Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 117
Like Tree95Likes

Thread: Donald Trump is against the Alt-Right cult

  1. #81
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Lismore, Australia
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    You forgot one, Neil & I think it's even the most obvious difference! This should be the 1st one on the list:

    Socialism is a form of capitalism, and even wants to mandate it (state capitalism); TZM wants to render capitalism obsolete.

    (Anyone ever see someone talk to themselves on a forum? )
    Socialism is the evolution of capitalism therefore yes it could be a form of it.


    Paragraph from the the World Socialist Movement " Democratic control is therefore also essential to the meaning of socialism. Socialism will be a society in which everybody will have the right to participate in the social decisions that affect them. These decisions could be on a wide range of issues—one of the most important kinds of decision, for example, would be how to organise the production of goods and services."
    YouTuber likes this.

  2. #82
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    302
    > TZM is social due to every miniscule facet being regulated. The main tenet is the fact that no one individual can attain dominance
    > above another because there is no mechanism by which to do so since everything is infinitely available to everyone.
    > Nothing is left to chance or natural selection.

    What about mate selection and breeding, that is left to natural selection and chance ?

    Unless we given TZM approved embryos to incubate only. :-)


    And, who gets the beachside property...
    HAL9000 likes this.

  3. #83
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    302
    > Socialism will be a society in which everybody will have the right to participate in the social decisions that affect them.
    > These decisions could be on a wide range of issues—one of the most important kinds of decision,
    > for example, would be how to organise the production of goods and services."

    So, would a Universal Basic Income thus be seen as socialist, because it would enable everyone to use their small allocation to resources in a market economy to influence the production of goods and services in a democratic fashion ?

  4. #84
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    302
    > TZM wants to render capitalism obsolete.

    I thought TZM wanted the best scientific solutions to problems ?

    What if capitalism is the best scientific solution.. then don't we keep it ?
    HAL9000 likes this.

  5. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    Perhaps some do; but what libertarians mainly want is not to be forced to do something that they don't want to do, but that doesn't include doing something where there can be a victim of one's actions. Libertarianism isn't about being self sufficient; perhaps at one time it was considered popular by self-proclaimed libertarians; but my economics professor said that self sufficiency leads to poverty & I'm pretty sure that there are very few libertarians who are fans of living a life of poverty, or living like hermits. All libertarians essentially want is to not have the government putting a gun to their heads forcing & coercing them to do things they don't want to do, putting up walls with guns to keep them in the country, etc. Now why the hell is that too much to ask for?
    This is only 'your definition' of Libertarianism Neil, and it's not even close to the official one being used....and its also a far cry from the stated ideology back when I was also leaning that direction (back in my 20's)

    The only 'government' that ever put a gun to 'my' head wasn't American, unless we're talking about some City Cops, but I still consider myself a FREE MAN..pretty much free to do what I want to do....I don't know what you're talking about with all this stuff......

    If ya don't like the direction that government is heading...then WORK to change it.....But be prepared to get your butt kicked now and then....

    And if your skin is thin, don't bother.....

    Movements for change require people with tough hides...
    Last edited by droneBEE; 03-08-2017 at 05:35 AM. Reason: clarity...more to say...
    YouTuber likes this.

  6. #86
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    302
    > The main distinction between socialism and capitalism is regulation vs a free market.
    > Other differences are trivial.

    Thanks, that is most useful.

    > Once there is even one regulation, there is no longer a free market.
    > The regulation is for society's benefit, therefore is socialism.
    > All regulation is social and is against the individual's greed for
    > capitalization upon another's weakness or ill-fortune.

    Again, an excellent answer that really helps to focus on the key elements.

    I can imagine an example there, where folk are allowed to drive, but we have to all drive on the same side of the road for the collective benefit of each other.
    SophicDrippins likes this.

  7. #87
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    302
    > I doubt there is anyone here who fully agrees with what TZM is thought to be nor do I think there are any two people
    > here who fully agree with each other. TZM seems to be a melting pot of ideas.

    Indeed !

    I think we are still very much in the brainstorming phase of trying to figure out what TZM is.

    Except, the only reason we have something set is stone is because some folk quickly grabbed power at the top and they decided what TZM should be, banning anyone else who disagreed with that view.

    Which is perhaps why this forum got to be such a tiny pond. :-)


    I hear this is what happens naturally with companies, they start of small listening to all the workers, then they grow bigger and stop doing that, eventually they get so bad at doing things they go bust, and the whole cycle starts again !

    If only they would keep listening to the people as they got bigger, this repeated cycle of failure could be prevented !

    But, sadly this does appear how evolution works. :-(

    If only we could stop it doing that !

    I just don't know how. :-(
    SophicDrippins likes this.

  8. #88
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    302
    Thanks for these answers, most helpful:

    > Socialism results in bigger, more powerful government, and along with it problems with cronyism, corruption, etc.; TZM wants to do away with government altogether.

    I'll avoid starting with, it would be nice if TZM could practice what it preaches and try to design solutions for its own organisation which don't suffer with cronyism and corruption !

    But it does perhaps show how difficult it is to solve that kind of issue, when if TZM can't manage it, and we are filled with the most number of best intentioned folk on the planet, what hope do we have for a future designed along better lines.

    Sadly, the line of, "do away with government altogether" seems like a plot from a B Movie, of how to invade a country by getting its citizens to disband the government so they are all weak as a kitten..

    I think the best we can do is as suggested I think by yourself, in reducing the size of government to the bare essentials, so it has the least negative effect on peoples lives, rather than do away with it altogether.


    > Socialism uses force and coercion to try to get results; TZM wants to use the application of the scientific method for social concern in order to get results.

    I'll again avoid mentioning how TZM uses force and coercion to get results..

    But I'm not sure how you get folk to do the right thing just by showing them the science says so and so is a good idea.

    I'm all for trying to get things done the soft way, but in some cases, I think there is only force and control to get certain things done for the benefit of everyone.

    I'm reminded there of flood defences for example.

    Would folk really for example let others drive a new railroad over their lands because it would be a really good way to move stuff from A to B.


    > Socialism has resulted in long bread lines and even bigger scarcity problems than there should be; TZM wants to eliminate scarcity.

    Sadly agree with the first part there.

    I don't think you can eliminate scarcity, only reduce it.

    Eg. we can't give everyone a gold plated jet, but we might be able to give everyone a bicycle. (Or at least, enough Universal Basic Income to afford one..)


    > Socialism has led to repression & genocide; TZM wants to do away with repression and genocide altogether.

    Sadly agree that is the case in your first point there.

    The last part, I at least do agree that TZM's aim there is a good one.

    Though sadly to date, they have kinda gone about encouraging the complete opposite !

    Well, except very recently, where there has been a kinda change in the movement and it has grown up a bit and not dare I say, a bit sensible !

    But that might just because no one is moderating the forum to stop us all being so sensible. :-)
    SophicDrippins and Spinout like this.

  9. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    616
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    That's nice; but I don't care.
    No need to mention that.....maybe that's why some people in The Alt-Right sees libertarianism as being retarded....interestingly and ironically, some members here see the same thing....
    "Change is almost always negative. Things degenerate." - Woody Allen

  10. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    806
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    One remark I'd make about this is that socialism is actually a form of capitalism, specifically state capitalism (aka central planning). The opposite spectrum of capitalism is free-market capitalism.
    Well, it's down to definitions again. Words can mean whatever you want, but the concepts of extremes are: free-market and regulated with varying degrees of regulation in the middle.

    capital + ism and social + ism

    -ism
    Word Origin
    1.a suffix appearing in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form action nouns from verbs ( baptism); on this model, used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence, etc. ( criticism; barbarism; Darwinism; despotism; plagiarism; realism; witticism; intellectualism).

    So, capitalism is a system where individuals seek to gain capital without restriction. Once restriction is in place, it is socialism because the restriction is for the good of society rather than the individual. Maybe socialism is better stated as societyism and capitalism could be better thought of as individualism (even though it's more about the freedom to build capital than it is about being free in general).

    An example would be dumping waste in the river. It's good for the building of capital because one doesn't have to pay to dispose of their waste, but it's bad for society. So the regulation that protects the environment hurts the individual capitalist. Therefore, capitalism and socialism are against each other.

    When you're speaking about socialism = state-capitalism, I suppose that can be true in some sense, but it's not the goal of the state to increase their capital or they would just make a law requiring everyone to surrender their capital (gold confiscation of the 30s?). The state actually has the ability to print its own capital darn-near-infinitely (only restricted by the faith of other states in that state's currency).

    Here is a series of (controversial) videos that you may enjoy on the matter of printing money ad infinitum.



    So socialism can't be defined as state-capitalism because it's not the goal of the state to increase its own capital, but their goal is to regulate every nuance of life. Maybe state-dictatorialism or something of the like would be more accurate. I do better with concepts rather than words, so perhaps you could recommend better nomenclature.

    The opposite end of the spectrum would be total lack of regulation and that is a good definition of capitalism.

    Peter Schiff does a good job of defining capitalism in his videos and from what I can tell, it's merely about ending all regulation and letting the market determine the shape and form of products and pricing. Molyneux also supports that type of thinking, so experience has led me to believe that capitalism is indeed the total lack of regulation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    (Anyone ever see someone talk to themselves on a forum? )
    Serenesam does that quite a bit

Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
web statistics
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1