Left Wing Discussion Thread IV: Oh Hai Marx

[Orostan]

The Allende thing happened because of US interventionism, it won't happen 100% of the time. If it did, it would be a complete violation of international law.

Not to mention government actions have nothing to do with capitalism as is the basis of the definition of capitalism

Capitalism is when the means of producrion are privately owned, and goods are produced for use. Even if the government taxes everyone a lot and gives everyone free stuff, if it still meets those criteria it's capitalist.

That wasn't exactly the first (or last) time the US intervened and intercepted democracy.

True, but nonetheless, it is illegal and would cause uproar if it happened today.

No it wouldn't. The 2009 Honduras coup didn't cause that.

Also;
>implying america gives a shit about the law

[New Emeline]

To clarify: I don't think implementing socialism in our current time is feasible, nor would it work in the long run. However, capitalism in the form it is now isn't working either, what with human rights violations and massive environmental damage.

[Orostan]

Venezuela is having problems because it has a 70% private economy trying to destroy the government.


They weren't Communist, they were socialist. They did have it better than they did under Capitalism though.

So, let me get this straight. “It’s always capitalism’s fault. Never mind that oil was the it’s biggest industrial sector, regardless it follows socialist teachings and so on. It didn’t work so it’s not socialism”

No, it didn't work because Capitalists are attempting to sabotage the economy by selling food to Columbia and not Venezuela, as well as Saudi Arabia flooding the oil market. That's not socialism, this is only possible in a market.

[FreedLymonia]

“Not real Scotsman” what a classic.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HXBjVau1w7Y

https://youtu.be/OlB_xNOAn1c

No true scotsman is putting an arbitrary qualifier on something. Emeline isn't doing that.

“The problem with those listed was that they were dictatorships, not that they were socialist/communist.” So you’re denying your denial they were socialist/communist. The only way for it to function is to be tyrannical and it is the only way it will properly be.

[Orostan]

I've got to go now. Anyone who wants to carry on the debate can.

Goodbye!

[New Emeline]

No true scotsman is putting an arbitrary qualifier on something. Emeline isn't doing that.

“The problem with those listed was that they were dictatorships, not that they were socialist/communist.” So you’re denying your denial they were socialist/communist. The only way for it to function is to be tyrannical and it is the only way it will properly be.

I never said they weren't communist/socialist. I said the presence of communism/socialism wasn't the issue with them. You misunderstood my phrasing.

[FreedLymonia]

So, let me get this straight. “It’s always capitalism’s fault. Never mind that oil was the it’s biggest industrial sector, regardless it follows socialist teachings and so on. It didn’t work so it’s not socialism”

No, it didn't work because Capitalists are attempting to sabotage the economy by selling food to Columbia and not Venezuela, as well as Saudi Arabia flooding the oil market. That's not socialism, this is only possible in a market.

Because the government was tyrannical in the first place because of its socialist policies. If it were free, which coincidentally seems to only be with capitalist countries, they might actually of been open to trade.

[FreedLymonia]

To clarify: I don't think implementing socialism in our current time is feasible, nor would it work in the long run. However, capitalism in the form it is now isn't working either, what with human rights violations and massive environmental damage.

Actions of government are unrelated to capitalism. As for the environment, I frankly believe it’s practically natural entirely.

[New Emeline]

To clarify: I don't think implementing socialism in our current time is feasible, nor would it work in the long run. However, capitalism in the form it is now isn't working either, what with human rights violations and massive environmental damage.

Actions of government are unrelated to capitalism. As for the environment, I frankly believe it’s practically natural entirely.

I didn't mean human rights violations from capitalist countries, I meant those from corporations. Whether or not you believe environmental damage is natural or not, you can't deny it will kill us if we don't figure out a solution.

Additionally, by your own logic, actions of government would be unrelated to socialism.

[FreedLymonia]

Not to mention government actions have nothing to do with capitalism as is the basis of the definition of capitalism

Capitalism is when the means of producrion are privately owned, and goods are produced for use. Even if the government taxes everyone a lot and gives everyone free stuff, if it still meets those criteria it's capitalist.

No it doesn’t actually becomes a fascistic state (economically speaking)

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Not to mention government actions have nothing to do with capitalism as is the basis of the definition of capitalism

Capitalism is when the means of producrion are privately owned, and goods are produced for use. Even if the government taxes everyone a lot and gives everyone free stuff, if it still meets those criteria it's capitalist.

True, but nonetheless, it is illegal and would cause uproar if it happened today.

No it wouldn't. The 2009 Honduras coup didn't cause that.

Also;
>implying america gives a shit about the law

The Honduras coup which the US didn't appear to have an involvement in.

[FreedLymonia]

Actions of government are unrelated to capitalism. As for the environment, I frankly believe it’s practically natural entirely.

I didn't mean human rights violations from capitalist countries, I meant those from corporations. Whether or not you believe environmental damage is natural or not, you can't deny it will kill us if we don't figure out a solution.

Additionally, by your own logic, actions of government would be unrelated to socialism.

No my comrade, the vary basis of socialism is workers owning it in other words government. Besides those violations only tend to exist in baren waste lands like Africa and these communist countries. If more capitalism was implemented less would be able to grow as people could vote with their wallet to not fund them. And no it won’t kill us. Literally nothing will change. We are actually no worse off than humanity ever was really. If the weather even does get that bad, by that time our tech would advance farther than now presumably to allow colonization of other planets, artificial stuff, etc

[New Emeline]

I didn't mean human rights violations from capitalist countries, I meant those from corporations. Whether or not you believe environmental damage is natural or not, you can't deny it will kill us if we don't figure out a solution.

Additionally, by your own logic, actions of government would be unrelated to socialism.

Besides those violations only tend to exist in baren waste lands like Africa and these communist countries.

Uhh, no. The atrocities are usually committed by American corporations.
Nike sweatshops, horrendous conditions in Amazon warehouses, Chiquita funding death squads, Nestle using actual slave labor.... Want me to continue?

[FreedLymonia]

Besides those violations only tend to exist in baren waste lands like Africa and these communist countries.

Uhh, no. The atrocities are usually committed by American corporations.
Nike sweatshops, horrendous conditions in Amazon warehouses, Chiquita using death squads, Nestle using actual slave labor.... Want me to continue?

And where were they done again? That’s right. In these communist regimes and poor ass backwards countries often with anti democratic policies. Also slavery is anti capitalist

[New Emeline]

Uhh, no. The atrocities are usually committed by American corporations.
Nike sweatshops, horrendous conditions in Amazon warehouses, Chiquita using death squads, Nestle using actual slave labor.... Want me to continue?

And where were they done again? That’s right. In these communist regimes and poor ass backwards countries often with anti democratic policies. Also slavery is anti capitalist

The governments themselves are not committing the atrocities, the [i]companies[/i] are. The reason they are happening is that exploitation and unethical business practices are profitable, so corporations will continue to commit them.

[FreedLymonia]

And where were they done again? That’s right. In these communist regimes and poor ass backwards countries often with anti democratic policies. Also slavery is anti capitalist

The governments themselves are not committing the atrocities, the companies are. The reason they are happening is that exploitation and unethical business practices are profitable, so corporations will continue to commit them.

And these governments that are supposedly for the working class are just letting it happen. Why not just say no or nationalize them?

[New Emeline]

The governments themselves are not committing the atrocities, the companies are. The reason they are happening is that exploitation and unethical business practices are profitable, so corporations will continue to commit them.

And these governments that are supposedly for the working class are just letting it happen. Why not just say no or nationalize them?

Most of the governments in the exploited countries are capitalist too, so....
Also, I thought government control was bad in your book.

[Uiiop]

The governments themselves are not committing the atrocities, the companies are. The reason they are happening is that exploitation and unethical business practices are profitable, so corporations will continue to commit them.

And these governments that are supposedly for the working class are just letting it happen. Why not just say no or nationalize them?

Because more capitalism is being implemented.

[FreedLymonia]

And these governments that are supposedly for the working class are just letting it happen. Why not just say no or nationalize them?

Most of the governments in the exploited countries are capitalist too, so....
Also, I thought government control was bad in your book.

It is bad, but not in their beliefs.

Also most aren’t nearly as capitalist as say Switzerland.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_o ... ic_Freedom

[Uiiop]

I didn't mean human rights violations from capitalist countries, I meant those from corporations. Whether or not you believe environmental damage is natural or not, you can't deny it will kill us if we don't figure out a solution.

Additionally, by your own logic, actions of government would be unrelated to socialism.

No my comrade, the vary basis of socialism is workers owning it in other words government. Besides those violations only tend to exist in baren waste lands like Africa and these communist countries. If more capitalism was implemented less would be able to grow as people could vote with their wallet to not fund them. And no it won’t kill us. Literally nothing will change. We are actually no worse off than humanity ever was really. If the weather even does get that bad, by that time our tech would advance farther than now presumably to allow colonization of other planets, artificial stuff, etc

How it is in other words "A government"?
Voting with the wallet sounds just as much as a government in practice as that.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Libertarianism inherently is against socialism. Socialism actively goes against what libertarianism seeks.

You are using the American definition of libertarianism which comes from the billionaires who founded this organization. Globally, there are many different types of libertarianism, including my own libertarian communism (Marxism-Luxemburgism, more specifically).

[FreedLymonia]

No my comrade, the vary basis of socialism is workers owning it in other words government. Besides those violations only tend to exist in baren waste lands like Africa and these communist countries. If more capitalism was implemented less would be able to grow as people could vote with their wallet to not fund them. And no it won’t kill us. Literally nothing will change. We are actually no worse off than humanity ever was really. If the weather even does get that bad, by that time our tech would advance farther than now presumably to allow colonization of other planets, artificial stuff, etc

How it is in other words "A government"?
Voting with the wallet sounds just as much as a government in practice as that.

No it’s more of a metaphor. Literally speaking you’re just buying a good or service or not and informing them that they are either bad at what they do or they are doing something bad. Point is that it’s a free market way of saying “we don’t like that” and since they want profit they will.

[FreedLymonia]

Libertarianism inherently is against socialism. Socialism actively goes against what libertarianism seeks.

You are using the American definition of libertarianism which comes from the billionaires who founded this organization. Globally, there are many different types of libertarianism, including my own libertarian communism (Marxism-Luxemburgism, more specifically).

So? They founded an organization that’s overall good... the problem?

I’m not even using the American definition anyways. If you seek to let people do as they please, then controlling their ability to voluntarily transact is going against that. Since that’s the premise of leftist policy then the further left, the less libertarian.

[Bloemensen]

Most of the governments in the exploited countries are capitalist too, so....
Also, I thought government control was bad in your book.

It is bad, but not in their beliefs.

Also most aren’t nearly as capitalist as say Switzerland.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_o ... ic_Freedom

Hong Kong, the highest nation on the list, is also the nation with the highest income inequality in the world, as well as having over 1 million people in poverty, living in pest ridden housing that can be as cramped as 35^2 ft.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yma9LcOCFRw

https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/08/07/p ... ent-truth/

It's clear that economic freedom≠ positive treatment of workers

[Uiiop]

How it is in other words "A government"?
Voting with the wallet sounds just as much as a government in practice as that.

No it’s more of a metaphor. Literally speaking you’re just buying a good or service or not and informing them that they are either bad at what they do or they are doing something bad. Point is that it’s a free market way of saying “we don’t like that” and since they want profit they will.

Explaining a metaphor that I already got doesn't really answer my question.
Your explanation only gives me confirmation on the "governmentness" of your preferred system.
But i'd guess in your mind that direct democracy doesn't count?