American Politics Thread VI: Can't We All Just Get Along?

[North Washington Republic]

>:(

We need a moderately regulated free market economy to have an comprehensive and efficient welfare state. A comprehensive and efficient welfare state cannot be achieved with a planned economy.

Welfare states do not eliminate the parasitic nature or unsustainability of capitalism. The goal needs to be less nearsighted and unimaginative than that, we need communal ownership of the means of production under which people will contribute according to their ability and receive according to their need.

Bourgeois-controlled society has proven itself to be inefficient and selfish, it's past time for a change. The wealthy are not a necessary part of society.

We need wealth to provide the social services that poor and marginalized communities need. Countries that have tried “communal ownership”/state ownership and planned economies were not and are not able to provide adequate services to their people. Cuba is a prime example of this. This is the issue of Marxism, it’s purely idealistic and not practical.

[Alcala-Cordel]

"Voluntary" implies there are other options. Under capitalism you have no options besides laboring for the bourgeoisie or becoming petty bourgeois yourself.

it's the same under communism, just replace bourgeoisie with "The Party"

There are no parties or states in communism.

[Exalted Inquellian State]

"Voluntary" implies there are other options. Under capitalism you have no options besides laboring for the bourgeoisie or becoming petty bourgeois yourself.

it's the same under communism, just replace bourgeoisie with "The Party"

Thats authoritarian socialism. Which does result from attempts to communism a good chunk of the time, and in effect, any government which controls production is a large company, but still.

[Merrill]

The type of theft that libertarianism is meant to protect.

Oh yes, they love some corporate authoritarianism.

When Wal-Mart can throw me in a rape cage for not shopping there, then I’ll take your argument seriously.

[Tarsonis]

My employer doesn’t force my labor. I can get a better job, or start business (wouldn’t it be nice if the government didn’t make that so difficult). Labor is voluntary, taxation and other government edicts are compulsory.

"work or starve"
libertarianism, not even once

That's not libertarianism, that's reality.

[Tarsonis]

it's the same under communism, just replace bourgeoisie with "The Party"

There are no parties or states in communism.

Of course not. It's never "real communism" is it

[Exalted Inquellian State]

There are no parties or states in communism.

Of course not. It's never "real communism" is it

Its an attempt at communism, about half the time at least. But not communism.

[Tarsonis]

Of course not. It's never "real communism" is it

Its an attempt at communism, about half the time at least. But not communism.

woosh

[Merrill]

The type of theft that libertarianism is meant to protect.

Also why is welfare their go to target instead of say the massive police state?
For example:

Revealed: LAPD officers told to collect social media data on every civilian they stop


The Los Angeles police department (LAPD) has directed its officers to collect the social media information of every civilian they interview, including individuals who are not arrested or accused of a crime, according to records shared with the Guardian.


Copies of the “field interview cards” that police complete when they question civilians reveal that LAPD officers are instructed to record a civilian’s Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and other social media accounts, alongside basic biographical information. An internal memo further shows that the police chief, Michel Moore, told employees that it was critical to collect the data for use in “investigations, arrests, and prosecutions”, and warned that supervisors would review cards to ensure they were complete.

The documents, which were obtained by the not-for-profit organization the Brennan Center for Justice, have raised concerns about civil liberties and the potential for mass surveillance of civilians without justification.

“There are real dangers about police having all of this social media identifying information at their fingertips,” said Rachel Levinson-Waldman, a deputy director at the Brennan Center, noting that the information was probably stored in a database that could be used for a wide range of purposes.

The Brennan Center conducted a review of 40 other police agencies in the US and was unable to find another department that required social media collection on interview cards (though many have not publicly disclosed copies of the cards). The organization also obtained records about the LAPD’s social media surveillance technologies, which have raised questions about the monitoring of activist groups including Black Lives Matter.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... WCXdPG23aI

I think you’re confusing libertarianism with progressives on both the left and right. Libertarians, , Minarchists, etc, desperately want fewer laws, and the police to be drastically reduced in their powers to enforce the laws that remain. No libertarian supports the example above.

[Alcala-Cordel]

>:(
Welfare states do not eliminate the parasitic nature or unsustainability of capitalism. The goal needs to be less nearsighted and unimaginative than that, we need communal ownership of the means of production under which people will contribute according to their ability and receive according to their need.

Bourgeois-controlled society has proven itself to be inefficient and selfish, it's past time for a change. The wealthy are not a necessary part of society.

We need wealth to provide the social services that poor and marginalized communities need. Countries that have tried “communal ownership”/state ownership and planned economies were not and are not able to provide adequate services to their people. Cuba is a prime example of this. This is the issue of Marxism, it’s purely idealistic and not practical.

Ah, the ol' reliable "no capitalism = vuvuzela" fallacy. What an unimaginative view of the future.

Powerful people have pulled this nonsense since the first empires emerged, acting like they were the only stable form of society and as such the endpoint. A few hundred years ago it was a popular belief in many parts of the world that democracy was impossible. The thing is that history never stops, and someday we'll be minor pieces of another historic age for modern people to learn about. Hopefully those people will live better than we do today, in a Zapatista-style community-focused society that's gone further than we could dream of.

[Proctopeo]

I don't know what powers Biden thinks he has, but I don't think he can get governors "out of the way".

[Immortan Khan]

"work or starve"
libertarianism, not even once

That's not libertarianism, that's reality.

Only because we allow it. An extensive social housing and welfare program would drastically reduce, if not eliminate, hunger.

[Antipatros]

I don't know what powers Biden thinks he has, but I don't think he can get governors "out of the way".

Lawyers are famously creative, you know.

[The Reformed American Republic]

That's not libertarianism, that's reality.

Only because we allow it. An extensive social housing and welfare program would drastically reduce, if not eliminate, hunger.

Sounds too rational for the status quo, but it is something that I certainly want to be implemented.

[Tarsonis]

That's not libertarianism, that's reality.

Only because we allow it. An extensive social housing and welfare program would drastically reduce, if not eliminate, hunger.

Even welfare, has work requirements unless one can claim disability. Welfare is a crutch not a means of sustenance. Otherwise you're proving Meril's point correct that Welfare recipients are parasites leaching from those who produce.

[Merrill]

>:(

We need a moderately regulated free market economy to have an comprehensive and efficient welfare state. A comprehensive and efficient welfare state cannot be achieved with a planned economy.

Welfare states do not eliminate the parasitic nature or unsustainability of capitalism. The goal needs to be less nearsighted and unimaginative than that, we need communal ownership of the means of production under which people will contribute according to their ability and receive according to their need.

Bourgeois-controlled society has proven itself to be inefficient and selfish, it's past time for a change. The wealthy are not a necessary part of society.

If the current society is inefficient and selfish, where are you going to get these perfect people that are unselfish to live in your ideal society. "The New Soviet Man" failed, just like all attempts to forcibly change human nature.

[Alcala-Cordel]

>:(
Welfare states do not eliminate the parasitic nature or unsustainability of capitalism. The goal needs to be less nearsighted and unimaginative than that, we need communal ownership of the means of production under which people will contribute according to their ability and receive according to their need.

Bourgeois-controlled society has proven itself to be inefficient and selfish, it's past time for a change. The wealthy are not a necessary part of society.

If the current society is inefficient and selfish, where are you going to get these perfect people that are unselfish to live in your ideal society. "The New Soviet Man" failed, just like all attempts to forcibly change human nature.

People as a whole aren't fundamentally bad or incapable of cooperation, the system in place is just run by selfish people.

We don't need to be perfect, we just need change.

[Immortan Khan]

Only because we allow it. An extensive social housing and welfare program would drastically reduce, if not eliminate, hunger.

Even welfare, has work requirements unless one can claim disability.

Disability requirements usually out of reach to many, especially those with mental health conditions. Then of course the homeless are caught in a trap - can't get a job without a place of residence, can't get some assistance without a job. There are far too many hoops.

Welfare is a crutch not a means of sustenance.

For the homeless, infirm, and elderly it 100% should be and should be far more accessible.

Otherwise you're proving Meril's point correct that Welfare recipients are parasites leaching from those who produce.

I care not for yours and his venomous worldview.

[Merrill]

My employer doesn’t force my labor. I can get a better job, or start business (wouldn’t it be nice if the government didn’t make that so difficult). Labor is voluntary, taxation and other government edicts are compulsory.

"Voluntary" implies there are other options. Under capitalism you have no options besides laboring for the bourgeoisie or becoming petty bourgeois yourself.

I don't want to help billionaires buy more megayachts, but if I don't work and buy things I'll become homeless.

As I've written previously, we need a frontier. When those that don't like the current society can found their own, everyone is happier. Planetary colonization can't get here soon enough. I could move to FreeHold, and you could join The Culture instead of stealing others property.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Only because we allow it. An extensive social housing and welfare program would drastically reduce, if not eliminate, hunger.

Even welfare, has work requirements unless one can claim disability. Welfare is a crutch not a means of sustenance. Otherwise you're proving Meril's point correct that Welfare recipients are parasites leaching from those who produce.

The people who agree with Meril's point are the ones who would normally agree with it no matter what. The people who read Ayn Rand and think she was a visionary and they often have psychopathic outlooks revolving around misapplying natural selection to human societies.

[Proctopeo]

it's the same under communism, just replace bourgeoisie with "The Party"

There are no parties or states in communism.

On paper, maybe. But quite a lot changes when the fantasy of communism collides with reality. The closest example of anything close to this idealized "true" communism are the Amish, and their religious nature is probably unsavory for most people who ascribe to communism.

I don't know what powers Biden thinks he has, but I don't think he can get governors "out of the way".

Lawyers are famously creative, you know.

There's really not much he can do except for making vague threats, I don't think. Unless he wishes to cast the die and go full autocrat, but that's very unlikely.

[Merrill]

My employer doesn’t force my labor. I can get a better job, or start business (wouldn’t it be nice if the government didn’t make that so difficult). Labor is voluntary, taxation and other government edicts are compulsory.

"work or starve"
libertarianism, not even once

In your Socialist Utopia, no one has to work if they don't want to? Are you magically at Star Trek levels of technology?

[The Black Forrest]

"work or starve"
libertarianism, not even once

In your Socialist Utopia, no one has to work if they don't want to? Are you magically at Star Trek levels of technology?

That would be SO coool.

[Tarsonis]

Even welfare, has work requirements unless one can claim disability. Welfare is a crutch not a means of sustenance. Otherwise you're proving Meril's point correct that Welfare recipients are parasites leaching from those who produce.

The people who agree with Meril's point are the ones who would normally agree with it no matter what. The people who read Ayn Rand and think she was a visionary and they often have psychopathic outlooks revolving around misapplying natural selection to human societies.

Poisoning the well does not a refutation make.

[North Washington Republic]

We need wealth to provide the social services that poor and marginalized communities need. Countries that have tried “communal ownership”/state ownership and planned economies were not and are not able to provide adequate services to their people. Cuba is a prime example of this. This is the issue of Marxism, it’s purely idealistic and not practical.

Ah, the ol' reliable "no capitalism = vuvuzela" fallacy. What an unimaginative view of the future.

Powerful people have pulled this nonsense since the first empires emerged, acting like they were the only stable form of society and as such the endpoint. A few hundred years ago it was a popular belief in many parts of the world that democracy was impossible. The thing is that history never stops, and someday we'll be minor pieces of another historic age for modern people to learn about. Hopefully those people will live better than we do today, in a Zapatista-style community-focused society that's gone further than we could dream of.

I take pride in having an unimaginative view of the future, so thank you very much. The fact is that even self-described Communist countries such as People’s Republic of China and Vietnam realized that they had to have some semblance of a free market economy in order to provide the services that their people need. This is reality. The idealism of pure Marxism is unachievable in the real world.