Unequal outcomes are indicative of a rigged game, especially if a given class of people consistently tend to win over others.
You are stupid on so many levels. Unequal opportunity is indicative of a rigged game, since you like to conflate socialism with a system of "equality of outcome" I'm not surprised at your confusion. Capitalism always leads to unequal opportunities and always leads to a rigged system. Number one your ability to produce wealth is determined by how much of it you already have (takes money to make money) and number two nepotism and old money privileges are rampant due to inheritance.
After the American revolution among others many of the high-borns stayed in power (many of the bloodlines are even to this day) because they kept their wealth and aristocratic status. This is why capitalism is little more than a tamed version of feudalism.
Theft? Slavery?
In capitalism the owners steal "surplus value" created by workers and the majority of people end up working for owners all their lives.
In capitalism the purpose of your existence is either to produce profit for someone else or to use other people to make profit for yourself. People who truly earn a considerable amount of wealth by doing things of true merit are the exception, not the norm.
Trump has cleaned more waste from the ocean than Obama, and Obama allowed the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline with no rebuke despite Natives rioting. Then he turned the hoses on them.
Cool, did you know Obama is a capitalist too?
As for the Asian families, libs are notorious for racism against Asians.
Not in particular and either way libs are capitalists.
you have no job and are mad that you have no money.
You have no job and are given money by the state.
The capitalism pic is funny because the left is intentionally attempting to put the state at the top of that pyramid
Have you not noticed that I consider libs to be barely any better than conservatives? There is quite a lot of old money controlling your economy but you want to whine about neo-liberals as if the system hasn't been fucked from the beginning.
the capitalists on this site seem to be doing quite well.
So is Obama, by capitalist logic that must make him a good person.
Venezuela is poor because it only sells one commodity which is controlled entirely by the state.
2/3 of the economy is private and the rest is state run. It order for it to qualify as "socialist" there needs to be quite a bit of PUBLIC/COLLECTIVE ownership and there is literally none.
They were poor when Obama was in office, before the sanctions.
The sanctions were there before Obama.
They were the richest country in Latin America before Socialism.
They were never socialist, they simply had enough public programs to worry the capitalists enough to start economically sabotaging them.
I think you need to ask Captain Blood the resident socialist expert what socialism is and isn’t as it changes its mind every posting
It's not my fault you are a retarded ass nugget. I have never changed my mind, you are just grasping for any excuse to be a dick because you suck.
his latest rant has him saying Stalinism
There is no such ideology as "Stalinism" you ignoramus cock sucker. Stalin himself was a Marxist Leninist who was not as wise as Lenin and more irresponsible as a leader.
Well let's look for some viable options.
Democratic Socialism VS Center-Right Libertarianism (?)
The origin of the genetic code
And I think you had disagreements about time travel as well.
All of these can be boiled down to objective facts.
That would be sensible, if the matter of dispute were one of merit.
Let's compile a list, then commence with the intellectual combat. I will moderate the debate and we will have a set of structured rounds for each issue.
That is, it is a matter of ego, pride, differing views of what true alliance looks like, etc.
Nom has a great deal of confidence in his views, and a great deal of them are correct. He is however, subject to the pull of his own ego as all humans are. That is why in order to resolve anything you both have to approach the debate scientifically rather than personally.
We need to find a way to hash it out, once for and all.
I can think of a few options.
1: Rap battle.
2: Quiz battle.
3: A structured debate with a quantifiable agreed upon set of conditions for victory which go over all your disagreements and determine who is factually correct.
Are you kidding me? I already told you, I took the red pill.
That's code for swallowing a pill full of right wing propaganda.
Yeah, we go to war over oil. I know the truth. But we need that oil
We don't really need it, we need to use different sources of energy. The reason we go to war over oil is because of rich oil barons who want more profit and because of the petrodollar crap.
People die everyday. What's the big deal if they die now or later?
I guess you won't mind if I shoot you in the face then.
The reason we have fake news is because libs can't handle the truth ;)
All MSM is fake news, if you think the libs are the only ones doing it you must be in an echo chamber.
The difference between libs and cons is that libs think real life is TV shows. Real life is nothing like TV shows ;)
Both libs and cons are retarded. You live in a fantasy where America is the good guy and murderers are war heroes. You live in a fantasy where America is free and is "spreading democracy" when it invades countries to take their resources.
Aliens who are advanced enough for interstellar travel don't have wars (or religions). If they were acting like us primitive apes they would have destroyed themselves/each other before they developed to that level technologically.
This in fact is my greatest concern for humanity, because we are not evolving socially at the rate we are evolving technologically.
What do you think is a good name for Bronto's ideology?
Historical Revisionist Anti-Islamic Theocratic Zio-Fascist Judeo-Christian Fundamentalism?
Or maybe we should go with an acronym.
Non-Egalitarian Fascist Asininity Fraudulently Implicating Objectively Untrue Statements.
Nefarious.
Probably the only post you ever made that made me rethink my stance on you being naive and simplistic.
You think I'm naive because I think humanity can progress much further than most people can imagine. You think I'm simplistic because I've never taken the time to explain my shit to you in full detail because I feel like it's a waste of effort and time.
Hitler (Who was Catholic)
Hitler was an occultist who hated christianity.
Stalin (Orthodox)
Stalin was an atheist.
Hitler started World War 2 to remove the stain of World War 1.
He started world war 2 to "cleanse" the earth of impure races and establish an Aryan empire.
Stalin killed in the name of power and communism
Stalin killed Nazis in the name of communism.
Mao killed because his policies fell flat on their face.
Mao didn't kill, people died because of his policies falling flat on their face and famines spreading.
I believe that it is better for society to abide in the "rural times."
In those times, we made advancements that lead us to where we are now in an attempt to solve the problems that existed then. It's ironic that you think undoing that is the way to solve the problems we have now.
Meaning, the ages where electronics did not exist. The era where library's, and jails, and malls were absent.
You are talking like Pol Pot, someone I have been compared to even though I am the exact opposite. There is another way, the way not of the present or the past but the future.
I say this because death rates are extremely higher than they were before.
That's because there are more people now.
Also, the way people act today are damaging the future inhabitants of the earth, and years for the human population to recreate.
Invulnerable acts; Such as, Littering, Harvesting (Without Rest.), and chemically injected products are crucially messing up the earth we live in.
These are problems of capitalism and the limitations of our technology. If and when we advance technologically to the extent that we can have entirely clean energy programs and whatnot, we can actually use technology to fix the environment. The answer is innovation, not regression. If society were to return to the old ways the cycle would simply repeat and we would have overall less of a chance as a species.
Furthermore, if our society wasn't revolving entirely around the profit motive there would be much less incentive to recklessly shit all over the environment.
Wouldn't it be easier to live in a time where peace abides more than not?
There never was such a time. The way to peace is through learning reason and creating a culture of reason. Not reverting back to less advanced methods of killing each other but keep the same thought process that leads to violence.
Now, we have to clinch on to dear mercy every time our kids leave the house with a car. (They'd walk, or use cattle. A much more safe way of transportation. Horse Deaths average about 0.0.0.1% out of 100 each year. Meanwhile, car averages range from 34%-41 yearly.
You know what else increases the likelihood of death? Not having access to modern medical techniques and living in a time when diseases were thought to come from demons.
Now, we have to make long-stressful phone calls for customer service. (Walk to the neighbor and verbally make contact with them to discuss an issue.)
Would you rather deal with customer service or chase mammoths with a pointy stick and a torch for 3 days straight without sleeping or eating in the hopes that you can drag enough meat back to your village before your family starves to death?
Now, we must fear the invasion of privacy, theft, or murder.
This shit has happened since forever.
(Before, goods were not seen as things that should be stolen
Yes they were, but not in a modern sense. Before we invented the social construct of owning things what you "owned" was decided by what you could take and defend.
but things that are shared between the community and village.
It wasn't like that in every case, there are many different ways a tribe can work. Many tribes operate like an authoritarian theocracy or monarchy and there are wars and conflicts with other tribes as well.
Of course, selfish people will continue to exist. Though, that's not a forced way of living. It's a character flaw.
Yes, you are encouraged to be selfish in capitalism. You are encouraged to be selfish in natural selection as well (although capitalism is far from natural selection and often selects the most negative traits specifically).
The character flaw is caused by the environment. If mutual benefit was built into the system in which we live there would be no selfishness, because being selfish in a way that harms others would not be in your self interest to begin with.
Now, we must save up lots of money for a home, years of work.... (Before, individuals would build small, compatible sized shelters for them and their families.*
Capitalism and technological limitations. 200 years from now we will be 3D printing environmentally friendly mega structures that are owned by everyone collectively.
lovers of money = capitalists
.. boastful = Mingiwuwu
.. arrogant = Mingiwuwu
.. revilers = people who get laid more than you
.. disobedient to parents= anyone who isn't a mindless sheep
.. ungrateful = capitalists who profit from other people's labor
.. unholy = anyone with a brain
.. unloving = The universe towards life, because god doesn't exist
Nah. The right wing will wake up soon and see the error of their ways. Then we can get back to decency. ;-)
The right in America has never been decent and the left in America mostly consists of a more moderate right. At no point in US history has the country been a social democracy. I don't know what kind of ideal you think existed pre-WW2. Before that was the great depression, and before that was WW1.
Have you at any point in your life been religious?
Yes, when I was young. (I am still kind of young but I mean adolescent young). If you're in your 50s and still believe in christianity you are a hopeless mental midget. As a teenager and tweenager I explored many different religions and forms of spirituality, but as my brain matured I realized that spirituality is in itself a psychologically primitive endeavor. Christianity is in fact among the worst religions. The ones that are both the most rewarding and closest to actually being real are Buddhism and a certain form of spiritual Satanism.
I've always liked FromWithin. I feel like there maybe hope for him yet
In my opinion he's a retarded baboon who has absolutely no concern for facts or logic. He is only concerned with his narrow dogmatic christian morality.
He gets intimidated by certain ideas he doesn't have an answer to, because a part of him knows he could be wrong. Why else would he get do angry with us?
He thinks we're evil baby murderers who are going to hell.
In a way, they are subconsciously open minded.
Maybe they know that they don't really know all the things they think they know deep down. But still, they resist it with all their might if that's the case. Try reasoning with someone like FromWithin or Outlaw...they're about as free thinking as a negro is white.
I disagree, I think everyone on this site is in fact a free thinker.
Well...you don't come here very often. As a CD regular I staunchly disagree. I have seen the true nature of these whackadoodles.
If they weren't thinking and questioning things, why would they be debating?
To satisfy their narcissistic desire to "win" debates while parroting right wing propaganda.
hope the reds don't destroy us,
Which reds?
and offer a financially unsustainable model
All the US government has to do is stop forcing people to give money to private insurance agencies, NSA spy programs and the invasion and occupation of foreign nations and we will have plenty of money for free healthcare and college.
