Added: 3 years ago
From: Arondeus
Views: 43,407
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (2,238)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I think it is misleading to say capitalism is BASED on greed and corruption. these are the effects of applied capitalism, but capitalism in itself is based on the idea of property rights

  • @Dolloozze The "applied capitalism" you are talking about is, in fact, crony capitalism, which means corruption, political clients and poverty; basically, the economic and political crises that happen in most Western countries derive from this.

    True capitalism, the economic doctrine of the liberal political philosophy, is based on private property in a state that does not get involved in the economy - the minarchist state.

  • @black7rock So you are saying that true capitalism only is in effect when the ideas of cronyism and camaraderie in business are abolished? I think I see where you are coming from, and i do agree. However, I cannot see how these qualities can ever be dealt with (and especially not in a free market) as they are the product of our intrinsic human nature. We are social beings gravitating towards taking care of those closest to us.

  • @black7rock But this is not the only reason i lack faith in the capitalistic economic structure. I think that the notion of property rights needs to be abolished all together. I truly think it is wrong for landowners to cut down huge areas of forests containing life and the CO2-consuming/O2-producing properties that we are dependent on as humans, just because they have a right to do with their property as they please. Capitalism never adresses this problem.

  • @black7rock In fact. As long as it is profitable (from a monetary viewpoint) this sort of behaviour is encouraged.

  • @Dolloozze everything is based on the idea of eating and multiplying 

  • Comment removed

  • This is crap. People do benefit from working together, however, if I work harder than the guy next to me, and I don't get rewarded for, why would I? Or if don't work at all, then why would I bother working to begin with. The lazy won't work because they will benefit from not working and the those who want to work won't because they won't receive anything for their hard work.

  • @djnewman7 There are three things wrong with your statement. First: This is NOT crap, this is a digital data stored in form of a video carrying a message. Second: You do not get rewarded in a capitalist society at all, you benefit the CEO. Third: Lazy people never benefit from not working, living on US' welfare is as bad as living in a shelter. Before you publicly criticize an idea, learn the facts dear Comrade.

  • @Arondeus I can agrea to that but i dont think that to show Lenin and to play russian music is a good idea...i mean Russia did not use Marx ideas in a smart way...Meybe you look a movie called " Zeitgeist moving forward "i think this idea that is presented in this move can work...it is a scientific way to create a better society and it is better then any ideology...ALL ISiMS dont work but sceince works....look the movie up " Zeitgeist moving forward "

  • government control over industry is just as bad as capitalism. The answer is co-operatives

  • @dancthegr Government control over industry is NOT socialism. In socialism, the Workers control the industry. In a true socialist society the manager of the company has the same influence as each individual worker.

    In a practical socialist society, the profit of the sales is used to benefit the general public rather than benefit the owners of the company. If you say Socialism has never worked, look at Britain, Germany, and Sweden as prime examples of socialist societies.

  • @SocialistSpeaker I didn't say socialism is bad; I am a socialist

  • Socialism is no better than capitalism as democracy is no better than oligarchy, and vice versa - every philosophy is so perfectible and corruptible. That's why we see governments- socialist, democratic, etc- shepherd the citizenry to their doom every day. What needs to be scrutinized are the people running the system: Are they moral and responsible leaders? Will they ensure the welfare of the people above everything else? When we find a great leader only then we find the perfect system.

  • @shruggedatlas Democracy is a good starting point though. If certain rights like free speech is guaranteed; then criticism of the rich and criticism of the poor is allowed; like on Youtube for example.

  • All of the Lenin and Stalin images are a bit offensive. Why not replace them with real socialists?

  • @TheForwardGaze because thats socialism. open your eyes you blame-america-first hippie; then once youve stoped relying on everyone ells that works for their money in the world to suport you, gotten a job, and with that job realized "wow, i dont want all this money (that i achieved because of capitalism) i just made throught my blood swet and hard work taken away from me " and you see that you shoul work for you self and live through your own hands: then you can give your imputs on the internet.

  • Socialism is the past. What you call socialism I call statism. There is nothing social about your caveman/barbarian ideology. It is the ideology of cannibals; might makes right; sacrifice the minority to sate the appetite of the majority. It is the hidden gun to the market's invisible hand. Why create something for yourself when you can just as easily take it by force from someone else? Socialism is poisonous and evil, and the most despicable of all ideologies.

  • @obtree I live in Norway and totally hate the socialism, its awful. If u do great with economics u get highly taxes and result is that u almost got nothing for hard work. So the reason why we have rich people here in Norway is because some have their money on Swiss/American accounts or are politicians

  • @obtree Socialism is collective-decision making -- this is true. I think you unfairly attribute certain actions to socialism however, in that any nation that puts a certain group of people because of supranatural conditions. That is to say, in socialism religion, class, ethnicity, race, should be introduced. in decision making or carry more weight. Ideas should be discussed openly, compassionately and sincerely to decide the best direction.

  • @SocialDissimulation I'm sorry if you think I've been unfair, but I think you are a bit naive. Organizations can't be compassionate, least of all the state. Only individuals can be. The state is a violent, coercive entity. Tax is slavery.

  • @obtree A group can very well be compassionate, that their agendas do not match your own does not mean that they are, in some fashion, apathetic to the needs and wants of other people. The Swiss State is as docile and caring as can be, so is the Finnish State. Both of which care very well for their people. Man was not meant to be an individual, and if he was you would live in your own cabin, hunt your own game, grow your own crops and live amongst the animals. Society is collective.

  • @SocialDissimulation Individuality isn't about being solitary. It's about being free to make decisions without coercion. It's about individuals freely associating with each other of their own volition. People don't need to be forced to work together, they will do that on their own.

  • @obtree I'm sorry but I have to respectfully disagree. If you partake in things that are accrued by the community around you, you have a duty to participate in a time of need. Bottom line, it may be true that civility has superceded brutal tactics but trust me -- they return quickly given enough time. Also, you ignored the Finnish State comment, about it being non-violent. I would like you to concede that government = ubiquitous violence.

  • @SocialDissimulation All states are violent. What would happen if a Finn stopped paying his taxes? Ultimately he would be put in a cage to be raped, and if he resists persistently he will be killed. Not unlike feudal times, you owe half of your production to the lord, and if you don't pay you are imprisoned or killed.

  • @obtree Have you ever even seen a Finnish prison? Not only does your ignorance become phantasmagorically astounding, your inability to leave point scoring behind is breathtaking. If you live within a society, reaping the collective benefits (like a police force), you ought to repay them, correct? You cannot expect to benefit from the whole and give nothing, the mechanics of society (even physics) simply don't work that way.

  • @SocialDissimulation There is a difference between purchasing a service willingly, and having it extorted from you through taxes and rent seeking. Your local mob boss offers a similar protection service, but when he collects payment you don't hear socialists talking about social contracts, etc.

    I don't care what the Finnish prison system looks like on the surface. The bottom line is a gun.

  • @obtree Yes, and I think it's only necessary to ask, while you live in the comforts of the society that has been built by the blood, sweat and tears of those around you -- that you mutually contribute. Again, if you don't wish to take in medicare, medicaid, pay taxes or anything of that sort you are free to live in the wild. Just don't expect to get something from nothing.

  • @SocialDissimulation Ah, the 'love it or leave it' fallacy. First of all, being an advocate is about changing the world you live in. I wouldn't bother preaching my gospel if I was going run off into the wild. Second, states cover the entire globe. There is nowhere I can go to live in a stateless society. Yet. Third, my ideal world can include stateless socialism. Your ideal socialist world cannot include statelessness. Wouldn't you rather a world where we can both get what we want?

  • @obtree Duty is very important to me, and statelessness is very caustic -- just look toward the Wild West. That a Sherrif is part of 'the establishment' means little when there is nothing to regulate his activity aside from pitchforks and nooses. A society -must- have a strong backbone or it is doomed to fail. Somalia is, in essence, stateless right now and I very much doubt you would like to live there at any time. The evolution of nations shows that government is a necessity.

  • @SocialDissimulation No I wouldn't like to live in Somalia, but Somalia is not a good example of a stateless society. The Somalians put all of their power into the state and then the state collapsed. Obviously it is chaotic. But the market can provide every service that the government does, so if power was placed in the hands of the market (read: individuals), there wouldn't be chaos without the state. The 'wild' west had a much lower crime and murder rate than the eastern, Union states.

  • @SocialDissimulation But the point I was making about the inclusivity of statelessness is that if you want to have a bunch of people with guns telling you how to lead your life, you can still have that. Their power, however, will be limited by your consent, and will not extend to people like me who do not consent to being ruled.

  • @obtree There are many things the market will never advocate because it has no benefit from doing so. The invisible hand of the market won't protect the nation, provide the upkeep from schools nor provide shelter to the homeless. That a few do, does not mean the rest won't. More and more people, instead of investing in their surrounding community try to keep as much of their money as they can be other than legal activities. The market is dangerously immoral.

  • @SocialDissimulation Again, organizations can't be moral. Your house is not a moral entity, neither is your car. You are a moral entity. The market is simply a way of organizing people, so that they can produce the types of things that other people need. If people want a military, schools, and homeless shelters, and I believe they do, somebody will provide it. Also, Americans donate $3 trillion/year to charity. You can expect that number to increase when 40% of their wealth is no longer stolen.

  • @obtree The people with the most money shelter a lot of their taxes in other locations, and where do you think that money goes? To the pockets of politicians, the ones that they have already paid? As for an organization not being immoral, does this mean that you do not believe corporations to be people? Does this mean that the Nazis weren't an evil organization, just a bunch of evil people in that organization? I don't believe corporations are people, but I believe in agendas by multiple people.

  • =/=* ubiquitous violence.

  • socialism is happening today. With occupy wall street and protesting all over the world we may finally have true freedom through socialism. marxism is now.

  • Or you could say that capitalism is based on the idea that you only get rewarded if you produce to satisfy the needs of others, whereas socialism is based on the idea that we can rely on others to provide that "reward" without necessarily satisfying others' needs.

  • The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions. Religion is meant to create illusory fantasies for the poor. Economic realities prevent them from finding true happiness in this life, so religion tells them this is OK because they will find true happiness in the next life.

  • @draksenzakura by Karl Marx

  • Religion is an illusion that provides reasons and excuses to keep society functioning just as it is. Much as capitalism takes our productive labor and alienates us from its value, religion takes our highest ideals and aspirations and alienates us from them, projecting them onto an alien and unknowable being called a god.

  • Planet Earth has enough resources to satisfy everyone's need but not everyone's greed. All form of organization who reject knowledge or any kind of logical reasoning have dangerous goals. They just want you to consume in this system and to spend your time in the illusion (TV, games, religion, party...). Everything that can make you stay asleep of your condition so you won't act against the system.

  • whoever created this video is a god socialism is for the people and there is no denying it  just like you said yes there are some people that got wealthy by them selves without any slaves doing there work for them like bill gates for example he made his money fairly and he wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth but even with socialism people can still do that so i don't know what the argument is there because all socialism does is stop evil right wing shits from using slavery.

  • Comment removed

  • you showed the pope, and say he sought to use fear and intimidation to get power? i am not Catholic, but i am a Christan, and a society were God is not allowed is not freedom, its enslavement

  • @94boxen Yeah you are right, a society without any indoctrination by religion is not freedom. True freedom has nothing to do with being oppressed mentally by religion or physically by so called government, you call that freedom? SO freedom for you is to follow a set of rules giving by religion, this religion who tells us how to live and what is going to happen after death? Wow you have a strange definition of freedom... The only enslavement is those who impose their idea's as the absolute truth.

  • @draksenzakura you dont have to belive in a religion, but my Father has never done anything to hurt me, he has allways guided, and comfoted me, and allways protected me in every situation. And just because some priest or other high rank Church official says i have to do some thing dosent meen I will go to hell, or make it law between God and me

  • Greed will always be present in society. So you might as well use a system that respects the individual liberties of the people. Socialism needs the expansion of the state. "Government that is big enough to supply you with everything is big enough to take it away. History shows that the bigger government gets, liberty contracts." Thomas Jefferson. The USSR was a true socialist state and that's y it failed. European nations are pseudo-socialist nations and that is y they are just slowly eroding.

  • "Socialism is the future of society, and is inevitable" Soviet Union collapsed 1991. No rights or individuality in China, North Korea collapsing, European riots in every major city, Greece and Ireland have fallen. Cuba laid off 500,000 government workers, possible trade with US. Vietnam and Laos embracing free market principles and on the verge of abandoning the communist party. Everyone is an equal asshole loser in socialism. And government controls all wealth. Greed IS socialism.

  • @Sumoto999 did you watch his first video?? he discusses how china, cuba, and the soviet union were not/are not true countries of socialism and how they do not work because the leaders elected are selected through the elite parties mainly. and the european riots occur because capitalism put people's jobs in danger as well as welfare, such as in france sarkozy raising the retirement age to 62. greed is capitalism. liberty and government of the people by the people and for the people is socialism.

  • Comment removed

  • @phenomenalclassic93 The Soviet Union, China, Cuba and North-Korea are still examples of how an attempt at socialism looks like. Of course socialism works in theory, every political movement works in theory, but in practice people áre greedy and selfish, you can't establish a community of more than ±100 people that will work like the socialist system. Like SUMOTO999 says, you could better accept greed as a part of humanity, and try to use this greed to create wealth and welfare.

  • @026SH humanity's greed is its basic neccessities, which government is able to distribute to its citizens rather than the individual him/herself, such as healthcare, education etc. germany, france, switzerland take socialist ideas and ensures that each of its citizens receive the same neccessary benefits, not certain groups, which is north korea's, china's and cuba's problem. how are those socialist countries when the people have almost little or no say in what happens in government?

  • @phenomenalclassic93 The economies in Germany, France and Switzerland are way too unregulated to be called socialist. All those countries are run by christian conservatives, not by social democrats or socialists. Healthcare isn't distributed, that's a common misunderstanding, people are forced to have a health insurance, so they never have to pay at the hospital. Education isn't provided as well, universities get a certain amount of money from the state, so it's cheaper than normal.

  • Western European countries have a pretty extended welfare system, but there are still way too many oppurtunities for free enterprise to be called socialist. Socialism also means a major part of the corporations should be under the control of the state, or the law should allow them. In these countries you're referring to, the government doesn't have these priveleges (thank God).

  • And by the way the government isn't able to "distribute things to its citizens", the government is just able to redistribute wealth, by taxing labour and consumption.

  • @026SH taxing consumption for benefits like public healthcare options, free education? yeah, socialism works.

  • @phenomenalclassic93 Every political movement works when you explain it in two sentences. The basic problem with socialism is this (as Friedman once said): One gets paid not to work, and one has to pay if he or she wants to work, it's a basic formula for unnecessary laziness and unemployment. The problem with leveling incomes is that hard work will not pay off anymore, it induces laziness and enemployment. Big companies and talented people get out of the country because of the high tax pressure

  • If you make a country a paradise for the lazy man, and a labour camp for the educated, no wonder your economy collapses.

  • @026SH that's capitalism for you. 

  • Capitalism isn't based on greed and corruption. It is based on earning what you work hard for. If kept in balance, it's a system that rewards technological advancement and sustainability. Greed and corruption are the cons in which people use to exploit this idea. Ironically enough, socialism suffers from the same cons that it aims to prevent (greed, laziness, and corruption). In theory, socialism is a great system. In reality, as history has shown it does not work

  • @ScatterMind1 No history shows people are selfish prcks

  • @imperialcommisar Actually, history showed lots of selfish pricks. A lot of history is based off of what selfish pricks have accomplished. Well...depending on how you look at things, many of them do both good and bad. Just depends on what part you wanna dive into detail with. Anyways, it's in human nature to look out for oneself, some are better at keeping selfishness at bay then others.

  • @ScatterMind1 No Selfishness is primiative...surely humanity would have evolved beyond this...sadly, no

  • Comment removed

  • I find it hilarious that socialists bash capitalism and corporations, yet they use the evil corporate produced software (i.e youtube) to facilitate their messages.

  • @ScatterMind1 That's the one of the contradictions that exists within the capitalist system, for one, youtube was made just for fun, yet people like you have access to our message. Us socialists use the contradictions of this system to spread our message...

  • Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

  • The Communist have a history of murdering their opponents! The consensus is that the Communist would have to murder 60 million American in order for them to control the US!! Communist Socialist have murdered over 250 million people since 1900!!  Come in my neighborhood you sob and I'll kill your commie ass, as a matter of fact the last commie I confronted I put a magazine up his ass and sent him home to that ass wipe ho chi minh..1968/69

  • How long will it take people to realise that there NEVER was a TRUE socialist country, the soviet union became corrupted like all dictatorships, the bad effects of communism or socialism are only because the governments are DICTATORSHIPS, NOT DEMOCRACIES, if the conservative minded people would realise that the world never actually completed the dream then maybe they will be human enough to look to future to have a better future.

  • Capitalism is too a group ideology, in the sense that it describes a way to solve problem by cooperation between people. The difference is that capitalism not only declares but specifies a way to do that: by assigning material resources to persons and have them cooperate by voluntary exchange.

  • Wake up and learn what Socialists really brought us

    youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7R­s&feature=related

  • I thumbs downed the first video but this one gets a thumbs up. and the music is sweet

  • so under this system, Boris the town fuck-up and alcoholic should be rewarded equally as Yuri the doctor who studied for 10 years and slaved for years of his life. Look pure capitalism inevitably leads to a small wealthy minorty, but socialism is worse. Its absolutely idealistic drivel that is unimplementable in a non totalitarian state.

  • @macdaddy912 If Boris is doing a job, then y not? Theyre both improving the society

  • @wowisuckatmath because the doctor is providing a much greater service to society then the bum is and should be justly rewarded for it, otherwise the incentive for progress disappears

  • @macdaddy912 Every job benefits the society somehow.

  • @wowisuckatmath but not equally and thats the flaw in this system. Its imperfect and while capitalism may not be flawless, I'll stick to it for the time being as its the best currently out there. How do you prevent corruption in a communist/socialist setting? you cant and it becomes totalitarian in little time which is the worst thing that can happen to a state.

  • @macdaddy912 In a true communist state, there basically is no state. Everyone gets a say. Which im pretty sure the founding fathers wanted..not people on wallstreet controling what happens.

  • @wowisuckatmath idealistic drivel. that sounds good on paper but in real life it is not compatible with human nature. people do not like to be equal, they like to be dominant and powerful. if its not people on wall street it will be a politburo which wont change until a member dies or gets ousted for "treason".

  • @macdaddy912 I dont believe its human nature, if your american then you know of the American Dream. We've been taught as kids to take what we want etc etc. In ancient times, villages worked together easily. there can be democratic elections in a communist state you know.

  • @wowisuckatmath I'm not american fyi. No we were not, I was taught as a child that everything has a value and if you want something, then you have to earn it through hard work and persistence. 'worked together easily' are you joking!? you mean the same ancient times where the greeks sacked troy for the sake of a woman or perhaps the egyptians enslaving the hebrews? Name to me one such example of true democratic elections in a communist state. We are programmed for self preservation.

  • @macdaddy912 Im pretty sure troy was just a story by Homer i believe. There have only been dictatorships where people claim theyre communist. You can have any type of government and still be communist because socialism/communism is an economic theory.

  • @wowisuckatmath 'troy was just a story by Homer i believe', wow, lets just leave this. everything you have just said, supports my arguement, ie that communsim will nearly inevitably be used as a political vehicle to power by dictators. It is a failed economic therory hence the reason why capitalism domintes the markets. But lets just leave this now. Maybe you should move to china, north korea and share with your fellow comarades.

  • can you or anyone tell me about one "socialist" country that have had a hight standard of living, or isnt that important. I feel sorry for people like you that creates their own reality. if your so dumb that you beleve castro, the soviet union and all the socialist states have been free and good places to live, its amazing that you event have the brain capasity to upload a video on youtube! It seems like you have internet, use it, read facts about socialism instead of ignorant propaganda!!!

  • Achievement unlocked: be the most ignorant person on youtube!

  • no one is equal one is better than someone else in something maybe its sports or in studying in school. socialism is a peice of shit because of its leaders that promise and neveer give

  • ya socialism works great look at cuba russia china laos venezuala argentina

  • SOCIALIST NORWAY IS NUMBER ONE IN QUALITY OF LIFE !

  • A SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF IRELAND? NOW, IS THAT THE SOUTH OR IS IT ALL-IRELAND? I ASK BECAUSE HALF THE ELECTORATE IN THE SOUTH DON'T SEEM TO KNOW, OR CARE, MUCH, IF ANYTHING, ABOUT THE NORTH. IT'S A FOREIGN COUNTRY TO THEM. THEY THINK DUBLIN IS IRELAND, THE FUCKING WANKERS.

  • "Cooperative work toward real solutions"... Who, exactly, decides what the solution is? What if I don't like the solution? Can I change it or is the will of the collective forced upon me? How is that freedom?

  • MINDLESS ZOMBIES IS SOCIALISM!!

  • Stupid propaganda videos. Socialism is fail. Capitalism is always win.

    I like how this guy says people live brainwashed in a capitalist system. Nice comedy , dude!

  • @crocve they do

  • @blazingwarrior0 You no funny!

  • capitalism has its flaws, but its still the best way for the poor to be able to lift themselves out of there poverty.

    in socialism who will decide how things will be run fairly. and how do we know that they will do there jobs fairly, unless you intend on hiring saints. which do not exist on this earth.

  • "short term, and vulgar goal of profit"

    - why is it you think wealth is intrinsically bad?

    i find it to be a fantastic motivational tool in that makes me work harder.

  • nice.

  • This isn't even an argument for socialism. It's just you saying it's somehow inevitable without any explanation of even why you think that.

  • just want to jot in some thoughts of mine, has it ever occurred to anyone that socialism is an ideology that defies human nature of pursuing his or her own self interest before sharing thoughts for another human counterpart?

  • I admire and respect the prospect of socialism. But I never think it will work, or be the future of humanity. There will always be selfish, greedy people in the world, willing to take advantage and gain power over others.

  • marxism is a perfect system no one can deny it the only flaw in communism and socialism is when people get greedy and want more power that's why a council that is monitored would be a better way of leading the main super powers to a better future for all

  • hey, i really like your videos. It is about time that the public had a better view of what Socialism is rather than what people controlling our information would like us to think. Unfortunatly for most americans critical thinking on this subject has proved too taxing, as it involves difficult tasks like turning off the TV and opening up a textbook.

  • to the loader

    it think you need to study human psycology

  • some of the pictures make it funny. but long live socialism! just like the early jerusalem church.

  • The pursuit of excellence can come from the love of what you do or a sense of social responsibility. Most of what I do in my life that I am passionate about, I do not get paid for. And yet it is this work that I am most devoted to and feel the most satisfaction from. It is sad for those of you who cannot imagine this. But many people can and do work to excel without financial compensation

  • I have seen that a person a person cant create his own business on a socialist country and in a capitalist country there isnt problems on creating your own business. Socialism gives the same money to a person that works 3 hours and a person that works 13 hours

    while in captilism a person gains more money if he works 8 hours than a person that works 2 hours

    And i sadly live on a socialist country

  • without**

    

  • Answer this: Name one time in history that socialism worked for a nation? Which ones are surviving today? Cuba and North Korea. Good luck trying to convince Americans buddy.

  • In socialism... everyone is equal (except the 'rulers'). Equality = everyone is a peasant. Leadership class compete for votes by promising increases in lifestyle (for all... because no one should have or 'deserves' more than anyone else.)

    Socialism denies the basic principle that people want more stuff and want a better life. I would say it "ignores" this principle... but after reading the first point I made, "denies" is a better description.

  • @ObjectiveArts There are many things that are inevitable about socialism... the most important is its destiny for failure.

  • Fools. Trade will not occur unless both parties benefit. Even when the rich gain money it is to the benefit of society. They put their money in a bank. The bank loans it out to people who then use that money to purchase property or build factories, which creates jobs for the poor. You see you don't need government to spread the wealth, the wealth spreads itself, unless the rich are stupid enough to hide or burn their money.

  • /watch?v=yJ8dtw02PHM

  • The World Socialist Website, featuring news and analysis six days a week, is the only publication fighting to build an international movement of working people against cuts, attacks on democratic rights and war. In 2008, trillions of dollars of public funds were given to the speculators who caused the economic crisis. Now that money is being paid back through cuts to education, healthcare and every area of social spending. Capitalism has failed, we need to build a new socialist movement!

  • The problem is, who measures equality? What I hate about socialists and communists is that they make the wealthy and big businesses look evil, and yet believe that they themselves are altruistic. Every person has greed in their heart. If they didn't, then the workers wouldn't demand more money from their bosses. Socialism never works because people are so stupide since they don't factor in human nature. I'm not defending the corporation. I'm saying all people have a selfish nature.

  • @jpzxcvbnm "You are selfish and I am not. Throw your money into the big pot so that I may collect a good deal of it myself..."

  • You need to do more research on Capitalism. All you're doing is spewing out your MSNBC definition of Capitalism, along with your woes from the recession. You're argument is weak, misinformed, and does nothing to educate your viewers.

  • Thank you very much Arondeus !

  • Most people only excel at what they do because they are forced to. That's what the capitalist system does, being a system where everyone and every firm has to look out for itself.

    In a socialist system, no one will be forced to excel. You can just relax and expect to be compensated like everyone else. Human progress will stop... You will see economic and technological stagnation like it has never been seen before...

  • How are you going to make sure everyone is sharing everything equally? How do you make sure those who are tasked with making sure everything is shared equally don't abuse their power?

    If everyone is rewarded equally for everything they do, what's the motivation to excel? Are you just going to trust everyone to work for altruistic reasons like "for the common good"? It certainly doesn't square with my experiences with humanity...

  • @sirmortrainey

    Please read some books on the subject. Marxism has nothing to do with "rewarding equally." You've been lied to.

  • @Arondeus

    Marxism is about creating a classless society I'm pretty certain? At least that is the ideal? Classless equals equal access to all society, people being rewarded based on their needs (approaching absolute equality) and trying to get rid of the profit incentive under a collective economy. Was it just the wording "rewarding equally" that you didn't like? The reward is supposed to be satisfaction for every worker in having provided a service to the society in itself?

  • @sirmortrainey

    You're trying to think of basketball in hockey terms, and that's where you miss the point. If there are no classes, if society is egalitarian-then no one can "reward" another for his/her work. The workers reward themselves by working hard and accomplishing their goals. It's ironic - capitalists claim to be for "freedom" but they sound like ... contented slaves who yearn for rewards from their masters like pathetic puppies.

    I want to stand with my fellow Human beings as equals.

  • @Arondeus

    Well a reward in my definition is just what you get compensated materially at the end of the day but for you it seems to require that someone superior gives it to someone inferior. Let me rephrase the second part then...

  • @Arondeus

    If everyone is guaranteed equal access to everything they need in life, then what's the motivation to work hard and excel? I could work much more or much less than the person next to me and I'd still be guaranteed what I need under socialism just cause I'm a human. I'd rather spend all of my time partying then and why wouldn't others?

    That's why I think productivity in socialism would go down and why extreme egatarianism would never be feasible...

  • @Arondeus Well, good for you, that you want to stand as equals. But most people really don't want to be equal. Capitalism exists because people want a shot at success, at excelling. People want to be better than the rest.

    And you're suggesting you don't mean equal rewarding? Then you're also suggesting differences in wealth will exist. And with differences in wealth come differences in power.

  • @Arondeus You sir are delusional. If your advocating just socialism, then your completely wrong. People are realizing that you cannot have a socialist state with a free enterprise. A prime example of this is China. They realized Mao had the wrong idea. They've realized the the people cannot be happy without prosperity and that is why the set up a free enterprise system to naturally support that human need, which is freedom.

  • @Arondeus

    "I want to stand with my fellow Human beings as equals"

    I don't. There are only so many resources to go around. I want to outwork them and get more of the resources for myself. Why? Because I enjoy utility. And guess what? So does everyone else. That's why socialism is for suckers. We are all animals. We are at competition with each other. Like it or not, THAT'S A FACT.

    Enjoy the contest. I know I will...

  • @Arondeus if your voice were a tad deeper, you'd sound like james earl jones :)

    but this is a really informative well written series. are you a fan of H.G. wells by any chance?

  • @Arondeus @sirmortrainey dont bother, marxists and socialists dont believe in freedom. even if their system works it will provide you with food, medical care, water shelter, and all the other things provided to a slave. they ignore the human spirit to dream for more than just the basic necessities. marx said "from each according to his abilities and each according to his needs" inherently that places a ceiling on what you can acquire, because there will always be someone who needs what you have.

  • @sirmortrainey "The reward is having provided a service to the society in itself?"

    people r more motivated in socialism because they will get paid a 3x higher salary and they r working for a public good (just like in a charity) instead of working to make some owner wealthy.

    read "Towards A New Socialism" by Cockshott to learn exactly how modern socialism run directly by citizens (instead of politicians like in ussr/cuba/china) would work. and view: watch?v=5U4e6ALxOhk

  • @kajmobile

    "...paid a 3x higher salary ..."

    May be true in the short run, but as productivity goes down under socialism, the economy will go down and so will wages. Making everyone equal inevitably drags everyone down...

    You forget powerful economies were built and can only be sustained by a fair measure of capitalism power by individualized incentives. Remove them with socialism and you go down. You will get equality, but in the end everyone will be equally poor.

  • @sirmortrainey "Making everyone equal inevitably drags everyone down"

    im sure people will vote to allow some pay differences based on performance or difficulty (even communism had some income inequality)

    but the overwhelming majority of jobs in todays system get paid equally and it hasnt dragged down the economy. very few have the opp to earn more at their job

    a transparent economy driven by consumers that fosters innovation and invests in it will be a dynamic economy. google dan pink tedtalk

  • @sirmortrainey "You forget powerful economies were built and can only be sustained by a fair measure of capitalism power by individualized incentives."

    there r plenty of incentives AND accountability. managers will have to compete with other organizations and against industry benchmarks for efficiency, satisfaction and innovation

    if an org stagnates, the transparent system will let the entire public know and replace mgmt with people who will do better

  • @sirmortrainey yea socialists have no class

  • @Arondeus Marxism a joke, now I respect your opinion but honestly, Karl Marx was rich, he never put in a hard days work in his life, its the same with Micheal Moore. Socialism/Comm. can still have corruption and greed, Look at the Soviet Union, the common people were starving while the leaders of the country were living this nice, lavish lifestyle. And I agree with sirmortainey, What makes you think people wont abuse thier power, this is a very bias argument, you should have called it straight

  • @CyberTechWolf marx was not rich. he and his wife barley got by in germany.

  • @ivantheterrible60 In his later years yes, I was talking about before he went out on his own. His parents we wealthy, they even had servants. While I see your point that not what the problem here is really......

  • @Arondeus <<<<listen to this man

    Marxism was never about giving free handouts. You earn completely what you work to achieve be it a little or a lot....marxism does not involve giving a large chunk to those who own your labour ...or handouts to people who want to do nothing

  • @sirmortrainey arent people sopposed to better themselves? maybe society should be bettered so people arent motivated by material possessions and wealth, and instead be motivated by the advancement of humanity and the earth in general.

  • @DrG0NZ094

    The world is not a safe place, people are VERY vulnerable in every sense, there are limited resources, and its simply naive to trust everyone. Based on these facts you can't better people to the point where wealth no longer motivates. Yes you should try and better people, but there are limits. It's a material world and we have material needs and dreams, that can't be changed.

  • @sirmortrainey

    Yes, we can't trust people, which is why we need the government to watch businesses and makesure they aren't up to no good.

  • @Mectrixctic

    And we do have a bit of that under capitalism too as it exists right now. There is a huge difference between having some government oversight of economic activity, and having the government in everything and as everything. And as far as I am concerned, my points thus far address both socialism and communism because both of them get rid of private initiative, private incentive, and the private sector and obsess with equality.

  • @sirmortrainey

    But the differences make it signifigant. In Communism the government owns the Businesses, and in Socialism both the Government and the people own it.

    I am more of a left-leaning coporatist than a socialist, so I'm more or less ambivalent on this issue. I'm taking civics after the summer, so I'll understand this subject better.

    Thank you for your information.

  • @Mectrixctic

    You know I didn't want to mess with this communism/socialism distinction thing (I find it irrelevant since they are both about extreme egalitarianism) but since you keep bringing it up sigh...

    In Marxist theory, communism is the final stage of socialism. If you WANT to distinguish between them, I think you have it the other way around (it's communism where people, government, and economy are more fused together).

  • @sirmortrainey

    But then a lot of countries in the past have at least called themselves communist or socialist. So it's all muddled up and I'd rather not get into the technicalities. I'm merely pointing out the shortcomings of a system that gets rid of private enterprise, private incentive, and the free market in favor of a collectivist approach with overeliance on altruism (aka communism or socialism).

  • @sirmortrainey equality is guaranteed because u have direct democratic control over income allocation. the majority will never vote to reduce their income by 70% so that executives can become billionaires.

    u r motivated by pride of work AND by getting paid a high income. 50% of US workers make LESS than $33k. if income was allocated equally u would get $100k. EVERYONE would be wealthy.

    u work because u r getting paid not because of altruism (no different than the way it works today)

  • @kajmobile

    Direct democratic control over income allocation? You know, people would NEVER vote as a collective to surrender their property over to a collective to be redistributed "fairly" and "equally." It's too much against human nature, most humans would want to hold on to what they have already, even if it is so little. That's why I think socialism can only come about through violence and so must be opposed...

  • @sirmortrainey "You know, people would NEVER vote as a collective to surrender their property over to a collective"

    they r not voting to surrender their property. they r voting on how income is allocated

    u and i both know that nearly 100% will vote to increase their income 3-fold (only 5% of earners make $100k or more)

    im not sure y u think people would be against voting to raise their income

    democratic changes come by voting not violence.

  • @sirmortrainey

    well said!

    i agree. its only in a capitalist society where someone born poor can, through hard work, lift themselves out of there poverty and get a better life.

    socialism will lead to communism. where life is great for the rich and will be hell for the poor. just look at all the other socialist societies that have ever been, and ask the people if they were happy? i bet i can predict there answer. 

  • @sirmortrainey capitalism is every1 workin' for d common good of d rich capitalist. poor get poorer. rich get richer.

  • @uknichu And communism is every1 workin' for d common good of d rich "communist."

  • @sirmortrainey dats y socialism is d best...

  • When it comes down to it, socialism basically expects all the people of the world to just come together and share everything. No more conflicts of interest, we will settle everything "as a group."

    ... impossible? Expecting too much of humanity? I think so...

  • @TheMountainlotus

    Hi.

    I originally wasn't going to respond to your post because your argument was ad hominem and contained no intelligence. But I emptied emails today and came upon it; I felt like I had to ridicule your logic.

    What I was saying, which you distorted, was that not everyone is altruistic enough to contribute to socialism. I clearly wasnt referring to myself, so you had to resort to the strawman fallacy. Tell me, does your narrow list of people for a greater good include criminals?

  • @MazterChief1992

    Actually since the 14th amendment allows us to make slaves out of criminals, altruism is not required of them.

  • Fundamental flaw of capitalism - Growth. This is a finite world in which continual growth cannot exist. Look at the biosphere and tell me what else grows? Earth recycles. Socialism looks like the future of humanity because 1) we are a socialist species with seemingly altruistic instincts and 2) capitalism will kill the world in the wight of it's growth and in turn, kill us.

  • @salamut2202

    This is why Libtards hate envorimentalism. They want to cultivate the land to make a profit.

  • According to the BIBLE, YOU are right! Socialism IS inevitable! And guess what!? IT's already HERE and has been for a VERY long time! It cracks me up when people say Jesus is a socialist! How many verses of the Bible must they ignore that proclaim HIM to be the LORD of LORDS, KING of KINGS! It amazes me how many believe the likes of what you post here without a single truthful reference! Well, all they need do is look at the first lying video where I schooled you on what socialism really is!

  • good thing there are capitalist like the owners of google (who own youtube), for you to be able to put this video online and "educate" all of us viewers

  • I saw Michael Moore's Sicko today. Although Britain and France are capitalist nations, their socialist-like health care systems rock! I don't know much about politics at all, but if the socialist idea can do that for health care, then who knows?

  • Although you have some decent points, you are far to bias to make a compelling argument.

  • @kingsnake2317

    Of course I am biased, I'm a Socialist.

    The world is dominated by capitalism, they don't need my help or defense. If you live in this world and don't already know what capitalism is all about, then I can't help you with a thousand videos. But thanks for visiting.

  • @Arondeus all in favour of socialism but you have to take a critical few and consider if there is any good points of capitalism ( not suggesting any but you can't make a video without exploring them). Just a small note on the first video, it makes sense to have educated people running government, otherwise you would have people who don't understand the consequences of their policies, this is why free education at even university level is important as then any one can help run the country.

  • Finally, however messed up the world is it will be more messed up if we try and implement socialism. Socialism necessitates the abolition of all private property. This means that a centralized authority will have to go around forcing all of mankind to give up their property and surrender it for the common good. A noble few might do that willingly, the majority won’t.

  • Let’s see which classroom learns better; I guarantee you Classroom A will have the more productive results. In Classroom B, the smart kids won’t bother to study as much as they could have (cause they’ll just get the same mark as people who study less anyways), and the lazy kids will be even lazier cause now they have a guarantee of a decent grade (plus they can probably count on the smart kids too eh?).