Occupy London! Here we go again!

Radiation · 22 Oct 2011 at 14:13

Dolph said:
No, it won't mean any of the above. You are just advocating what has already been attempted in places like the Soviet Union. May I suggest you go and research just how horrible those places were and how many people were killed or imprisoned by those states to keep the 'utopia' going?

This is an old and pointless comment as im not talking about communism, im talking about an improved and fairer form of capitalism/socialism, we've already seen the benefits of this but it doesn't go far enough, ideally we would live in a resource based system.

Theres obvious and huge differences from what you're talking about, what happened under those countries wasn't really about improving quality of life, it was about control, in the modern world we can build on what we have using science and technology, diversity and new ideas, trying to improve quality of life and civilisation as whole.

PermaBanned · 22 Oct 2011 at 14:14

Dolph said:
Any dictatorship is completely unacceptable if you actually believe in freedom.

Of course, we've already established that you do not, you wish for control, not freedom.

State authoritarianism is always ugly and should always be fought against, irrespective of how the authoritarianism is driven.

So you believe in a stateless society? I thought you said you weren't a communist? :confused:

Jay794 · 22 Oct 2011 at 14:17

What did a bunch of people sitting round ever achieve? The reason that 1% have all the wealth is because they bothered to show up for work lol

If you want freedom, go live in the woods

You're born>you work>you have some good times and bad times>you may get the chance to contribute to the prolonging of humanity>then you die

Politics, religion... It's all manufactured. Just enjoy what you've get whether it's an iPhone or a cup and ball

PermaBanned · 22 Oct 2011 at 14:26

Jay794 said:
What did a bunch of people sitting round ever achieve?

1968, France? The Paris Commune?

Dolph · 22 Oct 2011 at 15:13

Radiation said:
This is an old and pointless comment as im not talking about communism, im talking about an improved and fairer form of capitalism/socialism, we've already seen the benefits of this but it doesn't go far enough, ideally we would live in a resource based system.

Theres obvious and huge differences from what you're talking about, what happened under those countries wasn't really about improving quality of life, it was about control, in the modern world we can build on what we have using science and technology, diversity and new ideas, trying to improve quality of life and civilisation as whole.

The idea that you can improve people's quality of life by restricting their freedoms doesn't make any sense to me. What you advocate is state control of property, whatever the form the 'state' currently takes.

PermaBanned said:
So you believe in a stateless society? I thought you said you weren't a communist?

Communism isn't stateless, there is always a body with exclusive access to the monopoly of force (unless you're going for the crazy position where everyone suddenly decides to share the same idea, there are no dissenters and so on).

Incidentally, the term you are looking for with regards to my position is Minarchism, which is almost diametrically opposed to any form of communism or socialism which are highly dependent on 'state' control, of both fiscal and social behaviour.

PermaBanned · 22 Oct 2011 at 15:18

Dolph said:
Communism isn't stateless, there is always a body with exclusive access to the monopoly of force (unless you're going for the crazy position where everyone suddenly decides to share the same idea, there are no dissenters and so on).

Incidentally, the term you are looking for with regards to my position is Minarchism, which is almost diametrically opposed to any form of communism or socialism which are highly dependent on 'state' control, of both fiscal and social behaviour.

Now there's opinion, and there's down right lying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateless_communism

Dolph · 22 Oct 2011 at 15:25

PermaBanned said:
Now there's opinion, and there's down right lying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateless_communism

So like I said, you're going for the crazy position whereby either human nature vanishes or every single product and material suddenly becomes infinitely available.

There is a reason why this has never, ever happened in any attempt to implement communism....

PermaBanned · 22 Oct 2011 at 15:28

So if you'd like to prove your point that the current system is in some way 'better', could you please point out any attempt to implement capitalism that hasn't resulted in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie?

Floogie · 22 Oct 2011 at 15:30

Dolph said:
Communism isn't stateless, there is always a body with exclusive access to the monopoly of force (unless you're going for the crazy position where everyone suddenly decides to share the same idea, there are no dissenters and so on).

Incidentally, the term you are looking for with regards to my position is Minarchism, which is almost diametrically opposed to any form of communism or socialism which are highly dependent on 'state' control, of both fiscal and social behaviour.

Presumably if the disadvantaged majority suffering under your minarchistic utopia decided to change the system, then I'm sure the libertarian regime at the helm would be perfectly fine with that and choose not to exercise any state control?

Or were you counting on the same "crazy position where everyone suddenly decides to share the same idea" that you derided PermaBanned on?

[TW]Fox · 22 Oct 2011 at 15:54

PermaBanned said:
Now there's opinion, and there's down right lying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateless_communism

How on earth would that ever work? It doesnt work and would never work because you'd never get the 100% agreement required by all parties involved!

For a start the 1% you cry about would never go for it

So you'd have to imprison them... oh wait, and so it starts.

PermaBanned · 22 Oct 2011 at 15:57

Why would you when you can just take away their illusion of power?

Jokester · 23 Oct 2011 at 13:58

http://www.newscientist.com/article...e-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world.html

Interesting article about who owns everything.

Dolph · 23 Oct 2011 at 14:12

PermaBanned said:
So if you'd like to prove your point that the current system is in some way 'better', could you please point out any attempt to implement capitalism that hasn't resulted in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie?

Pretty much every capitalist democracy in the west?

Floogie said:
Presumably if the disadvantaged majority suffering under your minarchistic utopia decided to change the system, then I'm sure the libertarian regime at the helm would be perfectly fine with that and choose not to exercise any state control?

Or were you counting on the same "crazy position where everyone suddenly decides to share the same idea" that you derided PermaBanned on?

Constitutional protection of liberties from undue interference

or to put it another way, no individual or group of individuals will be given the right to wield the state monopoly of force unnecessarily.

PermaBanned · 23 Oct 2011 at 14:15

Dolph, that hasn't answered either question.

That is an interesting article, Jokester. But of course, what it doesn't really touch on 'much' is if that is a bad thing or not.

Tefal · 23 Oct 2011 at 14:19

PermaBanned said:
So if you'd like to prove your point that the current system is in some way 'better'

It exists.

The other system does not.

CREATIVE!11 · 23 Oct 2011 at 14:59

Jay794 said:
What did a bunch of people sitting round ever achieve? The reason that 1% have all the wealth is because they bothered to show up for work lol

If you want freedom, go live in the woods

You're born>you work>you have some good times and bad times>you may get the chance to contribute to the prolonging of humanity>then you die

Politics, religion... It's all manufactured. Just enjoy what you've get whether it's an iPhone or a cup and ball

Strong logic bro.

a lot of keyboard warriors ITT too, don't know how some people can be that bothered to sit and argue on a forum LOL. I have much better things to do with my time than try to "prove people wrong to massage my e-ego!".

ubersonic · 24 Oct 2011 at 13:58

If these self labelled "anti capitalists" hate our capitalist society so much maybe we can find them a better one, would they like the communist society of China? nope didn't think so, how about the socialist society of the USSR, nope not that either, then maybe they would enjoy the fascist society of the third reich? no not that? oh wait maybe they just want a free ride and to get in the news and cause trouble? ahh thought so, Get a job wasters.

anything I don't mind · 24 Oct 2011 at 14:16

I went again at lunch and i noticed a sign behind the socialist workers stand that said "end wealth" and next to it "how about a maximum wage".

I had to go up and tell them that it was the dumbest sign i have ever seen. I asked them if they want more people to be poor and they denied owning the sign. I then said they should take it down because it is stupid. They said it was not their sign and anyone can put any sign up. So i asked if i can put up a sign that says kill people. They said that the sign does not say that.

I then started to give them a lecture about how we already have socialism and that socialism is authoritarian and an american guy came up and we had a lengthy debate about socialism and i suggested he check out mises.org.

But the socialist workers table and the end weatlh sign remains. I was thinking of putting up a sign that says "end government" right behind them.

Glaucus · 24 Oct 2011 at 14:18

What I don't get, is many have said they have no jobs. But I thought if you signed on you had to be avilabe for work. How the hell do they qualify.

elmarko · 24 Oct 2011 at 14:59

shoes said:
Lol yeah those companies MADE you buy those products, they FORCED you to take out loads you couldn't afford, they created products which make your life better and easier, they generate so much tax it would blow your mind and that then pays for all the nice things the government provide us with, infrastructure, pensions, welfare, healthcare, education..... they give people jobs, they give people a purpose in life, they give people income.

Frankly these hippies can go **** themselves and stop blaming the corporations for their own failures. Get back to school and study something other than art you thick *****.

Troll?.

Is anybody this stupid?

You decide.

On a more serious note, those who have a problem with corporate greed - mainly the point of expecting the tax-payer (you know those of us in work) to get out the wallet for massive bailouts & corporate welfare packages.

Privatise the profits, nationalise the losses is the current method.

I'd wager by your defence of capitalism, you like it - well, have you considering that we are not living in a capitalist country? (in real capitalism the banks would have gone bust).