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

[The Reformed American Republic]

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.

No, it's true. Many libertarian thinktankes unironically believe that. Sure, not all do, but still, and no, that's not poisoning the well. That's stating facts.

[Kowani]

"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 you are unfamiliar with the idea that people should have their basic needs provided for is not my fault

[The Reformed American Republic]

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 you are unfamiliar with the idea that people should have their basic needs provided for is not my fault

We agree on nothing else, and I support that.

[Proctopeo]

"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 commune is 99% slam poets, baristas, and tarot readers. The remaining one person operates the giant black box that magically creates all the materials, products, and services so nobody has to do anything.

[Merrill]

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.

The US has spent more than 23 TRILLION dollars since 1965 on anti poverty programs. Please, tell us, how much more does it take?

[Tarsonis]

Poisoning the well does not a refutation make.

No, it's true. Many libertarian thinktankes unironically believe that. Sure, not all do, but still, and no, that's not poisoning the well. That's stating facts.

You're not refuting my point however.

[Alcala-Cordel]

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.

People have always been unimaginative about the future, but the future's always been something beyond imagination.


The people behind the status quo have always spent unfathomable sums of wealth to spread these beliefs and undermine new revolutions, but things will change whether you like it or not.

[Merrill]

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.

Small groups of people can choose to live as you want and be somewhat successful. It doesn't scale up to larger societies. What do you do when someone doesn't want to "share" the fruits of their labor? Will you force them?

[The Black Forrest]

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

The US has spent more than 23 TRILLION dollars since 1965 on anti poverty programs. Please, tell us, how much more does it take?

Ahhh? Trick question? how about as much as it takes to annoy the “I’ve got mine; screw you all” types?

So out of that time; does you source mention how much of an effort went on to eliminate social assistance programs?

[Immortan Khan]

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

The US has spent more than 23 TRILLION dollars since 1965 on anti poverty programs. Please, tell us, how much more does it take?

As much as needed to ensure there is not a single hungry belly.

[North Washington Republic]

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.

People have always been unimaginative about the future, but the future's always been something beyond imagination.


The people behind the status quo have always spent unfathomable sums of wealth to spread these beliefs and undermine new revolutions, but things will change whether you like it or not.

Of course things change, but change for change sake isn’t always good and should require the consent of the govern, that is why we have elections. We shouldn’t be chasing unachievable pipe dreams when we can implement reforms such as a wealth tax. We’ve had 90% tax rates for the rich in the past, and we can do it again to pay for services that the poor and marginalized communities need in order to live.

Basic human nature and pure Marxism is like oil and water.

[Merrill]

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.

I'm not an Objectivist. Rand rejected private charity, I wish we had more of it. I have an optimistic view of humanity. People will take care of their neighbors, they just need the boot off of their neck so that they can. People miss an important point in the Parable of the Good Samaritan: he had MONEY! He had enough to spare, he could CHOOSE to help! We need a robust, unfettered economy. Prosperity reduces poverty.

Why are so many of you so pessimistic? You seem to believe that people won't help others unless they are compelled to by the government.

[North Washington Republic]

The US has spent more than 23 TRILLION dollars since 1965 on anti poverty programs. Please, tell us, how much more does it take?

Ahhh? Trick question? how about as much as it takes to annoy the “I’ve got mine; screw you all” types?

So out of that time; does you source mention how much of an effort went on to eliminate social assistance programs?

Indeed. We pay more when we eliminate social assistance programs. Incarcerating someone costs more than providing social services that can reduce their chances of being incarcerated

[Alcala-Cordel]

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.

Small groups of people can choose to live as you want and be somewhat successful. It doesn't scale up to larger societies.

"Large societies" can easily be divided.

What do you do when someone doesn't want to "share" the fruits of their labor? Will you force them?

Everyone contributes according to their ability and receives according to their need. Everyone should be raised to help others. If they don't wanna help, well, they can try to survive on their own I guess.

What if I live under a bourgeois-dominated society that I donwant to participate in?

[The Reformed American Republic]

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.

I'm not an Objectivist. Rand rejected private charity, I wish we had more of it. I have an optimistic view of humanity. People will take care of their neighbors, they just need the boot off of their neck so that they can. People miss an important point in the Parable of the Good Samaritan: he had MONEY! He had enough to spare, he could CHOOSE to help! We need a robust, unfettered economy. Prosperity reduces poverty.

Why are so many of you so pessimistic? You seem to believe that people won't help others unless they are compelled to by the government.

Because many won't help or at least not enough. When we impose tax cuts and deregulation, most people don't benefit but the ultra-wealthy, and they buy more yachts than help those in need. We live in an era where a handful of people own more than half the world's population. How is that acceptable? It's not, and I'm hardly a communist.

[Alcala-Cordel]

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.

I'm not an Objectivist. Rand rejected private charity, I wish we had more of it. I have an optimistic view of humanity. People will take care of their neighbors, they just need the boot off of their neck so that they can. People miss an important point in the Parable of the Good Samaritan: he had MONEY! He had enough to spare, he could CHOOSE to help! We need a robust, unfettered economy. Prosperity reduces poverty.

Why are so many of you so pessimistic? You seem to believe that people won't help others unless they are compelled to by the government.

That bit about people being willing to help each other out is my talking point, don't try to attach this bourgeois pseudo-"libertarian" nonsense to it.

[Postauthoritarian America]

Biden moves to purge Trump appointees from non-political positions and they unanimously tell him to pound sand.

Just what about "serves at the pleasure of the President" don't they understand? A position appointed by the President is a political position; what the President giveth the President can taketh away. Go ahead, sue, and be sure and use money that otherwise would go to Republican candidates to pay for your pointless and futile lawsuit. I love it.

[Merrill]

Ahhh? Trick question? how about as much as it takes to annoy the “I’ve got mine; screw you all” types?

So out of that time; does you source mention how much of an effort went on to eliminate social assistance programs?

Indeed. We pay more when we eliminate social assistance programs. Incarcerating someone costs more than providing social services that can reduce their chances of being incarcerated

Prison in the US is an abomination. There should be fewer laws, the only crimes should be direct harm to others. There should be no prisons, only punishments. Locking someone up doesn't do anything for the victim. Theft should be repaid. Assault should be flogging, plus monetary recompense. Murder should result in slavery to the victims family to replace (as much as possible) the life taken.

[Merrill]

Small groups of people can choose to live as you want and be somewhat successful. It doesn't scale up to larger societies.

"Large societies" can easily be divided.

What do you do when someone doesn't want to "share" the fruits of their labor? Will you force them?

Everyone contributes according to their ability and receives according to their need. Everyone should be raised to help others. If they don't wanna help, well, they can try to survive on their own I guess.

What if I live under a bourgeois-dominated society that I donwant to participate in?

You don't want to work? You want everyone else to support you?

[Tarsonis]

Small groups of people can choose to live as you want and be somewhat successful. It doesn't scale up to larger societies.

"Large societies" can easily be divided.

What do you do when someone doesn't want to "share" the fruits of their labor? Will you force them?

Everyone contributes according to their ability and receives according to their need. Everyone should be raised to help others. If they don't wanna help, well, they can try to survive on their own I guess.

What if I live under a bourgeois-dominated society that I donwant to participate in?

So you support no work no food policies

[The Reformed American Republic]

Indeed. We pay more when we eliminate social assistance programs. Incarcerating someone costs more than providing social services that can reduce their chances of being incarcerated

Prison in the US is an abomination. There should be fewer laws, the only crimes should be direct harm to others. There should be no prisons, only punishments. Locking someone up doesn't do anything for the victim. Theft should be repaid. Assault should be flogging, plus monetary recompense. Murder should result in slavery to the victims family to replace (as much as possible) the life taken.

So you're liberating us from the eighth amendment?

[Postauthoritarian America]

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

The US has spent more than 23 TRILLION dollars since 1965 on anti poverty programs. Please, tell us, how much more does it take?

The US has spent about the same on its military since 1965 and lost every war it started. Please, tell us, how much more does it take?

[Alcala-Cordel]

Indeed. We pay more when we eliminate social assistance programs. Incarcerating someone costs more than providing social services that can reduce their chances of being incarcerated

Prison in the US is an abomination.

Oh, for sure. The fact that we let private corporations int-

There should be fewer laws, the only crimes should be direct harm to others.

Yeah, like capitalism! Maybe we should focus on rehabilitation instead of-

There should be no prisons, only punishments.

Or... maybe not focus on punishment so much as social programs to prevent crime from happening in the first place and rehabil-

Locking someone up doesn't do anything for the victim.

I mean yeah, which is why in most cases we should try to help the-

Theft should be repaid.

...

Assault should be flogging, plus monetary recompense.

That's still really cruel, though, and it still wouldn't do anything for the victim. You're still more focused on revenge than societal improvement, which is the very issue behind priso-

Murder should result in slavery to the victims family to replace (as much as possible) the life taken.

Okay what the fuck

[Alcala-Cordel]

"Large societies" can easily be divided.


Everyone contributes according to their ability and receives according to their need. Everyone should be raised to help others. If they don't wanna help, well, they can try to survive on their own I guess.

What if I live under a bourgeois-dominated society that I donwant to participate in?

So you support no work no food policies

I thought we were talking about greedy people who wanted to hoard the value of people's labor

[Alcala-Cordel]

"Large societies" can easily be divided.


Everyone contributes according to their ability and receives according to their need. Everyone should be raised to help others. If they don't wanna help, well, they can try to survive on their own I guess.

What if I live under a bourgeois-dominated society that I donwant to participate in?

You don't want to work? You want everyone else to support you?

Did I say that? No? There's your answer.