The argument you make against self-ownership is merely about semantics. Call it self-sovereignty, moral authority, or individual autonomy and your argument falls apart because it doesn't address core principals.
None of those terms are equatable to self-ownership and what it implies.
Individual autonomy (self-rule) for instance is premised on the idea that the freedom of one individual ends where the freedom of another begins - meaning you cannot morally use your person or property in a way that prevents another individual of utilizing their own freedom of choice; as wage-labor does.
Self-ownership is ultimately leads to a state of "all are free, but some are more free than others.
@MsSexySocialist "Individual autonomy (self-rule) for instance is premised on the idea that the freedom of one individual ends where the freedom of another begins"
That is self-ownership - one person cannot own another and only owns themselves, and therefore has no authority over another.
"Self-ownership is ultimately leads to a state of "all are free, but some are more free than others."
More buzzwords. Explain where you mean, provide some justification.
Mises and Hayek's ECP only ever applied to centralized statist-socialism.
Neither of them (or any other Austrian economists) ever bothered to address non-statist or decentralist models of economic democracy and self-management that had existed for nearly a century when Mises wrote the original essay.
A wealth of other models such as parecon and inclusive democracy have since been developed since which show the ECP to be a bogus red herring against a democratic economy.
@MsSexySocialist The reason why Austrian economics didn't bother to address non-statist economies is because a free market is a free market is a free market, no matter if you call it a democratic economy or not.
Mises and Hayek did not rebut the use of worker owner co-ops on a free market. If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.
And it's this religious belief that the "free market" will automatically sort everything out that is the central weakness of the Austrian school - that and its clear anti-scientific basis.
The issue is not the market or how "free" it is (as Proudhon understood) it's what kind of structures dominate it; authoritarian and hierarchical, or democratic and self-managed.
A market is more than compatible with economic democracy, heteronomous institutions are not.
@MsSexySocialist Religious? Anti-Scientific? Those are buzz words. Please don't insult my intelligence.
If you reject coercion and state power, then you are left with a free market, and a free market can become nearly anything the people want it to. If co-ops and non-hierarchical firms outperform corporations and heteronomous institutions then so be it, but if the opposite is true then there really is nothing you can do to stop them other than use force and contradict your principals.
@MsSexySocialist The points of fact are that hierarchical corporations exist today because of state intervention. Take away the state, and the overhead cost, diminishing returns, and yes the *economic calculation problem* as applied to corporations will cause them to rapidly contract if not collapse. But whatever firms spring up from the vacuum is something you have no authority to impose or control.
If you support the creation of a future system in which authoritarian structures and institutions are permitted to exist, well then I'm sorry but then that system is itself authoritarian.
The belief in self-ownership, while it may seem to offer theoretical liberty and autonomy, is premised on domination. Ownership is itself simply a form of rule; rule over property.
If one understands that it is rule and decision-making power that defines human relations . . .
@MsSexySocialist Your first mistake is thinking like a statist. I don't support the CREATION of any system, I support the destruction of coercive systems. Whatever emerges from the ashes, as long as it's not coercive, is fine by me. Thinking that a system must be imposed or created from the top-down is your inner statist talking. Emergence from the bottom up is what free market anarchism is about, no matter what you call it.
No anarchist supports the top-down implementation of any system. But it's a fantasy to think one can simply dissolve the state then expect everything to magically work itself out - as Austrian "logic" implies.
Also, I must point out that you refer to your ideology as "free market anarchism", but going by the yellow and black voluntaryist symbol you identify with, this isn't possible.
@MsSexySocialist "it's a fantasy to think one can simply dissolve the state then expect everything to magically work itself out"
You're right it is a fantasy. I don't think that way, nor do Austrians (heck most Austrians aren't anarchists). That is a straw man.
Society and economics are emergent processes. Just like a living ecosystem can morph to its environment through emergence, economy and society morph to the mold of people. Society doing such is a description, not a prescription.
@MsSexySocialist And anarcho-capitalism is certainly a form of anarchism. If you accept property rights and don't accept coercion, then that is anarcho-capitalism pure and simple.
Anarchism must consistently oppose all forms of rulership and subordination.
Etymologically the terms itself means "no rule/rulers". The kind of private institutions that operate via top-down command and minority-rule over the majority are all forms of "archy".
Support for dissolving the state alone is not sufficient to qualify a philosophy as anarchist.
If it was Marxism would also qualify as anarchism as statelessness is its long-term goal
@MsSexySocialist "Anarchism must consistently oppose all forms of rulership and subordination"
Untrue. Heck hven the wikipedia article puts this to rest: "Outside of the US, and by most individuals that self-identify as anarchists, it implies a system of governance, that goes to lengths to avoid the use of coercion, violence, force and authority, while still producing a productive and desirable society."
Electing a ruler for you and only you is perfectly permissible under anarchy.
"Also, since when is wikipedia a source of actual concrete knowledge?"
Where did I say wikipedia was *the* authoritative source? Please, I've studied anarchy for long enough to know that it is not the total absence of rule. You're getting all bent out of shape about rulers that you miss the greater question of if it's voluntary. If someone wants to be dominated, forcing them to be free would make you the violent one.
. . . then one can form an ethics premised on the rule over the self (autonomy) and the understanding that to dominate others in any a direct or systemic way infringes upon their right to self-rule as it removes their decision-making power and places it in the hands of an outside force - whether person or institution.
This is heteronomy and the bedrock of all authoritarianism.
To start from a position of ownership informs an ethics based upon the comodification and . . .
@MsSexySocialist Commodification, dehumanization, again only buzz-words. You have to back up such statements with some kind of concrete justification, not subjective abstractctions.
If a person chooses to work in a factory, and an employer wants them to, they can, even if you view it as dehumanizing. You are a third party and therefore have no authority to change them, or society. To impose your will and say that a person cannot own a business or work for a particular one is an act of statism.
"If a person chooses to work in a factory, and an employer wants them to, they can, even if you view it as dehumanizing"
Then you support authoritarianism.
How unfortunate.
"To impose your will and say that a person cannot own a business or work for a particular one is an act of statism"
You also seem to be unaware of what exactly a "state" is. Don't lapse into the typical ancap practice of flinging the word statist" at anything you don't like.
Who said I supported someone going to work for a factory? Imposing a false belief onto your opponent is extremely immature, and disrespectful, and a logical fallacy.
You may not like such institutions, and neither do I, but how do you eradicate such institutions? To do so through force is no different than the violence of the state. To do so through mass-media is no different then what you despise of the elites.
"You may not like such institutions, and neither do I, but how do you eradicate such institutions?"
By building alternatives to such institutions which utilize self-management, employee-control, cooperation, and lateralized relations; then focus on networking such institutions through free association.
"To do so through force is no different than the violence of the state"
I support no such thing. Doing so robs people of the CHOICE of what kind of future system they want.
. . . dehumanization of other individuals and the self. Not to even mention ecology.
One may not be able to "own" another person given the principles of self-ownership, but their decision-making power can be; this is a violation of individual autonomy as it permits an economic elite to rule over others.
This elites come to have decision-making power over those who sell it to them constituting subordination. Everyone becomes technically "free" but elites more free than others.
@MsSexySocialist When words have no context and are used for emotional reasons, then yes, they're buzz words.
Comodification without context doesn't explain your stance and doesn't refute mine. It has no significance other than to illicit an emotional response. Explain beyond the word itself and you'll have a more powerful argument.
"Ownership" implies something that can be bought and sold and used.
Hence, like a commodity.
This is an inherently anti-humanist concept and infers that individuals are of no value except with regard to what they may be worth in terms of economy.
This is economism and coded misanthropy at its worst. And I'm not trying to illicit emotions, I'm simply identifying what I see as a false hope for forming an ethics of personal and social autonomy.
@MsSexySocialist It does not follow that something being a commodity means it has no value.
And more words without context, coded misanthropy.
"I see as a false hope for forming..."
It's not about FORMING a set of ethics. That implies a top-down approach. Tell me how you arrive at your goal without resorting to the behavior that you so despise? The only ethical way is through the market, which is completely applicable under Anarcho-capitalism.
. . . the property someone possesses can be used to control or subordinate others; robbing them of autonomy.
I do not just mean this in the sense of direct, personal coercion, but in the systemic sense. When some can monopolize productive property or resources with zero boundaries, one must accept that they could be claimed to the detriment of others; depriving them of free access.
@MsSexySocialist And thank you for explaining ownership/property. I understand, I don't agree, but I do appreciate you spending the time.
I won't go into a debate on what is considered property, but I will pose the question again which you did not answer. How are you going to eradicate hierarchical institutions without resorting to their bag of tricks?
Which is the creation of institutions of direct and participatory democracy, self-management, and cooperation. Then the networking of these institutions into a "dual power" to contest both state and corporate power.
This process unfolds non-violently and does not advocate theft or expropriation. It therefore does not violate your "non-aggression principle".
@MsSexySocialist If such institutions are more profitable under a free market, then they are not only applicable to anarcho-capitalism, but will thrive in anarcho-capitalism.
However that does not address the main issue I have with your stance: is that rule is paramount to voluntary exchange when it should be the opposite.
There is nothing wrong with someone wanting to sell themselves if that's what they want. I may feel it's wrong for me, and you for you, but we are not that person.
"If such institutions are more profitable under a free market, then they are not only applicable to anarcho-capitalism, but will thrive in anarcho-capitalism"
I don't believe that's possible. Because if that happened, and self-managed institutions became dominant, then it would cease to be anarcho-*capitalism* and morph in something resembling Proudhonian Mutualism.
Capitalism is defined as "the market economy with private ownership of the means of production".
@MsSexySocialist Private ownership can be shared between multiple people, just as a house can be privately owned by the family. So yes, socialism in the voluntary sense, and mutualism too, can exist within the domain of anarcho-capitalism.
Speaking of which exactly what kind of future stateless economy would you prefer. It's clear you want a money-based market society, but what kind of firms would you like to see populate it?
Mostly small businesses? Mostly corporations? A mix of private firms and co-ops?
@MsSexySocialist It doesn't necessarily stop being capitalism if a majority of the firms are co-ops, worker owned, non-hierarchical, etc. They still have private property owned by the community of workers.
What stateless economy would I prefer? I don't know. I have no idea what works the best since the state has always been there mucking it up. I personally like small business and co-ops. If voluntary socialism, resource based economies, labor hour currency or whatever works, I'll accept it.
@MsSexySocialist I'd say that it is still private ownership if two or more people own something, like a house or car.
I work for a consumer co-op, and they treat me well. I agreed to, and advocate for, their business practices so I see no problem in endorsing a voluntary organization like that.
You're right that private power can be destructive, no doubts about that, but I personally think that when the market is turned against said powers, they will die, but only in the absence of a state.
And most seem to regard democratic enterprise as being somehow based on "mob-rule" (this is ignoring that anarchist democracy is based on consensus btw).
So it strikes me as . . . well, unusual to hear that.
I guess I can respect your desire to have an economy that's actually decided by people themselves and not an elite of owners.
Although personally I think it's misplaced to blame everything on the state alone, as I fell private power is just as culpable.
In order for it to be "capitalism" (stateless or not) all, or at least the majority, of the means of production would need to be under private ownership and the majority of firms be private firms.
If it was a 50/50 split between private firms and self-managed firms, it would still be a market economy, but not a capitalist one.
"To pose the question a different way: How are you going to stop people who WANT to go work for such institutions?"
A left-libertarian future society would be comprised of a free confederation of autonomous and self-governing organic communities.
If any community or group wished to secede from the confederation and found their own capitalist society with wage-labor, bosses, and so on, then they can do so.
That's the important part of democracy. The freedom to opt out.
@Casevil669 Ehh... The first time I watched the Zeitgeist films, I was totally behind it. I thought I had realized the solution to every one of the world's problems, but The Venus Project has some major flaws. First of all, it advocates an entirely centrally planned economy, and TheLeftLibertarianism, libertarians, and history, have shown that centralized control in the economy doesn't work. There's no way their 'all-knowing' computer can calculate the subjective, individual needs
@Casevil669 of individual humans. It's called the central planning calculation problem. Also, TVP advocates the centralization of production, which is detrimental to the biosphere. Don't listen to Zeitgeisters that claim to be individualists or libertarians, because no matter how much they espouse their supposed libertarianism, TVP is definitely not libertarian, or even left-lib, since it rejects free markets. Check out mutualism, geoanarchism, or social anarchism.
Passion for the creating of technology, for working for a greater good will always triumph over greed. Look at Dr. Jonas Salk. Saved millions, if not future billions of people. He wanted no money for his vaccine. That's someone to admire. Not some schmuck that made millions of the backs of economic slavery, defending his sweatshops under the mom of voluntaryanism. Again, if the alternative is starving, working isn't much of a free choice, is it?
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Look at Steve Jobs or Bill Gates. They created products that everybody wanted at a cheap price. They got rich and made lots of other people rich as well. We are all richer thanks to them. Wealth is not finite, it can be created out of thin air. China, Hong Kong and Singapore all have a very freindly business environment right now. Everyone is going there and they are getting rich thanks to capitalism.
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Yes, greed is fundamentally good.To paraphrase Yeats: the greatest civilizations were created by men who loved money and beautiful women. Those same civilizations were later destroyed by idealists. People like........................................YOU
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Spoken by a true left-wing loser. Enter into a contract with other human beings to exchange some effort to help work toward some endeavor OR starve/freeze/die.Unlike animals we have more options. Animals have to go find food and shelter or they will starve/freeze/die. We can do that too, or we can enter into commercial contracts with our other fellow human beings and utiilize currency to exchange workproduct efforts for our food, shelter and all other needs for survival.
"Enter into a contract with other human beings to exchange some effort to help work toward some endeavor "
You reason from the flawed premise that people work out of passion. Most do not and you know this. Most people simply work mind-numbing or pointless jobs to keep a roof over their head and keep food on the table. Most assembly-lines workers are not passioned by twisting screw A on appendage B all day long.
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH You sound like one of those "Occupy Wall Street" types. America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. People work to make their lives better. In China people do not have to work in sweatshops, but they voluntarily choose to. Most work for themselves, not other people.
Again, nice character assassination. It that all you have?
America has abundance in the hands of few, as the rest of the world. We have an abundance of food, yet 1,7 billion people are starving right now. We have an abundance of shelter and clean water, yet people are dying because they don't have money to trade for these basic necessities. That's what profit as an incentive creates.
Most people work because if they don't, they starve to death. You can't even deny this.
That's where you are wrong, mate. You don't have to not receive payment to be a slave. There's only a superficial difference between physical and economic slavery. Masters used to buy food for you. Now they give you money to buy food for yourself. Yet, you are still dependent. Nothing changed but the superficial illusion of freedom. They give you food in exchange for labor. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
That’s even ignoring debt bondage, which is your slavery to banks and the government. You can get paid in debt bondage, yet it’s universally regarded as slavery. Still there is little difference between taxation, selling of public debt, mortgages, loans and debt bondage. You should also look into the concept of unfree labour.
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Debt problems now go back to intrest rates caused by the FED reserve. Government insures loan so that anyone can get them. Then when the bank fails the state subsidizes their losses by bailing them out. This is not free market capitalism. This is corporatism.
An example, Henry Ford almost lost his business after creating and selling the first Ford Model T. You know why? He had made the car too good and durable. That meant people only bought once from him, so he couldn't turn a substantial profit. So after that, companies started making cars lousy and prone to breaking down, so you have to come back every year or so to buy replacement parts or every 5 years to buy a new car. That’s profitary incentive for you.
Financial wealth is indeed not finite, but resources, products and services are. Which brings us to another demonstration of how our current system is nothing but slavery: inflation. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates created half the products they could have because of their profitary incentive. A profitary incentive means you need to keep technology at an artificially low or inefficient level. This is best demonstrated with an example, like Henry Ford.
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Inflation is caused by the FED reserve which is not even a federal bank. Printing money out of thin air and keeping intrest rates low. I am on your side about that. Entrepreneurship is about created what people demand at the lowest price possible. of course he wanted to make a profit, that's why he went into business. Cars were already a luxury and very expensive by 1908. His goal was not to create an expensive car but to create a cheap one for the common man.
Exactly. Inflation is caused by the increasing of financial assets (by the Fed, or ECB or other central banks) while products, resources and services don't increase at such high rate. As you said, financial wealth is in principle infinite (unless you run out of power to run computers etc.). This is a problem because material wealth and labour are not. Thus inflation. The creation of this financial wealth is slavery to the central banks by fractional reserve banking.
This massive inflation could be prevented by the gold standard but there are many problems in re-implementing it and I still feel it would be better to make basic human needs non-transactional.
There is definitely no free market, although I would also have problems with that, it would probably be better than corporatism.
The point is not how expensive or cheap a car is, it's that a profitary incentive creates inherently flawed products.
Living of the fruits of your labor is a nice euphemism for 'giving you money in exchange for work to make sure you can provide basic necessities and don't starve to death'. The real fruits of labor are intellectual, not material. They are things like a sense of accomplishment, helping people, the joy of exploring science, making people smile, creating machines etc. Basic human needs shouldn't be a fruit of labor or a reward or trade good for anything.
Socialism never killed anyone. Capitalism never killed anyone. Communism never killed anyone. You know who keeps killing people? Other people. Mostly, other people with power. Statists.
@moonshot926 There was never a pure, 100% socialism on this planet. and there is no such thing as "utopia", societies shape the future and progress all the time.
If you say that the fruits of human labor are financial wealth, which you need in order not to die, then you are basically saying that the right to life itself is the fruit of human labor. If the right to life is the fruit of human labor, a reward for working, then it's slavery. For if a master doesn't feed his slave, he dies and a slaves work is the only thing keeping him alive.
You keep interchanging the blame between scientific management and private sector. The private sector made America great. The methodology of implanting a productive workforce is what kills us. Dictatorship never works, there was a time in americas history where being self employed was easy. Don't confuse what you are blaming
He uses emotional rhetoric because the main issues with why work is such a torturous, horrible system is that it does serious emotional damage to the human mind, it's a very emotional issue and the way this man addresses it fits perfectly, if he were to use nothing but cold facts and statistics it wouldn't have the same impact and it would be straight out false, because it's cold math and statistics that lead to this damaging system in the first place, the fact is it IS about how people feel.
We need to move to Resource Based Economy, get away from monetary system that plague us with false scarcity and purposeful obsolescence. If we want to elevate the human being we need to destroy the monotony of the monetary system.
@Joophish YA YA , WE NEED RBE, SO THAT WE CAN BE FREE FROM SLAVERY BECAUSE THE ROBOTZ WILL DO ALL THE WORK. I QUIT MY JOB, NOW I'M FREE FROM SLAVERY, I SMOKE POT ALL DAY LONG LIVIN IN MY MOMS BASEMENT. IN RBE ROBOTZ WILL CREATE ALL THE POT WE EVER NEED.SO WAKE UP SHEEPLES, DON'T HAVE TO WORK FOR A LIVING,SO WE CAN ALL BE EQUALLY POOR.
This is a very good job. However, I find the use of emotionally persuasive rhetoric to be a bit too much. However, if this is supposed to be an inspiring speech its use is relevant and good. 5*
basically join the rat race , get a few perks : running water etc... or go live in the woods off the radar in survival mode. Yes I agree WORK / LIFE IS A BIG FUCKING JOKE !
@wayoftheroad1 Yeah but the beautiful thing is that life is what you make it. And they're groups of people (leaderless may I add) that agree this world and lives we live suck, and best of all they know how it can be better /watch?v=Fb_bTUJp39o&list=FL10lRDwBIQC1prTyhrHn5cw&feature=mh_lolz
Thank you for pointing out timed management's part at improving the efficiency of inevitable arrival...now with timed management your soul is dead b4 your body...efficient for the undertaker...only have to drain blood b4 we move down assembly line to the grave...In disposable material world, life is as garbage...let's call it shit...after all, the economy of words efficiently saves energy for... work....ugh
Work was a source of joy, when I punched in for Red Rover and the play of a child...now I work at Art...I got fired (thanks be to god) from the career that after 17 years poisoned my passion and made my days a drudgery, my existence a curse...I am happy, alive, Poor in money and rich in life.
Anybody who dislikes this video should be put into a time machine and transported back to the 18th century. They should be forced to work in the hot sugar cane fields of Haiti just like the African slave were . Maybe then they would understand the true nature of WORK .
This is a good video BUT for two things. One--the narrator sounds like Greg Rudseski. and at 5:48 when it promotes its Zeitgeist 'utopia' of a totally computer-centralized machine-city--and how it still supports 'productivity'. But about work and people being made to be machines it is good.
A lot of your claims (at least the ones that don't focus on emotion as their prime argument) rests on the fact that people are forced into debt by going to college. Now, there are various reasons why college is so expensive (Peter Schiff goes into that), but you don't need college to gain success. But the question I have, to a proponent of democracy, would that kind of system mean that the minority must obey the demands of the majority?
@ TheLeftLIbertarian hey there left libertarian! brilliant videos u got up there..im personally an anarchist of the bakunin variety so was impressed with all the material u got up on ur channel...we should get in touch...send me a pm..i live in singapore btw..anw, i was wondering what movie u got that clip from - the one where a man slams the keyboard at another's face..
@voiceofreason467 Oh, and thanks for confirming what I said about you being a coward, you can't handle me by yourself so you brought in your butt-buddies to help you. You truly are a pathetic little creature, Treason.
Labels are just that, Labels. It is we the People who put meaning behind them.
I for one, am sick of fucking Labels. We use them so damn much to separate and divide people. This whole idea of ending Hard Labor and allowing people to be more free in this world is all about shifting how we see things, and how we think, and right now people are creating the same damn problems over and over and over again because of our God damn GIANT EGO'S
@TZMBigsteelguy Again, having people who think anyone who isn't a dirty commie like them is sick and in need of treatment lecturing me about humility only makes me laugh.
@TZMBigsteelguy Yes, you do support an ism, communism specific, you just put it under a different name. And if I didn't go into a bulshit semantics argument with treason, what makes you think I'll get into one with you?
@voiceofreason467 You know, part of the reason I don't even try to press matters further, is become I just enjoy watching you squirm as you attempt to weasel out of the hole you've dug yourself into. But really, just because you have no balls, doesn't give you the right to crictize mine.
@voiceofreason467 And yet you refuse to acknowledge what I've told you several times already: that my only purpose here is to ridicule you and your beliefs. And how does that even make sense? Come up with a proper comeback, you libbie piece of shit, or have you, in your quest to become like the magical robots you jerk off to, also forsaken your sense of wit?
@voiceofreason467 Ah, whatever, truly your hipocrisy is only matched by your cowardice, you're a pathetic little man who can't even own up to what he says. But then again, I suppose I can't be too harsh, cowardice and hipocrisy are common traits amongst the likes of you.
@voiceofreason467 Again, you seem to forget, I'm not here to debate you, about Chomsky or anything else, I'm here to make fun of you and ridicule your pathetic beliefs, nothing more.
@voiceofreason467 Actually you did. So I guess all of the sudden, credentials matter, now that it suits you? Hipocristy FTW. You Zeitards are the most pathetic shits I've ever seen.
@voiceofreason467 I would consider lying and painting the US and the West as the scum of the Earth badmouthing it, but again, I'll leave you to define your own terms.
@voiceofreason467 Well, I think it shows that high stations in academia say nothing about a person's values, seeing as it is so incredibly easy to lie and maintain said positions, so I'm satisfied that this disproves your pathetic appeal to authority.
@voiceofreason467 Actually, it's more like a fact, it's not just acknowledged by me, it's acknowledged who isn't a scum sucking traitorous anti-western libbie shit.
And no, what makes him an enemy of the Free World is badmouthing it and slandering it at every turn, while, again, taking advantage of its provide, that makes him not just a traitor but a dirtbag hypocritical shit.
@voiceofreason467 Yeah, you also go offline to bars and caffees and badmouth the West you despise there while still taking advantage of the freedom it provides for scum-sucking shit like you.
@voiceofreason467 Haha! So you do admit to being a no-good scum-sucking traitor who goes on YT just to badmouth the West that you despite yet take advantage of the freedom it provides. Scumbag, if I could have you deported to North Korea and have a single oppressed North Korean citizen who's suffering under Kim Jong-Ill's rule shipped here in your place so he could be free, I would.
As for the rest, bah, I don't really believe you, or really care.
@voiceofreason467 And I told you I'm not going to engage in a debate with you, as it would be pointless, and I feel satisfied with the way I've presented my position, so I don't feel I have anything to prove to you either. So I'm just gonna keep poking fun at you.
@voiceofreason467 Chomsky is a renowned professor and highly-conceited academic, some argue the most important living intellectual of our time, and he's a dirtbag enemy of the Free World who lies like a rug. Him happening to teach at a renowned university doesn't mean anything.
@voiceofreason467 *coff* *coff* Just a reminder for anyone out there: this tool's idea of evidence is a video of another leftist shit just like him babbling on about the same things he does, in short, no actual evidence.
@voiceofreason467 The only people you help by sitting on your ass and badmouthing the West are people like Chavez, Castro, Kim Jong-Ill and other scum enemies of the Free World, and for that you truly deserve to die in the most painful manner possible.
@voiceofreason467 And I told you before, I'm not willing to get into a debate, all I'm doing is making fun of you and calling you names, and you just stand there and take it. I don't have to back up anything, because I've already been proven right, and you've already been proven wrong. Asking me to make some sort of argument as to why Communism is wrong and doesn't work, is like asking someone to make an argument as to why the Earth is round. They don't need, because they've proven right.
@voiceofreason467 And not a single fuck was given that day about what the arrogant pseudo-intellectual commie traitor thought. You're a liar, a fucking liar who takes advantage of people's good nature, like I said before, you and your lot should all be lined up against a wall and shot for what you've done.
@voiceofreason467 So again, not giving you anything, not going into a debate because there's nothing to debate over, and while I'm well above your attempts to embezzle me, I don't feel like indulging you right now.
@voiceofreason467 Well I've had the bad luck of being familiar with your neo-communist fringe group since early 2009 when you with your anti-western propaganda tricked my best friend into joining you, and destroyed my friendship with her, so I'm also pretty sure I know what your beliefs are. And I also don't feel the need to enter a debate, where you go 'no, that's just what we said, what we actually meant was whatever', and I'm left wondering why I should take your word over the Head Zeitard's.
@voiceofreason467 And yet when I say to look up your own Movement's beliefs, you ignore it. Fine, remain the hapless little drone of the aging liberal hippie douche that you are now.
@voiceofreason467 I don't need to, it's not my fault if you don't know your Movement's own beliefs, you think everyone who isn't a dirty communist like you is sick and must be reeducated, you don't word it that way, granted, but it's what you mean. If you don't know this maybe you should do more research on your Movement's stance on things.
I told you: I'm not engaging in a pointless debate for you to attempt to mislead me.
@voiceofreason467 Says the guy who thinks everyone who disagrees with him is sick, and in need of reeducation! Ahahahahah! I don't know if I should be angry or just laugh my ass off right now.
@voiceofreason467 Ah, ok then, here's my answer: you're a either a dumbfuck or a lying little shit that would make Chomsky proud for trying to mislead me. I also have a policy of not entering debate with lying fucks who by all right should be deported to North Korea when all they're doing is attempting to mislead you. I told you before: I'm not here to debate you or 'talk bussiness', I'm just making fun of you because I'm bored.
@voiceofreason467 Man, you're a persistent little shit aren't you? I told you I'm not going to debate you, because there's nothing left to debate about. You want a debate about how communism can work? Go have one with the undercover Marxist agents posing as teachers in your college who brainwashed you in the first place, they also seem to be oblivious to their advocated system's worldwide.
@voiceofreason467 To you maybe, but somehow the image of you arrogant pseudo-intellectuals being run over by tanks of the 'evil imperialist westerners' you so despite, yet take advantage of the freedom they provide makes me feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside X)
Again, why are you trying to engage in a debate with me? I told you: there's no debate, you've already been proven wrong, there's nothing left to debate about, you already lost.
@voiceofreason467 That's what you undercover Marxist agents posing as academics have been trying to make us believe for years: that communism = wrong, even though communism has been proven wrong more than once, actually, so you can re-ignite whatever debate you still think there is to be had about this. Sorry, but no, there's no debate you've already been proven wrong, now either accept it and accept capitalism as the ruling system, or curl up and die, I don't really care which at this point.
@voiceofreason467 Like I give two shits whether or not you take me seriously. Really I guess it doesn't have anything to do with anything, I just wanted to see you being squashed by tank treads and dying in a gruesome manner, I thought it would be adequate.
@voiceofreason467 Hey, I got an idea: why don't you go join your terrorist friends in the Middle East, and fight against the 'evil, oppressive capitalist westerners'? Just try not to clog up our tanks' treads with your guts when we run you over like the worthless piece of garbage that you are, will you?
@cricketol No, I very happy person me, I'm not a malcontent who sits on his ass badmouthing the society he lives in just because I can't fit in it, unlike you Zeitards.
@TheGoldenKing20 well im glad you can life with you self in this society you can live in that does not really give a shit about much but its self. and idk what zeitards is have a typing stutter you may need to fix its called spell check and for vary informed people like your self watching fox news helps you only make you mind up one way ... there way.... so please dont do use a favor and read or learn something out side your frame of mind it may make you learn something new
Communist hogwash, me thinks. In the world these stoner hippies want, I could go out to the street and go on a rampage with a machine gun, and there'd be no one to stop me, because according to these guys 'authority is bad, man'...
I also don't look fondly on the prospect of sharing my wife with other men; women aren't joints, you potheads, you don't just pass'em around like that.
@TheGoldenKing20 Communist hogwash, what are you 80 are you still scared of the red terror please and if you want to have a rampage with a machine gun on the street that means you need this governing system. authority is bad if your being held down by it on every turn. and the idea of sharing you wife .. what does this video have to do with that or do you have your own propaganda you want to spread lol
Office Space!! That movie is hilarious.
DesecrateConformity 1 week ago in playlist More videos from TheLeftLibertarian
Great job.
CaptainOmarful 3 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Democracy in the workplace? No more capitalsim? Wouldn't that destroy the state? How wonderfully subversive. Why didn't anyone think of this before?
TheForwardGaze 1 month ago
LeftLibertarian,
The argument you make against self-ownership is merely about semantics. Call it self-sovereignty, moral authority, or individual autonomy and your argument falls apart because it doesn't address core principals.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
None of those terms are equatable to self-ownership and what it implies.
Individual autonomy (self-rule) for instance is premised on the idea that the freedom of one individual ends where the freedom of another begins - meaning you cannot morally use your person or property in a way that prevents another individual of utilizing their own freedom of choice; as wage-labor does.
Self-ownership is ultimately leads to a state of "all are free, but some are more free than others.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist "Individual autonomy (self-rule) for instance is premised on the idea that the freedom of one individual ends where the freedom of another begins"
That is self-ownership - one person cannot own another and only owns themselves, and therefore has no authority over another.
"Self-ownership is ultimately leads to a state of "all are free, but some are more free than others."
More buzzwords. Explain where you mean, provide some justification.
Dirge987 1 month ago
look on wikipedia: /Economic_calculation_problem
This video is pure shit. Without the things this video disses, most of us weren't even born.
heekee12345 1 month ago
@heekee12345
Mises and Hayek's ECP only ever applied to centralized statist-socialism.
Neither of them (or any other Austrian economists) ever bothered to address non-statist or decentralist models of economic democracy and self-management that had existed for nearly a century when Mises wrote the original essay.
A wealth of other models such as parecon and inclusive democracy have since been developed since which show the ECP to be a bogus red herring against a democratic economy.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago in playlist More videos from TheLeftLibertarian
@MsSexySocialist The reason why Austrian economics didn't bother to address non-statist economies is because a free market is a free market is a free market, no matter if you call it a democratic economy or not.
Mises and Hayek did not rebut the use of worker owner co-ops on a free market. If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
And it's this religious belief that the "free market" will automatically sort everything out that is the central weakness of the Austrian school - that and its clear anti-scientific basis.
The issue is not the market or how "free" it is (as Proudhon understood) it's what kind of structures dominate it; authoritarian and hierarchical, or democratic and self-managed.
A market is more than compatible with economic democracy, heteronomous institutions are not.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist Religious? Anti-Scientific? Those are buzz words. Please don't insult my intelligence.
If you reject coercion and state power, then you are left with a free market, and a free market can become nearly anything the people want it to. If co-ops and non-hierarchical firms outperform corporations and heteronomous institutions then so be it, but if the opposite is true then there really is nothing you can do to stop them other than use force and contradict your principals.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist The points of fact are that hierarchical corporations exist today because of state intervention. Take away the state, and the overhead cost, diminishing returns, and yes the *economic calculation problem* as applied to corporations will cause them to rapidly contract if not collapse. But whatever firms spring up from the vacuum is something you have no authority to impose or control.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
If you support the creation of a future system in which authoritarian structures and institutions are permitted to exist, well then I'm sorry but then that system is itself authoritarian.
The belief in self-ownership, while it may seem to offer theoretical liberty and autonomy, is premised on domination. Ownership is itself simply a form of rule; rule over property.
If one understands that it is rule and decision-making power that defines human relations . . .
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist Your first mistake is thinking like a statist. I don't support the CREATION of any system, I support the destruction of coercive systems. Whatever emerges from the ashes, as long as it's not coercive, is fine by me. Thinking that a system must be imposed or created from the top-down is your inner statist talking. Emergence from the bottom up is what free market anarchism is about, no matter what you call it.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
"Thinking like a statist"? Please.
No anarchist supports the top-down implementation of any system. But it's a fantasy to think one can simply dissolve the state then expect everything to magically work itself out - as Austrian "logic" implies.
Also, I must point out that you refer to your ideology as "free market anarchism", but going by the yellow and black voluntaryist symbol you identify with, this isn't possible.
"Anarcho"-capitalism is not a form of anarchism.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist "it's a fantasy to think one can simply dissolve the state then expect everything to magically work itself out"
You're right it is a fantasy. I don't think that way, nor do Austrians (heck most Austrians aren't anarchists). That is a straw man.
Society and economics are emergent processes. Just like a living ecosystem can morph to its environment through emergence, economy and society morph to the mold of people. Society doing such is a description, not a prescription.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist And anarcho-capitalism is certainly a form of anarchism. If you accept property rights and don't accept coercion, then that is anarcho-capitalism pure and simple.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
It cannot be a form of anarchism.
Anarchism must consistently oppose all forms of rulership and subordination.
Etymologically the terms itself means "no rule/rulers". The kind of private institutions that operate via top-down command and minority-rule over the majority are all forms of "archy".
Support for dissolving the state alone is not sufficient to qualify a philosophy as anarchist.
If it was Marxism would also qualify as anarchism as statelessness is its long-term goal
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist "Anarchism must consistently oppose all forms of rulership and subordination"
Untrue. Heck hven the wikipedia article puts this to rest: "Outside of the US, and by most individuals that self-identify as anarchists, it implies a system of governance, that goes to lengths to avoid the use of coercion, violence, force and authority, while still producing a productive and desirable society."
Electing a ruler for you and only you is perfectly permissible under anarchy.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
An-Archy.
NO RULERS.
The word itself disagrees with you.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MsSexySocialist "The word itself disagrees with you."
Yeah, no.
"Also, since when is wikipedia a source of actual concrete knowledge?"
Where did I say wikipedia was *the* authoritative source? Please, I've studied anarchy for long enough to know that it is not the total absence of rule. You're getting all bent out of shape about rulers that you miss the greater question of if it's voluntary. If someone wants to be dominated, forcing them to be free would make you the violent one.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
Also, since when is wikipedia a source of actual concrete knowledge?
It's hardly an authority to call on.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Dirge987
Additionally, this statement makes no sense:
"it implies a system of *governance*, that goes to lengths to avoid the use of coercion, violence, force and authority"
Governance cannot by definition exist without coercion, violence, force and authority.
Anarchism exists by the credo "there is no authority but yourself".
No governance but self-governance.
No management but self-management.
No rule but self-rule (autonomy).
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@Dirge987
. . . then one can form an ethics premised on the rule over the self (autonomy) and the understanding that to dominate others in any a direct or systemic way infringes upon their right to self-rule as it removes their decision-making power and places it in the hands of an outside force - whether person or institution.
This is heteronomy and the bedrock of all authoritarianism.
To start from a position of ownership informs an ethics based upon the comodification and . . .
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist Commodification, dehumanization, again only buzz-words. You have to back up such statements with some kind of concrete justification, not subjective abstractctions.
If a person chooses to work in a factory, and an employer wants them to, they can, even if you view it as dehumanizing. You are a third party and therefore have no authority to change them, or society. To impose your will and say that a person cannot own a business or work for a particular one is an act of statism.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
"If a person chooses to work in a factory, and an employer wants them to, they can, even if you view it as dehumanizing"
Then you support authoritarianism.
How unfortunate.
"To impose your will and say that a person cannot own a business or work for a particular one is an act of statism"
You also seem to be unaware of what exactly a "state" is. Don't lapse into the typical ancap practice of flinging the word statist" at anything you don't like.
It's extremely immature.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist "Then you support authoritarianism."
Who said I supported someone going to work for a factory? Imposing a false belief onto your opponent is extremely immature, and disrespectful, and a logical fallacy.
You may not like such institutions, and neither do I, but how do you eradicate such institutions? To do so through force is no different than the violence of the state. To do so through mass-media is no different then what you despise of the elites.
Dirge987 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Dirge987
"You may not like such institutions, and neither do I, but how do you eradicate such institutions?"
By building alternatives to such institutions which utilize self-management, employee-control, cooperation, and lateralized relations; then focus on networking such institutions through free association.
"To do so through force is no different than the violence of the state"
I support no such thing. Doing so robs people of the CHOICE of what kind of future system they want.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@Dirge987
. . . dehumanization of other individuals and the self. Not to even mention ecology.
One may not be able to "own" another person given the principles of self-ownership, but their decision-making power can be; this is a violation of individual autonomy as it permits an economic elite to rule over others.
This elites come to have decision-making power over those who sell it to them constituting subordination. Everyone becomes technically "free" but elites more free than others.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist Also, you cannot own decision-making power. Influence, yes, but own, no. This is just another abstraction.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
You seem to have a habit of dismissing any concept you can't retaliate against a "buzz word".
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist When words have no context and are used for emotional reasons, then yes, they're buzz words.
Comodification without context doesn't explain your stance and doesn't refute mine. It has no significance other than to illicit an emotional response. Explain beyond the word itself and you'll have a more powerful argument.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
Context:
"Ownership" implies something that can be bought and sold and used.
Hence, like a commodity.
This is an inherently anti-humanist concept and infers that individuals are of no value except with regard to what they may be worth in terms of economy.
This is economism and coded misanthropy at its worst. And I'm not trying to illicit emotions, I'm simply identifying what I see as a false hope for forming an ethics of personal and social autonomy.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist It does not follow that something being a commodity means it has no value.
And more words without context, coded misanthropy.
"I see as a false hope for forming..."
It's not about FORMING a set of ethics. That implies a top-down approach. Tell me how you arrive at your goal without resorting to the behavior that you so despise? The only ethical way is through the market, which is completely applicable under Anarcho-capitalism.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
"It does not follow that something being a commodity means it has no value"
I didn't say it did. I said it only has value in terms of economy. This is economism; reducing all human relations to economic ones.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist "I said it only has value in terms of economy. This is economism; reducing all human relations to economic ones."
By who? And how? And how do you know? You can't see into the minds of others. These are still abstractions.
I've heard of no person treating all human action as economic relations. I suspect that's another straw man.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
"I've heard of no person treating all human action as economic relations. I suspect that's another straw man"
It's what the concept of self-ownership implies.
Ownership is, as I explained, just another form of rule - rule over property.
Those believing in self-ownership accept that one can do whatever they please with their property as a natural right.
This is potentially destructive as it does not take into account the fact that . . .
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@Dirge987
. . . the property someone possesses can be used to control or subordinate others; robbing them of autonomy.
I do not just mean this in the sense of direct, personal coercion, but in the systemic sense. When some can monopolize productive property or resources with zero boundaries, one must accept that they could be claimed to the detriment of others; depriving them of free access.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist And thank you for explaining ownership/property. I understand, I don't agree, but I do appreciate you spending the time.
I won't go into a debate on what is considered property, but I will pose the question again which you did not answer. How are you going to eradicate hierarchical institutions without resorting to their bag of tricks?
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
Through what's called "Dual power strategy".
Which is the creation of institutions of direct and participatory democracy, self-management, and cooperation. Then the networking of these institutions into a "dual power" to contest both state and corporate power.
This process unfolds non-violently and does not advocate theft or expropriation. It therefore does not violate your "non-aggression principle".
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist If such institutions are more profitable under a free market, then they are not only applicable to anarcho-capitalism, but will thrive in anarcho-capitalism.
However that does not address the main issue I have with your stance: is that rule is paramount to voluntary exchange when it should be the opposite.
There is nothing wrong with someone wanting to sell themselves if that's what they want. I may feel it's wrong for me, and you for you, but we are not that person.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
"If such institutions are more profitable under a free market, then they are not only applicable to anarcho-capitalism, but will thrive in anarcho-capitalism"
I don't believe that's possible. Because if that happened, and self-managed institutions became dominant, then it would cease to be anarcho-*capitalism* and morph in something resembling Proudhonian Mutualism.
Capitalism is defined as "the market economy with private ownership of the means of production".
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist Private ownership can be shared between multiple people, just as a house can be privately owned by the family. So yes, socialism in the voluntary sense, and mutualism too, can exist within the domain of anarcho-capitalism.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
But then doesn't it stop being "capitalism"?
Speaking of which exactly what kind of future stateless economy would you prefer. It's clear you want a money-based market society, but what kind of firms would you like to see populate it?
Mostly small businesses? Mostly corporations? A mix of private firms and co-ops?
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist It doesn't necessarily stop being capitalism if a majority of the firms are co-ops, worker owned, non-hierarchical, etc. They still have private property owned by the community of workers.
What stateless economy would I prefer? I don't know. I have no idea what works the best since the state has always been there mucking it up. I personally like small business and co-ops. If voluntary socialism, resource based economies, labor hour currency or whatever works, I'll accept it.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987
"They still have private property owned by the community of workers"
But then, by economic definition, it becomes collectively-owned, not privately-owned.
"I personally like small business and co-ops"
O_O
Uh . . . forgive me but I have to admit that surprises me. A self-proclaimed anarcho-capitalist who says they like co-ops.
I've talked with several right-libertarians (minarchists and anarcho-capitalists) and most say things like " democracy is a form of communism".
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist I'd say that it is still private ownership if two or more people own something, like a house or car.
I work for a consumer co-op, and they treat me well. I agreed to, and advocate for, their business practices so I see no problem in endorsing a voluntary organization like that.
You're right that private power can be destructive, no doubts about that, but I personally think that when the market is turned against said powers, they will die, but only in the absence of a state.
Dirge987 1 month ago
@Dirge987 (continued)
And most seem to regard democratic enterprise as being somehow based on "mob-rule" (this is ignoring that anarchist democracy is based on consensus btw).
So it strikes me as . . . well, unusual to hear that.
I guess I can respect your desire to have an economy that's actually decided by people themselves and not an elite of owners.
Although personally I think it's misplaced to blame everything on the state alone, as I fell private power is just as culpable.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@Dirge987
In order for it to be "capitalism" (stateless or not) all, or at least the majority, of the means of production would need to be under private ownership and the majority of firms be private firms.
If it was a 50/50 split between private firms and self-managed firms, it would still be a market economy, but not a capitalist one.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
@MsSexySocialist To pose the question a different way: How are you going to stop people who WANT to go work for such institutions?
Dirge987 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Dirge987
"To pose the question a different way: How are you going to stop people who WANT to go work for such institutions?"
A left-libertarian future society would be comprised of a free confederation of autonomous and self-governing organic communities.
If any community or group wished to secede from the confederation and found their own capitalist society with wage-labor, bosses, and so on, then they can do so.
That's the important part of democracy. The freedom to opt out.
MsSexySocialist 1 month ago
Open Source Ecology
Narnnelia 1 month ago
LIFE SUCKS ... AND THEN U DIE
dickjohnson254 1 month ago
Well said!
benjaamin8 1 month ago
I used to like work, until I took an arrow to the knee
nutt829 1 month ago
does this guy know a lot about honey badgers too?
Joophish 1 month ago
Man I wish I didn't just watch this. I almost had myself believing I was free, now I have to start all over.
CrixMakin 1 month ago 8
then...what should we do? where should we protest? how do we fix this?
Everstars88 1 month ago
Oh and in case anyone doesn't know and like this video, a thing called The Venus Project could be of interest. Google it.
Casevil669 1 month ago 14
@Casevil669 Ehh... The first time I watched the Zeitgeist films, I was totally behind it. I thought I had realized the solution to every one of the world's problems, but The Venus Project has some major flaws. First of all, it advocates an entirely centrally planned economy, and TheLeftLibertarianism, libertarians, and history, have shown that centralized control in the economy doesn't work. There's no way their 'all-knowing' computer can calculate the subjective, individual needs
DesecrateConformity 1 week ago in playlist More videos from TheLeftLibertarian
@Casevil669 of individual humans. It's called the central planning calculation problem. Also, TVP advocates the centralization of production, which is detrimental to the biosphere. Don't listen to Zeitgeisters that claim to be individualists or libertarians, because no matter how much they espouse their supposed libertarianism, TVP is definitely not libertarian, or even left-lib, since it rejects free markets. Check out mutualism, geoanarchism, or social anarchism.
DesecrateConformity 1 week ago in playlist More videos from TheLeftLibertarian
Comment removed
Casevil669 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Passion for the creating of technology, for working for a greater good will always triumph over greed. Look at Dr. Jonas Salk. Saved millions, if not future billions of people. He wanted no money for his vaccine. That's someone to admire. Not some schmuck that made millions of the backs of economic slavery, defending his sweatshops under the mom of voluntaryanism. Again, if the alternative is starving, working isn't much of a free choice, is it?
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Look at Steve Jobs or Bill Gates. They created products that everybody wanted at a cheap price. They got rich and made lots of other people rich as well. We are all richer thanks to them. Wealth is not finite, it can be created out of thin air. China, Hong Kong and Singapore all have a very freindly business environment right now. Everyone is going there and they are getting rich thanks to capitalism.
moonshot926 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Yes, greed is fundamentally good.To paraphrase Yeats: the greatest civilizations were created by men who loved money and beautiful women. Those same civilizations were later destroyed by idealists. People like........................................YOU
moonshot926 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH If you're getting paid for it, it's not slavery.
moonshot926 1 month ago
"We live in slavery"
No you don't.
No one is forcing anyone to work.
moonshot926 2 months ago
@moonshot926
In physical slavery, your master needs to feed and house you. In economic slavery, you need to feed and house yourself.
If starving is the only other option, working isn't a choice.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Spoken by a true left-wing loser. Enter into a contract with other human beings to exchange some effort to help work toward some endeavor OR starve/freeze/die.Unlike animals we have more options. Animals have to go find food and shelter or they will starve/freeze/die. We can do that too, or we can enter into commercial contracts with our other fellow human beings and utiilize currency to exchange workproduct efforts for our food, shelter and all other needs for survival.
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Nice character assassination you start with.
"Enter into a contract with other human beings to exchange some effort to help work toward some endeavor "
You reason from the flawed premise that people work out of passion. Most do not and you know this. Most people simply work mind-numbing or pointless jobs to keep a roof over their head and keep food on the table. Most assembly-lines workers are not passioned by twisting screw A on appendage B all day long.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Basic needs for survival should not be purely transactional by currency in this day and age of technology and understanding.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH You sound like one of those "Occupy Wall Street" types. America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. People work to make their lives better. In China people do not have to work in sweatshops, but they voluntarily choose to. Most work for themselves, not other people.
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Again, nice character assassination. It that all you have?
America has abundance in the hands of few, as the rest of the world. We have an abundance of food, yet 1,7 billion people are starving right now. We have an abundance of shelter and clean water, yet people are dying because they don't have money to trade for these basic necessities. That's what profit as an incentive creates.
Most people work because if they don't, they starve to death. You can't even deny this.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Some people in some parts of the world are starving. this can all be for diffrent reasons. But what does that have to do with greed?
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926
That's where you are wrong, mate. You don't have to not receive payment to be a slave. There's only a superficial difference between physical and economic slavery. Masters used to buy food for you. Now they give you money to buy food for yourself. Yet, you are still dependent. Nothing changed but the superficial illusion of freedom. They give you food in exchange for labor. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@moonshot926
That’s even ignoring debt bondage, which is your slavery to banks and the government. You can get paid in debt bondage, yet it’s universally regarded as slavery. Still there is little difference between taxation, selling of public debt, mortgages, loans and debt bondage. You should also look into the concept of unfree labour.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Debt problems now go back to intrest rates caused by the FED reserve. Government insures loan so that anyone can get them. Then when the bank fails the state subsidizes their losses by bailing them out. This is not free market capitalism. This is corporatism.
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926
An example, Henry Ford almost lost his business after creating and selling the first Ford Model T. You know why? He had made the car too good and durable. That meant people only bought once from him, so he couldn't turn a substantial profit. So after that, companies started making cars lousy and prone to breaking down, so you have to come back every year or so to buy replacement parts or every 5 years to buy a new car. That’s profitary incentive for you.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Financial wealth is indeed not finite, but resources, products and services are. Which brings us to another demonstration of how our current system is nothing but slavery: inflation. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates created half the products they could have because of their profitary incentive. A profitary incentive means you need to keep technology at an artificially low or inefficient level. This is best demonstrated with an example, like Henry Ford.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Inflation is caused by the FED reserve which is not even a federal bank. Printing money out of thin air and keeping intrest rates low. I am on your side about that. Entrepreneurship is about created what people demand at the lowest price possible. of course he wanted to make a profit, that's why he went into business. Cars were already a luxury and very expensive by 1908. His goal was not to create an expensive car but to create a cheap one for the common man.
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Exactly. Inflation is caused by the increasing of financial assets (by the Fed, or ECB or other central banks) while products, resources and services don't increase at such high rate. As you said, financial wealth is in principle infinite (unless you run out of power to run computers etc.). This is a problem because material wealth and labour are not. Thus inflation. The creation of this financial wealth is slavery to the central banks by fractional reserve banking.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@moonshot926
This massive inflation could be prevented by the gold standard but there are many problems in re-implementing it and I still feel it would be better to make basic human needs non-transactional.
There is definitely no free market, although I would also have problems with that, it would probably be better than corporatism.
The point is not how expensive or cheap a car is, it's that a profitary incentive creates inherently flawed products.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Is it slavery to force someone to let other people live off the fruits of their labor?
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Living of the fruits of your labor is a nice euphemism for 'giving you money in exchange for work to make sure you can provide basic necessities and don't starve to death'. The real fruits of labor are intellectual, not material. They are things like a sense of accomplishment, helping people, the joy of exploring science, making people smile, creating machines etc. Basic human needs shouldn't be a fruit of labor or a reward or trade good for anything.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Anarchy and a moneyless society is what I propose.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH In Zimbabwe there is no work. Move there commie.
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Wow, what a coherent argument. That really made me rethink my position.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH There is no utopia. Sorry. Socialism killed at least 100 million people.
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926
Socialism never killed anyone. Capitalism never killed anyone. Communism never killed anyone. You know who keeps killing people? Other people. Mostly, other people with power. Statists.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH Go back to France. Commie.
moonshot926 1 month ago
@moonshot926 You sir, are an uneducated moron.
Casevil669 1 month ago
@moonshot926 There was never a pure, 100% socialism on this planet. and there is no such thing as "utopia", societies shape the future and progress all the time.
shahafsagi 1 month ago
@moonshot926
If you say that the fruits of human labor are financial wealth, which you need in order not to die, then you are basically saying that the right to life itself is the fruit of human labor. If the right to life is the fruit of human labor, a reward for working, then it's slavery. For if a master doesn't feed his slave, he dies and a slaves work is the only thing keeping him alive.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@moonshot926
I didn't mention greed. I only wanted to illustrate that abundance is a false measurement of happiness or the 'goodness' of an economic system.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH What are you proposing then? Anarchy?
moonshot926 1 month ago
Comment removed
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 1 month ago
You keep interchanging the blame between scientific management and private sector. The private sector made America great. The methodology of implanting a productive workforce is what kills us. Dictatorship never works, there was a time in americas history where being self employed was easy. Don't confuse what you are blaming
iloveradomstuff 2 months ago
He uses emotional rhetoric because the main issues with why work is such a torturous, horrible system is that it does serious emotional damage to the human mind, it's a very emotional issue and the way this man addresses it fits perfectly, if he were to use nothing but cold facts and statistics it wouldn't have the same impact and it would be straight out false, because it's cold math and statistics that lead to this damaging system in the first place, the fact is it IS about how people feel.
MetalCatharsis 3 months ago
fuck this im going on the dole and playing music
thethreeamazingmen 3 months ago
We need to move to Resource Based Economy, get away from monetary system that plague us with false scarcity and purposeful obsolescence. If we want to elevate the human being we need to destroy the monotony of the monetary system.
Joophish 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Joophish YA YA , WE NEED RBE, SO THAT WE CAN BE FREE FROM SLAVERY BECAUSE THE ROBOTZ WILL DO ALL THE WORK. I QUIT MY JOB, NOW I'M FREE FROM SLAVERY, I SMOKE POT ALL DAY LONG LIVIN IN MY MOMS BASEMENT. IN RBE ROBOTZ WILL CREATE ALL THE POT WE EVER NEED.SO WAKE UP SHEEPLES, DON'T HAVE TO WORK FOR A LIVING,SO WE CAN ALL BE EQUALLY POOR.
CAPITALISM BAD, CAPSLOCK GOOD.
hayden50 2 months ago
An Eye opener!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We are at a point in human history where all of us work so companies could profit, that's the main goal of the existance in our world today.
No where to run away.
No one responsible to hate.
To ways to stop this nonsense
1 To fight for a better world, better system
2 To cease from existance as a race.
So many people think that this is o.k, it's shocking how confromed we all are!
GivinStatic 3 months ago
An Eye opener!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We are at a point in human history where all of us work so companies could profit, that's the main goal of the existance in our world today.
No where to run away.
No one responsible to hate.
To ways to stop this nonsense
1 To fight for a better world, better system
2 To cease from existance as a race.
So many people think that this is o.k, it's shocking how confromed we all are!
GivinStatic 3 months ago
We live to work, I figured out, and I don't like it at all, I would rather be dead, but it's not that easy...
mau571 3 months ago in playlist Vídeos favoritos de mau571
This is amazing, one of the best labor commentaries I've ever heard
purplepineberry 4 months ago
0:25-0:34 I took a shit does that mean i am shit
extremeeXrement1 4 months ago
How does this not have more views!?!?!?
JoeyStockton 4 months ago
@JoeyStockton
First they ignore you....
catbuffalo 4 months ago
I love your point in this movie!
mrhein1986 4 months ago in playlist Foretrukne videoer fra mrhein1986
You've done a fantastic job on this video. I'm looking forward to seeing the other's in the series.
SKeller4USPresident 4 months ago
This is a very good job. However, I find the use of emotionally persuasive rhetoric to be a bit too much. However, if this is supposed to be an inspiring speech its use is relevant and good. 5*
Karestasse 5 months ago
Great job on this video
brockwrichards 5 months ago
Let's all do nothing, which is even less than hunting & gathering.
Who will even put food in my my mouth & bathe me?
Scottit 5 months ago
quoted by Sir Dennis Leary :
" LIFE SUCKS GET A FUCKING HELMET ! "
basically join the rat race , get a few perks : running water etc... or go live in the woods off the radar in survival mode. Yes I agree WORK / LIFE IS A BIG FUCKING JOKE !
wayoftheroad1 5 months ago 4
@wayoftheroad1 Yeah but the beautiful thing is that life is what you make it. And they're groups of people (leaderless may I add) that agree this world and lives we live suck, and best of all they know how it can be better /watch?v=Fb_bTUJp39o&list=FL10lRDwBIQC1prTyhrHn5cw&feature=mh_lolz
benjaamin8 1 month ago
work is a disgustng form of slavery
lenzez 5 months ago
Living = slavery. So don't have children if they're going to become slaves to life.
jakegamesnake 6 months ago
Labor = Slavery . Somethings never change . The ones with the Gold make the rules .
egrip45 6 months ago
Nice rant
jakegamesnake 6 months ago
Thank you for pointing out timed management's part at improving the efficiency of inevitable arrival...now with timed management your soul is dead b4 your body...efficient for the undertaker...only have to drain blood b4 we move down assembly line to the grave...In disposable material world, life is as garbage...let's call it shit...after all, the economy of words efficiently saves energy for... work....ugh
TheGBuck 6 months ago
Work was a source of joy, when I punched in for Red Rover and the play of a child...now I work at Art...I got fired (thanks be to god) from the career that after 17 years poisoned my passion and made my days a drudgery, my existence a curse...I am happy, alive, Poor in money and rich in life.
TheGBuck 6 months ago
Job Growth: aka, more slaves.
S0up3rD0up3r 6 months ago
Anybody who dislikes this video should be put into a time machine and transported back to the 18th century. They should be forced to work in the hot sugar cane fields of Haiti just like the African slave were . Maybe then they would understand the true nature of WORK .
egrip45 6 months ago
This is a good video BUT for two things. One--the narrator sounds like Greg Rudseski. and at 5:48 when it promotes its Zeitgeist 'utopia' of a totally computer-centralized machine-city--and how it still supports 'productivity'. But about work and people being made to be machines it is good.
zezt 6 months ago
A lot of your claims (at least the ones that don't focus on emotion as their prime argument) rests on the fact that people are forced into debt by going to college. Now, there are various reasons why college is so expensive (Peter Schiff goes into that), but you don't need college to gain success. But the question I have, to a proponent of democracy, would that kind of system mean that the minority must obey the demands of the majority?
FreeEcon 6 months ago
@ TheLeftLIbertarian hey there left libertarian! brilliant videos u got up there..im personally an anarchist of the bakunin variety so was impressed with all the material u got up on ur channel...we should get in touch...send me a pm..i live in singapore btw..anw, i was wondering what movie u got that clip from - the one where a man slams the keyboard at another's face..
Heartgold92 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Oh, and thanks for confirming what I said about you being a coward, you can't handle me by yourself so you brought in your butt-buddies to help you. You truly are a pathetic little creature, Treason.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 *Sigh* It's good to see censorship is still popular amongst Communists, somethings never change, do they? :)
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@TheGoldenKing20
Labels are just that, Labels. It is we the People who put meaning behind them.
I for one, am sick of fucking Labels. We use them so damn much to separate and divide people. This whole idea of ending Hard Labor and allowing people to be more free in this world is all about shifting how we see things, and how we think, and right now people are creating the same damn problems over and over and over again because of our God damn GIANT EGO'S
TZMBigsteelguy 7 months ago
@TZMBigsteelguy Again, having people who think anyone who isn't a dirty commie like them is sick and in need of treatment lecturing me about humility only makes me laugh.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@TheGoldenKing20
What is a Definition of a Commie anyway? Are you talking about someone who supports Communism? Because i don't support any of those Ism's
If you want to Label what this world is under , then call it DISASTER CAPITALISM
To make profit off of the Destruction of the environment and life.
TZMBigsteelguy 7 months ago
@TZMBigsteelguy Yes, you do support an ism, communism specific, you just put it under a different name. And if I didn't go into a bulshit semantics argument with treason, what makes you think I'll get into one with you?
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 You know, part of the reason I don't even try to press matters further, is become I just enjoy watching you squirm as you attempt to weasel out of the hole you've dug yourself into. But really, just because you have no balls, doesn't give you the right to crictize mine.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 And yet you refuse to acknowledge what I've told you several times already: that my only purpose here is to ridicule you and your beliefs. And how does that even make sense? Come up with a proper comeback, you libbie piece of shit, or have you, in your quest to become like the magical robots you jerk off to, also forsaken your sense of wit?
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Ah, whatever, truly your hipocrisy is only matched by your cowardice, you're a pathetic little man who can't even own up to what he says. But then again, I suppose I can't be too harsh, cowardice and hipocrisy are common traits amongst the likes of you.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Sticks and stones, libbie.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Again, you seem to forget, I'm not here to debate you, about Chomsky or anything else, I'm here to make fun of you and ridicule your pathetic beliefs, nothing more.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Actually you did. So I guess all of the sudden, credentials matter, now that it suits you? Hipocristy FTW. You Zeitards are the most pathetic shits I've ever seen.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 I would consider lying and painting the US and the West as the scum of the Earth badmouthing it, but again, I'll leave you to define your own terms.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Well, I think it shows that high stations in academia say nothing about a person's values, seeing as it is so incredibly easy to lie and maintain said positions, so I'm satisfied that this disproves your pathetic appeal to authority.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Actually, it's more like a fact, it's not just acknowledged by me, it's acknowledged who isn't a scum sucking traitorous anti-western libbie shit.
And no, what makes him an enemy of the Free World is badmouthing it and slandering it at every turn, while, again, taking advantage of its provide, that makes him not just a traitor but a dirtbag hypocritical shit.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Yeah, you also go offline to bars and caffees and badmouth the West you despise there while still taking advantage of the freedom it provides for scum-sucking shit like you.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Haha! So you do admit to being a no-good scum-sucking traitor who goes on YT just to badmouth the West that you despite yet take advantage of the freedom it provides. Scumbag, if I could have you deported to North Korea and have a single oppressed North Korean citizen who's suffering under Kim Jong-Ill's rule shipped here in your place so he could be free, I would.
As for the rest, bah, I don't really believe you, or really care.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 And I told you I'm not going to engage in a debate with you, as it would be pointless, and I feel satisfied with the way I've presented my position, so I don't feel I have anything to prove to you either. So I'm just gonna keep poking fun at you.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Chomsky is a renowned professor and highly-conceited academic, some argue the most important living intellectual of our time, and he's a dirtbag enemy of the Free World who lies like a rug. Him happening to teach at a renowned university doesn't mean anything.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 *coff* *coff* Just a reminder for anyone out there: this tool's idea of evidence is a video of another leftist shit just like him babbling on about the same things he does, in short, no actual evidence.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 The only people you help by sitting on your ass and badmouthing the West are people like Chavez, Castro, Kim Jong-Ill and other scum enemies of the Free World, and for that you truly deserve to die in the most painful manner possible.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 And I told you before, I'm not willing to get into a debate, all I'm doing is making fun of you and calling you names, and you just stand there and take it. I don't have to back up anything, because I've already been proven right, and you've already been proven wrong. Asking me to make some sort of argument as to why Communism is wrong and doesn't work, is like asking someone to make an argument as to why the Earth is round. They don't need, because they've proven right.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 And why should I care what an ACTUAL fucking liar thinks?
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 And not a single fuck was given that day about what the arrogant pseudo-intellectual commie traitor thought. You're a liar, a fucking liar who takes advantage of people's good nature, like I said before, you and your lot should all be lined up against a wall and shot for what you've done.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 So again, not giving you anything, not going into a debate because there's nothing to debate over, and while I'm well above your attempts to embezzle me, I don't feel like indulging you right now.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Well I've had the bad luck of being familiar with your neo-communist fringe group since early 2009 when you with your anti-western propaganda tricked my best friend into joining you, and destroyed my friendship with her, so I'm also pretty sure I know what your beliefs are. And I also don't feel the need to enter a debate, where you go 'no, that's just what we said, what we actually meant was whatever', and I'm left wondering why I should take your word over the Head Zeitard's.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 And yet when I say to look up your own Movement's beliefs, you ignore it. Fine, remain the hapless little drone of the aging liberal hippie douche that you are now.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 I don't need to, it's not my fault if you don't know your Movement's own beliefs, you think everyone who isn't a dirty communist like you is sick and must be reeducated, you don't word it that way, granted, but it's what you mean. If you don't know this maybe you should do more research on your Movement's stance on things.
I told you: I'm not engaging in a pointless debate for you to attempt to mislead me.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Says the guy who thinks everyone who disagrees with him is sick, and in need of reeducation! Ahahahahah! I don't know if I should be angry or just laugh my ass off right now.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Ah, ok then, here's my answer: you're a either a dumbfuck or a lying little shit that would make Chomsky proud for trying to mislead me. I also have a policy of not entering debate with lying fucks who by all right should be deported to North Korea when all they're doing is attempting to mislead you. I told you before: I'm not here to debate you or 'talk bussiness', I'm just making fun of you because I'm bored.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 *advocated system's FAILURE worldwide
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Man, you're a persistent little shit aren't you? I told you I'm not going to debate you, because there's nothing left to debate about. You want a debate about how communism can work? Go have one with the undercover Marxist agents posing as teachers in your college who brainwashed you in the first place, they also seem to be oblivious to their advocated system's worldwide.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 To you maybe, but somehow the image of you arrogant pseudo-intellectuals being run over by tanks of the 'evil imperialist westerners' you so despite, yet take advantage of the freedom they provide makes me feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside X)
Again, why are you trying to engage in a debate with me? I told you: there's no debate, you've already been proven wrong, there's nothing left to debate about, you already lost.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 That's what you undercover Marxist agents posing as academics have been trying to make us believe for years: that communism = wrong, even though communism has been proven wrong more than once, actually, so you can re-ignite whatever debate you still think there is to be had about this. Sorry, but no, there's no debate you've already been proven wrong, now either accept it and accept capitalism as the ruling system, or curl up and die, I don't really care which at this point.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Like I give two shits whether or not you take me seriously. Really I guess it doesn't have anything to do with anything, I just wanted to see you being squashed by tank treads and dying in a gruesome manner, I thought it would be adequate.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Hey, I got an idea: why don't you go join your terrorist friends in the Middle East, and fight against the 'evil, oppressive capitalist westerners'? Just try not to clog up our tanks' treads with your guts when we run you over like the worthless piece of garbage that you are, will you?
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@voiceofreason467 Go back to your bong party, scum.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@TheGoldenKing20 wake up and smell the smog and change your attitude. your acting like you in sixth grade you.. you not so happy person you...
cricketol 7 months ago
@cricketol No, I very happy person me, I'm not a malcontent who sits on his ass badmouthing the society he lives in just because I can't fit in it, unlike you Zeitards.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@TheGoldenKing20 well im glad you can life with you self in this society you can live in that does not really give a shit about much but its self. and idk what zeitards is have a typing stutter you may need to fix its called spell check and for vary informed people like your self watching fox news helps you only make you mind up one way ... there way.... so please dont do use a favor and read or learn something out side your frame of mind it may make you learn something new
cricketol 7 months ago
Communist hogwash, me thinks. In the world these stoner hippies want, I could go out to the street and go on a rampage with a machine gun, and there'd be no one to stop me, because according to these guys 'authority is bad, man'...
I also don't look fondly on the prospect of sharing my wife with other men; women aren't joints, you potheads, you don't just pass'em around like that.
TheGoldenKing20 7 months ago
@TheGoldenKing20 Communist hogwash, what are you 80 are you still scared of the red terror please and if you want to have a rampage with a machine gun on the street that means you need this governing system. authority is bad if your being held down by it on every turn. and the idea of sharing you wife .. what does this video have to do with that or do you have your own propaganda you want to spread lol