Kapitalism
-
Yeah, I didnt think you would be able to defend against any of it.
But since you're still being condescending, this conversation is now over.
I will check the stuff you mentioned because, unlike you, I have no issue with being corrected.
Good luck with your attitude mate.
Lol I sure have a limited energy for tankies, but if you're serious i'll be so to.
Have a nice evening.
-
Yes, Intellectual Property must go down. People often think positively of copyright, thinking that no one would support artists if they weren't forced to, and that artists couldn't possibly make a living if it weren't for copyright. I think we are rich enough that if we were to share it properly we could give everyone, not just the talented, time and resources to create art. And I think the talented would still gain advantages by being talented, people want to support artists that mean a lot to them. But to be fair, limiting or removing copyright is not only not that popular of an idea, it's also the least of our worries, cause it mostly concerns entertainment purposes.
Patent laws is where we need to act. To give a clear example: patent laws mean that excessive amounts of money goes to pharmaceutical companies, This is always defended by saying that they in turn will invest this money into research. The problem is
-
They spend far more money on marketing than on R&D, which effectively means that you're often not getting the best medicine, it means your getting the best marketed medicine.
-
When money does go to R&D, the research that's being done, is limited to that which benefits the pharmaceutical company. This is an unacceptable limitation. For example it is not in the interest of pharmaceutical companies to to cure disease, it's far more commercially attractive to make it a manageable chronic disease, where you rely on medication for the rest of your life.
-
Companies will not share their knowledge. For a company these are trade-secrets that could benefit their competition and if you have to compete obviously sharing knowledge is not in your best interest. But if you want to help humanity forward, obviously you should.
-
Drug prices are often excessively high, in part because of the previously mentioned marketing costs that you pay for.
Neither of these problems would exist if R&D was funded by governments and charity. And the pharmaceutical is just one industry that's taken as an example. The way that intellectual property is holding humanity back can not be overstated. Basically we need to go free and open source on IP,
I think the strength of your intellectual property protection should be inversely proportional to the size of your organization.
A character I design myself or an invention I patent myself should be firmly protected so I can't be bullied out of the market as easily, but a big company should get only fleeting protection.
That's just my take.
-
-
I am not talking about WWII at all because it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand
I brought up WWII because the peak of the Gulag system was starting on 1936, and by Stalin's death in the mid-1950s it had essentially disappeared, it was a system implemented during a time of extreme necessity due to dekulakization, maintained during WW2 and the Nazi hysteria of the late 1930s after the assassination of Kirov, and dismantled after Nazism had been eliminated from Europe.
really quite racist
The USSR was patently the least racist nation in Europe. While in my homeland of Spain education in Basque and Catalan was forbidden, the Soviet Union for the first time in history guaranteed the citizens of all the republics an education in the official language of their choice, leading for the first time to universal education in Ukrainian, Kazakh, Belarusian, or even minor languages such as Mari for those who spoke it and desired to be educated in such languages. In France, up to 1993, there were no public schools teaching children in Occitan language, and even now I don't think there's even one. Fuck, the "Union of Socialist Soviet Republics" doesn't even have a toponym or an ethnicity in its name, how many countries can claim the same?!
evil and oppressive
Look. I'm a Spaniard. In 1936, we had a fascist coup which resulted in a civil war between fascists and anti-fascists. The policy of the western world was to do nothing and to leave the war to itself while the Nazis and the Italian Fascists bombed the fuck out of my country's partisans (ever heard of Picasso's Gernika?). The only nation in the planet to help the antifascist struggle was the Soviet Union, which is the only source of Spanish antifascists of weapons, planes, tanks and military training against the fascists. It's crazy to tell me that the only nation that helped the fight against fascism in my homeland was "evil and oppressive". Your grandpa, a Jewish man, would have been murdered if it weren't for the Soviets. The very fact that you're here is because of the 27 million lives that the Soviet Union sacrificed in order to save Europe from Nazism.
It’s crazy to tell me that the only nation that helped the fight against fascism in my homeland was “evil and oppressive”
No, it is entirely accurate. They did some good and a LOT of evil. Totalitarian states tend to be evil. They were no exception.
Your grandpa, a Jewish man, would have been murdered if it weren’t for the Soviets.
No my FORMER BOSS was in a gulag again without a trial which you seem to be avoiding discussion of.
My grandfathers fought the Nazis in Europe and Japanese in the Pacific. A great uncle fought in Spain and in Germany against fascists both times. MY ancestral history empowers me to fight the evils of totalitarianism, why doesn’t yours?
The very fact that you’re here is because of the 27 million lives that the Soviet Union sacrificed in order to save Europe from Nazism.
Obviously this is not true at all.
-
Not according to people I know who experienced both. In the USA you know your charges and you might not be enslaved.
The USSR was evil and racist. It’s one of the reasons why they failed.
-
It’s crazy to tell me that the only nation that helped the fight against fascism in my homeland was “evil and oppressive”
No, it is entirely accurate. They did some good and a LOT of evil. Totalitarian states tend to be evil. They were no exception.
Your grandpa, a Jewish man, would have been murdered if it weren’t for the Soviets.
No my FORMER BOSS was in a gulag again without a trial which you seem to be avoiding discussion of.
My grandfathers fought the Nazis in Europe and Japanese in the Pacific. A great uncle fought in Spain and in Germany against fascists both times. MY ancestral history empowers me to fight the evils of totalitarianism, why doesn’t yours?
The very fact that you’re here is because of the 27 million lives that the Soviet Union sacrificed in order to save Europe from Nazism.
Obviously this is not true at all.
Sorry, mixed up grandpa and boss, hence the "the fact that you're here". The fact that you could have that conversation with your boss is because the Soviets gave everything to save him.
My grandfathers fought the Nazis in Europe and Japanese in the Pacific. A great uncle fought in Spain and in Germany against fascists both times
So all your family fought on the side of socialism against fascism and now you spit on their tomb by saying "socialism is just as bad"?
The Soviet Union was the most advanced and humane state of its time. Western Europe was murdering tens of millions through imperialism in the global south, the US had literal Jim Crow era laws against black people and was killing tens of millions through imperialism in Central/South America. If it weren't for the fucking Bolsheviks, the entirety of Eastern Europe would have been genocided by Nazis and the few remaining people colonised, never to industrialise. The Soviet Union was the first country to guarantee truly universal healthcare, education and pensions, and only then did Europe have to follow through for fear of revolution. Highest unionisation rates in the world, abolished houselessness and unemployment. It certainly had flaws, but it's literally the best it had to offer. For every Stalinist repression victim you quickly go dig up, I'll show you ten Africans murdered by French/Belgians, or a hundred Indians murdered by British.
-
Not according to people I know who experienced both. In the USA you know your charges and you might not be enslaved.
The USSR was evil and racist. It’s one of the reasons why they failed.
wrote last edited by [email protected]the US prision system legally and literally enslaves people today. prisioners work in the US.
the US is evil and racist today. your gulags hold almost a quarter of the planet's entire prision population.
-
the US prision system legally and literally enslaves people today. prisioners work in the US.
the US is evil and racist today. your gulags hold almost a quarter of the planet's entire prision population.
hence the “might not get enslaved”. You might not get enslaved in the US system. The USSR was enslaving all in the gulags.
As you have repeatedly backed the evils of an authoritarian racist system are you in a place to judge anyone morally?
Please change, we don’t need more people defending racism.
-
Sorry, mixed up grandpa and boss, hence the "the fact that you're here". The fact that you could have that conversation with your boss is because the Soviets gave everything to save him.
My grandfathers fought the Nazis in Europe and Japanese in the Pacific. A great uncle fought in Spain and in Germany against fascists both times
So all your family fought on the side of socialism against fascism and now you spit on their tomb by saying "socialism is just as bad"?
The Soviet Union was the most advanced and humane state of its time. Western Europe was murdering tens of millions through imperialism in the global south, the US had literal Jim Crow era laws against black people and was killing tens of millions through imperialism in Central/South America. If it weren't for the fucking Bolsheviks, the entirety of Eastern Europe would have been genocided by Nazis and the few remaining people colonised, never to industrialise. The Soviet Union was the first country to guarantee truly universal healthcare, education and pensions, and only then did Europe have to follow through for fear of revolution. Highest unionisation rates in the world, abolished houselessness and unemployment. It certainly had flaws, but it's literally the best it had to offer. For every Stalinist repression victim you quickly go dig up, I'll show you ten Africans murdered by French/Belgians, or a hundred Indians murdered by British.
wrote last edited by [email protected]So all your family fought on the side of socialism against fascism and now you spit on their tomb by saying “socialism is just as bad”?
My family fought against totalitarian systems not “for socialism”. The USSR wasn’t socialist and it never planned on becoming that after the communists lost the first election.
My family fought fascists and authoritarians. You back authoritarians who oppress the people. Do you see the difference?
Why do you think your whataboutism will work this time?
-
hence the “might not get enslaved”. You might not get enslaved in the US system. The USSR was enslaving all in the gulags.
As you have repeatedly backed the evils of an authoritarian racist system are you in a place to judge anyone morally?
Please change, we don’t need more people defending racism.
You might not get enslaved in the US system
so thats a big change of tone here. my man the US system is the most brutal in the planet, especially for people outside of it. trump is only giving you a small taste of what you do to us. you can't put 20% of the planet in prision and take the moral high ground.
you guys are the only ones who need changing. the real racism is what you do to black people and latino immigrants TODAY. please look inside before trying to use propaganda to smear a country that hasnt existed for 4 decades as if that makes the west any less awful.
-
You might not get enslaved in the US system
so thats a big change of tone here. my man the US system is the most brutal in the planet, especially for people outside of it. trump is only giving you a small taste of what you do to us. you can't put 20% of the planet in prision and take the moral high ground.
you guys are the only ones who need changing. the real racism is what you do to black people and latino immigrants TODAY. please look inside before trying to use propaganda to smear a country that hasnt existed for 4 decades as if that makes the west any less awful.
so thats a big change of tone here.
No it's what was said in a previous post. Your lack of reading comprehension in this case is worth noting in light of what follows which is incorrect and inane.
-
so thats a big change of tone here.
No it's what was said in a previous post. Your lack of reading comprehension in this case is worth noting in light of what follows which is incorrect and inane.
is us imperialism not a thing? is that incorrect?
or is it the brutality of your prisions?
-
Other way around. They're capitalists but don't support the free market. So they want the factory to be privately owned and run for profit, but they still want the government to interfere with patent-infringing sales.
And I'd argue that capitalism is an inherently bad idea, even in theory. Nobody deserves free rent just for owning something, like land or natural resources. Property manager is a job, landlord is not.
May I introduce you to Georgism?
Please... I beg you. Its really cool I swear T_T
-
All of the jobs needed in society are not all of the jobs people would do if left to their own pursuits. Incentives are required.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yeah absolutely. Material incentives are needed, but they don't need to be so high, just fair. Certainly not a monopoly over predictable technological progress (more or less predictable) that allows them to prevent people using that progress. Especially since that monopoly is being captured by capitalists.
And incentives can and should be non-materialist too. Think of a oscar or grammy show for the best new inventions. Or something similar to crowdsourcing platforms where people can vote on what inventions they want to see rewarded and implemented. A bank that can finance risky ventures like this instead of concentrating more wealth. We have more tools and possibilities today and we need an updated economic theory that can use these tools.
The idea of a lone inventor that can profit of his own invention is sort of like fantasy economics today. I believe it comes from comics and superhero movies lol. Reality is privatizing profit and socializing the costs of previous research and slowing down implementation of progress.
-
Properly regulated capitalism isn't strictly horrible. The biggest issue we have is that first bit, unfortunately.
-Me, a dirty socialist
Fuck reformism. All my homies hate reformism.
-
Democracy is a form of government.
Capitalism and Socialism are economic systems.
You could have a Democratic Socialist system, if the majority of people wanted it.
You could have an Authoritarian Dictatorship that allowed Capitalism.
It's a little more complex because people are used to living under Capitalism and many people don't really understand Socialism and would fight against their own interest to revert to the status quo, as a result some socialist philosophers have suggested not giving people a choice but to accept socialism, a so-called "dictatorship of the proletariat", but even in such a system you could have a constitution that enshrines socialism as the the economic system, while still giving people the ability to vote on everything else.
For example "Private Property" could be abolished. Factories and business could be owned by all of the employees as a whole and the profits shared equitably. After a short time living in such a system it would be unlikely that the majority of people would vote to return power back over to just a few individuals.
This would likely depend on the transition going smoothly. Give people a little hardship and the knee jerk/reactionary response would be to proclaim they were "better off" before.
The main problem with Socialism is that people are so used to having 'rulers', that they simply do not know how to act in their absence. This creates a seeming 'power vacuum'. Unscrupulous individuals can use that fact as a way to assume the roles vacated by the formerly rich and powerful in the name of being a force that maintains the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat", when very often they seem to become dictators themselves.
In my personal opinion, violent revolution will always lead to that outcome. If we ever want to evolve as a society, people must first understand what Socialism actually is and why it's the best choice for the majority of people. We must freely choose it, because it's the right thing to do.
That is made extremely difficult because the rich and powerful like being rich and powerful, and will use every bit of their resources to ensure they stay rich and powerful. It's easier to convince cops to side with them to keep them in power by sharing a tiny bit of their wealth, than it is to convince them to do the right thing, when they aren't even sure what the right thing is.
There is a reason that Education is a political battleground in the US. If people were actually taught the truth, they probably would choose to do the right thing. The capitalists won't allow that to happen if they can help it.
Anytime you see someone trying to cut funding for education, or try to have a whitewashed version of history taught. This is the reason.
This is also the source of "Red Scare" propaganda and fear mongering. 'Keep people scared, ignorant, and confused' will probably be the subtitle of the last 100 years if they make a movie about it in the future, provided the Fascists and/or Capitalists don't win.
Edit: JFK once said "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." I think there is a lot of wisdom in that and I wish people in power would take it to heart, though I know they wont.
Very well said, thank you.
-
Fuck reformism. All my homies hate reformism.
I mean, I'm totally down for the burn it all to the ground approach, too. It'd certainly be much better long term. Reformism at this point is definitely more akin to a bandaid when you need a full amputation.
