Does anyone else see the irony of denouncing capitalism through the medium of YouTube, which belongs to a publicly-traded company: Google. Do you think a resource such as this could exist in this form in a communist state? It's clear to me that the revenue earned through advertisements allows YouTube to provide an incredible product on which to broadcast interesting conversations like this.
@PapaWilk 'Communist state' is an oxymoron. Although of course nobody owns the word. Something horizontal like the internet can totally thrive in a social(ist) society if you ask me.
@reido2828 very fair point, but I think that that is where philosophy lies, what is human nature? I think that this needs to be established before one creates a mental framework. I believe that human's are naturally co-operative, so I have Socialistic sympathies and loathe Capitalism. You believe in competition, where Capitalism would be a good answer. But everyone must understand that the system cannot be left unregulated, as it is too damaging to certain unlucky people.
@joaquinveyron you say that the failures of Marxist states are due to the teachings of Marx, not the neglect of them. Then you state that leftists don't understand Marx (I am sorry to announce that I do not believe that you do). That is a very obvious contradiction, those who tried to create Marxist states must have been leftists, so if they did not understand Marx, then the failures must not have been down to Marx's teachings.
The one factor he fails tot ake into account is peak oil- how can, capitalism endure if it continues on the princple of continual economic growth engineered by a finite resource?
@TheBananaAutocracy Not even necessary to take into account. Continuous growth and the decline of the capitalist mode of production to sustain growth implies that such realities are problematic. However, a decline of oil wouldn't necessary destroy capitalism; if anything, it would create a revolutionary moment or a massive depression. Capitalism can still regenerate itself, it is a social system - a social order, if you will-, not so much an 'economic system'.
Zizek is a very dangerous guy if someone takes him seriously. Everything he said is based upon a pseudo-moral, that remains hidden, unfounded and thus cannot be thematized or objected, that's something fluid, just a rethorical topoi. He can't just use marxian foundation as it is refuted by Mises, Rawls, Nozick, etc, so he blur his basis and remains with none. Pardon the bad english.
Where do some of the images in the background come from? That one with the dancing light-figure with the word BUY on its chest is interesting. What is it?
Watching first time and two days later we found our old "invented" enemy Iran. Mexico drug cartels= two birds with one stone. I guess we can concentrate on missiles bombarding a beautiful land as opposed to the monotonous wall street camp and slap.
It is all fantastic Marxism and Socialism but in the end of the day he lectures in a school (EGS) that you have to pay 15,000 pounds just to put your feet there, With student accommodation that costs you 4000 pounds for 6 weeks in a ski resort in Switzerland (that country, the haven, the money laundry....).Its called Caviar Socialism. He is right: the Left is outdated, gone. He is the best example of it. Being paid by the rich to "philosophize".
@MrFpenteado Your information I agree with, but your conclusion I don't. The desire for an actual difference between the current situation and the future isn't corrupt by it's 'invention' within the old system. The only way to judge him would be to look at his position AFTER a significant change has occurred. Take the French Revolution for example. The judging of who was wrong happened AFTER. That is why a revolutionary movement shouldn't look for justification in the old situation.
@s90210h If you are talking about history, lets get back to history, in this case to ancient history. Does the word "Sophist" or "Sophism" mean anything to you?
Most of our fossil fuels were produced by decayed ocean plant/animal life, mostly on the small scale. Carbon from dead dino's do not make up the majority of fossil fuels. Perhaps that's irrelevant to your point, but I figured I should mention it for truth's-sake. ;)
@davidhoyh his point is (both here) - and not his for that matter,Chomsky says the same thing -that there is no pure capitalism,the relation betwen politics and economy can't be stoped. If you can't understand that you shouldn't be watching this clip in the first place
@yellowwasp09 Ok, you LEFTIST DIMWITS, if you think that ALL the COMMUNIST SHITHOLES are not supposed to have anything to do with the "great" ideas of Marx (yeah, right :-) ), then you surely will be able to lay out how communist goals can be achieved WITHOUT
1) POVERTY, FAMINES, IN-EFFICIENCIES, but with PROSPERITY
2) TERROR, DICTATORSHIPS, UN-FREEDOM, but in FREEDOM.
I wonder at the usefulness of his advice to leftists. Fight harder? I would like to see a more detailed prescription. Maybe like: don't let conservatives casually redefine words; don't pretend that capitalism is mostly ok; don't let rightist propaganda occupy a level playing field (ie racism, violence, etc. are not equal but opposite opinions).
Hell I don't know. Nationalist conservatism is dominating right now, and things are getting ugly.
The corporatist/neo-fascist revolution we're seeing needs to be aggressively confronted and dominated on ALL FRONTS. Leftists need to STOP avoiding conflict and instead embrace inevitable conflicts in such an important time as this, Leftists, with all our superior firepower/ammunition, need to get used to winning and LIKING it. We must not let right-wing propaganda go un-confronted/neutralized. As right-wing lies/delusions/madness accelerates, we must choke off its oxygen supply.
Really? I seem to recall Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao, pol pot, confederate states of America are all left wing democrats. I can certainly name a thousand more for you if you like? Face the fucking facts conservatism is individualism and small government. Look up Thomas Paine, Winston Churchill, Lincoln, George Washington, thatcher read them all and you will be startled. Fascism has always been rooted in left wing ideology. Sorry putz your wrong.
Are you FUCKING kidding me?? Where are you getting this?? You have NOT done your homework, you've listened to right-wing propaganda that serves to wash its hands of the blood it has caused, lay its dirty deeds on the left-wing, then take off its statist/Capitalist/authoritarian hat to don the hat of "individualism" and "freedom". That's ALWAYS been a huge fucking load of shit to ANYBODY with half a brain and half an EDUCATION ON FACTS/SCIENCE/HISTORY. You're so fucking stupid.
@IngeniousEpithet here, here! i can't believe someone with enough belief in human nature to think we can all learn and develop and mature... even to try to straighten out a person who thinks fascism is a left-wing ideology is beyond my compassion level. you obviously have great hope in humanity... but we know some will fight knowledge to the bitter end, so i consider you having won the argument XD it's really hard to imagine someone being as stupid as that guy, btw.
haha, well thanks, man. The trick to it really isn't a trick at all... it's enforcing the facts, persistence, and thorough discussion/consideration. Beneath all of this you must be open to changing your mind given superior information, however, there is a lot of dead-WRONG information out there that is quite convincing to many people (like saying Fascism is left-wing, or saying global warming is a big conspiracy). I debate these people because these are EXTREMELY IMPORTANT issues.
I mean Jesus... even looking at WIKIPEDIA you'll find that Fascism is right-wing... oh but lemme guess... Wikipedia is either A) Full of commie/liberal bias; and/or B) Is totally inaccurate and never regulated (which it actually HAS been proven reasonably accurate AND well-moderated). DO YOUR FUCKING HOMEWORK.
I have and Hitler was a socialist, Stalin communist, Polpot socialist, Mao socialist. There left wing ideologies you tard. I don't need Wikipedia because I have common sense. Grow up little child grow up and read more.
You're completely wrong. Hitler was NOT a Socialist... he used Socialist rhetoric to gain popularity, then once the Nazis gained sufficient power, they STOMPED OUT Socialists, unions, liberals, intellectuals, communists, anarchists, gays, jews, and so on. Don't sit there and pretend that, because Hitler used some Socialist rhetoric, that somehow HE is an embodiment of it. Fascism and Nazism are about 80% right-wing and a complex mix of other policies... it is NOT left-wing, period.
It is not left wing it is fascism but you can't deny hitlers economic policies were promptly left wing. Hitler was not right wing due to his increased cabinet sizes and tax breaks for families with lots of kids. THAT IS SOCIALISM. Look at the other socialist governments and what they did to the world. Look up the confederate states in America. Another radical left wing idea who had millions of slaves. Read more instead of using youtube for information.
hahah, seriously dude... where are you getting this disinformation from?? You need to realize that hijacking language is not truth. The left-wing is NOT confederate, NOT nazi, NOT totalitarian communist (or fascist). Relax and get a grip, research Socialism, there are many useful, noble, and realistic policies within it that are NO-BRAINERS for an evolved society.
I like socialism and combined with a free market is a good system. But I am talking about previous fascists who were leftists and had problems with inflation, genocide and corruption. Theres reasons why 100% socialist governments collapse and don't last long. Stalin the butcher was a socialist and murdered millions of people PERIOD. Have respect for human life?
Look up Social Democracy then. Countries like France, Germany, Canada, and the Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc.) have this style of system and it seems to work better than ours in many key ways. Providing ample social safety nets is quite good for people and actually ends up REDUCING risk taken on by entrepreneurs starting their own businesses... if you don't have to worry about food/shelter/medical care/higher education... then you can start a biz w/ less worry.
Also, once again, if you research Fascism, the vast majority of its make-up is right-wing, including economically. Yes, every dictatorship is different and employs its own mix of influences. However, the problem with Fascism (or Communism for that matter) is the AUTHORITARIANISM, imperialism, corruption, and genocide involved. If Hitler employed any ACTUAL Socialist policies, they were probably beneficial to people at first (winning hearts/minds) until he abandoned it once in power.
Name a successful communist or socialist country? Name one that lasted two centuries? Socialism as a whole does not work. Certain things about it can work but they need to be met with a free market otherwise there is no incentive to do anything.
Communism is defined as "stateless, moneyless, classless" society. It has never existed so indeed it has never been succesful. Also "socialism in one country" is a Stalinist notion rejected by most of the socialist movement. If we look at Marx' description of a workers' state we see universal suffrage, delegates accountable to the people, workers' wage for public officials and labour vouchers instead of money, thus: the USSR was not Marxist-socialist either.
We define capitalism as a society that is based on free market, individual liberty, and we the people control it and are responsible for it. So what we see in Western Europe and in America is not capitalism but corporatism and in Capitalism there is not support to be classes either because regardless of who you are or what race you are your rights are given to you as individuals. Thus USA is not a capitalist society either.
You cannot have private property, the monetary system, wage-slavery, wealth-stratification, centralized markets, or economic hierarchy without a state, a de-facto state, and/or unacceptable levels of oppression. With a DEMOCRATIC government, the people AT LEAST have some say in protecting themselves from powerful private entities. That's why Social Democracies work better than our system.
Again if you take control of the system through big business like the USA has done then its very easy to look back at the social system but can you name any that actually work? We the people need to be in control and need to be aware of what is going on. Look at the constitution and then read about Ron Paul and start there. You'll end up at a very good point where socialism and free market capitalism can be combined equally.
I'm quite familiar with Ron Paul and admire him quite a bit. However, many of his free-market ideas are a bit crazy/naive. To de-regulate our markets and reduce taxes on the rich is NOT a good idea, there is a reason for these things, and if we are to dismantle them then we must ONLY dismantle them in conjunction with just about EVERYTHING else in government/markets. Socialism/Capitalism have been combined most beneficially in Social Democracies like France, Germany, and Scandinavia.
I know what it is and how old are you? Why would you send me a wiki article? I've read it. If you had strong facts and ideas you would send me an article written by an independent lol send me Wikipedia and your a moron.
Do you REALLY know what it is or are you just saying that to try and win an argument?? I sent you to a wiki article because you appeared not to understand that things like it exist, and thus needed an elementary education on the term. If anybody appeared to be a moron, it's you, thus the wiki link.
Hey Moron moron MORON! I know the wiki article ok it sums it up in simple terms but who are we kidding no man and his political book are that simple. Every political philosophy theoretically could work if implemented properly but man his an urge and lust for power. Read Napoleon and you'll understand. Anyway your points are that of a n indexperienced child. You know nothing of Socialism nor Capitalism. Men like Steve jobs would never be able to do what they did under socialism
You obviously HAVEN'T read even the basic definitions of Socialism or Social Democracy, if you did, you wouldn't be saying what you just said. First of all, Socialism is a BROAD category of socio-political thought and encompasses a wide range of systems from the most purist to the most watered down. In the most purist form, Socialism is THE WORKER'S CONTROL OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION, and does not involve the STATE running things. Socialism is also somewhat part of EVERY country.
As for Social Democracy... yes, it has been tried and very successfully in places like France, Canada, Germany, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Sweden, etc. They have implemented very common-sense and strong social safety nets and worker's rights and with GREAT results. Their countries are also freer, happier, healthier, taller, more intelligent, more equal, more peaceful, and more competitive than we are in many ways.
And yes, lust for power is a problem in ALL utopian systems. Any system which expects humans to be better than they naturally ever have been is a utopian system doomed to failure. Which is why I'm an Anarchist. Anarchist society would prevent humans from having significant wealth/power over and above other people (or creatures).
A good point that I agree with. Unfortunately the author removed why? Communist. I do agree that centralizing wealth and power is bad business for society as a whole and that is why communism fails and capitalism/corporatism like in America fails to. I still think we need wealth/incentive because competition is what makes us humans thrive. Rewards for innovation is what makes people innovate at levels way above communists.
@IngeniousEpithet Ok, you LEFTIST DIMWITS, if you think that ALL the COMMUNIST SHITHOLES are not supposed to have anything to do with the "great" ideas of Marx (yeah, right :-) ), then you surely will be able to lay out how communist goals can be achieved WITHOUT
1) POVERTY, FAMINES, IN-EFFICIENCIES, but with PROSPERITY
2) TERROR, DICTATORSHIPS, UN-FREEDOM, but in FREEDOM.
While innovation/tech advancement is admirable and has brought us some very notable rewards... we must also consider its double-edge. Industrialization, mass-society, and super-advanced technologies have presented exponentially-increasing pandora's boxes of wonders, solutions, and yet MORE problems to solve. I think we must be careful in our techno-obsession and lust for endless consumption... as the saying goes-- "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell."
@Reido2828 Ok, you LEFTIST DIMWITS, if you think that ALL the COMMUNIST SHITHOLES are not supposed to have anything to do with the "great" ideas of Marx (yeah, right :-) ), then you surely will be able to lay out how communist goals can be achieved WITHOUT
1) POVERTY, FAMINES, IN-EFFICIENCIES, but with PROSPERITY
2) TERROR, DICTATORSHIPS, UN-FREEDOM, but in FREEDOM.
Anarchism doesn't prevent people from self-defense, nor does it prevent various groups from toppling any group which wishes to establish itself into a position of power, exploitation, coercion, etc. And I don't expect ALL hierarchy to vanish from the planet, however, a realistic vision of widely implemented Anarchism would provide a much more equal/free/trusting world than what we have seen within strong hierarchies and positions of top-down power/wealth.
@Reido2828 DImwit, instead of you brain amputated dipshit. I not only read Marx in English and GErman, but more importantly I UNDERSTOOD Marx, contrary to all LEFTIST IDIOTS.
Obviously, you are just anothere LEFTIST IDIOT who chickens out when it comes to ARGUMENTS and FACTS. Otherwise you would be capable of answering those "easy" 2 questions below, for the answer of which I offered € 100,000 of my CAPITALISTIC EUROS!
I'm not Communist and I've already stated that Communism is authoritarian. HOWEVER, Socialism encompasses a WIDE RANGE of viewpoints and societies. Once again I recommend you DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK on successful implementations of Socialism. They absolutely exist, I've already listed examples for you to research. The notion that there is no incentive to work in a Socialist society is crap... people naturally want to create and work towards their own goals, not pointless wage-slavery.
Have you read the Communist Manifesto?? Communism's ULTIMATE aim might be a stateless society... but it calls directly for a tyrannical middle-man of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Why not skip the bullshit, grow a pair and go straight to Anarchism? If I remember correctly... during the October Revolution, the Bolsheviks betrayed Anarchists and fucked them over. NEVER AGAIN.
Yes... ULTIMATELY Communism is stateless... but by calling for an INCREASE in government power (via the dictatorship of the proletariat) you end up killing off any dreams of a stateless society by the corruption that naturally results from a further concentration of power. Anarcho-Communism at least cuts out the dictator middle-man and shoots STRAIGHT for a stateless society. I do not consider myself Anarcho-Communist, per se, but I appreciate it and agree with certain tenets
But is it a Democracy? If I remember correctly, recently reading the Communist Manifesto... Marx wanted to implement a workers' dictatorship over the bourgeoisie in order to rebalance the inequities of power/wealth between them. However, does this not result in here's the new boss same as the old boss?? Essentially it's not even about bosses but HIERARCHY. Communism has failed because it puts faith/power into hierarchical systems which are inherently oppressive.
Like most of Zizek's commentary except the part about catastrophes being responsible for oil creation. The consensus amongst geologists is that the slow and constant accretion of small organisms in shallow seas over millennia deposited in sediments and slowly cooked by earth's internal heat results in petroleum if held at a relatively constant pressure and temperature under anoxic conditions.
Madoff cooked his books so that the money generated by new suckers paying in, was falsely represented as profits from investments he had made. This is not a subtle difference - it is fraudulent bookkeeping. If this man does not understand the difference he should not be making pronouncements about capitalism.
@T1Brit Have you heard of Enron, Tyco or MCI...more recently Bear Sterns, Citi, JP, Wells Fargo or countell other industry or banking giants that are too big to fail? The message is this; Corporatism and banking are completely decoupled from demand, so that the only way to show profit is to cook the books (Ponzi scheme) a more concise example is the stock market itself.; stock is a hot potato that is passed around until the inevitable collapse of the underlying company. its all a Ponzi scheme!
@arlin25 It was the corruption of the model of capitalism that has caused these terrible crashes. If the accountants at Enron had done their job, there would have been no enron scandal - if the laws created to restrain such absurd leveraged gambling had been enforced, then the investment banks could not have done what they did - if the SEC or ratings agencies had done their job, none of it would have happened.
The guardians were asleep. They failed.to do their job. THAT is why it happened.
@T1Brit Capitalism is inherently corrupt, but not initially. With capitalism needing continual (if not exponential) growth, there will (and did) come a time where cooking the books is necessary to keep up appearances. Liberal capitalism, as with any ideology, for its continuation, requires unquestioning faith in its perpetuity, despite its finitude. The guardians guard the system! Zizek explains it better in the video called, "The Monstrosity of Christ"
@arlin25 Capitalism is the inevitable result of a sophisticated society that has progressed beyond hunting and gathering. As some people are forced to specialize in skills like shoe making they cannot also feed themselves by hunting. Therefore society divides into groups who must find a way to exchange value - you cannot always swap a pair of shoes for a steak. Money then gives rise to capitalism when certain projects require more money than one person owns. It's natural law - not a conspiracy
@T1Brit P.P..S - Or you could get a piece of land and try growing your own food. See how much you can produce without a tractor and farms tools and pesticides and all that.
You will certainly lose some weight and get fitter. Before you die.
@T1Brit I understand the industrial division of labor and credit/money and why capitalism is the result. I'm just referring to the inherent flaws in it. Capitalism favors incumbents; those who either through war or slavery have gained and advantage. In modern times, its lobbying and the good 'ol boys club. Capitalism is a great theory, which is why its so alluring, can't maintain its integrity in practice. Capitalism is also the offspring of a perfect egoism which can always rationalize itself.
@arlin25 You speak as if there were some alternative ! How do you suggest that human beings should exchange goods and services? When they need to do so there will be money, and when there is money there will be banks, and when there are great projects there will be corporations - it is not the result of any theory. it is the result of the natural laws of supply and demand and the marketplace that determines what people are willing to pay for anything. What other method have you got in mind?
@arlin25 Short answer to very complex question. I suppose you mean that he could give the butcher a small part of the value of one jet engine? Maybe he could write that down on a piece of paper and the butcher could use that piece of paper to exchange for other goods.... wait a minute, this sounds familiar
@T1Brit there is a way to account for all such exchanges, and yes it does sound familiar...the difference is that it would be free exchange! no interest or middlemen usurping wealth. credit would be based on actual production, not derivative speculation. value would be based on proportion to the aggregate production, not an irrational "market." growth and wealth accumulation would be based on derived efficiencies...oh, and all means of production would be mutually owned...that's not familiar!!!
@arlin25 You are free to engage in such barter if you want to. There is no law against it.. You will have to find a way to determine value that is acceptable to both parties - good luck with that. The Marketplace is not an invention of human beings. Even animals trade to some extent. It is just what both sides of a transaction are prepared to accept. It is the most simple and reliable way to find the price of any item. In a basic market there are no 'middlemen'. Just buyers and sellers.
@T1Brit P.S. - 'Mutually owned' sounds wonderful when used as an argument in this context. But I wonder how wonderful you would find it, if you had spent 20 years of your life building something, like say, a farm. To have a group of people from across town turn up with their 15 kids and demand their share of your mutually owned produce.
@T1Brit We as humans have to stop comparing ourselves to animals to justify some ideology. why do we have to use " the most simple and reliable way" to derive value? why cant we devise an equitable sophisticated, but still mutually accepted and reliable method of deriving value. I proposed mutual ownership of the "means of production" not the actual produce. decouple price/value from capital costs =lower prices. You do realize we already pay the capital cost on everything,,,its called taxes!!!!!
@T1Brit to continue... we pay the capital cost on everything in the form of taxes, how? all money is derived from debt, all debt is derived from treasury bills, notes and bonds...all guarantee on those bills, notes and bonds are based on the full faith and credit of the US, which is based on the power to tax! now, we pay the capital cost initially, and then we pay it again because the company's capital cost is embedded in the price of everything. you might say what about wages or excess profit?
@T1Brit there are no excess profits....get this now....all transactions zero out. at least there supposed to. this is the purpose of the IRS, to account for all transactions to make sure the books balance! so when you see millionaires, what ur seeing is someone hoarding resources that should and need to be circulating in the system. its a zero-sum game. someone gets excess profits...you get poorer. tax cuts actually hurt the economy. wealth eventually gets taken back or the debt will grow!!!!!!!
@arlin25 Get this: I AGREE WITH YOU. it would be far better to have a value system based on something more concrete than pure market price. I agree that the principle of money allows for value to be uselessly hoarded into lumps. I find it absurd that one day the whole world is pronounced rich - and the next day the whole world is suddenly poor - when NOTHING has changed except some numbers in a Wall St computer.
But what method of value measurement do you propose? Please invent one.
@T1Brit Value based on proportionality. the value of any one thing is based on its proportion to the aggregate production And the aggregate production is based on the aggregate demand. individual accounts are based on the value of their production. no scarcity, no value manipulation. most of what i'm suggesting is in theory already happening...I think the real devil is the ownership structure. I think at least the means of production should be mutually owned, that way purely ur work is ur reward
@arlin25 This comment thread is now totally out of sequence. I can't follow it. But your ideas sound reasonable enough. I think that ever since Marx people have proposed a zillion methods by which human economics might work. My point, such as it is, is that no matter what you decree, you will find that the old fashioned model will always resurface. If you suppress the market, you simply create a black market. \
If the lawmakers are poodles of industry, then you vote them out - or hang them.
@T1Brit i totally agree, when you suppress human ingenuity to produce you only create a black market...I am not advocating ANY suppression of a man's ability or need to produce or consume what he wants (not even God does that!). to me it about the means of production; who owns it, money; who controls it and price/value; how is it derived. i think mutuality solves a lot of the flaws in an otherwise genius free-market system
@arlin25 I think all that you suggest has been done. The collective is stronger and more fair. The people share means of production. Bankers are reduced to public servants etc etc etc.
And then, after a few years - some of the people start to break the rules. They are re-educated. This does not solve the problem. The re-education grows harsher. There is popular discontent. It is crushed. The police begin to operate in secret. The torture chambers and the disappearances begin.
@T1Brit oookay, i get the sarcasm. but i'm no communist! i believe in FREE markets, not manipulated ones where the few live off the many. but if you like it the way it is, that's ur choice, i happen to think there's a more equitable alternative. i understand why capitalism is so intoxicating...it panders to the most base and powerful sense of self; the ego. long term survivability will rely on mutualism. the heart, important as it is, cant function if not for the hand that puts food to the mouth
@arlin25 It absolutely is not intended to be ironic. The imposition of any system that is not the natural one to which people normally tend inevitably leads to authoritarian government which inevitably leads to all the tools of repression that we saw in the Soviet bloc, China, N Korea etc.
Your principles are perfectly sound - but I am not talking about principles. I am talking about what can be expected to function in the real world without the need for a police state to enforce it.
@T1Brit so what ur telling me is human being are incapable of developing and participating in a mutualistic economic system (especially if its working)? ii disagree with that and i'm saddened by your pessimism, because i'm sure you're not alone in that thought. well i'll say this; either we evolve psychologically to a point where this type of economy i possible, or it'll be forced upon us by the economic catastrophe looming in capitalism. ur right, most times only catastrophe makes humans change
@arlin25 Not at all. I am telling you that you can do whatever you want. That is the basic principle of free society. But some people will choose to become bankers, and some will choose to be money lenders.
Some will form corporations and so on. I am saying the western world as it is has developed according to the basic principle of freedom within the law. If the laws that already exist are actually applied you would not see the kind of disasters we have seen. Criminal behavior is the problem.
@T1Brit What is law? Law is an attempt to regulate humans from inhuman tendencies. Or more esoterically, law is an attempt to make everything illegal then license what to some, what was once illegal. Case in point interest. it was once deemed immoral/illegal, but laws have been made to license that activity to some. Capitalism is legalized/licensed usury and theft. its basic tenet; private property is a form of theft because who has the right to say of land, this is mine? law licenses this theft
@arlin25 Law varies from place to place. English common law grew naturally from the customs and social norms of the people themselves - in Europe it was mostly replaced by Napoleonic law, of which I know nothing. But I agree with you the principle of ownership of vast amounts of land is often a toxic leftover from feudal times, and maybe that will change - but when it comes to a house that you have built, it is fair enough to say that it belongs to you isn't it? Law changes. You can change it.
@T1Brit the only thing a man can say is his is the labor he posited into building that house. the wood and other materials came from the earth, which is everyone's. the land on which it sits is everyone's. i submit that we have to rethink whats ownable and how to value what (labor) is owned. my suggestion is a land trust with all citizens as tenants-in-common. and the land only is leased/taxed. all material emanating therefrom is mutually owned, therefore only the labor to extract is sellable
@arlin25 What about the architect who designed it, the lumberjack who cut down the trees, the brickmaker, the ironmonger, the power company, the phone company, the gas, light.... the police who patrol the street and the fire engine waiting for your call.
@T1Brit all laborers are paid for their work, its just that the materials, land nor interest are added to the cost because all those things are mutually owned...its kinda simple, but its complicated in the context of the staus quo
@T1Brit i'm not advocating the destruction of occupations or endeavors, i'm advocating mutual benefit. I can be a banker (read accountant here) without charging interest on top of wages for service. you can be a corporation without charging capital costs on top of wages for production. money lenders couldn't exist because money is created by the people who use it, not by those who create it to be used (at interest). a shared benefit needs no "laws" because u can't manipulate value or hoard money
@arlin25 How are you going to stop somebody from offering to lend money at a rate of interest?
Make it illegal? That simply will not work. It is pointless to talk about what ought to be. Unless you base your laws upon what people actually DO then you are creating a nightmare.
If everybody is doing it, you better make it legal, as they say. ( within reason of course )
Take American drug laws for example. Look what happens when you try to enforce behavior.
@T1Brit no, i'm not going to try to stop anybody from doing anything. i'm saying like-minded people who see the value in the system I've articulated can join and create a closed-loop economy that functions mutualistically. anyone within that system is barred from usury or hoarding by the very nature of the system without laws or police imperative. in fact, the system works best if there is a competing system like pure capitalism, because to pay off the initial debt, external sales are necessary!
@T1Brit cool, ur hired! but since i don't own a horse, it'll have to be a three-way transaction...i'll offer my consulting services to a guy who has a horse, then i'll give you that horse in exchange for your webmaster services
@arlin25 On top of that I think rather than explaining your concept verbally, which exposes you to the danger of being taken for a Leninist spy, I would suggest your site contains an animated graphic that shows how value flows through the system you describe. Flash is out if you want it to run on an i-pad so it will have to be HTML 5.
What kind of consulting? I had rather decided on a horse.
@T1Brit financial consulting, what I do for a living. I agree with ur assessment, verbally it sounds Leninist, but visually representing the value flow would illuminate thew concept. That is exactly what I have in mind. a UML model structure with underlying XML schemas could be rendered via HTML 5, SVG or any XML-based graphics engine. I'm in the process of getting the pre-development funding to procure the technical assistance to map the transactional models for a wide range of use-cases in UML
@arlin25 UML. I had to look it up. Well one way or another you could certainly put a clear descriptive graphic based explanation of what you are saying. I also do graphics and program, but mainly 3D virtual stuff. PHP and javascript and mySQL for the web end - but I also do a lot of dev work in second life using LSL.
Actually come to think of it you could mock up an entire community in SL couldn't you. Run a sim using your system with real people. See if it works.
@T1Brit UML works best ideographically for the semi-tech savvy. A SIM however, would be absolutely genius to demonstrate the system concept to the general public. working behind the SIM could be the same UML/XML data using some query format for Extraction Translation and Loading from specified databases, to run the SIM. I do prefer pure JAVA over javascript. check out canoo.com
@arlin25 Well I can make that happen in SL if you wanted. Mind you I am kind of up to my ass as it is. But as far as interfacing with an external DB to activate various activities inworld, that is no trouble. I don't quite understand exactly what it is you have so can't visualize what it might look like in the virtual environment. But there are people and transactions for sure. It is real money too of course.
@arlin25 New day here. I am GMT+1 timezone. What I mean by real money is the inworld currency. 1 US dollar buys approx. 250 Linden dollars in SL. So your test subjects could be using real money or real value to exchange goods and services. It might add a certain rigor to the decision making process they use. If a genuine simulation of a RL ( real life ) community is what you wanted to achieve. The cost of running a fill sized SL sim is 295 US dollars per month. But...
@T1Brit ... it would not even be necessary to set aside a special zone inworld to demonstrate the concept. You would merely need to set up a set of rules that players would have to conform to if they wanted to participate. Just like a RL version, there would be the normal economy outside which the players would have access to if they chose, but within your community all transactions would be governed by your principles. All this would be tracked by the DB of course. A simple device worn by the..
@T1Brit ..participants would record all sim transactions. Like a virtual cell phone / credit card. This also I can do. In fact I have something very similar already up and running for the purpose of selling virtual real estate.
@T1Brit o.k., i get it. if you have at least $ 250 US worth of transactions a month the site would pay for itself and be proof of concept. sounds interesting and doable...we should talk more about this idea...do you have gmail? if not i can send you an invite
@arlin25 Listen dude - I feel like I am beating you up. I don;t want to do that. I agree with your principles. I agree a better system could exist. In some places it DOES exist. For example, in Japan, the CEO never makes more than about 10 times what the shop floor worker does. In the US it is 100 times more. The human race is still evolving and there is far to go. I hope that AI will provide a solution to many of these problems because it will be the first intelligent non human objective view
@T1Brit i feel no beating. i think u hit the nail on the head though; AI can be part of the solution. We've termed it "production planning" whereas the aggregate demand is measured (quantitatively) and the social intercourse (interfaces) are measured (qualitatively) and the result is a production plan that is in equilibrium. underlying the production plan is mutual ownership of the means of production which decreases pro rata, the price of goods. this precludes the necessity for continual growth
@arlin25 Yes I am certain that true AI is much closer than we realize and will be applicable to exactly this kind of problem. Not just that very advanced sentient computers will be able to analyze questions of demand and supply as you say, but also because it will soon become apparent to the general public that they are often the best judge in any situation that is complicated by human factors. Rather like the way nobody argues with a calculator or a video camera.
@T1Brit ... and IBMs Watson has already created some excellent PR for them. Even though it is not true AI, it has made it clear to everybody that a computer can do better than a human even in a situation like general knowledge. When the real thing arrives and is tested on every problem they can throw at it, it will be common knowledge that they are very good. If the AI says you are getting too much salary, you will have a very tough sell to defend it.
@T1Brit btw, popular discontentment, secret police and torture chambers (Guantanamo bay) already happens in the US...its just not on the tourism brochure!
@arlin25 Five minutes research about what life is actually like in a police state would quickly disabuse you of such foolish ideas.
You are not going to be woken up by a boot through your door at 4 AM unless you are either a drug dealer or a known terrorist. You are not going to be tortured or murdered in secret. Guantanamo bay exists because no other country in the world wants to take them, and they immediately return to terror when released.
Please provide evidence of a US police torture cell
@T1Brit btw, small farmers are going to mutual ownership...its called CSA's Community-supported Agriculture.. its a way to guarantee a market for their product...production meeting demand at the crossroad of shared ownership...no excess, no scarcity no manipulation...shared ownership precludes manipulation, therefore no need for laws. the system is its own regulator
@T1Brit NO MIDDLEMEN? of course there's middle men...their called brokers and bankers! the gum up the flow of exchange with interest and transaction fees. how poor we are when we have to pay taxes interest and fees just to live. in a closed system (central banking), he who charges interest on money will eventually own everything
@T1Brit I want to touch on the part about "and when there are great projects there will be corporations" that's true, but what if these corporations were mutual companies, where the patrons were part owner. where any excess accrues to the whole, not the corporate money hoarder. Do you know how corporations re-inject the excess $ they've hoarded back into the economy? they LOAN it back to you! The capital you payed to allow them to get, they turn around and loan it back to you WITH INTEREST!
@arlin25 But does not the profit from a corporation get paid to the shareholders as dividends? Does that not include all the people who have put their life savings into a 401K ? I am not up to speed on the US system. And I know that investors have been screwed by the crash. But again I say that it was caused by the total failure of those responsible to enforce the laws already in existence. Do you know the full story about how the gang of bankers got the law changed and prevented regulation
@T1Brit the net worth of the shareholders of all the companies in the world accrues to the top 2-3%. law enforcement is always a day late and a dollar short. the damage will always already be done. you ever watched an action movie and the cops only show at the end to clean up the hero's mess? that's how law works...its a post facto remuneration/indemnification that only pretends to be prevention. between 2008 and 2010 investors lost 40-60% of their retirement funds. there is no bailout for that!
@arlin25 None of that would have happened if the US Government had not THROWN OUT the laws created after the great depression to prevent such disasters - there would have been no 40:1 leveraged banks , no unregulated CDOs and CDSs - or mortgage sharks to feed them .The people who tried to DO THEIR JOB - Like Brooksley Born at the CTFC were bullied into silence and fired.
America saw the greatest prosperity ever in the history of mankind - it was fucked by CRIMINALS who broke the fucking rules !
@T1Brit the system of free-market capitalism is the reason the laws change! if you get money and power, you have influence, directly or indirectly. power gets what power wants. banksters wanted fewer regulations, thats what they got...simple supply and demand. if there was mutual ownership, you couldn't cheat...if the only value or wealth you could create was what you urself (not employees/slaves) could create, you couldn't cheat! if we weren't brainwashed by capitalism, we wouldn't cheat!
@arlin25 P.S. There is nothing to stop you from hitching a ride to Canada and making a living by hunting moose and building log cabins. Why don't you give it a try? See how you like it.
@T1Brit You sound like one of those sound-bite neocons. If your precious capitalism (as it is) continues to rule the day, we'll all be forced to hunt for moose in Canada. Btw, it won't be called Canada anymore, it'll all be the North American Union. People, money and material all moving flawlessly across former international boarders, efficiently...higher profits, lower wages...the perfect Capitalist storm! This is a good system IF your part of the upper 1%... ..if your not.....not so much
@arlin25 I am only sreaking in soundbytes because that is all you tube will allow. But the basic facts are not complex - nobody decided that the world of commerce should be the way it is - it evolved from the demands of the human beings that were using it. Of course there will always be some people smarter than others - of course having a head start is always an advantage. But great fortunes are lost also. There is no law that says rich people must stay rich. What better system do you know?
@arlin25 P.S. It is pretty rich for you to say that 'we will all be living in canada... ' etc.
Are you living in a wooden shack? Do you eat basic grains and rabbit every single day? Do you work in the fields from dawn till dusk? Or do you sit in front of a modern computer, in a heated home, with a fridge full of food, and plenty of clothes, and clean hot and cold running water, and a car parked outside, etc etc etc.
Yeah - capitalism has been so mean to you hasn't it.
Does anyone else see the irony of denouncing capitalism through the medium of YouTube, which belongs to a publicly-traded company: Google. Do you think a resource such as this could exist in this form in a communist state? It's clear to me that the revenue earned through advertisements allows YouTube to provide an incredible product on which to broadcast interesting conversations like this.
PapaWilk 1 week ago
@PapaWilk 'Communist state' is an oxymoron. Although of course nobody owns the word. Something horizontal like the internet can totally thrive in a social(ist) society if you ask me.
Ollie9402 6 days ago
Though I can't agree with the man completely he's an excellent speaker.
Harrodsplays 1 week ago
@reido2828 very fair point, but I think that that is where philosophy lies, what is human nature? I think that this needs to be established before one creates a mental framework. I believe that human's are naturally co-operative, so I have Socialistic sympathies and loathe Capitalism. You believe in competition, where Capitalism would be a good answer. But everyone must understand that the system cannot be left unregulated, as it is too damaging to certain unlucky people.
CaptainJones32 1 week ago
@joaquinveyron you say that the failures of Marxist states are due to the teachings of Marx, not the neglect of them. Then you state that leftists don't understand Marx (I am sorry to announce that I do not believe that you do). That is a very obvious contradiction, those who tried to create Marxist states must have been leftists, so if they did not understand Marx, then the failures must not have been down to Marx's teachings.
CaptainJones32 1 week ago
I can see how anti-left politics is so common due to the intellectual giant that is joaquinveyron
CaptainJones32 1 week ago
with all the nose touching, he is clearly lying about everything he says
MrDitto30 2 weeks ago
this guys is a pro communist, I lived under communism and there was nothing good or even bearable under it
MrDitto30 2 weeks ago
@MrDitto30 You apparently did not listen to anything he said. You got to confused by the words you heard. You are an idiot.
glowboy0014 1 week ago
hat is that he says in the beginning? "Oh my God I hate that - "
bluebettle 2 weeks ago
Love him, an absolute mental giant of a man.
debaser181 1 month ago 4
@debaser181
the only thing giant about him is his ego
MrDitto30 2 weeks ago
The one factor he fails tot ake into account is peak oil- how can, capitalism endure if it continues on the princple of continual economic growth engineered by a finite resource?
TheBananaAutocracy 1 month ago
@TheBananaAutocracy Not even necessary to take into account. Continuous growth and the decline of the capitalist mode of production to sustain growth implies that such realities are problematic. However, a decline of oil wouldn't necessary destroy capitalism; if anything, it would create a revolutionary moment or a massive depression. Capitalism can still regenerate itself, it is a social system - a social order, if you will-, not so much an 'economic system'.
Tougemaster06 1 month ago
I'd like to see him answer a question about an image of switzerland or denmark.
xRA1D32x 1 month ago
he's brilliant
xRA1D32x 1 month ago
lol at 12:24, bond rates have stayed at historical lows since the crisis began so it's obvious debt is not a problem when the economy is depressed.
Literally the fundamentalists' explanation is somehow the Fed is manipulating bond rates make it seem like debt isn't a problem.
AndroidPolitician 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Zizek is a very dangerous guy if someone takes him seriously. Everything he said is based upon a pseudo-moral, that remains hidden, unfounded and thus cannot be thematized or objected, that's something fluid, just a rethorical topoi. He can't just use marxian foundation as it is refuted by Mises, Rawls, Nozick, etc, so he blur his basis and remains with none. Pardon the bad english.
133839297 2 months ago
Comment removed
133839297 2 months ago
Where do some of the images in the background come from? That one with the dancing light-figure with the word BUY on its chest is interesting. What is it?
epsilon8998 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Go back to old Russia and drink your Vodka...
glenchaddock72 3 months ago in playlist More videos from VPROinternational
This has been flagged as spam show
This has been by far the most fascinating show/program/speech I have seen since a long long time
dadgadable 3 months ago
Watching first time and two days later we found our old "invented" enemy Iran. Mexico drug cartels= two birds with one stone. I guess we can concentrate on missiles bombarding a beautiful land as opposed to the monotonous wall street camp and slap.
Malaikatrendy 3 months ago
Sophist....
MrFpenteado 3 months ago
It is all fantastic Marxism and Socialism but in the end of the day he lectures in a school (EGS) that you have to pay 15,000 pounds just to put your feet there, With student accommodation that costs you 4000 pounds for 6 weeks in a ski resort in Switzerland (that country, the haven, the money laundry....).Its called Caviar Socialism. He is right: the Left is outdated, gone. He is the best example of it. Being paid by the rich to "philosophize".
MrFpenteado 3 months ago
@MrFpenteado Your information I agree with, but your conclusion I don't. The desire for an actual difference between the current situation and the future isn't corrupt by it's 'invention' within the old system. The only way to judge him would be to look at his position AFTER a significant change has occurred. Take the French Revolution for example. The judging of who was wrong happened AFTER. That is why a revolutionary movement shouldn't look for justification in the old situation.
s90210h 3 months ago
@s90210h If you are talking about history, lets get back to history, in this case to ancient history. Does the word "Sophist" or "Sophism" mean anything to you?
MrFpenteado 3 months ago
a waste of time.
i'm not happy with the system at all, but the useful content of this video is about 5 minutes of valid critique of today's system, the rest is crap.
AttilaLendvai 3 months ago
everyone needs to shut up, the arguing is ridiculous. the obvious answer is NO government.
somekidfromtexas 4 months ago
@somekidfromtexas
No shit, communism IS no government according to Marx and Lenin (google "Pure Communism", first wikipedia link).
GodOfTheInternets 3 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets Too bad communism is idiotic and will never work.
somekidfromtexas 3 months ago
@somekidfromtexas
And why is that? Economic calculation problem? That's long been refuted.
GodOfTheInternets 3 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets That is one of the reasons but it doesn't matter, I don't want to argue. At least we can agree the state is the true enemy?
somekidfromtexas 3 months ago
charity = 'chocolate laxative'. brilliant !
hernamine38 4 months ago
Fuck communism
Reido2828 4 months ago
min 42. italy is the only avantgarde
bttgcm 4 months ago
@AlchemicGnosis
Please note:
Most of our fossil fuels were produced by decayed ocean plant/animal life, mostly on the small scale. Carbon from dead dino's do not make up the majority of fossil fuels. Perhaps that's irrelevant to your point, but I figured I should mention it for truth's-sake. ;)
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
and scho on and scho on
jxhensley 4 months ago
@AlchemicGnosis oil comes from algea and micro organisms decaying on the sea floor not dinosaurs
mynillywita9milli 5 months ago
The style of this video is just silly—the "voice of god", the empty room?
zingomingo 5 months ago
when he cannot distinct mixed economy government intervention and pure capitalism, as asserted by Jim Rogers, i have seen enough of this clip
davidhoyh 5 months ago
@davidhoyh his point is (both here) - and not his for that matter,Chomsky says the same thing -that there is no pure capitalism,the relation betwen politics and economy can't be stoped. If you can't understand that you shouldn't be watching this clip in the first place
yellowwasp09 5 months ago 10
This has been flagged as spam show
@yellowwasp09 Ok, you LEFTIST DIMWITS, if you think that ALL the COMMUNIST SHITHOLES are not supposed to have anything to do with the "great" ideas of Marx (yeah, right :-) ), then you surely will be able to lay out how communist goals can be achieved WITHOUT
1) POVERTY, FAMINES, IN-EFFICIENCIES, but with PROSPERITY
2) TERROR, DICTATORSHIPS, UN-FREEDOM, but in FREEDOM.
I pay you € 1.000.000, if you are able to.
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
I wonder at the usefulness of his advice to leftists. Fight harder? I would like to see a more detailed prescription. Maybe like: don't let conservatives casually redefine words; don't pretend that capitalism is mostly ok; don't let rightist propaganda occupy a level playing field (ie racism, violence, etc. are not equal but opposite opinions).
Hell I don't know. Nationalist conservatism is dominating right now, and things are getting ugly.
phalsebob 5 months ago 3
Comment removed
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
Comment removed
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@phalsebob
The corporatist/neo-fascist revolution we're seeing needs to be aggressively confronted and dominated on ALL FRONTS. Leftists need to STOP avoiding conflict and instead embrace inevitable conflicts in such an important time as this, Leftists, with all our superior firepower/ammunition, need to get used to winning and LIKING it. We must not let right-wing propaganda go un-confronted/neutralized. As right-wing lies/delusions/madness accelerates, we must choke off its oxygen supply.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet Ye, no kidding.
phalsebob 4 months ago
@phalsebob
lol... why the fuck did my reply post 3 times?? Sorry bout that.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
And left wing garbage cannot be the full face of society because of the fascist regimes that have come to past.
Reido2828 4 months ago
@Reido2828
Wtf are you talking about...??
Fascism is right-wing.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
Really? I seem to recall Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao, pol pot, confederate states of America are all left wing democrats. I can certainly name a thousand more for you if you like? Face the fucking facts conservatism is individualism and small government. Look up Thomas Paine, Winston Churchill, Lincoln, George Washington, thatcher read them all and you will be startled. Fascism has always been rooted in left wing ideology. Sorry putz your wrong.
Reido2828 4 months ago
@Reido2828
Hitler and Mussolini were righties.
Traiannnn 4 months ago
@Traiannnn
You got evidence of that? I feel bad for someone like you who uses youtube as a source for facts. Moron.
Reido2828 4 months ago
@Reido2828
Are you FUCKING kidding me?? Where are you getting this?? You have NOT done your homework, you've listened to right-wing propaganda that serves to wash its hands of the blood it has caused, lay its dirty deeds on the left-wing, then take off its statist/Capitalist/authoritarian hat to don the hat of "individualism" and "freedom". That's ALWAYS been a huge fucking load of shit to ANYBODY with half a brain and half an EDUCATION ON FACTS/SCIENCE/HISTORY. You're so fucking stupid.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet here, here! i can't believe someone with enough belief in human nature to think we can all learn and develop and mature... even to try to straighten out a person who thinks fascism is a left-wing ideology is beyond my compassion level. you obviously have great hope in humanity... but we know some will fight knowledge to the bitter end, so i consider you having won the argument XD it's really hard to imagine someone being as stupid as that guy, btw.
AlemanJuan 4 months ago 2
@AlemanJuan
haha, well thanks, man. The trick to it really isn't a trick at all... it's enforcing the facts, persistence, and thorough discussion/consideration. Beneath all of this you must be open to changing your mind given superior information, however, there is a lot of dead-WRONG information out there that is quite convincing to many people (like saying Fascism is left-wing, or saying global warming is a big conspiracy). I debate these people because these are EXTREMELY IMPORTANT issues.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@Reido2828
I mean Jesus... even looking at WIKIPEDIA you'll find that Fascism is right-wing... oh but lemme guess... Wikipedia is either A) Full of commie/liberal bias; and/or B) Is totally inaccurate and never regulated (which it actually HAS been proven reasonably accurate AND well-moderated). DO YOUR FUCKING HOMEWORK.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
I have and Hitler was a socialist, Stalin communist, Polpot socialist, Mao socialist. There left wing ideologies you tard. I don't need Wikipedia because I have common sense. Grow up little child grow up and read more.
Reido2828 4 months ago
@Reido2828
You're completely wrong. Hitler was NOT a Socialist... he used Socialist rhetoric to gain popularity, then once the Nazis gained sufficient power, they STOMPED OUT Socialists, unions, liberals, intellectuals, communists, anarchists, gays, jews, and so on. Don't sit there and pretend that, because Hitler used some Socialist rhetoric, that somehow HE is an embodiment of it. Fascism and Nazism are about 80% right-wing and a complex mix of other policies... it is NOT left-wing, period.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
It is not left wing it is fascism but you can't deny hitlers economic policies were promptly left wing. Hitler was not right wing due to his increased cabinet sizes and tax breaks for families with lots of kids. THAT IS SOCIALISM. Look at the other socialist governments and what they did to the world. Look up the confederate states in America. Another radical left wing idea who had millions of slaves. Read more instead of using youtube for information.
Reido2828 4 months ago
@Reido2828
hahah, seriously dude... where are you getting this disinformation from?? You need to realize that hijacking language is not truth. The left-wing is NOT confederate, NOT nazi, NOT totalitarian communist (or fascist). Relax and get a grip, research Socialism, there are many useful, noble, and realistic policies within it that are NO-BRAINERS for an evolved society.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
I like socialism and combined with a free market is a good system. But I am talking about previous fascists who were leftists and had problems with inflation, genocide and corruption. Theres reasons why 100% socialist governments collapse and don't last long. Stalin the butcher was a socialist and murdered millions of people PERIOD. Have respect for human life?
Reido2828 4 months ago
@Reido2828
Look up Social Democracy then. Countries like France, Germany, Canada, and the Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc.) have this style of system and it seems to work better than ours in many key ways. Providing ample social safety nets is quite good for people and actually ends up REDUCING risk taken on by entrepreneurs starting their own businesses... if you don't have to worry about food/shelter/medical care/higher education... then you can start a biz w/ less worry.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@Reido2828
Also, once again, if you research Fascism, the vast majority of its make-up is right-wing, including economically. Yes, every dictatorship is different and employs its own mix of influences. However, the problem with Fascism (or Communism for that matter) is the AUTHORITARIANISM, imperialism, corruption, and genocide involved. If Hitler employed any ACTUAL Socialist policies, they were probably beneficial to people at first (winning hearts/minds) until he abandoned it once in power.
IngeniousEpithet 4 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
Name a successful communist or socialist country? Name one that lasted two centuries? Socialism as a whole does not work. Certain things about it can work but they need to be met with a free market otherwise there is no incentive to do anything.
Reido2828 4 months ago
@Reido2828
Communism is defined as "stateless, moneyless, classless" society. It has never existed so indeed it has never been succesful. Also "socialism in one country" is a Stalinist notion rejected by most of the socialist movement. If we look at Marx' description of a workers' state we see universal suffrage, delegates accountable to the people, workers' wage for public officials and labour vouchers instead of money, thus: the USSR was not Marxist-socialist either.
GodOfTheInternets 3 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets
We define capitalism as a society that is based on free market, individual liberty, and we the people control it and are responsible for it. So what we see in Western Europe and in America is not capitalism but corporatism and in Capitalism there is not support to be classes either because regardless of who you are or what race you are your rights are given to you as individuals. Thus USA is not a capitalist society either.
Reido2828 3 months ago
@Reido2828
You cannot have private property, the monetary system, wage-slavery, wealth-stratification, centralized markets, or economic hierarchy without a state, a de-facto state, and/or unacceptable levels of oppression. With a DEMOCRATIC government, the people AT LEAST have some say in protecting themselves from powerful private entities. That's why Social Democracies work better than our system.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
Again if you take control of the system through big business like the USA has done then its very easy to look back at the social system but can you name any that actually work? We the people need to be in control and need to be aware of what is going on. Look at the constitution and then read about Ron Paul and start there. You'll end up at a very good point where socialism and free market capitalism can be combined equally.
Reido2828 3 months ago
@Reido2828
I'm quite familiar with Ron Paul and admire him quite a bit. However, many of his free-market ideas are a bit crazy/naive. To de-regulate our markets and reduce taxes on the rich is NOT a good idea, there is a reason for these things, and if we are to dismantle them then we must ONLY dismantle them in conjunction with just about EVERYTHING else in government/markets. Socialism/Capitalism have been combined most beneficially in Social Democracies like France, Germany, and Scandinavia.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@Reido2828
Check it out:
" en.wikipedia. org /wiki/Social_democracy "
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
I know what it is and how old are you? Why would you send me a wiki article? I've read it. If you had strong facts and ideas you would send me an article written by an independent lol send me Wikipedia and your a moron.
Reido2828 3 months ago
@Reido2828
Do you REALLY know what it is or are you just saying that to try and win an argument?? I sent you to a wiki article because you appeared not to understand that things like it exist, and thus needed an elementary education on the term. If anybody appeared to be a moron, it's you, thus the wiki link.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
Hey Moron moron MORON! I know the wiki article ok it sums it up in simple terms but who are we kidding no man and his political book are that simple. Every political philosophy theoretically could work if implemented properly but man his an urge and lust for power. Read Napoleon and you'll understand. Anyway your points are that of a n indexperienced child. You know nothing of Socialism nor Capitalism. Men like Steve jobs would never be able to do what they did under socialism
Reido2828 3 months ago
@Reido2828
You obviously HAVEN'T read even the basic definitions of Socialism or Social Democracy, if you did, you wouldn't be saying what you just said. First of all, Socialism is a BROAD category of socio-political thought and encompasses a wide range of systems from the most purist to the most watered down. In the most purist form, Socialism is THE WORKER'S CONTROL OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION, and does not involve the STATE running things. Socialism is also somewhat part of EVERY country.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@Reido2828
As for Social Democracy... yes, it has been tried and very successfully in places like France, Canada, Germany, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Sweden, etc. They have implemented very common-sense and strong social safety nets and worker's rights and with GREAT results. Their countries are also freer, happier, healthier, taller, more intelligent, more equal, more peaceful, and more competitive than we are in many ways.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@Reido2828
And yes, lust for power is a problem in ALL utopian systems. Any system which expects humans to be better than they naturally ever have been is a utopian system doomed to failure. Which is why I'm an Anarchist. Anarchist society would prevent humans from having significant wealth/power over and above other people (or creatures).
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
So how would Anarchism stop people from forming a network and then going for power? Your idea sounds medieval and not well thougbht through yet.
Reido2828 3 months ago
Comment removed
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
A good point that I agree with. Unfortunately the author removed why? Communist. I do agree that centralizing wealth and power is bad business for society as a whole and that is why communism fails and capitalism/corporatism like in America fails to. I still think we need wealth/incentive because competition is what makes us humans thrive. Rewards for innovation is what makes people innovate at levels way above communists.
Reido2828 3 months ago
@Reido2828
Wtf? My comment was removed? Shit... I don't even remember what it said. I sincerely hope the author didn't delete it...
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@IngeniousEpithet Ok, you LEFTIST DIMWITS, if you think that ALL the COMMUNIST SHITHOLES are not supposed to have anything to do with the "great" ideas of Marx (yeah, right :-) ), then you surely will be able to lay out how communist goals can be achieved WITHOUT
1) POVERTY, FAMINES, IN-EFFICIENCIES, but with PROSPERITY
2) TERROR, DICTATORSHIPS, UN-FREEDOM, but in FREEDOM.
I pay you € 1.000.000, if you are able to.
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
@Reido2828
While innovation/tech advancement is admirable and has brought us some very notable rewards... we must also consider its double-edge. Industrialization, mass-society, and super-advanced technologies have presented exponentially-increasing pandora's boxes of wonders, solutions, and yet MORE problems to solve. I think we must be careful in our techno-obsession and lust for endless consumption... as the saying goes-- "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell."
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@IngeniousEpithet " then when cornered, spew forth venomous "
Hahahahhaah, when did this happen??
Ok, let us see your "intellectual capabilities" on those questions:
1) Name just ONE example where communism was SUCCESSFUL
2) Explain how communism can be realised WITHOUT resulting in a NIGHTMARE of POVERTY, TERROR, DICTATORSHIPS, FAMINES, IN-EFFICIENCIES.
I am ready to pay you 100,000 of my CAPITALISTIC EUROS, if you can :-)
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
@Reido2828
Oh wait... if I remember correctly, I think youtube messed up and I accidentally double-posted, so I removed the copy. Hah! it should all be there...
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Reido2828 Ok, you LEFTIST DIMWITS, if you think that ALL the COMMUNIST SHITHOLES are not supposed to have anything to do with the "great" ideas of Marx (yeah, right :-) ), then you surely will be able to lay out how communist goals can be achieved WITHOUT
1) POVERTY, FAMINES, IN-EFFICIENCIES, but with PROSPERITY
2) TERROR, DICTATORSHIPS, UN-FREEDOM, but in FREEDOM.
I pay you € 1.000.000, if you are able to.
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Reido2828
Anarchism doesn't prevent people from self-defense, nor does it prevent various groups from toppling any group which wishes to establish itself into a position of power, exploitation, coercion, etc. And I don't expect ALL hierarchy to vanish from the planet, however, a realistic vision of widely implemented Anarchism would provide a much more equal/free/trusting world than what we have seen within strong hierarchies and positions of top-down power/wealth.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Reido2828 DImwit, instead of you brain amputated dipshit. I not only read Marx in English and GErman, but more importantly I UNDERSTOOD Marx, contrary to all LEFTIST IDIOTS.
Obviously, you are just anothere LEFTIST IDIOT who chickens out when it comes to ARGUMENTS and FACTS. Otherwise you would be capable of answering those "easy" 2 questions below, for the answer of which I offered € 100,000 of my CAPITALISTIC EUROS!
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
@Reido2828
I'm not Communist and I've already stated that Communism is authoritarian. HOWEVER, Socialism encompasses a WIDE RANGE of viewpoints and societies. Once again I recommend you DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK on successful implementations of Socialism. They absolutely exist, I've already listed examples for you to research. The notion that there is no incentive to work in a Socialist society is crap... people naturally want to create and work towards their own goals, not pointless wage-slavery.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
Communism is stateless, it is anti-authoritarian.
GodOfTheInternets 3 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets
Have you read the Communist Manifesto?? Communism's ULTIMATE aim might be a stateless society... but it calls directly for a tyrannical middle-man of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Why not skip the bullshit, grow a pair and go straight to Anarchism? If I remember correctly... during the October Revolution, the Bolsheviks betrayed Anarchists and fucked them over. NEVER AGAIN.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets
Or Anarcho-communism... rather than standard Communism.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
No. Communism is by its very definition stateless. Anarcho-communism is just a different means to achieve pure (i.e. stateless) communism.
GodOfTheInternets 3 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets
Yes... ULTIMATELY Communism is stateless... but by calling for an INCREASE in government power (via the dictatorship of the proletariat) you end up killing off any dreams of a stateless society by the corruption that naturally results from a further concentration of power. Anarcho-Communism at least cuts out the dictator middle-man and shoots STRAIGHT for a stateless society. I do not consider myself Anarcho-Communist, per se, but I appreciate it and agree with certain tenets
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
@IngeniousEpithet
The dictatorship of the proletariat is a workers' DEMOCRACY. So even that's not entirely true. And I'm more of a libertarian socialist.
GodOfTheInternets 3 months ago
@GodOfTheInternets
But is it a Democracy? If I remember correctly, recently reading the Communist Manifesto... Marx wanted to implement a workers' dictatorship over the bourgeoisie in order to rebalance the inequities of power/wealth between them. However, does this not result in here's the new boss same as the old boss?? Essentially it's not even about bosses but HIERARCHY. Communism has failed because it puts faith/power into hierarchical systems which are inherently oppressive.
IngeniousEpithet 3 months ago
isn't "balance" presicely a human made label too? would you say oil exist as a result of natures "search for balance"? I'd find that curious.
dederjot 5 months ago
Democracy in Iran opressed by the clerical regime???
People voted in favor of such a regime in 79 and won by a never before seen majority!!!
jorgemendozapereira 6 months ago
thanks I enjoyed that I too was born in 1949 in a communist country but I have deep hatred for chinese communism
Theknopf 6 months ago
Like most of Zizek's commentary except the part about catastrophes being responsible for oil creation. The consensus amongst geologists is that the slow and constant accretion of small organisms in shallow seas over millennia deposited in sediments and slowly cooked by earth's internal heat results in petroleum if held at a relatively constant pressure and temperature under anoxic conditions.
mapmanic 6 months ago
Madoff cooked his books so that the money generated by new suckers paying in, was falsely represented as profits from investments he had made. This is not a subtle difference - it is fraudulent bookkeeping. If this man does not understand the difference he should not be making pronouncements about capitalism.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit Have you heard of Enron, Tyco or MCI...more recently Bear Sterns, Citi, JP, Wells Fargo or countell other industry or banking giants that are too big to fail? The message is this; Corporatism and banking are completely decoupled from demand, so that the only way to show profit is to cook the books (Ponzi scheme) a more concise example is the stock market itself.; stock is a hot potato that is passed around until the inevitable collapse of the underlying company. its all a Ponzi scheme!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 It was the corruption of the model of capitalism that has caused these terrible crashes. If the accountants at Enron had done their job, there would have been no enron scandal - if the laws created to restrain such absurd leveraged gambling had been enforced, then the investment banks could not have done what they did - if the SEC or ratings agencies had done their job, none of it would have happened.
The guardians were asleep. They failed.to do their job. THAT is why it happened.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit Capitalism is inherently corrupt, but not initially. With capitalism needing continual (if not exponential) growth, there will (and did) come a time where cooking the books is necessary to keep up appearances. Liberal capitalism, as with any ideology, for its continuation, requires unquestioning faith in its perpetuity, despite its finitude. The guardians guard the system! Zizek explains it better in the video called, "The Monstrosity of Christ"
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Capitalism is the inevitable result of a sophisticated society that has progressed beyond hunting and gathering. As some people are forced to specialize in skills like shoe making they cannot also feed themselves by hunting. Therefore society divides into groups who must find a way to exchange value - you cannot always swap a pair of shoes for a steak. Money then gives rise to capitalism when certain projects require more money than one person owns. It's natural law - not a conspiracy
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit P.P..S - Or you could get a piece of land and try growing your own food. See how much you can produce without a tractor and farms tools and pesticides and all that.
You will certainly lose some weight and get fitter. Before you die.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit I understand the industrial division of labor and credit/money and why capitalism is the result. I'm just referring to the inherent flaws in it. Capitalism favors incumbents; those who either through war or slavery have gained and advantage. In modern times, its lobbying and the good 'ol boys club. Capitalism is a great theory, which is why its so alluring, can't maintain its integrity in practice. Capitalism is also the offspring of a perfect egoism which can always rationalize itself.
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 You speak as if there were some alternative ! How do you suggest that human beings should exchange goods and services? When they need to do so there will be money, and when there is money there will be banks, and when there are great projects there will be corporations - it is not the result of any theory. it is the result of the natural laws of supply and demand and the marketplace that determines what people are willing to pay for anything. What other method have you got in mind?
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit Cooperative barter!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 How is a guy who makes jet engines for a living going to barter with a butcher?
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit Asymmetrically!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Short answer to very complex question. I suppose you mean that he could give the butcher a small part of the value of one jet engine? Maybe he could write that down on a piece of paper and the butcher could use that piece of paper to exchange for other goods.... wait a minute, this sounds familiar
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit there is a way to account for all such exchanges, and yes it does sound familiar...the difference is that it would be free exchange! no interest or middlemen usurping wealth. credit would be based on actual production, not derivative speculation. value would be based on proportion to the aggregate production, not an irrational "market." growth and wealth accumulation would be based on derived efficiencies...oh, and all means of production would be mutually owned...that's not familiar!!!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 You are free to engage in such barter if you want to. There is no law against it.. You will have to find a way to determine value that is acceptable to both parties - good luck with that. The Marketplace is not an invention of human beings. Even animals trade to some extent. It is just what both sides of a transaction are prepared to accept. It is the most simple and reliable way to find the price of any item. In a basic market there are no 'middlemen'. Just buyers and sellers.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit P.S. - 'Mutually owned' sounds wonderful when used as an argument in this context. But I wonder how wonderful you would find it, if you had spent 20 years of your life building something, like say, a farm. To have a group of people from across town turn up with their 15 kids and demand their share of your mutually owned produce.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit We as humans have to stop comparing ourselves to animals to justify some ideology. why do we have to use " the most simple and reliable way" to derive value? why cant we devise an equitable sophisticated, but still mutually accepted and reliable method of deriving value. I proposed mutual ownership of the "means of production" not the actual produce. decouple price/value from capital costs =lower prices. You do realize we already pay the capital cost on everything,,,its called taxes!!!!!
arlin25 6 months ago
@T1Brit to continue... we pay the capital cost on everything in the form of taxes, how? all money is derived from debt, all debt is derived from treasury bills, notes and bonds...all guarantee on those bills, notes and bonds are based on the full faith and credit of the US, which is based on the power to tax! now, we pay the capital cost initially, and then we pay it again because the company's capital cost is embedded in the price of everything. you might say what about wages or excess profit?
arlin25 6 months ago
@T1Brit there are no excess profits....get this now....all transactions zero out. at least there supposed to. this is the purpose of the IRS, to account for all transactions to make sure the books balance! so when you see millionaires, what ur seeing is someone hoarding resources that should and need to be circulating in the system. its a zero-sum game. someone gets excess profits...you get poorer. tax cuts actually hurt the economy. wealth eventually gets taken back or the debt will grow!!!!!!!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Get this: I AGREE WITH YOU. it would be far better to have a value system based on something more concrete than pure market price. I agree that the principle of money allows for value to be uselessly hoarded into lumps. I find it absurd that one day the whole world is pronounced rich - and the next day the whole world is suddenly poor - when NOTHING has changed except some numbers in a Wall St computer.
But what method of value measurement do you propose? Please invent one.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit Value based on proportionality. the value of any one thing is based on its proportion to the aggregate production And the aggregate production is based on the aggregate demand. individual accounts are based on the value of their production. no scarcity, no value manipulation. most of what i'm suggesting is in theory already happening...I think the real devil is the ownership structure. I think at least the means of production should be mutually owned, that way purely ur work is ur reward
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 This comment thread is now totally out of sequence. I can't follow it. But your ideas sound reasonable enough. I think that ever since Marx people have proposed a zillion methods by which human economics might work. My point, such as it is, is that no matter what you decree, you will find that the old fashioned model will always resurface. If you suppress the market, you simply create a black market. \
If the lawmakers are poodles of industry, then you vote them out - or hang them.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit i totally agree, when you suppress human ingenuity to produce you only create a black market...I am not advocating ANY suppression of a man's ability or need to produce or consume what he wants (not even God does that!). to me it about the means of production; who owns it, money; who controls it and price/value; how is it derived. i think mutuality solves a lot of the flaws in an otherwise genius free-market system
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 I think all that you suggest has been done. The collective is stronger and more fair. The people share means of production. Bankers are reduced to public servants etc etc etc.
And then, after a few years - some of the people start to break the rules. They are re-educated. This does not solve the problem. The re-education grows harsher. There is popular discontent. It is crushed. The police begin to operate in secret. The torture chambers and the disappearances begin.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit oookay, i get the sarcasm. but i'm no communist! i believe in FREE markets, not manipulated ones where the few live off the many. but if you like it the way it is, that's ur choice, i happen to think there's a more equitable alternative. i understand why capitalism is so intoxicating...it panders to the most base and powerful sense of self; the ego. long term survivability will rely on mutualism. the heart, important as it is, cant function if not for the hand that puts food to the mouth
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 It absolutely is not intended to be ironic. The imposition of any system that is not the natural one to which people normally tend inevitably leads to authoritarian government which inevitably leads to all the tools of repression that we saw in the Soviet bloc, China, N Korea etc.
Your principles are perfectly sound - but I am not talking about principles. I am talking about what can be expected to function in the real world without the need for a police state to enforce it.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit so what ur telling me is human being are incapable of developing and participating in a mutualistic economic system (especially if its working)? ii disagree with that and i'm saddened by your pessimism, because i'm sure you're not alone in that thought. well i'll say this; either we evolve psychologically to a point where this type of economy i possible, or it'll be forced upon us by the economic catastrophe looming in capitalism. ur right, most times only catastrophe makes humans change
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Not at all. I am telling you that you can do whatever you want. That is the basic principle of free society. But some people will choose to become bankers, and some will choose to be money lenders.
Some will form corporations and so on. I am saying the western world as it is has developed according to the basic principle of freedom within the law. If the laws that already exist are actually applied you would not see the kind of disasters we have seen. Criminal behavior is the problem.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit What is law? Law is an attempt to regulate humans from inhuman tendencies. Or more esoterically, law is an attempt to make everything illegal then license what to some, what was once illegal. Case in point interest. it was once deemed immoral/illegal, but laws have been made to license that activity to some. Capitalism is legalized/licensed usury and theft. its basic tenet; private property is a form of theft because who has the right to say of land, this is mine? law licenses this theft
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Law varies from place to place. English common law grew naturally from the customs and social norms of the people themselves - in Europe it was mostly replaced by Napoleonic law, of which I know nothing. But I agree with you the principle of ownership of vast amounts of land is often a toxic leftover from feudal times, and maybe that will change - but when it comes to a house that you have built, it is fair enough to say that it belongs to you isn't it? Law changes. You can change it.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit the only thing a man can say is his is the labor he posited into building that house. the wood and other materials came from the earth, which is everyone's. the land on which it sits is everyone's. i submit that we have to rethink whats ownable and how to value what (labor) is owned. my suggestion is a land trust with all citizens as tenants-in-common. and the land only is leased/taxed. all material emanating therefrom is mutually owned, therefore only the labor to extract is sellable
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 What about the architect who designed it, the lumberjack who cut down the trees, the brickmaker, the ironmonger, the power company, the phone company, the gas, light.... the police who patrol the street and the fire engine waiting for your call.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit all laborers are paid for their work, its just that the materials, land nor interest are added to the cost because all those things are mutually owned...its kinda simple, but its complicated in the context of the staus quo
arlin25 6 months ago
@T1Brit i'm not advocating the destruction of occupations or endeavors, i'm advocating mutual benefit. I can be a banker (read accountant here) without charging interest on top of wages for service. you can be a corporation without charging capital costs on top of wages for production. money lenders couldn't exist because money is created by the people who use it, not by those who create it to be used (at interest). a shared benefit needs no "laws" because u can't manipulate value or hoard money
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 How are you going to stop somebody from offering to lend money at a rate of interest?
Make it illegal? That simply will not work. It is pointless to talk about what ought to be. Unless you base your laws upon what people actually DO then you are creating a nightmare.
If everybody is doing it, you better make it legal, as they say. ( within reason of course )
Take American drug laws for example. Look what happens when you try to enforce behavior.
Nightmare.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit no, i'm not going to try to stop anybody from doing anything. i'm saying like-minded people who see the value in the system I've articulated can join and create a closed-loop economy that functions mutualistically. anyone within that system is barred from usury or hoarding by the very nature of the system without laws or police imperative. in fact, the system works best if there is a competing system like pure capitalism, because to pay off the initial debt, external sales are necessary!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Go for it. I'll do the website - for payment I want a horse.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit cool, ur hired! but since i don't own a horse, it'll have to be a three-way transaction...i'll offer my consulting services to a guy who has a horse, then i'll give you that horse in exchange for your webmaster services
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 On top of that I think rather than explaining your concept verbally, which exposes you to the danger of being taken for a Leninist spy, I would suggest your site contains an animated graphic that shows how value flows through the system you describe. Flash is out if you want it to run on an i-pad so it will have to be HTML 5.
What kind of consulting? I had rather decided on a horse.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit financial consulting, what I do for a living. I agree with ur assessment, verbally it sounds Leninist, but visually representing the value flow would illuminate thew concept. That is exactly what I have in mind. a UML model structure with underlying XML schemas could be rendered via HTML 5, SVG or any XML-based graphics engine. I'm in the process of getting the pre-development funding to procure the technical assistance to map the transactional models for a wide range of use-cases in UML
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 UML. I had to look it up. Well one way or another you could certainly put a clear descriptive graphic based explanation of what you are saying. I also do graphics and program, but mainly 3D virtual stuff. PHP and javascript and mySQL for the web end - but I also do a lot of dev work in second life using LSL.
Actually come to think of it you could mock up an entire community in SL couldn't you. Run a sim using your system with real people. See if it works.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit UML works best ideographically for the semi-tech savvy. A SIM however, would be absolutely genius to demonstrate the system concept to the general public. working behind the SIM could be the same UML/XML data using some query format for Extraction Translation and Loading from specified databases, to run the SIM. I do prefer pure JAVA over javascript. check out canoo.com
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Well I can make that happen in SL if you wanted. Mind you I am kind of up to my ass as it is. But as far as interfacing with an external DB to activate various activities inworld, that is no trouble. I don't quite understand exactly what it is you have so can't visualize what it might look like in the virtual environment. But there are people and transactions for sure. It is real money too of course.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit how much "real" money?
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 New day here. I am GMT+1 timezone. What I mean by real money is the inworld currency. 1 US dollar buys approx. 250 Linden dollars in SL. So your test subjects could be using real money or real value to exchange goods and services. It might add a certain rigor to the decision making process they use. If a genuine simulation of a RL ( real life ) community is what you wanted to achieve. The cost of running a fill sized SL sim is 295 US dollars per month. But...
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit ... it would not even be necessary to set aside a special zone inworld to demonstrate the concept. You would merely need to set up a set of rules that players would have to conform to if they wanted to participate. Just like a RL version, there would be the normal economy outside which the players would have access to if they chose, but within your community all transactions would be governed by your principles. All this would be tracked by the DB of course. A simple device worn by the..
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit ..participants would record all sim transactions. Like a virtual cell phone / credit card. This also I can do. In fact I have something very similar already up and running for the purpose of selling virtual real estate.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit o.k., i get it. if you have at least $ 250 US worth of transactions a month the site would pay for itself and be proof of concept. sounds interesting and doable...we should talk more about this idea...do you have gmail? if not i can send you an invite
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Yeah I sent it to you - check your inbox
T1Brit 6 months ago
@arlin25 Listen dude - I feel like I am beating you up. I don;t want to do that. I agree with your principles. I agree a better system could exist. In some places it DOES exist. For example, in Japan, the CEO never makes more than about 10 times what the shop floor worker does. In the US it is 100 times more. The human race is still evolving and there is far to go. I hope that AI will provide a solution to many of these problems because it will be the first intelligent non human objective view
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit i feel no beating. i think u hit the nail on the head though; AI can be part of the solution. We've termed it "production planning" whereas the aggregate demand is measured (quantitatively) and the social intercourse (interfaces) are measured (qualitatively) and the result is a production plan that is in equilibrium. underlying the production plan is mutual ownership of the means of production which decreases pro rata, the price of goods. this precludes the necessity for continual growth
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Yes I am certain that true AI is much closer than we realize and will be applicable to exactly this kind of problem. Not just that very advanced sentient computers will be able to analyze questions of demand and supply as you say, but also because it will soon become apparent to the general public that they are often the best judge in any situation that is complicated by human factors. Rather like the way nobody argues with a calculator or a video camera.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit ... and IBMs Watson has already created some excellent PR for them. Even though it is not true AI, it has made it clear to everybody that a computer can do better than a human even in a situation like general knowledge. When the real thing arrives and is tested on every problem they can throw at it, it will be common knowledge that they are very good. If the AI says you are getting too much salary, you will have a very tough sell to defend it.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit btw, popular discontentment, secret police and torture chambers (Guantanamo bay) already happens in the US...its just not on the tourism brochure!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 Five minutes research about what life is actually like in a police state would quickly disabuse you of such foolish ideas.
You are not going to be woken up by a boot through your door at 4 AM unless you are either a drug dealer or a known terrorist. You are not going to be tortured or murdered in secret. Guantanamo bay exists because no other country in the world wants to take them, and they immediately return to terror when released.
Please provide evidence of a US police torture cell
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit btw, small farmers are going to mutual ownership...its called CSA's Community-supported Agriculture.. its a way to guarantee a market for their product...production meeting demand at the crossroad of shared ownership...no excess, no scarcity no manipulation...shared ownership precludes manipulation, therefore no need for laws. the system is its own regulator
arlin25 6 months ago
@T1Brit NO MIDDLEMEN? of course there's middle men...their called brokers and bankers! the gum up the flow of exchange with interest and transaction fees. how poor we are when we have to pay taxes interest and fees just to live. in a closed system (central banking), he who charges interest on money will eventually own everything
arlin25 6 months ago
@T1Brit I want to touch on the part about "and when there are great projects there will be corporations" that's true, but what if these corporations were mutual companies, where the patrons were part owner. where any excess accrues to the whole, not the corporate money hoarder. Do you know how corporations re-inject the excess $ they've hoarded back into the economy? they LOAN it back to you! The capital you payed to allow them to get, they turn around and loan it back to you WITH INTEREST!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 But does not the profit from a corporation get paid to the shareholders as dividends? Does that not include all the people who have put their life savings into a 401K ? I am not up to speed on the US system. And I know that investors have been screwed by the crash. But again I say that it was caused by the total failure of those responsible to enforce the laws already in existence. Do you know the full story about how the gang of bankers got the law changed and prevented regulation
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit the net worth of the shareholders of all the companies in the world accrues to the top 2-3%. law enforcement is always a day late and a dollar short. the damage will always already be done. you ever watched an action movie and the cops only show at the end to clean up the hero's mess? that's how law works...its a post facto remuneration/indemnification that only pretends to be prevention. between 2008 and 2010 investors lost 40-60% of their retirement funds. there is no bailout for that!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 None of that would have happened if the US Government had not THROWN OUT the laws created after the great depression to prevent such disasters - there would have been no 40:1 leveraged banks , no unregulated CDOs and CDSs - or mortgage sharks to feed them .The people who tried to DO THEIR JOB - Like Brooksley Born at the CTFC were bullied into silence and fired.
America saw the greatest prosperity ever in the history of mankind - it was fucked by CRIMINALS who broke the fucking rules !
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit the system of free-market capitalism is the reason the laws change! if you get money and power, you have influence, directly or indirectly. power gets what power wants. banksters wanted fewer regulations, thats what they got...simple supply and demand. if there was mutual ownership, you couldn't cheat...if the only value or wealth you could create was what you urself (not employees/slaves) could create, you couldn't cheat! if we weren't brainwashed by capitalism, we wouldn't cheat!
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 P.S. There is nothing to stop you from hitching a ride to Canada and making a living by hunting moose and building log cabins. Why don't you give it a try? See how you like it.
T1Brit 6 months ago
@T1Brit You sound like one of those sound-bite neocons. If your precious capitalism (as it is) continues to rule the day, we'll all be forced to hunt for moose in Canada. Btw, it won't be called Canada anymore, it'll all be the North American Union. People, money and material all moving flawlessly across former international boarders, efficiently...higher profits, lower wages...the perfect Capitalist storm! This is a good system IF your part of the upper 1%... ..if your not.....not so much
arlin25 6 months ago
@arlin25 I am only sreaking in soundbytes because that is all you tube will allow. But the basic facts are not complex - nobody decided that the world of commerce should be the way it is - it evolved from the demands of the human beings that were using it. Of course there will always be some people smarter than others - of course having a head start is always an advantage. But great fortunes are lost also. There is no law that says rich people must stay rich. What better system do you know?
T1Brit 6 months ago
@arlin25 P.S. It is pretty rich for you to say that 'we will all be living in canada... ' etc.
Are you living in a wooden shack? Do you eat basic grains and rabbit every single day? Do you work in the fields from dawn till dusk? Or do you sit in front of a modern computer, in a heated home, with a fridge full of food, and plenty of clothes, and clean hot and cold running water, and a car parked outside, etc etc etc.
Yeah - capitalism has been so mean to you hasn't it.
T1Brit 6 months ago