I'm going to point out that communism and socialism are not interchangeable and they're not the same thing. Socialism has worked. Capitalism has relatively worked. Communism has successively failed, despite its lovely appearance in theory.
im christian but i like this. stupid scosalist. but wsho's to say god didnt make earth and just let evolution run it's corse mabey helping it here in there
@marketanarchist2011 Don't use "Real world" Communism, because frankly, it's not communism, and I don't feel like arguing why it's not. Look at Europe, many countries there have socialism, and are doing very well in the living department. Capitalism has been around for longer, don't try to say less have died under it, you'll lose. My point is what he is suggesting here is not capitalism, as much as social darwinism. Big difference there!
@Kidarias01 I was born in Romania, which was under 40 years of "real" communism. In the las 20 years, it was under horrible socialism and we are doing awful in the "living departament". This socialism has led the world to the 2008-present economic recession. Things will get alot worse in the next 12 months. Tell me who was killed by capitalism.
@marketanarchist2011 The fact is that Romania has very few high demand resources. Whether the market is Capitalist or Socialist, it's not going to be pretty. The economic depression was caused by corruption. In Capitalism workers die because the vast supply of workers pushes down their value. They are paid next to nothing and starve, or die of curable illnesses. The fact that you care about individual human life, proves you are not a Social Darwinist.
@Arielslopa Indeed they are. Compare Europe to Early Victorian England, when there were no rules for manufacturers. Compare Europe to America before the union movement.
you can have socialism.. not the other way around.. Lenin believed you can skip the democracy building part and jump straight into socialism.. obviously Lenin was dead wrong..
more considered a social-democracy.. hell marx thought democracy would eventually always lead to socialism. A much better comparison to use would be a video about social democracy opposite to capitalist democracy.. That would be much more informative because you wouldn't be mistaking one thing for another... by the way, commies are socialists but they are a group of socialists who strayed from the wise teachings of marx. Marx hated democracy but he realized u must have democracy before..
I watch your videos sometimes even though your condescending nerdieness kinda gets on my nerves but i have one serious problem with your evalutions.. You completely misunderstand the concept of true socialism.. I used to have the same problem because it is what we as Americans are taught to think when someone says socialism.. I think most people really mean to say totalitarian dictatorship with a socialist shell.. but that doesn't flow so they say socialist.... The socialism of marx is actually
@Phizanot Capitalism is hardly Social Darwinism. Darwinism implies that certain parties lose out, wheras under capitalism, in any voluntary exchange (that is, free from fraud and imposing costs on others against people's consent (like food poisoning) , or coercion) there is a mutual benefit in the transaction, as both parties feel better off after the transaction than they were before, else they would not have entered the transaction in the first place.
@DoctorCapitalist And what of the man who has nothing, or what he has is of little demand, or great in supply everywhere. He has no value for a pure capitalist society. A Social Darwinist would believe he should die, and in a pure capitalism, he will die.
@Kidarias01 If the majority can vote for an entity to take from them through violent force then surely they have the willpower to just, you know, hand over their money voluntarily if it is what society wants. Before the existence of the welfare state, there were friendly societies which would help the poor.
You also wouldn't see people giving to lazy ghetto people either. They'd give to people if they accepted low wage jobs (then they'd be subsidized). This way they build up experience.
@Kidarias01 This method would be a lot more effective in lifting people out of poverty (involuntary unemployment doesn't really exist when there's no minimum wage). The less barriers to entry would make it easier to start a business. For example, you could move into an abandoned building to start a business.
@numanumaro At what point does my line of reasoning go wrong? Instead of trolling and scoffing, why not make a constructive argument to try convince me why I'm wrong?
well, i kinda agree. the idea that government intervention somehow can guide the free market into a system which somehow benefits everyone in society. sadly, no matter how much interventtion we see, the market is still as unjust, uncaring for those who don' own capital. You see the problem with this comparison of the free market to evolution, is that evolution has been scientifically observed. it has been tested and it has been documented.
@Dolloozze But saying that the free market would have this same quality - that it is self regulating and self sustainable and working towards a "bigger good" - Only when it is left unregulated has never been observed and i would love it if you showed me a scientific study showing this to be the case
If the economy was evolution nobody would have money. The 1% (who are apex predators) would have massively over hunted their weak little prey, the 99%, resulting in destruction of the "econosystem".
Unless of course weak 99% banded together, learned how to use tools, and started fighting back against their predators (Occupy Foodchain?). Social Darwinism isn't a one way street buddy.
@dacoolray "Yeah, because , National Socialism was totally different from authoritarianism. In socialism, your owners love you." Too funny. There's no difference between fascism and communism other than method of control. There's pro-state and anti-state. Prostate: You want to make us (and yourself) human livestock. You have a tragic case of Stockholm Syndrome. Antistate: Humans act in self interest, and giving people government power is the best way to create a deadly agency problem.
@NeCacaluXuxultic Communists have stages green socialistm, middlegrown -, rife - and finnaly communistm. If some citizen ask his communist master "Why does X suck?" the master can say "Where in a to early stage." Ouf course, they never progres trough these stages so the master can play this bullshit trick.
@Svetlozarov, You mean MARXISM has stages. Socialism is nothing like communism because with COMMUNISM you need a ruler that you can actually trust which is WHY communism doesn't work because they usually get someone who became an asshole or is assassinate by the USA and gets replace by an asshole. Scandinavia is socialist and they have more rights than the USA and live a LOT better than US Americans. I wish i can say the same about El Salvador (damn gangs! i will RULE someday!!!)
@NeCacaluXuxultic You asked a question "Why do people ALWAYS think that socialism is communism!?!?!" I ansered it. And no mather socialist, communist or "capitalist" (corporatist), al state are evil and unsustainable.
@Svetlozarov,and so are non-state like Anarchism because we NEED a governmental structure regardless of how evil it is. Without it then there is no order and if there is no order it will lead to Chaos. :/. man... life sucks
@Svetlozarov because we are not reptiles. We are very emotional creatures who can't control themselves unless we have restriction on what we do (or even believe). I'm a socialist btw (well technically I am a meritocratic, socialist, democratic monarch) and it really annoys me that AMERICANS generally don't know a damn thing about Socialism and always ASSUME it is like with STALIN or Hitler. Democracy/Republicanism didn't go well with my people. It lead to oppression from the rich to the poor.
@NeCacaluXuxultic Primitive creatures poses emotion, they don't posses reason. Luckely we are the least emotional of all creatures. What stops the rulers? What stops a deprecive president from launching nukes that will put him and the hole of humanity out it's missery? The way to overcome irrational, emotionaly controlled criminals is provided by reason. Exclusion from society is a good example. The state isn't, it's full with paradoxes.
@Svetlozarov "primitive creatures poses emotion, they don't posses reason. " I've studied biology for 6 years and already I see your claim is pure bullshit. "Luckely we are the least emotional of all creatures." oh wow..we certainly are NOT! LOL!
@NeCacaluXuxultic Animals posses fear and agrecion, and most of the time the're nothing to balance it out. A hungry lion for example attacks a human with gun even dow it's suicide. And even if you're right, what stops the emotions of the leaders? Why are they capable of perfect reacon, while we're not?
@NeCacaluXuxultic Bush didn't kill a flie before he got in to office, he hid his agrecion until he got into power. Even the most advanced lie detector can't crack a politician. Whe have tried this for 3000 yeares and we have never succeded. Maybe leaders aren't the anser.
@NeCacaluXuxultic And that is starting to happen now here in the good ol' us of a. The rich are taking control of everything, and screwing the working class which composes at least 90%. So yeah, our 10% are our lords and kings with titles like CEO and CFO and COO.
@jmitterii2, and this is why I am a socialist. IRONICALLY I don't approve of socialism ever happening in teh USA since we have too many lazy cunts. We need a better form of economy and government. Or better yet.. have a dictatorship that kills all retarded people.. we need someone like HITLER but without the racism -_-.... or.. we could just change the education system and make it EXACTLY like Japan. Americans are bloody stupid -_-
@NeCacaluXuxultic Well an absolute on anything doesn't work.And I agree, absolute socialism here would be a disaster.But a mixed market economy what we have now works, it just now needs to clean up the uncontrolled stuf thats occuring which has destroyed a once thriving middle class.I guess I'll never understand why the very rich double and tripple digit million and billionaires continue trying sqz for cost cutting 4 profits. When in the long run it even hurts their own business on demand side.
@jmitterii2, Genocide would work o.O. LOL! I know that was messed up but we have too many retards in this country. *sigh* I honestly though electing OBAMA over that old white guy was gonna be better... man.... I always knew were gonna be fucked either way... but ObaMER turned out to be worse than I though. To ME he makes BUSH look good. Then again..he is elected RIGHT AFTER Bush fucked up... I guess he just has horrible luck in cleaning up his mess.
i will give you credit, that is a very interesting way to create an argument. I am now visualizing the economy as an ecosystem. The problem is there is kudzu here. kudzu, japanese stilt grass, honeysuckle, and many invasive prolific plants. now capitalists see this as a good thing because exponential growth has no end and makes for a strong economy, but socialists understand that the world is finite and that the nation's limited resources need to be used wisely and not consumed as a virus
or cancer consumes life. If you look at an ecosystem that has an invasive prolific species, it is lacking in biodiversity. native productive plants that provide foraging, tools, and medicine, and nutritious chemicals to the soil, are choked out by greedy prolific plants that are not kept in check because they are not equal players in the ecosystem. i see capitalism as a patch of woods that is being overtaken by kudzu.
Not a very good comparison - theistic creationists vs. free-market capitalists. And you basically acknowledged the problem in your video and then dismissed it. The creationist asks not only "whence order?" but "whence ANYTHING?"
We could have a conversation about order, but that's not the creationist's first concern. But, the atheist or free market capitalist can't ask that question ("whence anything"). They pretend as though it's insignificant.
couldn't of put it better. creationists think, evolution = survival of the fittest, an unrestrained free market (capitalism) = survival of the fittest. Dont you get it! Jesus IS a socialist!
uh no, He wasn't. He respected the profit motive and expected people to be self-sufficient without having to rely on the state for support. Furthermore, the bible advocates a single flat tax on everyone, irrespective of income level. It respects the right of an individual to leave an inheritance, and disallows the state from infringing/punishing this right by taxation. Definitely not socialist.
My God, this man is an idiot. Yes, because the economy and biology are completely similar. Yes, because socialism is a cult. Come on, you moron. Do some research!
Unless, of course, this is just satire. In that case, it's not very good. Sorry.
Oh wait, we are supposed to believe that unregulated bussinesses will treat their workers fairly, pay them fairly?.... You seriously believe that people shop based on how a company treats its workers?
No because you can't buy fairness for workers at these Low Low Low Low prices... Pay the workers less, can afford to keep prices low... = low overheads ((wages)).. HIGH profits... as the consumer buy's your cheap stuff!....
Yeah, real bottom up there reared perhaps in anticipation of an ass fk
JacobSpinney: Hey. Don't you think its absurd to compare a 'designer of non-human form' and a designer of human form - and thus making a conclusion which is not correct since your premise is wrong?
the market is an emergent phenomena of supply and demand in a free market it is neither directly man made nor man controlled. This of course changes once governments get involved in attempting to regulate it which diminishes or destroys the effectiveness of price signals depending on the extent of the meddling.
Capitalists on the other hand make their entire argument one from ignorance. Something like "We can never design an economy better than [nature] can. It ought to be left alone to itself. Economies are just TOO complex for us to figure out [or something]."
Wow, straw man arguments all over. Socialists do not claim that an economy cannot work from the bottom up. The claim is more along the lines that an economy left to develop from the bottom up (free market capitalism) always becomes horribly abusive to civil liberties, economic prosperity of the poor, environmental health, etc. and it corrupts government.
So the socialist claim is that we can apply design to an economy to make it work more fairly and efficiently. It is like artificial selection.
"The claim is more along the lines that an economy left to develop from the bottom up (free market capitalism) always becomes horribly abusive to civil liberties, economic prosperity of the poor, environmental health, etc. and it corrupts government."
This is true of socialism and corporatism, as proven by history, but free market capitalism? Impossible. You cannot make the economy work more fairly and efficiently, you can only destroy it.
If it were impossible of free-market capitalism, the Industrial Revolutions would have been periods of the greatest social equality, environmental health, etc. The fact is, government regulation of the markets which sprang up during that time happened because free-market capitalism became abusive, forming monopolies and taking shortcuts like dumping toxic waste into drinking water sources. Besides the horrible worker abuses, of course.
Don't confuse socialism with Stalinism. Look up "what is socialism" on socialistworld net. Socialism is bottom-up, not top-down. It is democratic, not authoritarian. It would give people more freedom and more of a say in decision making, not less. Capitalism does not create order out of chaos - the present financial crisis has been brought about by the failure of capitalism.
I'm an atheist and I don't approve of this message because you imply that capitalism is in any way more "rational" or "natural" than socialism, which is just simply ridiculous. You could make the same case for socialism and let capitalism disappear. This amounts to silly propaganda.
Hooray for casually confusing Socialism and Soviet Communism! Never mind the fact the two are about as different as the French and Mandarin languages. We can just totally ignore that because, afterall, people aren't interested in factual information, they just want an opinion shoved down their gullet for them so they don't have to think.
@JacobSpinney Sure, that's pretty much what it is. However the video portrays Soviet Communism while calling it Socialism. Soviet Communism which is where the government owns everything and the people own nothing. Another way of putting is that from the "socialist"'s closing remark that he's in a "father knows best" state, not a socialist state. What I'm seeing in the video is not in any way shape or form collective ownership so much as a failed attempt at being witty about politics.
@luccaskunk It's nonsense to say that communism and socialism aren't related. Communism is the logical conclusion of socialism. I challenge you to point out any inaccuracy I put across other than the design flaw of the hammer and sickle.
@JacobSpinney I didn't say they aren't related, I said that Soviet Communism bares no resemblance to socialism. Socialism is the people owning everything. Communism is the government owning everything. The "All Loving Authority from Up Above telling us what to do" mentioned by the "socialist" is clearly not a socialist system but a Soviet Communist one.
@luccaskunk If we all owned everything, than we would have to ask everybody's permission to use something all the time. This is unworkable, so there has to be a ruling class of people who decide who get's to own what and under what terms, which is the case with western social democracies. I currently own less than half of what I produce, the rest is being taken by the rulers. This is only marginally different from communism, where they take 100%.
@JacobSpinney Keep in mind that Soviet Communism bares only a vague resemblance to actual Communism. There were jokes during the Soviet years in Russia about how if Marx were resurrected, he would be disallowed the right to speak in public and possibly sent to Siberia to keep him away from the populace.
Mind you, I'm not advocating any of it. I'm simply bothering to know the difference between Socialism, Communism, and the Soviet brand of what even they mistakenly called "Communism".
@JacobSpinney Hey there, you put a challenge to find any flaws, so here they are (the ones I spotted at first watch, at least) ; Socialism does absolutely not ignore market economy. It regulates it, usually for a particular purpose. It is more or less as interesting a caricature as creationists who say atheists "must" apply survival of the fittest as a moral.
@JacobSpinney And if Socialism and Comunism are, definitely related, they are in the same way as Liberalism and Nazism. In other words; they are related in th sense that Comunism applies socialism and Nazism applies Liberalism. But it just doesn't work the other way around. Liberals are not Nazis, just like Socialists are not Communists.
National Socialism is MUCH closer to socialism and communism than it is to original liberalism. All three are authoritarian and statist ideologies while liberalism is anti-authoritarian.
And actually, even if you were talking about soviet communism, you made a comparative mistake, since you presented the "communist" saying that free market economy doesn't make sense. No communists ever said anything like it. They thought it was an UNFAIR way of letting things happen, not an impossible way. In conclusion, the comparison is absolutely pointless. Sorry
@JacobSpinney "It's nonsense to say that communism and socialism aren't related. Communism is the logical conclusion of socialism."
Sure, because evolution leads to social Darwinism. You're using the common misconception of socialism being a political system. Socialism is actually an economic system, so your argument is a straw man argument. Cheers!
@JacobSpinney Sweden is socialist and still isn't communist. In fact, most countries that go communist end up being socialist in the end. Rather than being a line it's more like a parabola effect.
Police departments, public schools, fire departments, and hospitals as well as construction companies, utilities (clean water and electric power) are by definition socialist programs. Sam with the DMV, as well as state boards of education, and a proper government itself is supposed to work for the people therefore America is a socialist nation by definition.
You are an utter fucking moron. If America is a socialist country by simply having a few public programns despite the fact that most goods and services are controlled by the private market, then what the fuck would you consider a capitalist country to be?
You seem to think that once a nation adopts a single government program, it automatically becomes socialist, lol. You can't be this fucking dumb.
I may have said something similar to what you said but that wasn't exactly what I ment. We may have government programs sure, but America is supposed to be a balanced mix of socialism and capitalism. We can't have it too far in either direction; same with political ideologies as well as issues regarding religion.
I got this "CRAZY IDEA" by paying attentin in History Clasgrowing up. What's happening now is no different than the days monopolies practically had control of the united states government.
@NUTCASE71733 lolwut? what do those things have to do with the "definition" of America? Where are those programs written into the Constitution? The Bill of Rights? The government working for the people by no means implies socialism. lawl.
Hi, I'm a capitalist and I'm off to exploit my consumers. Seriously Jacob, you're so indoctrinated into this 'free market' idea. You fail to realize both of these systems are extremely outdated and are not going to work for the future years to come. Communism is flawed, and so is capitalism. Making some parody video should not be an approach to build a better future.
@TheBigKiller How has human nature and his condition changed that you know a better way, please explain. Assuming you believe our system "was good for it's time", but now you have a superior channel.
@TheBigKiller Come on now, I know my writing is terrible, but to say you could not understand what I was articulating is just bullshit. Based on what, is our system outdated?
In any case. My point was to explain to you what socialism was, seeing you have some generalizations in your "Socialist vs capitalist"-videos. Although funny, they are incorrect on some points. I hope you learned something.
@MrMutualism I hope you'll notice that in my recent videos, I typically don't even use labels like "socialism" and "capitalism" for this very reason. They have different definitions to different people. Nowadays, as you can see in my state is not great video, I leave the labels aside and just talk about the concepts so as to avoid a meaningless definition war.
@JacobSpinney It was a good video, well done. Though the relative definitions to different people are, in my opinion, quite relevant, since the definitions the actual socialists have/had are the relevant ones.
@JacobSpinney I think it's demonstrable though, that there is a difference between socialism,(the strawman in this video) the economic model, and communism, the political model.
This made Karl Marx respond with his book, "Misère de la philosophie", and thus create a feud between these 2 men (Note: Marx considered Proudhon to be a scientific socialist up to the point where Proudhon rejects Marx's dogmatic ideas, whereas Proudhon then becomes a "utopian socialist"). Proudhon and Marx both developed their theories from Adam Smiths and Ricardos value theory, hence the similarities. This eventually leads to Marx creating his "scientific socialism" with Engels.
These men, being anarcho-socialists desiring a free market, have formed the modern socialism (primarily Proudhon).
Proudhon developed his theory of value in the writing; Systèmes des contradictions économiques, ou philosophie de la misère, where he explained 'value' with 2 sides: Utility value & Exchange value, whereas the latter is a reflex of the former. Though a value of a product changes when you take labour into account - making his theory a labor theory of value. NEXT.
With that logic, assuming all socialists actually desire a state/central planned/controlled economy would be generalization, and thus not really something of value. We cannot forget the fact that there are socialists who want a free market aswell - Mutualists. You shouldn't rule out the market-socialists such as, Proudhon, Kevin Carson, Benjamin Tucker etc. etc. These men - especially Proudhon - are essential to the whole socialist theory.
From what I have learned by reading socialist litterature, market-socialist litterature, debating with anarchosocialists and marxists - the definition of socialism is [not] "central planned economy" or "state control over the means of production", but it is >Worker< control over the means of production. (Note: Statesocialism need a state - directly controlled by the workers - to be legitimately called a socialism (though you and I agree that states always end up in elitism and so forth). NEXT--
Hmmm. Okay Jacob. I have watched about each and everyone of your videos. I agree with you on everything except on the economics. And I really think you should rethink your definition of socialism, before you use it in this satirical sense :). Don't take this as anything else but friendly advice, and me sharing my own knowledge and experience.
I'll explain in the next comment, damn letter-limit!
Again i agree with your opinion to some degree, but just because a process happens naturally dosent mean its the best way. We are flock animals anyway so that argument dosent get you far. So lets go with nature let the biggest guns win. As it would be done in primates or cro-magnon. Nope. Still agree but a bad argument.
@TheyHearUsNow People who reject the blind faith and ignorance of reason and evidence when it comes to religion, but then hop right back on to blind faith and ignorance when it comes to the state.
One problem with the analogy is that creationists are trying to explain order with "magic". Socialists are NOT trying to "explain order" with socialism - they're trying to impose it, while pointing out the lack of order/balance, IE money and power tending to flow to those who already have money and power.
@Flyborg The magic that socialism believes in is that the rulers are somehow able to shrug off all of the incentives for corruption and abuse AND somehow be able to calculate how to efficiently allocate resources without needing market prices.
@JacobSpinney Indeed, socialism makes (faulty) assumptions about the ability (and honesty) of both leaders and the people. But they're trying (and failing) to solve actual problems.
But I'd say it's just as unfounded (I wouldn't say "magical") to believe that leaders can fix all problems, as it is to assume that corporations can self-regulate, and decide on their own not to dump garbage in every corner, or abuse their employees, etc, because they (often) already do that whenever able.
@Flyborg Creationists aren't suggesting creation came from magic but from a metaphysical creator. Calling it "magic" is being insulting and just causes them to want to ignore everyone else, thereby ruining the chance for dialogue.
@in0eterminacy But it's magic by definition - IE use of supernatural methods to manipulate the natural world. It is of course not the word they would use and it is used in mockery, BUT it doesn't change the meaning, since "magic" = "unknown supernatural method", and it's not like "magic" is any less reasonable. (Also I wasn't talking to a creationist here - if I was, I would not cling to the word "magic", but might describe their "unknown supernatural method" as "what is essentially magic")
This is a false analogy. "Order" in evolution comes from the "bottom up" (i.e. random mutation, etc.). But once that order is established (i.e. an actual living organism is born), it is run more like an authoritarian state than an anarchist one (i.e. your brain is more or less the dictator of the rest of your body). Even embryogenesis is very deterministic and "authoritarian", to continue the analogies. An "anarchist" embryo would come out deformed in almost all cases. And if we look more at ...
@mykeBC natural social systems, we see that the most successful class of animals (Insects) have a very hierarchical social structure (ants, bees). And there are more examples of "authoritarian" social structures in the animal world than there are egalitarian ones (I don't even know if this exists in the animal world). In short, using biology and animal behavior as an analogy for the superiority of anarchism/capitalism over statism/socialism is a bad idea.
Ok creationism does not assume that nothing starts from scratch. See it simply says that someone in fact created everything rather than just an explosion. I think people need to be "supervised" sometimes or else it becomes chaotic with all the different perspectives and opinions there are. Don't forget that it was chaotic capitalism that brought what we know today as Unions, Social Security, etc...
thank you for making this connection!! i always thought it was bloody obvious but so few seem to bring it up. it was this connection that made my biological anthropology major bf an anarchist.
@RandomNameName Thank you! Exactly!
CaptainShadowCross 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yes the economy can evolve by itself, but it needs regulation. Just like humans need the rule of law, a police force, government etc.
RandomNameName 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
RandomNameName 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
RandomNameName 3 weeks ago
I'm going to point out that communism and socialism are not interchangeable and they're not the same thing. Socialism has worked. Capitalism has relatively worked. Communism has successively failed, despite its lovely appearance in theory.
CaptainShadowCross 1 month ago
Don't mix socialism with communism retard.
MrIize 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the similarities.
JamesonGraber 1 month ago
I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the similarities.
JamesonGraber 1 month ago
...Pretty fucking horrible argument right here.
bobmuffins 1 month ago
im christian but i like this. stupid scosalist. but wsho's to say god didnt make earth and just let evolution run it's corse mabey helping it here in there
7777TheShade 1 month ago
Lot's of stuff died in evolution. Do you think it's "ok" to watch lots of people dying because, it's just their luck?
Kidarias01 1 month ago
@Kidarias01 whats your point? More people died in socialism, either national-socialism, communism or democracy than because of capitalism.
marketanarchist2011 1 month ago
@marketanarchist2011 Don't use "Real world" Communism, because frankly, it's not communism, and I don't feel like arguing why it's not. Look at Europe, many countries there have socialism, and are doing very well in the living department. Capitalism has been around for longer, don't try to say less have died under it, you'll lose. My point is what he is suggesting here is not capitalism, as much as social darwinism. Big difference there!
Kidarias01 1 month ago
@Kidarias01 I was born in Romania, which was under 40 years of "real" communism. In the las 20 years, it was under horrible socialism and we are doing awful in the "living departament". This socialism has led the world to the 2008-present economic recession. Things will get alot worse in the next 12 months. Tell me who was killed by capitalism.
marketanarchist2011 1 month ago
@marketanarchist2011 The fact is that Romania has very few high demand resources. Whether the market is Capitalist or Socialist, it's not going to be pretty. The economic depression was caused by corruption. In Capitalism workers die because the vast supply of workers pushes down their value. They are paid next to nothing and starve, or die of curable illnesses. The fact that you care about individual human life, proves you are not a Social Darwinist.
Kidarias01 1 month ago
@Kidarias01 Europe is doing well? right...
Arielslopa 1 month ago
@Arielslopa Indeed they are. Compare Europe to Early Victorian England, when there were no rules for manufacturers. Compare Europe to America before the union movement.
Kidarias01 1 month ago
you can have socialism.. not the other way around.. Lenin believed you can skip the democracy building part and jump straight into socialism.. obviously Lenin was dead wrong..
DustinLT1985 2 months ago
more considered a social-democracy.. hell marx thought democracy would eventually always lead to socialism. A much better comparison to use would be a video about social democracy opposite to capitalist democracy.. That would be much more informative because you wouldn't be mistaking one thing for another... by the way, commies are socialists but they are a group of socialists who strayed from the wise teachings of marx. Marx hated democracy but he realized u must have democracy before..
DustinLT1985 2 months ago
I watch your videos sometimes even though your condescending nerdieness kinda gets on my nerves but i have one serious problem with your evalutions.. You completely misunderstand the concept of true socialism.. I used to have the same problem because it is what we as Americans are taught to think when someone says socialism.. I think most people really mean to say totalitarian dictatorship with a socialist shell.. but that doesn't flow so they say socialist.... The socialism of marx is actually
DustinLT1985 2 months ago
The thing about evolution is that while logical and entirely scientific, it's naturally unethical.
So is Social Darwinism buddy.
Phizanot 2 months ago
@Phizanot Capitalism is hardly Social Darwinism. Darwinism implies that certain parties lose out, wheras under capitalism, in any voluntary exchange (that is, free from fraud and imposing costs on others against people's consent (like food poisoning) , or coercion) there is a mutual benefit in the transaction, as both parties feel better off after the transaction than they were before, else they would not have entered the transaction in the first place.
Subjective theory of value, learn it son.
DoctorCapitalist 2 months ago
@DoctorCapitalist And what of the man who has nothing, or what he has is of little demand, or great in supply everywhere. He has no value for a pure capitalist society. A Social Darwinist would believe he should die, and in a pure capitalism, he will die.
Kidarias01 1 month ago
@Kidarias01 >implying noone would help him
DoctorCapitalist 1 month ago
@DoctorCapitalist Which they should if they are self interested, because people should care, it is in their best interest, but it doesn't work :'(
Kidarias01 1 month ago
@Kidarias01 If the majority can vote for an entity to take from them through violent force then surely they have the willpower to just, you know, hand over their money voluntarily if it is what society wants. Before the existence of the welfare state, there were friendly societies which would help the poor.
You also wouldn't see people giving to lazy ghetto people either. They'd give to people if they accepted low wage jobs (then they'd be subsidized). This way they build up experience.
DoctorCapitalist 1 month ago
@Kidarias01 This method would be a lot more effective in lifting people out of poverty (involuntary unemployment doesn't really exist when there's no minimum wage). The less barriers to entry would make it easier to start a business. For example, you could move into an abandoned building to start a business.
DoctorCapitalist 1 month ago
@Kidarias01 If there is a demand in society to help the poor, people will do it voluntarily out of their own free will, after all, they value it.
DoctorCapitalist 1 month ago
@DoctorCapitalist HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
That's actually really fucking funny.
numanumaro 1 month ago
@numanumaro At what point does my line of reasoning go wrong? Instead of trolling and scoffing, why not make a constructive argument to try convince me why I'm wrong?
DoctorCapitalist 1 month ago
central planning cant work for some things therefore it cant work for anything derpderpderp
mmann66666 2 months ago
you got socialism wrong...you ment communism
MareSwiss 2 months ago
well, i kinda agree. the idea that government intervention somehow can guide the free market into a system which somehow benefits everyone in society. sadly, no matter how much interventtion we see, the market is still as unjust, uncaring for those who don' own capital. You see the problem with this comparison of the free market to evolution, is that evolution has been scientifically observed. it has been tested and it has been documented.
Dolloozze 2 months ago
@Dolloozze But saying that the free market would have this same quality - that it is self regulating and self sustainable and working towards a "bigger good" - Only when it is left unregulated has never been observed and i would love it if you showed me a scientific study showing this to be the case
Dolloozze 2 months ago
@Dolloozze But i do agree when you say that the state is not great
Dolloozze 2 months ago
Excellent. This is the first time I've seen this comparison on video. (But I've heard it talked about quite a bit).
LucisFerre1 2 months ago
If the economy was evolution nobody would have money. The 1% (who are apex predators) would have massively over hunted their weak little prey, the 99%, resulting in destruction of the "econosystem".
Unless of course weak 99% banded together, learned how to use tools, and started fighting back against their predators (Occupy Foodchain?). Social Darwinism isn't a one way street buddy.
Shaitan051 2 months ago
@Shaitan051, try listening to the script next time.
LucisFerre1 2 months ago
@LucisFerre1
Care to elaborate?
Shaitan051 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Shaitan051 [[Care to elaborate?]]
Elaborate on your apparent need to clue yourself in on what he's actually saying? You're kinda dense, aren't ya?
LucisFerre1 2 months ago
you are going to get into ALOT of trouble for this.
you do realize that the majority of conservatives are religious nutbars right?
alvisc2002 2 months ago
lol this was good. applaud you sir.
SanguineBullet667 3 months ago
This is your only video I haven't like so far. Stupid atheist analogy.
TheSkunker 3 months ago
@GnomesAmok what?
sniped101 3 months ago
funny
upyr1 3 months ago
So.. are we talking social darwinism instead 8D ?
GormBerserker 4 months ago
@GnomesAmok What a shitsucker you are
david52875 4 months ago
I think you've mixed socialism up with communist authoritarianism.
dacoolray 5 months ago
@dacoolray "Yeah, because , National Socialism was totally different from authoritarianism. In socialism, your owners love you." Too funny. There's no difference between fascism and communism other than method of control. There's pro-state and anti-state. Prostate: You want to make us (and yourself) human livestock. You have a tragic case of Stockholm Syndrome. Antistate: Humans act in self interest, and giving people government power is the best way to create a deadly agency problem.
DancesWithWindmills 4 months ago
@Esuaci, you are confusing socialism with communism *sigh* I never heard of socialism fuck up human beings :/. Just look at Scandinavia :D
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
wow.. this guy clearly doesn't know the difference between Socialism and Communism -_-. Why do people ALWAYS think that socialism is communism!?!?!
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
@NeCacaluXuxultic Communists have stages green socialistm, middlegrown -, rife - and finnaly communistm. If some citizen ask his communist master "Why does X suck?" the master can say "Where in a to early stage." Ouf course, they never progres trough these stages so the master can play this bullshit trick.
Svetlozarov 5 months ago
@Svetlozarov, You mean MARXISM has stages. Socialism is nothing like communism because with COMMUNISM you need a ruler that you can actually trust which is WHY communism doesn't work because they usually get someone who became an asshole or is assassinate by the USA and gets replace by an asshole. Scandinavia is socialist and they have more rights than the USA and live a LOT better than US Americans. I wish i can say the same about El Salvador (damn gangs! i will RULE someday!!!)
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
@NeCacaluXuxultic You asked a question "Why do people ALWAYS think that socialism is communism!?!?!" I ansered it. And no mather socialist, communist or "capitalist" (corporatist), al state are evil and unsustainable.
Svetlozarov 5 months ago
@Svetlozarov,and so are non-state like Anarchism because we NEED a governmental structure regardless of how evil it is. Without it then there is no order and if there is no order it will lead to Chaos. :/. man... life sucks
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
@NeCacaluXuxultic Why do we NEED it? Why is it the only thing that brings order?
Svetlozarov 5 months ago
@Svetlozarov because we are not reptiles. We are very emotional creatures who can't control themselves unless we have restriction on what we do (or even believe). I'm a socialist btw (well technically I am a meritocratic, socialist, democratic monarch) and it really annoys me that AMERICANS generally don't know a damn thing about Socialism and always ASSUME it is like with STALIN or Hitler. Democracy/Republicanism didn't go well with my people. It lead to oppression from the rich to the poor.
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
@NeCacaluXuxultic Primitive creatures poses emotion, they don't posses reason. Luckely we are the least emotional of all creatures. What stops the rulers? What stops a deprecive president from launching nukes that will put him and the hole of humanity out it's missery? The way to overcome irrational, emotionaly controlled criminals is provided by reason. Exclusion from society is a good example. The state isn't, it's full with paradoxes.
Svetlozarov 5 months ago
@Svetlozarov "primitive creatures poses emotion, they don't posses reason. " I've studied biology for 6 years and already I see your claim is pure bullshit. "Luckely we are the least emotional of all creatures." oh wow..we certainly are NOT! LOL!
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
@NeCacaluXuxultic Animals posses fear and agrecion, and most of the time the're nothing to balance it out. A hungry lion for example attacks a human with gun even dow it's suicide. And even if you're right, what stops the emotions of the leaders? Why are they capable of perfect reacon, while we're not?
Svetlozarov 5 months ago
@Svetlozarov, most of our leaders are sociopaths. :/.. that's the problem. We need leaders like Dexter :D
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
@NeCacaluXuxultic Bush didn't kill a flie before he got in to office, he hid his agrecion until he got into power. Even the most advanced lie detector can't crack a politician. Whe have tried this for 3000 yeares and we have never succeded. Maybe leaders aren't the anser.
Svetlozarov 5 months ago
@NeCacaluXuxultic And that is starting to happen now here in the good ol' us of a. The rich are taking control of everything, and screwing the working class which composes at least 90%. So yeah, our 10% are our lords and kings with titles like CEO and CFO and COO.
jmitterii2 5 months ago
@jmitterii2, and this is why I am a socialist. IRONICALLY I don't approve of socialism ever happening in teh USA since we have too many lazy cunts. We need a better form of economy and government. Or better yet.. have a dictatorship that kills all retarded people.. we need someone like HITLER but without the racism -_-.... or.. we could just change the education system and make it EXACTLY like Japan. Americans are bloody stupid -_-
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
@NeCacaluXuxultic Well an absolute on anything doesn't work.And I agree, absolute socialism here would be a disaster.But a mixed market economy what we have now works, it just now needs to clean up the uncontrolled stuf thats occuring which has destroyed a once thriving middle class.I guess I'll never understand why the very rich double and tripple digit million and billionaires continue trying sqz for cost cutting 4 profits. When in the long run it even hurts their own business on demand side.
jmitterii2 5 months ago
@jmitterii2, Genocide would work o.O. LOL! I know that was messed up but we have too many retards in this country. *sigh* I honestly though electing OBAMA over that old white guy was gonna be better... man.... I always knew were gonna be fucked either way... but ObaMER turned out to be worse than I though. To ME he makes BUSH look good. Then again..he is elected RIGHT AFTER Bush fucked up... I guess he just has horrible luck in cleaning up his mess.
NeCacaluXuxultic 5 months ago
i will give you credit, that is a very interesting way to create an argument. I am now visualizing the economy as an ecosystem. The problem is there is kudzu here. kudzu, japanese stilt grass, honeysuckle, and many invasive prolific plants. now capitalists see this as a good thing because exponential growth has no end and makes for a strong economy, but socialists understand that the world is finite and that the nation's limited resources need to be used wisely and not consumed as a virus
MrCrunchybizzle 5 months ago
Comment removed
MrCrunchybizzle 5 months ago
or cancer consumes life. If you look at an ecosystem that has an invasive prolific species, it is lacking in biodiversity. native productive plants that provide foraging, tools, and medicine, and nutritious chemicals to the soil, are choked out by greedy prolific plants that are not kept in check because they are not equal players in the ecosystem. i see capitalism as a patch of woods that is being overtaken by kudzu.
MrCrunchybizzle 5 months ago
@MrCrunchybizzle and that kudzu is wal mart.
MrCrunchybizzle 5 months ago
Because economies, which can be effected by outside sources, are totally identical to random genetic mutations, right?
bobmuffins 5 months ago
Not a very good comparison - theistic creationists vs. free-market capitalists. And you basically acknowledged the problem in your video and then dismissed it. The creationist asks not only "whence order?" but "whence ANYTHING?"
We could have a conversation about order, but that's not the creationist's first concern. But, the atheist or free market capitalist can't ask that question ("whence anything"). They pretend as though it's insignificant.
The question stands nonetheless.
nkblovewins 5 months ago
Hehehe
RealLiveDebates 5 months ago
couldn't of put it better. creationists think, evolution = survival of the fittest, an unrestrained free market (capitalism) = survival of the fittest. Dont you get it! Jesus IS a socialist!
jesusisasocialist 6 months ago
@jesusisasocialist
uh no, He wasn't. He respected the profit motive and expected people to be self-sufficient without having to rely on the state for support. Furthermore, the bible advocates a single flat tax on everyone, irrespective of income level. It respects the right of an individual to leave an inheritance, and disallows the state from infringing/punishing this right by taxation. Definitely not socialist.
DraughtOfPeace 6 months ago
My God, this man is an idiot. Yes, because the economy and biology are completely similar. Yes, because socialism is a cult. Come on, you moron. Do some research!
Unless, of course, this is just satire. In that case, it's not very good. Sorry.
dudelikesWoW 6 months ago
Statheists are the worst
KyleSkullz 6 months ago
Oh wait, we are supposed to believe that unregulated bussinesses will treat their workers fairly, pay them fairly?.... You seriously believe that people shop based on how a company treats its workers?
No because you can't buy fairness for workers at these Low Low Low Low prices... Pay the workers less, can afford to keep prices low... = low overheads ((wages)).. HIGH profits... as the consumer buy's your cheap stuff!....
Yeah, real bottom up there reared perhaps in anticipation of an ass fk
stewie1974 6 months ago
JacobSpinney: Hey. Don't you think its absurd to compare a 'designer of non-human form' and a designer of human form - and thus making a conclusion which is not correct since your premise is wrong?
larsiemannen 6 months ago
state socialism is a fail.
Demockracy69 7 months ago
Socialism is about maximising the use-value of products but I wouldn't expect anyone here to understand that. This video is stupid.
id1337x 7 months ago
76 socialists can't see the parallels between socialism and creationism.
breakingthe4thwall 8 months ago
Capitalism works because evolution works? Lol, that's a new one. Austro-tards are getting desperate.
warmongerpro 8 months ago
So what if you're a Creationist and a Capitalist? >.>
KamisamanoOtaku 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KamisamanoOtaku Then my friend, you are fucked.
wildabeast11235 7 months ago
difference is that the market is actually a manmade construct.
dapopo100 9 months ago
@dapopo100
the market is an emergent phenomena of supply and demand in a free market it is neither directly man made nor man controlled. This of course changes once governments get involved in attempting to regulate it which diminishes or destroys the effectiveness of price signals depending on the extent of the meddling.
Berelore 8 months ago
@Berelore yep, the market just magically sells and supplies stuff. No humans involved whatsoever.
dapopo100 8 months ago
@dapopo100 False.
hotfudgemoney 8 months ago
That's an interesting parallel you've drawn there
DarkHumorist 9 months ago
free will is the last act of creation out of nothing and a notion of central planning. Would fit right in.
modelmark 9 months ago
@modelmark Do you want your life centrally planned? I don't. Man did not create reason, thus he cannot manipulate it to fit his ideals.
hotfudgemoney 8 months ago
I'm religious and this is hilarious.
Rensune 9 months ago
now hold it right there buddy free market is designed
kainniak1 9 months ago
Capitalists on the other hand make their entire argument one from ignorance. Something like "We can never design an economy better than [nature] can. It ought to be left alone to itself. Economies are just TOO complex for us to figure out [or something]."
kDest 9 months ago
Wow, straw man arguments all over. Socialists do not claim that an economy cannot work from the bottom up. The claim is more along the lines that an economy left to develop from the bottom up (free market capitalism) always becomes horribly abusive to civil liberties, economic prosperity of the poor, environmental health, etc. and it corrupts government.
So the socialist claim is that we can apply design to an economy to make it work more fairly and efficiently. It is like artificial selection.
kDest 9 months ago
@kDest Wow, you're fucking stupid.
"The claim is more along the lines that an economy left to develop from the bottom up (free market capitalism) always becomes horribly abusive to civil liberties, economic prosperity of the poor, environmental health, etc. and it corrupts government."
This is true of socialism and corporatism, as proven by history, but free market capitalism? Impossible. You cannot make the economy work more fairly and efficiently, you can only destroy it.
itachi705 9 months ago
@itachi705
>>but free market capitalism? Impossible
If it were impossible of free-market capitalism, the Industrial Revolutions would have been periods of the greatest social equality, environmental health, etc. The fact is, government regulation of the markets which sprang up during that time happened because free-market capitalism became abusive, forming monopolies and taking shortcuts like dumping toxic waste into drinking water sources. Besides the horrible worker abuses, of course.
kDest 9 months ago
Don't confuse socialism with Stalinism. Look up "what is socialism" on socialistworld net. Socialism is bottom-up, not top-down. It is democratic, not authoritarian. It would give people more freedom and more of a say in decision making, not less. Capitalism does not create order out of chaos - the present financial crisis has been brought about by the failure of capitalism.
druscot 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You believe that there is an all knowing, all powerful person who can create the perfect society? What are you, a theist? XD
MacabreManifesto 9 months ago
End the tyranny of traffic lights!
Antikryst 9 months ago
I'm an atheist and I don't approve of this message because you imply that capitalism is in any way more "rational" or "natural" than socialism, which is just simply ridiculous. You could make the same case for socialism and let capitalism disappear. This amounts to silly propaganda.
lynth 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you miserable little nazi
musicman02 10 months ago
Hooray for casually confusing Socialism and Soviet Communism! Never mind the fact the two are about as different as the French and Mandarin languages. We can just totally ignore that because, afterall, people aren't interested in factual information, they just want an opinion shoved down their gullet for them so they don't have to think.
luccaskunk 10 months ago
@luccaskunk So socialism is not the collective ownership of the means of production? Please, then, enlighten me on what socialism is.
JacobSpinney 10 months ago
@JacobSpinney Sure, that's pretty much what it is. However the video portrays Soviet Communism while calling it Socialism. Soviet Communism which is where the government owns everything and the people own nothing. Another way of putting is that from the "socialist"'s closing remark that he's in a "father knows best" state, not a socialist state. What I'm seeing in the video is not in any way shape or form collective ownership so much as a failed attempt at being witty about politics.
luccaskunk 10 months ago
@luccaskunk It's nonsense to say that communism and socialism aren't related. Communism is the logical conclusion of socialism. I challenge you to point out any inaccuracy I put across other than the design flaw of the hammer and sickle.
JacobSpinney 10 months ago
@JacobSpinney I didn't say they aren't related, I said that Soviet Communism bares no resemblance to socialism. Socialism is the people owning everything. Communism is the government owning everything. The "All Loving Authority from Up Above telling us what to do" mentioned by the "socialist" is clearly not a socialist system but a Soviet Communist one.
luccaskunk 10 months ago
@luccaskunk If we all owned everything, than we would have to ask everybody's permission to use something all the time. This is unworkable, so there has to be a ruling class of people who decide who get's to own what and under what terms, which is the case with western social democracies. I currently own less than half of what I produce, the rest is being taken by the rulers. This is only marginally different from communism, where they take 100%.
As default, everything should be UNowned.
janc71 9 months ago
@JacobSpinney Keep in mind that Soviet Communism bares only a vague resemblance to actual Communism. There were jokes during the Soviet years in Russia about how if Marx were resurrected, he would be disallowed the right to speak in public and possibly sent to Siberia to keep him away from the populace.
Mind you, I'm not advocating any of it. I'm simply bothering to know the difference between Socialism, Communism, and the Soviet brand of what even they mistakenly called "Communism".
luccaskunk 10 months ago
@JacobSpinney Hey there, you put a challenge to find any flaws, so here they are (the ones I spotted at first watch, at least) ; Socialism does absolutely not ignore market economy. It regulates it, usually for a particular purpose. It is more or less as interesting a caricature as creationists who say atheists "must" apply survival of the fittest as a moral.
07rabo1 10 months ago
@JacobSpinney And if Socialism and Comunism are, definitely related, they are in the same way as Liberalism and Nazism. In other words; they are related in th sense that Comunism applies socialism and Nazism applies Liberalism. But it just doesn't work the other way around. Liberals are not Nazis, just like Socialists are not Communists.
07rabo1 10 months ago
@07rabo1
WOW that was one badly informed comment.
National Socialism is MUCH closer to socialism and communism than it is to original liberalism. All three are authoritarian and statist ideologies while liberalism is anti-authoritarian.
MigDanskeren 10 months ago
@JacobSpinney
And actually, even if you were talking about soviet communism, you made a comparative mistake, since you presented the "communist" saying that free market economy doesn't make sense. No communists ever said anything like it. They thought it was an UNFAIR way of letting things happen, not an impossible way. In conclusion, the comparison is absolutely pointless. Sorry
07rabo1 10 months ago
@JacobSpinney "It's nonsense to say that communism and socialism aren't related. Communism is the logical conclusion of socialism."
Sure, because evolution leads to social Darwinism. You're using the common misconception of socialism being a political system. Socialism is actually an economic system, so your argument is a straw man argument. Cheers!
jesuriah 9 months ago
@JacobSpinney Sweden is socialist and still isn't communist. In fact, most countries that go communist end up being socialist in the end. Rather than being a line it's more like a parabola effect.
DuykRuyk 9 months ago
@JacobSpinney
Police departments, public schools, fire departments, and hospitals as well as construction companies, utilities (clean water and electric power) are by definition socialist programs. Sam with the DMV, as well as state boards of education, and a proper government itself is supposed to work for the people therefore America is a socialist nation by definition.
NUTCASE71733 9 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 You say it as if I support any of those programs.
JacobSpinney 9 months ago
@JacobSpinney
You sounds like either A) A violation of Poe's Law or B) A total fucking idiot. I honestly hope it's the former considering. No one can be that dumb.
NUTCASE71733 9 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 Please see my state is not great video.
JacobSpinney 9 months ago
@NUTCASE71733
You are an utter fucking moron. If America is a socialist country by simply having a few public programns despite the fact that most goods and services are controlled by the private market, then what the fuck would you consider a capitalist country to be?
You seem to think that once a nation adopts a single government program, it automatically becomes socialist, lol. You can't be this fucking dumb.
itachi705 9 months ago
@itachi705
I may have said something similar to what you said but that wasn't exactly what I ment. We may have government programs sure, but America is supposed to be a balanced mix of socialism and capitalism. We can't have it too far in either direction; same with political ideologies as well as issues regarding religion.
NUTCASE71733 9 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 No it is not... Where the fuck did you get that crazy idea? What do you want us to fail like Europe?
hotfudgemoney 8 months ago
@hotfudgemoney
I got this "CRAZY IDEA" by paying attentin in History Clasgrowing up. What's happening now is no different than the days monopolies practically had control of the united states government.
NUTCASE71733 8 months ago
@itachi705 He's not dumb, that's an acceptable stance.
hotfudgemoney 8 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 lolwut? what do those things have to do with the "definition" of America? Where are those programs written into the Constitution? The Bill of Rights? The government working for the people by no means implies socialism. lawl.
hotfudgemoney 8 months ago
Of course this analogy is only good for state-run socialism. One could also make this one:
Creationists: "I'm off to church because the fruits of my labor belong to my all-powerful God!"
Socialist: "I'm off to my state-run job because the fruits of my labor belong to Government!"
Capitalist: "I'm off to work because the fruits of my labor belong my Employer!"
None of these systems allow one to enjoy the fruits of their labor but instead, to do work for others in hope they'll return the favor.
caspringer09 10 months ago
@TheBigKiller I hope you don't think of using a centrist economy, because that ain't working so far in many nations adopting a similar system.
AnarchisThinker 10 months ago
we do NOT necessarily believe in "evolution", as it's the whore of capitalism
COMMUNISTPHILOSOPHY 10 months ago
@nammoo89 Mostly the former, but the latter may just as well turn into an elitist ruling class. Go read up!
maqrux 10 months ago
about time someone combined my 2 favorite sports creationist bashing and hippy bashing
Berelore 11 months ago
Hi, I'm a capitalist and I'm off to exploit my consumers. Seriously Jacob, you're so indoctrinated into this 'free market' idea. You fail to realize both of these systems are extremely outdated and are not going to work for the future years to come. Communism is flawed, and so is capitalism. Making some parody video should not be an approach to build a better future.
TheBigKiller 11 months ago
@TheBigKiller How has human nature and his condition changed that you know a better way, please explain. Assuming you believe our system "was good for it's time", but now you have a superior channel.
thesonybluray 11 months ago
@thesonybluray Due to the lack of grammar and logical sequence in your question I am not able to answer it.
TheBigKiller 11 months ago
@TheBigKiller Come on now, I know my writing is terrible, but to say you could not understand what I was articulating is just bullshit. Based on what, is our system outdated?
thesonybluray 11 months ago
Ugh, this was longer than I anticipated...
In any case. My point was to explain to you what socialism was, seeing you have some generalizations in your "Socialist vs capitalist"-videos. Although funny, they are incorrect on some points. I hope you learned something.
Best regards, MrMutualism.
MrMutualism 11 months ago
@MrMutualism I hope you'll notice that in my recent videos, I typically don't even use labels like "socialism" and "capitalism" for this very reason. They have different definitions to different people. Nowadays, as you can see in my state is not great video, I leave the labels aside and just talk about the concepts so as to avoid a meaningless definition war.
JacobSpinney 11 months ago
@JacobSpinney It was a good video, well done. Though the relative definitions to different people are, in my opinion, quite relevant, since the definitions the actual socialists have/had are the relevant ones.
MrMutualism 11 months ago
@MrMutualism Errr, quite IRRELEVANT*
MrMutualism 11 months ago
Comment removed
leotheloser 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JacobSpinney ever heard of the big bang ya fucking idiot
athism is a fairytale
similiar to christianity
finite energies cannot just pop out from nothing
science proves that
also fuck you greedy capitalist pig
fuck your capitalist propaganda
leotheloser 9 months ago
@JacobSpinney I think it's demonstrable though, that there is a difference between socialism,(the strawman in this video) the economic model, and communism, the political model.
jesuriah 9 months ago
This made Karl Marx respond with his book, "Misère de la philosophie", and thus create a feud between these 2 men (Note: Marx considered Proudhon to be a scientific socialist up to the point where Proudhon rejects Marx's dogmatic ideas, whereas Proudhon then becomes a "utopian socialist"). Proudhon and Marx both developed their theories from Adam Smiths and Ricardos value theory, hence the similarities. This eventually leads to Marx creating his "scientific socialism" with Engels.
MrMutualism 11 months ago
These men, being anarcho-socialists desiring a free market, have formed the modern socialism (primarily Proudhon).
Proudhon developed his theory of value in the writing; Systèmes des contradictions économiques, ou philosophie de la misère, where he explained 'value' with 2 sides: Utility value & Exchange value, whereas the latter is a reflex of the former. Though a value of a product changes when you take labour into account - making his theory a labor theory of value. NEXT.
MrMutualism 11 months ago
With that logic, assuming all socialists actually desire a state/central planned/controlled economy would be generalization, and thus not really something of value. We cannot forget the fact that there are socialists who want a free market aswell - Mutualists. You shouldn't rule out the market-socialists such as, Proudhon, Kevin Carson, Benjamin Tucker etc. etc. These men - especially Proudhon - are essential to the whole socialist theory.
NEXT COMMENT ;_;
MrMutualism 11 months ago
From what I have learned by reading socialist litterature, market-socialist litterature, debating with anarchosocialists and marxists - the definition of socialism is [not] "central planned economy" or "state control over the means of production", but it is >Worker< control over the means of production. (Note: Statesocialism need a state - directly controlled by the workers - to be legitimately called a socialism (though you and I agree that states always end up in elitism and so forth). NEXT--
MrMutualism 11 months ago
Hmmm. Okay Jacob. I have watched about each and everyone of your videos. I agree with you on everything except on the economics. And I really think you should rethink your definition of socialism, before you use it in this satirical sense :). Don't take this as anything else but friendly advice, and me sharing my own knowledge and experience.
I'll explain in the next comment, damn letter-limit!
MrMutualism 11 months ago
That was hilarious! Great point with the double-thinking socialist. Bravo.
maidenak 11 months ago
Again i agree with your opinion to some degree, but just because a process happens naturally dosent mean its the best way. We are flock animals anyway so that argument dosent get you far. So lets go with nature let the biggest guns win. As it would be done in primates or cro-magnon. Nope. Still agree but a bad argument.
mrfuzzer1 1 year ago
what was the point of this video? I'm a capitalist who believes in Evolution and disagrees with socialism.
TheyHearUsNow 1 year ago
@TheyHearUsNow It was directed at statethiests
masonkiller666 1 year ago
@masonkiller666 And who are they?
TheyHearUsNow 1 year ago
@TheyHearUsNow People who reject the blind faith and ignorance of reason and evidence when it comes to religion, but then hop right back on to blind faith and ignorance when it comes to the state.
masonkiller666 1 year ago
One problem with the analogy is that creationists are trying to explain order with "magic". Socialists are NOT trying to "explain order" with socialism - they're trying to impose it, while pointing out the lack of order/balance, IE money and power tending to flow to those who already have money and power.
Flyborg 1 year ago
@Flyborg The magic that socialism believes in is that the rulers are somehow able to shrug off all of the incentives for corruption and abuse AND somehow be able to calculate how to efficiently allocate resources without needing market prices.
JacobSpinney 1 year ago
@JacobSpinney Indeed, socialism makes (faulty) assumptions about the ability (and honesty) of both leaders and the people. But they're trying (and failing) to solve actual problems.
But I'd say it's just as unfounded (I wouldn't say "magical") to believe that leaders can fix all problems, as it is to assume that corporations can self-regulate, and decide on their own not to dump garbage in every corner, or abuse their employees, etc, because they (often) already do that whenever able.
Flyborg 1 year ago
@Flyborg Creationists aren't suggesting creation came from magic but from a metaphysical creator. Calling it "magic" is being insulting and just causes them to want to ignore everyone else, thereby ruining the chance for dialogue.
in0eterminacy 1 year ago
@in0eterminacy But it's magic by definition - IE use of supernatural methods to manipulate the natural world. It is of course not the word they would use and it is used in mockery, BUT it doesn't change the meaning, since "magic" = "unknown supernatural method", and it's not like "magic" is any less reasonable. (Also I wasn't talking to a creationist here - if I was, I would not cling to the word "magic", but might describe their "unknown supernatural method" as "what is essentially magic")
Flyborg 1 year ago
This is a false analogy. "Order" in evolution comes from the "bottom up" (i.e. random mutation, etc.). But once that order is established (i.e. an actual living organism is born), it is run more like an authoritarian state than an anarchist one (i.e. your brain is more or less the dictator of the rest of your body). Even embryogenesis is very deterministic and "authoritarian", to continue the analogies. An "anarchist" embryo would come out deformed in almost all cases. And if we look more at ...
mykeBC 1 year ago
@mykeBC natural social systems, we see that the most successful class of animals (Insects) have a very hierarchical social structure (ants, bees). And there are more examples of "authoritarian" social structures in the animal world than there are egalitarian ones (I don't even know if this exists in the animal world). In short, using biology and animal behavior as an analogy for the superiority of anarchism/capitalism over statism/socialism is a bad idea.
mykeBC 1 year ago
Ok creationism does not assume that nothing starts from scratch. See it simply says that someone in fact created everything rather than just an explosion. I think people need to be "supervised" sometimes or else it becomes chaotic with all the different perspectives and opinions there are. Don't forget that it was chaotic capitalism that brought what we know today as Unions, Social Security, etc...
marioalosangeles 1 year ago
Was that necessary?
LegoFreakPictures 1 year ago
Love how your getting pwned Other Jactard.
mecher3k 1 year ago
Nice one!
Wrath0fKhan 1 year ago
I liked the last parts about the socialist and creationist:
Well, that was interesting.
Denon333dash888 1 year ago
thank you for making this connection!! i always thought it was bloody obvious but so few seem to bring it up. it was this connection that made my biological anthropology major bf an anarchist.
Sean2046 1 year ago