|
|
Post by ltfred on Nov 20, 2011 17:03:14 GMT -5
I dislike capitalism, but calling it organized crime? Why? Gandhi said that capitalism was organised violence of the largest scale. Since it uses the threat of starvation to force people to work. He was a bit of an anarchist like that (why don't his ideas get more play in the anarchist literature, I wonder?). |
|
|
|
Post by RavynousHunter on Nov 20, 2011 17:55:29 GMT -5
Because his was more of a peaceful anarchism while a lot of modern (read New Age) anarchism is basically anti-government wharrgarbl from people who don't understand simple concepts like federally-funded and regulated military forces and how they're a good thing.
Is capitalism bad? No. It has its flaws, but so does every other sociopolitical ideology out there. The problem is when one tries to go for PURE capitalism, or PURE socialism, or PURE communism...purity is never achieved, it always ends up twisted by someone for their own gain. The best way to approach it is to mix them, use the best parts of one to supplement the weak points in another. A proper suit of armor never consists of just one layer of defense, the same principal applies to social and economic policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Meshakhad on Nov 21, 2011 1:03:37 GMT -5
Wrong thread. You want the political cartoon thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Nov 21, 2011 1:06:22 GMT -5
Misfire moved to the appropriate thread. For great justice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Nov 21, 2011 3:57:20 GMT -5
Someone scrawled "Capitalism" on a stop sign I walk by somewhat frequently. I kinda want to take a sharpie with me one day and add "Irresponsible" to it. Reminds me of this, which I spotted while out rafting:  This was written further down:  True loe. |
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Nov 21, 2011 7:01:29 GMT -5
Because his was more of a peaceful anarchism while a lot of modern (read New Age) anarchism is basically anti-government wharrgarbl from people who don't understand simple concepts like federally-funded and regulated military forces and how they're a good thing. Yeah, but how come the academic literature doesn't include him? Just because anarchy is European? I think the problem is when the people in charge willingly refuse to know what they're doing. See: governments of England, Greece, Italy, the European Central Bank, ect... |
|
|
|
Post by Yla on Nov 21, 2011 8:18:09 GMT -5
I think the problem is when the people in charge willingly refuse to know what they're doing. See: governments of England, Greece, Italy, the European Central Bank, ect... That too. Actually, I think both come down to A Lack Of Common Sense. I can't read what's written on that bridge. "I love you charity  construct capitalism" |
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Nov 21, 2011 9:16:23 GMT -5
I think the problem is when the people in charge willingly refuse to know what they're doing. See: governments of England, Greece, Italy, the European Central Bank, ect... That too. Actually, I think both come down to A Lack Of Common Sense. I can't read what's written on that bridge. "I love you charity construct capitalism" Deconstruct Capitalism. I assume the “I love you Charity” and “I love you Kym” are separate, unrelated tags. |
|
|
|
Post by Yla on Nov 21, 2011 14:18:27 GMT -5
But there's also a 'ME' there (which I originally took as a 'MEDE'). Is that supposed to be caveman-speak? "Me deconstruct capitalism"? In that case, it's wrong, since as far as I know, our linguistic root had a verb-last order, so it would be "Me capitalism deconstruct".
|
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Nov 21, 2011 15:10:57 GMT -5
But there's also a 'ME' there (which I originally took as a 'MEDE'). Is that supposed to be caveman-speak? "Me deconstruct capitalism"? In that case, it's wrong, since as far as I know, our linguistic root had a verb-last order, so it would be "Me capitalism deconstruct". I don’t think that is necessarily part of either message. Just some leftover garbage from a different bit of tagging. |
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Nov 21, 2011 19:10:01 GMT -5
I think the problem is when the people in charge willingly refuse to know what they're doing. See: governments of England, Greece, Italy, the European Central Bank, ect... That too. Actually, I think both come down to A Lack Of Common Sense. I think it's a lack of acamedic rigor. Economics ignored or argued away all the lessons of the profession between the 1930s and 1960s, assuming that the market was perfect and people were rational and so on. If they'd had academic rigor, they would have known their economic history and they would have known their sociology- areas of study that would refute their ridiculous assumptions. The problem, actually, was common sense. Economists 'knew', through their 'common sense', that Keynesians were wrong, and that economic shocks could never happen again. |
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Nov 22, 2011 8:16:54 GMT -5
Am I the only one who finds the trend of calling women "females" kinda offensive? I find it a bit dehumanizing. second |
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Nov 22, 2011 8:28:42 GMT -5
I sometimes use "females" and "males". Never really considered the dehumanizing aspects, although it's definitely food for thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Nov 22, 2011 8:33:49 GMT -5
I have never ever ever heard of male and female being “dehumanizing”. |
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Nov 22, 2011 8:42:47 GMT -5
I can sort of see where they're coming from when the words are used as nouns rather than adjectives, although being referred to as "a female" has never really bothered me.
|
|
construct capitalism"
