They Are Back and Other Tidbits.

[Revoltingest]

Social engineers, theorists, the idealists who want
to remake society-idealists with
their dreams of how it outta be-

Going by the results, I'd say the effort
to stone the prophets and poke them
with sharp sticks is misdirected.

Get the social engineers!

Mao, Stalin, Schicklegruber, pol pot,
Moussolini, idealists, all.

I'm OK with the idea of social engineering.
For example, laws against criminal acts are
designed to incentivize against such behavior.
Where these socialist types get it wrong is in
the assumption that people will be different, ie,
better in order for their system to work.
It's a bad premise. People will be who they've
always been.

 

[epronovost]

The UBI isn't an alternative to capitalism.
I even advocate that it be adopted in Ameristan.

It is. Capitalism is a productivist system. To make money, you must produce something (or own something). UBI gives you a revenue on the basis of being a human being; by virtue of nature not through your work, in function of your productivity. It's not opposed to work at all and even encourages it to gain even better living conditions, but it's not necessary for survival. That can be implemented within a mixed economy and already is to a certain degree, but not in a heavily capitalist one due to the role of the State in it.

It sure looks like they're opposite ends of the spectrum.
What is "communalism" to you.

It's a left-wing form of anarchism based on ownership by usage. It can be classified as a form of socialism since there is a regulatory role of the State and property of the means of production is collectivised, but it's not collectivised to the whole of society or to the State like in a marxist form of socialist, but to those who participate in a that specific venture. Example, in such a system, Amazon wouldn't belong to its investors, nor the State, but to the totality of its employees including its administration staff.

 

[epronovost]

Mao, Stalin, Schicklegruber, pol pot,
Moussolini, idealists, all.

As was Adam Smith, Keynes, Burke, Hobbs and the fathers of your favored systems. They all went wrong at some point too and had to be corrected by other idealists. That's how life works. Someone gets an idea to solve a problem, if it's convincing we try to apply it and ''wing it'' from there. Idealism is one of the fuel of innovation. Of course, there are better ideas then others. Capitalism was an average one. It needed a lot of corrections very early on.

 

[Audie]

The differe

As was Adam Smith, Keynes, Burke, Hobbs and the fathers of your favored systems. They all went wrong at some point too and had to be corrected by other idealists. That's how life works. Someone gets an idea to solve a problem, if it's convincing we try to apply it and ''wing it'' from there. Idealism is one of the fuel of innovation. Of course, there are better ideas then others. Capitalism was an average one. It needed a lot of corrections very early on.

The difference you overlooked is the power to
enforce.

Mao said, "let alone thousand voices contend "
but he didn't mean it.

 

[Audie]

I'm OK with the idea of social engineering.
For example, laws against criminal acts are
designed to incentivize against such behavior.
Where these socialist types get it wrong is in
the assumption that people will be different, ie,
better in order for their system to work.
It's a bad premise. People will be who they've
always been.

No new socialist man??

 

[epronovost]

The differe

The difference you overlooked is the power to
enforce.

Mao said, "let alone thousand voices contend "
but he didn't mean it.

Absolutely. Mao, Lenin, Castro and others basically took the idea of a ''populist and popular revolution'' and transformed it to ''a minority of self-appointed leaders will tell the people what do to and they will do it''. It's just good old dictators with a new kind of selling pitch inspired by populist grassroot movements that existed before them. They were opportunists at best.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is. Capitalism is a productivist system. To make money, you must produce something (or own something). UBI gives you a revenue on the basis of being a human being; by virtue of nature not through your work, in function of your productivity. It's not opposed to work at all and even encourages it to gain even better living conditions, but it's not necessary for survival. That can be implemented within a mixed economy and already is to a certain degree, but not in a heavily capitalist one due to the role of the State in it.

For reference....
Definition of capitalism | Dictionary.com
Excerpted....
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

It's a left-wing form of anarchism based on ownership by usage. It can be classified as a form of socialism since there is a regulatory role of the State and property of the means of production is collectivised, but it's not collectivised to the whole of society or to the State like in a marxist form of socialist, but to those who participate in a that specific venture. Example, in such a system, Amazon wouldn't belong to its investors, nor the State, but to the totality of its employees including its administration staff.

Anarchism would result in capitalism, simply because
people gravitate towards making & trading things.
And under anarchy, there'd be no mechanism to stop it.
Essentially, you'd have entirely unregulated capitalism.
I prefer some regulation, eg, environmental, monopoly
prevention, GAAP, consumer protection.

 

[Revoltingest]

No new socialist man??

There is only the same old man.
Their behavior can only be improved by
incentives in the system. The system cannot
be predicated upon improved man.

 

[epronovost]

Anarchism would result in capitalism, simply because
people gravitate towards making & trading things.
And under anarchy, there'd be no mechanism to stop it.
Essentially, you'd have entirely unregulated capitalism.
I prefer some regulation, eg, environmental, monopoly
prevention, GAAP, consumer protection.

I thiink you underestimate what anarchism would be. Anarchism is opposed to capitalism due to the fact it's a hierarchical system. Note that making and trading things isn't anything related toward capitalism. It's a feature of all economic systems down to barter economy and hunter-gatherers. What anarchism wouldn't allow you is to own means of productions or a non-elective corporate structure.

 

[Revoltingest]

I thiink you underestimate what anarchism would be. Anarchism is opposed to capitalism due to the fact it's a hierarchical system.

Ref....
Definition of anarchism | Dictionary.com
Excerpted....
noun
1 a doctrine urging the abolition of government or governmental
restraint as the indispensable condition for full social and political liberty.
2 the methods or practices of anarchists, as the use of violence to
undermine government.
3 anarchy.

To say "anarchism" is opposed to capitalism is likely true
for many of the rabble rioting in public. (They aren't the
sharpest tools in the shed....just emotional & violent
ne'er do wells.)
Do away with governmental restraint, & there will be
capitalism. Also piracy. Not just communes & coops.

 

[epronovost]

capitalism. Also piracy. Not just communes & coops.

And how will capitalist maintain their property rights without a government to enforce it? Without a government security force on their side people living in mansions don't tend to keep them long. Accumulating capital would require governance as would corporate structure, stock exchange, etc. Here's a higher quality definition of it.

Anarchism is a political philosophy and movement that is sceptical of authority and rejects all involuntary, coercive forms of hierarchy. Anarchism calls for the abolition of the state, which it holds to be undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful. It is usually described alongside libertarian Marxism as the libertarian wing (libertarian socialism) of the socialist movement and as having a historical association with anti-capitalism and socialism.

There is indeed a school called anarcho-capitalist but much like anarcho-nationalist, they are poorly seen by older schools of anarchism since both would call for a State and violence to be maintained. Anarcho-capitalism is basically the wet dream of robber barons afterall with support for slavery, pedophilia and other "wonderfully equalitarian and humane notions".

 

[Revoltingest]

And how will capitalist maintain their property rights without a government to enforce it?

By force.
It's the old way.
Hire the Pinkertons.
Better than the courts & cops.

Definition of anarchy | Dictionary.com
Excerpted....
1 a state of society without government or law.
2 political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control:The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.

 

[epronovost]

By force.
It's the old way.
Hire the Pinkertons.
Better than the courts & cops.

Definition of anarchy | Dictionary.com
Excerpted....
1 a state of society without government or law.
2 political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control:The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.

Don't confuse anarchism, the political doctrine, with the colloquial anarchism as a state of lawlessness. Words have different meaning depening on their usage.

 

[Revoltingest]

Don't confuse anarchism, the political doctrine, with the colocial anarchism as a state of lawlessness.

What kind of government do you imagine anarchists would implemnet?

 

[epronovost]

What kind of government do you imagine anarchists would implemnet?

Like those found in the Anarchist communes and proto-state of history. It's a form of grassroot direct democracy based around community councils, worker assemblies or, in the case of 11th century Island, "Thing", which is some sort of people's assembly, the ancestor of modern parliements.

 

[Revoltingest]

Like those found in the Anarchist communes and proto-state of history. It's a form of grassroot direct democracy based around community councils, worker assemblies or, in the case of 11th century Island, "Thing", which is some sort of people's assembly, the ancestor of modern parliements.

Tyranny of the majority, eh.
Will it have police & a military?
Those would be necessary to prevent capitalism,
ie, free economic association (without the permission
of community councils & worker assemblies).
Doesn't sound so stateless.
Why do you think it wouldn't evolve into the kinds
of governments we see around the globe already?

 

[Watchmen]

By force.
It's the old way.
Hire the Pinkertons.
Better than the courts & cops.

Definition of anarchy | Dictionary.com
Excerpted....
1 a state of society without government or law.
2 political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control:The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.

Hire the Peaky Blinders!

 

[epronovost]

Tyranny of the majority, eh.

Not exactly since anarchist do have a conception of natural humans rights at the core of their ideology. Anarchist proto-states and commune had social contracts at their basis.

Will it have police & a military?

No it doesn't at least not in such a formal manner. (though a militia on call to protect's people natural rights would exist). Elected sheriffs and peace officers could be thing too.

Those would be necessary to prevent capitalism,
ie, free economic association (without the permission
of community councils & worker assemblies).

You can make all the economic association of your choice and start any business of your choice whenever you want. The only trick is that you own wht you use which means all your employees, all your partners, if you have any and aren't a one person business, would have an equal share in the process and interest of your business.

Why do you think it wouldn't evolve into the kinds
of governments we see around the globe already?

It depends on the type of anarchism and the circumstances. It could indeed transform in a number of thing from a more classical representative democracy with a decentralised structure to a brutal dictatorship ruled by some crazed warlord, but that can be true of any form of government or organisation. They are all subject to changes and risks.

 

[Revoltingest]

Hire the Peaky Blinders!

Imagine a stateless country....no government but for these
councils & committees. Organized crime would flourish.
Heckfire, it wouldn't even be a crime.
Anarchists should move to Somalia during its
government's collapse. Try anarchy on for size.

 

[epronovost]

Organized crime would flourish.

Actually, anarchist proto-states and communes proved to be no more criminalised than the any other society or community.

Somalia isn't exactly a good example since it's more of an imploded State that turned into dozens of fief held by warlords and robber barons.