Capitalism

[Republicana]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HA HA HA I can laugh at my own jokes too!!!!!!!HA HA HA

[Marco]

Republicana - WHO ARE YOU???

[Anonymous]

Ha ha ha ha ha I know who you are REPUBLICANA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think most people know who she is, dont they?????!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

But O'Rourke's philosophy isn't just the sort that would allow gay marriages. Fascists believe that the state should have lots of power and tell people people how to live. I believe (and presumably O'Rourke) that individuals should be permitted to make their own choices about how they live their lives. For example, they should be permitted to have gay marriages, smoke cigarettes etc, spend their money in the way they chose. Those lifestyle choices may not always be good ones, but that's besides the point.

Worryingly, there are fascists on this site. People who believe that the state should tell people how to live their lives. For things they want to do, they think government has not business interfering with - very convenient! But they want all sorts of laws and regulations against those they resent - not the Jews this time, but against the entrepeneurs, the middle classes, and those who create wealth. They think people should not be able to make their own choices about how they can spend their money.

[Emma]

The definition comes from 'fasces', a bunch of sticks tied together that are stronger for their unity. When you say there are fascists on the site, you are implying that people here want to be bound together in unity with everyone else. Perhaps by this you mean they believe government intervention should be stronger in fiscal - and therefore personal -life. Yet, if my guess is correct, these are often the same people offering contrary opinions to the status quo. Why would they want to remove rights such as freedom of speech? Human rights are here for the greater good. Freedom of speech, assembly, press, worship etc. These are laudable. I wish every country had them. And I agree with PJ about personal liberties such as smoking in public, marrying who you love and any number of small things that the government has no role in.

But the kind of freedom afforded by unregulated capitalism (and i stress; un- or under-regulated) can lead to unpleasantries such as pollution and exploitation. These are not for the common good. not for ANYONE. Who cares howw rich we all are if our planet is unlivable and our lifestyles are unsustainable? (remember, fossil fuels aren't forever) And in many cases where the only motivation is profit, human rights are suppressed, eg right to assembly. I'd say the right to strike for better pay and working conditions too but maybe that's just a little 'fascist' for you. I believe in private property. But I also believe in public property, eg healthcare and education. I believe in government intervention, but I believe in human rights too. Is that so very improbable?

[Hendrik Puschmann]

for once I feel compelled to make a contribution to St-Adz.

You say, modern capitalism is unregulated. Where do you get this notion from? Capitalism can only be sustained by sophisticated (and costly) regulatory institutions which ensure that competition prevails. E. g. the EU commission. Whithout them, monopolies and oligopolies would suffocate free market activity in no time. Why compete if you can band together and thus effortlessly control the market? Unless, of course, the market is regulated.

I am not criticising your beliefs here (I'd only grow angry). I simply think that you underestimate the complexity of modern capitalism and its balance of power.

On the contrary, I respect your idealistic struggle for a better world. Well, I do most of the time. So long as I am sufficiently far away. Like on a differend continent.

Yours ever,

Hendrik Puschmann

[Rob Milsom]

Ah, Hendrik, how good it is to hear you once again. You may not be Serjent-At-Arms any more, but it seems you are as keen as ever to put in your tuppence-worth.

On the capitalism debate, you are, however, sadly mistaken. Capitalism in the free market sense cannot proceed without some degree of under-regulation. Whilst in theory, there are protocols to prevent unregulated exploitation, in practise - as I am sure you remember from your IR lectures - large swathes of the earth are effectively res nullius (and so anything goes): viz the Kyoto Protocol.

Possibly you overestimate the benigness of free markets and the sterngth of their regultory institutions......

Yours, with the greatest respect for your opinions, much as I don't agree with them,

Rob

[Emma]

I did not say that modern capitalism was underregulated, but many desire it to be. Ask Marian.

[Al]

life wasn't as dull with you to rip the shit out of daily on this site...

[Glorious Left]

What on earth for?

[Anonymous]

makes us into mad, selfish, killer arseholes. YOu anal lot - what on earth did property ever do for the world?

[pelopidas]

"Property
makes us into mad, selfish, killer arseholes. YOu anal lot - what on earth did property ever do for the world?"

what? is this serious?
"mad, selfish, killer arseholes"- speak for yourself

[pilot]

you honestly don't believe in private property. Try going and living in a council house, you'll probably understand the merits then.

[COLLECTIVISE]

If you weren't so selfish, people wouldn't need to live in stinking council houses or on the streets. There's enough to go round. Property is a flawed concept, not one to be respected.

[pelopidas]

"Property is a flawed concept, not one to be respected" What the fuck do you think happened in Russia?
The land was collectivised by Lenin. Guess what happened,productivity fell, there were 2 famines isolated to Russia in which millions died. Why did this happen? Because nobody had any motivation to work and grow food.
Property is flawed is it? Not nearly as flawed as your bloody stupid ideas which History has proved wrong.
Why do you think the standard of living and longevity of life are far higher in capitalist countries than communist ones????

[monkeymadness]

COULD I HAVE EVERYONE'S ATTENTION:

DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE ABOVE DISCUSSION HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT MOSTLY BY 'ANONYMOUS' PEOPLE, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO READ, NAY, EVEN TRUST THE ABOVE STATEMENTS. THIS IS BECAUSE I DONT KNOW WHO THEY ARE.






(posted by the office of 'we are too scared to let our readers know about alternatives to us')

[S.P.I.G]

A not too subtle dig at the Saint Monkeymadness?

[monkeymadness]

no sorry, it was all a typo.

[underworlddreams]

no sorry, it was all a typo.

[Thackary]

Chuckle!