Capitalism versus Communism, Anarchism etc Watch

This discussion is closed.
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#61
Report 15 years ago
#61
(Original post by Mr White)
Capitalism is not perfect, but it is the best realistic chance that the human race has of living peacefully. Sure, people get exploited, but these flaws are minor - people who are weak deserve to be exploited. Equality of condition is one thing that is impossible to acheive, but Equality of opportunity exists fully in any capitalist society, this one included.
And it was going so well until this last paragraph!
0
Mr White
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#62
Report 15 years ago
#62
(Original post by llama boy)
And it was going so well until this last paragraph!
Can you be so sure? Anyone can reach any level in this society. Race, gender, religion, parents - all of these can slightly hinder a person's advancement, but do not make it impossible. It is not true to say that there is any person in this country who couldn't be prime minister if they had the intelligence and motivation.
0
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#63
Report 15 years ago
#63
(Original post by Mr White)
Can you be so sure?
Of what? I'm sure some of your points are logically incoherent and others are wildly unsupported.

Anyone can reach any level in this society. Race, gender, religion, parents - all of these can slightly hinder a person's advancement, but do not make it impossible. It is not true to say that there is any person in this country who couldn't be prime minister if they had the intelligence and motivation.
Well, I'll respectfully disagree. Furthermore you've just contradicted yourself by accepting that equality of opportunity doesn't exist.

As for the rest of your post:

Capitalism is not perfect, but it is the best realistic chance that the human race has of living peacefully.
I found this particularly amusing given the world situation at the moment. Of course you could argue that human nature is naturally competitive etc etc bla bla, but that doesn't mean that a system that embraces that is going to be the most peaceful.

Sure, people get exploited, but these flaws are minor - people who are weak deserve to be exploited.
This bit too. It is logically fallacious to deduce an "ought" from an "is". Perhaps you have a hidden premise in there, if you do I'd like to hear it.

Equality of condition is one thing that is impossible to achieve, but Equality of opportunity exists fully in any capitalist society, this one included.
And here we have the categorical statement that you've just denied.
0
pedy1986
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#64
Report 15 years ago
#64
(Original post by llama boy)
Of what? I'm sure some of your points are logically incoherent and others are wildly unsupported.

Well, I'll respectfully disagree. Furthermore you've just contradicted yourself by accepting that equality of opportunity doesn't exist.

As for the rest of your post:

I found this particularly amusing given the world situation at the moment. Of course you could argue that human nature is naturally competitive etc etc bla bla, but that doesn't mean that a system that embraces that is going to be the most peaceful.

This bit too. It is logically fallacious to deduce an "ought" from an "is". Perhaps you have a hidden premise in there, if you do I'd like to hear it.

And here we have the categorical statement that you've just denied.
Excellent post. Thank you for the link also.
0
Mr White
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#65
Report 15 years ago
#65
(Original post by llama boy)
Of what? I'm sure some of your points are logically incoherent and others are wildly unsupported.

Well, I'll respectfully disagree. Furthermore you've just contradicted yourself by accepting that equality of opportunity doesn't exist.

As for the rest of your post:

I found this particularly amusing given the world situation at the moment. Of course you could argue that human nature is naturally competitive etc etc bla bla, but that doesn't mean that a system that embraces that is going to be the most peaceful.

This bit too. It is logically fallacious to deduce an "ought" from an "is". Perhaps you have a hidden premise in there, if you do I'd like to hear it.

And here we have the categorical statement that you've just denied.
How inane. You seem to think that I care about the best interests of the majority. As long as the elite are fully able to exploit the system (which capitalism allows), then it works. Those who deserve to be at the top of the pyramid, are.
0
randdom
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#66
Report 15 years ago
#66
(Original post by Mr White)
How inane. You seem to think that I care about the best interests of the majority. As long as the elite are fully able to exploit the system (which capitalism allows), then it works. Those who deserve to be at the top of the pyramid, are.
That isn't true because we didn't start on a level playing field and it isn't easy to make the way up the pyrimid.
0
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#67
Report 15 years ago
#67
(Original post by Mr White)
How inane. You seem to think that I care about the best interests of the majority. As long as the elite are fully able to exploit the system (which capitalism allows), then it works. Those who deserve to be at the top of the pyramid, are.
I don't care what you think; only that you manage to express it in a coherent way, backing up your points, and free from logical fallacies.

So far you've failed at that miserably.
0
Mr White
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#68
Report 15 years ago
#68
(Original post by randdom)
That isn't true because we didn't start on a level playing field and it isn't easy to make the way up the pyrimid.
Yes we do. Intelligence and motivation are all that are needed. Are black people unable to get jobs due to their skin colour? What about women and homosexuals? Nope, any social class can reach any level, provided the neccessary motivation and talent is there.
0
Mr White
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#69
Report 15 years ago
#69
(Original post by llama boy)
I don't care what you think; only that you manage to express it in a coherent way, backing up your points, and free from logical fallacies.

So far you've failed at that miserably.
Would you prefer me to quote obscure economic theory to convince you? I am expressing opinions, not writing an essay. I don't participate in this discussion board in an attempt to impress random people I'll never meet, but rather because I enjoy it. You, on the other hand, seem to be the opposite.
0
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#70
Report 15 years ago
#70
(Original post by Mr White)
Would you prefer me to quote obscure economic theory to convince you?
Not at all. I'm expressing my opinion and engaging in constructive criticism of your's. Almost what you'd expect from a discussion board!

I am expressing opinions, not writing an essay.
Are all your opinions this malformed and incoherent?

I don't participate in this discussion board in an attempt to impress random people I'll never meet, but rather because I enjoy it. You, on the other hand, seem to be the opposite.
Now, now Mr White, you know very well you use this message primarily as a tool of your ego. Just like bono, in fact.
0
Mr White
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#71
Report 15 years ago
#71
(Original post by llama boy)
Not at all. I'm expressing my opinion and engaging in constructive criticism of your's. Almost what you'd expect from a discussion board!

Are all your opinions this malformed and incoherent?

Now, now Mr White, you know very well you use this message primarily as a tool of your ego. Just like bono, in fact.
Perhaps, but I don't spend my time aggressively pissing on walls. Keep that testosterone in check and calm down a little bit.
0
pedy1986
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#72
Report 15 years ago
#72
(Original post by Mr White)
Perhaps, but I don't spend my time aggressively pissing on walls. Keep that testosterone in check and calm down a little bit.
Can you make it clear next time you participate in dicussion you wish your own little world view not to be challenged? Thanks.
0
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#73
Report 15 years ago
#73
(Original post by Mr White)
Perhaps, but I don't spend my time aggressively pissing on walls. Keep that testosterone in check and calm down a little bit.
lol, aggressive, moi? not a bit of it. :rolleyes:
0
username9816
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#74
Report 15 years ago
#74
(Original post by Mr White)
Perhaps, but I don't spend my time aggressively pissing on walls. Keep that testosterone in check and calm down a little bit.
What a shame, I was hoping for some amazing forum contribution from yourself, as you are so big mouthed and all. Ahhh well, I guess the drama queen "remember me, this is the end" posts are as far as it goes.
0
Apollo
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#75
Report 15 years ago
#75
(Original post by bono)
What a shame, I was hoping for some amazing forum contribution from yourself, as you are so big mouthed and all. Ahhh well, I guess the drama queen "remember me, this is the end" posts are as far as it goes.
and u say you never start the fights :rolleyes:
0
username9816
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#76
Report 15 years ago
#76
(Original post by PadFoot90)
and u say you never start the fights :rolleyes:
No, i came and llama boy and mr white were arguing.
0
Apollo
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#77
Report 15 years ago
#77
(Original post by bono)
No, i came and llama boy and mr white were arguing.
i meant u and mr white.
0
Mr White
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#78
Report 15 years ago
#78
(Original post by llama boy)
lol, aggressive, moi? not a bit of it. :rolleyes:
Of course not, perish the thought. It's refreshing to find someone with a brain cell for a change, unlike these other people, who's usual tactic of debating is repeating the same point over and over, putting parts in capitals, and randomly accusing people of racism.

Alright, I suppose we have a difference of opinion. I accept that capitalism isn't perfect, but what alternative is there? Communism? Anarchism? Not going to happen, so I would be interested to know what form of government you think would be effective.

Edit: The only one I can think of is a militaristic form of leadership, capable of bullying people into obedience, where democracy is replaced by fear - stalinist Russia, for example, or any third world dictatorship.
0
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#79
Report 15 years ago
#79
(Original post by Mr White)
Alright, I suppose we have a difference of opinion. I accept that capitalism isn't perfect, but what alternative is there? Communism? Anarchism? Not going to happen, so I would be interested to know what form of government you think would be effective.
OK...I guess you mean two things by saying that communism / anarchism are "not going to happen". Firstly, that human nature prohibits those conditions working successfully. Secondly, that there are vested interests too powerful for such a state (sic) to come about.

Taking that as a premise and putting my reformist hat on, I'd probably advocate some form of localised market-based socialism combined with federalist democracy on a global level with absolute constitutional controls to preserve that democracy (strict limits on influences on govt, an independent press, for example). My ideological basis for that would be that the rights of business, per se, are non-existent. Business should only exist and be able to trade in as much as it can serve the people. Of course, you could argue that the vested interests that would oppose communism / anarchism would probably oppose this just as vigorously, and you'd probably be right.

However, there comes a point when you realise that by accepting this you're simultaneously accepting that meaningful change will never happen and paradoxically by doing that you actually make said change even less likely.

Edit: The only one I can think of is a militaristic form of leadership, capable of bullying people into obedience, where democracy is replaced by fear - stalinist Russia, for example, or any third world dictatorship.
A major problem with capitalist democracy is that the former has a nasty habit of infringing on the latter. By ruling out any co-operative or (obviously) dictatorial solution though, you are essentially left with such a system and have to attempt to ensure the two uneasy bedfellows can get along. I would hope the system I briefly outlined would be able to do that, but then capitalism has a habit of being very pervasive indeed.
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#80
Report 15 years ago
#80
"Taking that as a premise and putting my reformist hat on, I'd probably advocate some form of localised market-based socialism combined with federalist democracy on a global level with absolute constitutional controls to preserve that democracy"

You should form a party and sell that to the electorate. They'd lap it up (all 5 of them that could understand it)
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Which party will you be voting for in the General Election?

Conservatives (49)
17.95%
Labour (136)
49.82%
Liberal Democrats (37)
13.55%
Green Party (18)
6.59%
Brexit Party (4)
1.47%
Independent Group for Change (Change UK) (3)
1.1%
SNP (5)
1.83%
Plaid Cymru (2)
0.73%
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) (0)
0%
Sinn Fein (4)
1.47%
SDLP (0)
0%
Ulster Unionist (1)
0.37%
UKIP (6)
2.2%
Other (0)
0%
None (8)
2.93%

Watched Threads

View All