
Capitalism Is Evil
#1
Posted 14 September 2004 - 03:50 PM
#2
Posted 14 September 2004 - 03:54 PM
#3
Posted 14 September 2004 - 03:57 PM
Which leads my to the responses of my two increasingly independant personality modes:
Why can't we just get along? War causes only pain.
Fuck that. When you say war, you're just talking about the current model, old, rich men, sending young, poor men to die over land, money, and power. A war of liberation is the only way to end it, don't get all punk-socialist-peacenik on me.
#4
Posted 14 September 2004 - 07:59 PM

#5
Posted 14 September 2004 - 08:01 PM
#6
Posted 14 September 2004 - 08:02 PM

#7
Posted 14 September 2004 - 08:06 PM
#8
Guest_mysticdragon13_*
Posted 15 September 2004 - 01:37 PM
Oh and I doubt either man could throw a pitch to home plate.
#9
Posted 15 September 2004 - 02:32 PM

#10
Posted 15 September 2004 - 02:32 PM
#11
Posted 15 September 2004 - 02:35 PM
#12
Posted 15 September 2004 - 02:56 PM
Corporativism.Originally posted by Hero of Winds@Sep 15 2004, 02:32 PM
Both systems (capitalism and communism) are bad. But capitalism is the lesser of two evils. I'm looking for a good balance between the two... and ISN'T socialism.
#13
Posted 15 September 2004 - 02:58 PM
#14
Posted 15 September 2004 - 03:14 PM
#15
Posted 15 September 2004 - 03:16 PM
#16
Posted 15 September 2004 - 03:18 PM
#17
Posted 15 September 2004 - 05:09 PM
#18
Posted 15 September 2004 - 08:21 PM
#19
Guest_mysticdragon13_*
Posted 15 September 2004 - 08:22 PM
Hey guess what I was reading my sociology book and there is something like that! It's called democratic socialism. And after reading a little about it I feel I will convert.Originally posted by Hero of Winds@Sep 15 2004, 11:32 AM
Both systems (capitalism and communism) are bad. But capitalism is the lesser of two evils. I'm looking for a good balance between the two... and ISN'T socialism.
Democratic socialism is a convergence of capitalist and socialist economic theory in which the state assumes ownership of strategic industries and services but allows other enterprises to remain in private hands. In Western Europe, democratic socialism has evolved as a political and economic system that attempts to preserve individual freedom in the context of social equality and centrally planned economy......
...Under democratic socialism, the state assumes ownership of only strategic industries and services, such as airlines, railways, banks, television and radio stations, medical services, colleges, and important manufacturing enterprises. Certain enterprises can remain in private hands as long as government policies can ensure that they are responsive to the nation’s common welfare. High tax rates prevent excessive profits and the concentration of wealth. In return, the population receives extensive welfare benefits, such as free medical care, free college education, or subsidized housing.
Can I get a hell yeah on the free college part?
#20
Posted 15 September 2004 - 08:24 PM
Hmmm. Fascist.Originally posted by Big O@Sep 15 2004, 08:21 PM
No it doesn't hit the rich as hard as socialism, and doesn't engage in class warfare. The idea is to unite the nation to create a cooporative vision. Strikes and Lock Ins are illegal.
(After IM convo)
j00r Korhend? OOH! Fascist.
#21
Posted 15 September 2004 - 08:29 PM

And I'm starting to develop an interest in Corporativism...
*goes off to do research*
#22
Posted 15 September 2004 - 08:30 PM
#23
Guest_TanakaBros06_*
Posted 15 September 2004 - 08:34 PM
So Korhend, Ken, and Dea got new names? Anyone else?
#24
Posted 15 September 2004 - 08:40 PM
Ostensibly, the entire society is to be run by decisions made by these corporate groups. It is a form of class collaboration put forward as an alternative to class conflict and was first proposed in Pope Leo XIII's 1891 encyclical, Rerum Novarum which influenced Catholic trade unions which were organised in the early twentieth century to counter the influence of trade unions founded on a socialist ideology. The Vatican's ideas were also influential in the development of fascist economic theory.
Gabriele D'Annunzio and anarcho-syndicalist Alceste de Ambris incorporated much of corporative philisophy in their Constitution of Fiume.
One early and important theorist of corporatism was Adam Müller, an advisor to Prince Metternich in what is now eastern Germany and Austria. Müller propounded his views as an antidote to the twin "dangers" of the egalitarianism of the French Revolution and the laissez faire economics of Adam Smith. In Germany and elsewhere there was a distinct aversion among rulers to allow unrestricted capitalism, owing to the feudalist and aristocratic tradition of giving state privileges to the wealthy and powerful.
Under Fascism in Italy, employers were organized into syndicates known as "corporations" according to their industries, and these groups were given representation in a legislative body known as the Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni.
According to various theorists corporatism was an attempt to create a "modern" version of feudalism by merging the "corporate" interests with those of the state. Also see neofeudalism.
This use of the term "corporation" is not exactly equivalent to the restricted modern sense of the word. Compare corporate state and militarism. Corporate in this context is intended to convey the meaning of a "body," as in corpus. Its fundamental concept is to reflect more medieval European concepts of a whole society in which the various parts each play a part in the life of the society, just as the various parts of the body play specific parts in the life of a body.
Some elements of corporatism can be found still existing today, for example in the ILO Conference or in the Economic and Social Committee of the European Union, or the collective agreement arrangements of the Scandinavian countries.
#25
Posted 15 September 2004 - 10:36 PM
I never had anything to base it on but I knew it was him.Originally posted by Alakhriveion@Sep 15 2004, 08:24 PM
Hmmm. Fascist.
(After IM convo)
j00r Korhend? OOH! Fascist.
#26
Guest_mysticdragon13_*
Posted 16 September 2004 - 01:40 AM
Technically it's not. It just has it in the name but it is classified as something different from socialism and capitalism entirely. I like it because it's the middle ground between the two. You get the best of both worlds.Originally posted by Hero of Winds@Sep 15 2004, 05:29 PM
MD13: I said something that isn't socialism.
And I'm starting to develop an interest in Corporativism...
*goes off to do research*
#27
Guest_Sycron_*
Posted 16 September 2004 - 04:13 PM
#28
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:09 PM
#29
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:11 PM
Actually, economists have found that capitalism leads to democracy, not the other way around.
#30
Posted 16 September 2004 - 07:14 PM