to-remember way for computers to say "protect and feed humans".
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:34:40 No.4142897
    >>4142854
    Man, when I think atheist anon is the most retarded around, you have to come and open your mouth to prove me wrong.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:34:58 No.4142899
    >>4142876
    Why do you cling to bosses, jobs and money?
    Mechanize the labor force properly and they're all obsolete
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:37:34 No.4142917
    Some real commie needs to come and start explaining why robots will take over the world because I'm running out of answers
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:38:00 No.4142921
    >>4142862
    That's an incredibly stupid way of looking at it:
    >what will the 50% of utterly worthless people do?
    No one's ever utterly useless. Factory workers just have a comparative advantage in doing menial labor. Sure, they bitch and moan when they get laid off, but they can do millions of other things.

    And once robots are producing things, their products will come more cheaply. That means that everyone can afford more things, so they can buy the stuff that the former factory workers are now producing. Who knows? Maybe it's fancy hand-crafted widgets or salad dressing or whatever else.
    >> socialist !!mfsOLeP4xPg 05/02/09(Sat)01:38:34 No.4142928
    Question one:

    First off all lets point out a mistake:
    You began with socialism and ended the sentence with communism. They're different things.

    My idea:
    You probably have the wrong idea of Cold War communism and socialism in mind, when western capitalist and eastern socialist hated each other guts, thus impairing travel.

    That is not always the case with socialism. It is POSSIBLE to travel if you live in socialist state, IF your country and other countries allow it. Not having that right is usually due to stupid disputes.

    Question 2:
    It is possible. We're constantly told we have limited resources because there hasn't been enough done to use renewable energy. We're constantly reminded that we are running out(oil, coal, and other unrenewable fuels). If solar energy, thermal, etc. was truly harnessed we would not worry about energy, then we could truly push research in all directions and RECYCLING the shit ton of things we throw away.

    Question 3:
    Again you went from discussing socialism but wording it as communism. Two different things man.

    Yachts and all those other things are LUXURIES. Who the hell really needs one? In an "ideal" socialist society everyone would be guarantied the best basics of life, that is not to say we would get city things like we are lead to believe.

    All those over the top things we desire should be achievable if, like in any society, do the work and effort to achieve it.

    Socialism doesn't mean there isn't anyone richer than other, just that there is a better distribution of wealth(IF DONE RIGHT), that capitalism does not guarantee.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:40:51 No.4142950
    >>4142921
    >Maybe it's fancy hand-crafted widgets or salad dressing or whatever else.
    Exactly. Creativity is the only true currency.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:43:57 No.4142975
    Communism works great if you have absolutely no understanding of basic economics and sociology.

    People, at their very core, are selfish. Always have been, always will be. It doesn't matter what time era you're from, what climate you've lived in -- if you're a bipedal hominid with a large cerebral cortex, any act you take, is because you feel that you will benefit from it in the end.

    The laws of economics, at their very core, are amoral, uncaring, and steadfast, like the laws of physics. The laws of supply and demand are as equally important and applicable in the 21st century United States as they were during the Chinese Qing dynasty.

    People respond to incentives. People obey the laws of economics. Remove incentives and try to break the laws of economics, and you can be sure of catastrophe.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:44:48 No.4142982
    >>4142975
    >Baaah
    fixt
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:44:55 No.4142983
    >>4142950
    I disagree. Currency is a unit of reciprocal trade.

    Creativity cannot be traded. Creativity cannot be atomized into units.

    I think you mean to say that creativity is the source of all value. And I agree with that.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:46:45 No.4142999
    Though often conflated with the thought of Karl Marx, Marx merely saw socialism as a stage in the ineluctable transition from capitalism to communism.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:50:40 No.4143034
    >>4142975
    I don't think you quite understand Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments.

    It's not that people are inherently greedy, because we can never determine that. That's just an opinion, as a zillion people will say in this thread.

    We construct capitalism as a system built on greed because it's the worst-case scenario. It's like the zombie plan of economics. You never know when someone's going to turn out to be a jerk or a greedy bastard, but capitalism makes sure that--even if people ARE greedy--nobody loses their shirt because some guy's a douche.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:51:05 No.4143037
    >>4142928
    Capitalism can lead to a super-advanced society where everyone can fly around in jetpacks and have robo-servants, IF DONE RIGHT.

    Anything is possible "if done right"; who's to say what's right or not?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:51:25 No.4143039
    >>4142999
    wait
    forgive my ignorance
    but i thought communism was the stage between capitalism and socialism.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:51:38 No.4143044
    >>4142921
    I disagree. like what?

    If all labor is done by robots, and these robots are setup and maintained by a small group of highly skilled technicians/engineers, what pray-tell is the ex working-class to do?

    Sure we need a bunch of highly skilled engineers, designers and artists to design products to put through these factories, but these guys are hardly the working class.

    All I can figure is the government will raise the taxes to over 9000 on the few productive people, and will make sure a bunch of bullshit paper pushing bureaucrat jobs exist for those too useless to actually assist in the means of production.

    In this future utopia you seem to want all needs of people will be met by a bevy of almost entirely automated factories, Do you seriously expect 50% of people to make their living by practicing various crafts like basket weaving?

    Who the fuck would need a handmade basket with all the robots cranking away?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:52:53 No.4143053
    >>4142022
    I will repeat these words that are not mine, until somebody understands them.
    A GM executive once said: The business of GM is not making cars. The business of GM is making money.
    Now, how can you make a good car, if your goal is not to make a car but to make money out of it? You're fated to make the cheapest crappiest car because you will make more money that way.
    How can you cure a human being, if you're more concerned with the money you will extract from him to spend in a holiday in the Bahamas?
    Doing things with ulterior motives is not the way to do things. You're lying to yourself and to your costumers.
    I am not saying people should do things for free. In the present state of society, you don't have time to fish in the morning, be your own doctor in the afternoon and make your own car at night. But money, in a fair society should be a tool for exchanging value, not to create value, because money is a symbol it has no value on itself, it cannot breed itself. I spent ten hours building a car. The price of the car should be 10 hours plus steel and rubber. I spent ten hours curing your hemorroids,the price of the cure should be 10 hours plus gauze plus one hour for the year I studied curing hemorrhoids.
    But, in order to sell cars for profit, you need to pay the worker less than his work is worth, use the cheapest materials, and on top of that say, buy my car because it will make you look good and get laid, so put more 10000 bucks for the guarantee of getting laid that this car will give you. And so on and so forth.
    Finally, the hours of your life are priceless, you cannot sell the time of your life, like you sell peanuts of paper clips. You're not a thing. Your time is yours, you are the only one who is entitled to put a price on the goods you produce with the time of your life.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:53:06 No.4143057
    >>4142975
    >>4142975
    fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck minor rage
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:55:17 No.4143070
    >>4143034
    tl:dr
    In a gift economy, everyone is the victim of their neighbor's taste.

    In a trade economy, everyone is the champion of their own desires.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:55:58 No.4143078
    >>4143039
    You're just ignorant. Capitalism is the stage between feudalism and socialism.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:57:02 No.4143088
    >>4143053
    You do not understand money.

    Please stop making a complete ass out of yourself.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:58:05 No.4143102
    >>4143053
    Fine. If money's not important, please quit your job and mail all the balance of your bank account to:
    Happy Dude
    321 Evergreen Terrace
    Springfield
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)01:58:25 No.4143106
    >>4143053
    And you are the only one that puts the "price on the goods you produce with the time of your life" in a capitalist system, because you are the one that decides whether or not to work for the company at the advertised rate for labor.

    If you want to make more money, invest in yourself (education) and get a better job that utilizes the most valuable thing any person has, the lump of meat between your ears.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:01:21 No.4143122
    >>4143044
    300 years of technology only made human labor cheaper. Look at third world countries or even the US itself and see if technology has helped people work less. make more money or have better standards of life. Fuck, did you know that there's rocket fuel and banned pesticides in the water your drink?
    Capitalists have been pulling this bullshit that technology makes life better for 300 years. I really don't feel like contracting them at the moment so I will say, yes all this technology is there to make your life easier, not their lives easier.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:03:08 No.4143133
    You have betrayed yourself to be a stupid ass with this:
    >But, in order to sell cars for profit, you need to pay the worker less than his work is worth
    Wages approach the marginal productivity of labor. THAT MEANS that people actually ARE paid amounts approaching the social value of their time. Otherwise, the worker can just leave and work for another firm, or find something to do with his time other than GET ROBBED.

    Also, profit approaches zero in a competitive market. That means that you run the company for your wages, not for profit.
    PROFIT != WAGES for executives
    PROFIT = LOSS
    If a company is running a profit, then that means that it's making less money than it could. That company should use the profit to buy more labor and capital and, by selling more, run the competition out of business.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:03:44 No.4143138
    >>4143034
    My mistake. When I said selfish, I really meant self-interested, That is a different sentiment altogether from 'greed'. There is no deenying people are self-ineterested, it is fact; even the person who commits the most charitable act in the world is still acting because he believes that he will somehow benefit from the situation.

    I've yet to read the Theory of Moral Sentiments,so I'll stop there for now.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:04:09 No.4143141
    >>4143106
    Sure, in the Capitalist system people can choose where to work and how many hours to work. Their time defitively is their own and not a commodity.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:06:24 No.4143156
    >>4143133
    My god, you telling me that I am stupid. The only thing I can do now is kill myself. There's no other way.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:08:08 No.4143167
    >>4143122
    I don't know why you're so persistent in being completely wrong.
    >Look at third world countries or even the US... see if technology has helped people work less. make more money or have better standards of life.
    It has done all of those things. Are you saying that you would trade lives, right now, with a person from the 1860's? The 860's?
    >did you know that there's rocket fuel and banned pesticides in the water your drink?
    There's not, and anyway, water used to have:
    - dead things
    - dangerous parasites
    - shit from neighbors upstream
    - dirt
    in it. If you hate tap water so much, go dig a well. Or if you make up a story about the water table, go to undeveloped Africa and drink their water. Don't come crying to me when you get sick within hours.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:08:20 No.4143170
    >>4143102
    one of these days i will get you happy dude and your automatic dialer!
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:10:43 No.4143189
    >>4143156
    What happened? Did the robot block your intelligent, well-reasoned rebuttal?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:11:33 No.4143198
    As an anarcho-communist, I will say that a society without video games is probably not a society worth pursuing. Life is meant to be enjoyed, and video games can be everything from harmless pastimes to works of art.

    Any communism that says we all have to live joyless lives is a communism that can fuck itself.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:14:25 No.4143224
    >>4143122
    Yes 300 years of technology has made human labor cheaper, because the most mindless of human labor can be automated simply (even with 1890's technology). As soon as you need adaptivity (at the moment) you need a very highly paid and skilled person.

    Yes technology has made people work less (or at least less hard) and has raised their standards of living. In the 1930's when Medicare was instituted, the age of retirement was 55 and medicare would kick in then. It was a smart deal, because people died just about the time they hit 55. Medicare is bankrupt because people have the audacity of not breaking their bodies in factory labor now and live quite well, for quite a long time.

    Technology has improved the lives in 3rd world countries too. They would be doing much better if they would stop killing one another. I have heard it argued that ending colonialism too early is the cause. We destroyed the native culture and introduced all sorts of technology, but did not remain in control long enough to introduce our own culture.

    Yes I know there is all kinds of shit in the water we drink. there used to be strontium 90 in milk (and everywhere) due to the above ground nuclear tests out west. And yet at least in the US the environment is cleaner than it was in the 40s, and holy shit, people seem to be living quite well.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:21:24 No.4143276
    >>4143224
    The brilliant part about capitalism is that people get external rewards for doing socially valuable things.

    Take lawns. Everybody likes a nice lawn. Everybody has an incentive to keep a nice lawn for resale value. I guarantee that lawns look worse now in the places with home values axed by the recession. I bet that Detroit has the worst-looking lawns per capita in the country, because people have lower home prices and lower incentives.

    You can't make this sort of system run on a communal level, because labor is individually contributed. Incentives must be routed to the origin for maximum productivity because people respond to incentives.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:27:43 No.4143327
    >>4143138

    >ven the person who commits the most charitable act in the world is still acting because he believes that he will somehow benefit from the situation.

    How do you know this? Hell, how does HE know this? What about soldiers who jump on grenades to save their comrades? At what point does he start thinking he's going to benefit from such an altruistic act? He doesn't even have children, let's say. And such heroisms have, indeed, happened.

    This is not a justification for communism. However, know that they type of self-interest we experience in our day is CAUSED by capitalism, not the reason for it. That's what the poster you were responding to essentially said: it's a system that tries to utilize self-interest to ensure that no one screws anyone over... yet, somehow, it manages to fail miserably.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:34:50 No.4143385
    >>4143276
    No offense, but a well-cut lawn is of very questionable social value, certainly ecologically it's less valuable than xeroscaping and in most ways is inferior to, say, a vegetable garden. Basically, you're saying that capitalism promotes doing dumb shit that looks good because it sells.

    The old Adam Smith "it is not the benevolence of the baker" bit is more convincing. But Smith also pointed out that when groups of business men come together it's more often than not to conspire to screw their customers.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:34:58 No.4143386
    >>4143224

    >Technology has improved the lives in 3rd world countries too. They would be doing much better if they would stop killing one another. I have heard it argued that ending colonialism too early is the cause. We destroyed the native culture and introduced all sorts of technology, but did not remain in control long enough to introduce our own culture.

    Oh, imperialists. Do you think that MAYBE it has to do with the de facto continuation of the old imperialist control in the newly "freed" countries that just *happen* to have suddenly been indebted to their old masters through the World Bank and the IMF? They might be doing better IF we stopped pretending to be helping them out and pull our dicks out of their assholes.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:39:17 No.4143419
    >>4143327
    I'm not the person that you're quoting, but here's my take.

    Altruism is great. I wish more people were altruistic. Greed sucks, too. But any social system has to be prepared for both greedy people and altruistic people. I'm also taking trade as a given here, because self-sufficient people don't need to imagine social systems.

    The only self-protecting form of trade is one based on individual incentives. That's the only one that's safe from jerks. This system definitely has a self-enforcing effect, in that it's easy to pursue individual incentives exclusively.

    HOWEVER, the important note is that this is the most FAIR system. Nobody gets something for nothing. Altruistic people are no longer the helpless victims of greedy people. Individuals get rewards proportional to their behavior.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:41:51 No.4143439
    >>4143385
    Hey bro,

    I couldn't help but notice you're attacking a superficial example. I wondered if you wanted to also try some ad hominem, or maybe strawmen.

    Anyway, just a friendly note. Hit me back sometime. We can go pound down some yeager and touch each other's dicks.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:45:04 No.4143466
    >>4143198
    This is why anarcho-communism is full of failure. Enjoy your society where bourgeois ideas will flourish and there'll be no state to prevent the bourgeois from taking back control. It failed in Catalonia, and it will always fail.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:47:37 No.4143486
    >>4143386

    Yeah thats why the US keeps giving loans to African nations, then when they can't pay forgiving the loans. We give billions with no strings too.

    You seem to be one of those fools that thinks western society is built on the backs of the poor and oppressed third world. Bullshit. It is of no advantage to the US for anyone anywhere to be dirt poor, uneducated, sickly or otherwise put-upon.

    If every third worlder woke up with a college education, a first rate sanitation system, and a great industrial base, that would be the best thing ever. We would make so much money with them in business and would profit so much from the innovations they would produce for themselves through network effects. We cannot make any money or profit from anyone that cannot realize their potential due to their part of the world being a shithole.

    You think that if the 3rd world suddenly quit running our factories that we would suffer. We would _not_. All of that work would be pulled back and done domestically with better quality in automated factories, run by a smattering of skilled domestic labor making $50k a year.

    It is to the advantage of the 3rd world that they do the work just cheaper than we can automate it. They get billions of dollars of exports and the time to build their own industrial base just like we did. It is to our advantage that they build themselves up.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:49:41 No.4143498
    >>4143466

    It was hit by an outside influence. What did you expect? It was born in a very dangerous, unstable period, and though it had A LOT going for it it eventually caved to outside pressure, not internal instability.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:53:58 No.4143533
    >>4143439
    Actually, if you had bothered to think about it, you might realize that what I am saying is that capitalism promotes the most economically advantageous behavior, which is SOMETIMES socially valuable, but as often as not is either harmlessly dumb (like lawns) or incredibly fucking terrible (like the air and water pollution of the US in the 50's and 60's or in China now).

    Free markets are a good idea. Central planning has shown itself to lead to evil shit like dictatorships and factories producing shit nobody needs. But capitalism is not free from weaknesses, and often pursues results that make money but have horrible consequences, as well as creating a new form of serfdom in some cases where a corporation becomes a kingdom in itself.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)02:57:52 No.4143565
    >>4143486

    That would be great if capitalists could think in future profits instead of profits now. Instead we have the same thing going on that America and Britain had in the 19th and early 20th century: shitty working environments and shitty wages, without much hope to become educated and advance.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:00:36 No.4143591
    http://www.onlytorrents.com/torrent/flow-for-the-love-of-water-2008-dvdrip-xvid-vomit:efdd9767c3c315
    b7c42efabbd9cfe4a5560aba11
    Flow, for the love of water

    Watch it.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:05:12 No.4143622
    >>4143224
    Yeah, it's good to live life based on belief.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:09:02 No.4143651
    >>4143565
    Well the (current) 1st world showed the way. Workers will have to unionize and make demands. It will all work out for the best (meaning the spread of wealth and the opportunity for success).

    What will so very cool is if parts of the 3rd world reaches the conclusion that a society structured different from the 1st world is better in some way valuable to them. I have no doubt it will be a wealthy and egalitarian society, but of what shape and type.

    Decisions were made based on a certain level of technological development in the US and Brittan. Things are very different now. ?does this matter?
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:16:09 No.4143705
    >>4143224
    Some things are better, some things are not. Many forms of pollution where cleaned up or are being cleaned up because of laws that set limits on capitalist activity. Also, the low cost of labor means that many people in the west live pretty badly. Having a TV is not real wealth.

    Also, depending on where and what type of labor, in many non-capitalist societies worked much LESS than people in the US do now. Hunter-gatherers often would take like 2 days a week to get food and then just chill out for the rest of the week. Even serfs in Russia had more holidays and days off than many American laborers now. Heck, in many agricultural societies there were periods of intense labor like harvests contrasted with periods of very little labor. I think a person who works 60 hour weeks and takes 10 days off a year is probably working as much as many serfs did back in the day.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:37:07 No.4143844
    >>4143705
    I agree that naked capitalism would be basically anarchy, and that the symbiosis between a representative democracy and slightly neutered capitalism works very well in the US. Though much of our environmental problems were caused because no one really understood the effects that certain types of pollution would have. Things that were thought to be totally inert (fluorocarbons) and were wonder molecules turned out to have pretty bad effects. But we learn, and compensate.

    The Economist did an article of the poor globally and its conclusion was quite different than yours. (shockingly.) The dirt poor Appalachian families they surveyed had a good diet, great access to information and markets, (yes TV's), and excellent opportunities to get ahead, unlike many places in the 3rd world.

    Look if you don't like your life where you are in the US, with the naked ambition and drive to get ahead surrounding you, just get off the fricken' bus! Use the internets, find a place where the cost of living is about zero, buy a mobile home for $5k and farm cabbage. No one will stop you!

    There is something to be said for hooking yourself into the Blaring adrenaline rush of modern society where technology races ahead and what is new is old in five minutes.

    Every day a whole bunch of very smart people in modern society decide that what they are doing is the way that they want to live. And you know what, it has worked out very well thus far. I will allow that things are not perfect, but I am optimistic.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:37:28 No.4143847
    >>4142639

    That is not communism. That is totalitarian dictatorship. Has nothing to do with the economic system of communism.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:45:01 No.4143880
    >>4143705
    People work more nowadays than serfs.
    No work on Sundays and holidays (tons of them) lots of breaks during the day. No work past 6PM (angelus)
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:46:26 No.4143892
    investment banker here

    lol you're all so fucking ignorant. that in itself is not a crime, though it is irritating when combined with the presumption to comment on things beyond the purview of your knowledge. what is culpable is the hilarious illogic that you all employ in attempting to formulate arguments. cretins.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:48:04 No.4143903
    >>4143892

    >investment banker

    trollface.jp2
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:58:08 No.4143984
    >>4143892

    Without a direct point your post is no more than electronic diarrhea.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)03:59:18 No.4143994
    >>4143984

    it had a direct point, you obtuse or illiterate fuckstain: that all that preceded my post was pure nonsense.
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)04:02:05 No.4144008
    >>4141525
    go back to lf, marxism is fucking stupid hth

    also get out
    >> Anonymous 05/02/09(Sat)04:08:04 No.4144052
    >>4143994
    I am neither obtuse nor illiterate, jackass. The point of a message board is to test the bounds of each others rationality, and to explore the edges of society, which is 9000 times better when the discussion can be anonymous.

    If you can neither make a direct point, or keep moving along the internet shaking your head silently in wonder, then you are truly a worthless fuck.
    >> Anonymous 05/08/09(Fri)23:24:50 No.4145241
    ADSFASD FUCKING BUMP I'VE WAITED FOR DAYS LET'S CONTINUE



    Delete Post [File Only]
    Password
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]
    Watched Threads
    PosterThread Title
    [V][X]Anonymous
    [V][X]Anonymous