View Poll Results: Should capitalism be voluntary?

Voters
20. You may not vote on this poll
  • It is and it should

    11 55.00%
  • It is not and it should

    2 10.00%
  • It is not and it shouldn't

    2 10.00%
  • It is and it shouldn't

    1 5.00%
  • Capitalism sucks anyways

    3 15.00%
  • I don't know

    0 0%
  • Other

    1 5.00%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Should capitalism be voluntary?

  1. #21
    Educator
    taxigirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Last Seen
    10-21-16 @ 06:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    1,205

    Re: Should capitalism be voluntary?

    Quote Originally Posted by cmakaioz View Post
    Sure :p

    Take two groups with different approaches to doing things...we'll call them Builders and Bullies.

    Builders work with each other. They may argue (endlessly), they may not see eye to eye on everything, but at the end of the day they -- together -- figure out what to do to solve problems and take care of things by working with each other.

    Bullies work against each other. When they don't agree on how to do something, they force others to yield to them by violence. This isn't just beating people up (although that's a common option); it's also things like hoarding things for themselves beyond what they can use, blocking people from supporting themselves by locking up resources, etc. They don't just strong-arm people into doing things their way; they break up alternatives as well.

    Whenever Builders and Bullies come into conflict, Bullies tend to have an advantage in that they are already used to the mindset, the strategies, and the tactics associated with working against each other. Bullies are good at starting and maintaining actions which force others to comply because that's already their normal approach to doing things. Builders, on the other hand, are vulnerable to easy disruption, as they are used to working WITH each other.

    Builders have the strength of collaboration; they can do many things which are difficult or impossible to do were it not for working with each other. This strength builds up over time as knowledge, experience, and resources are accumulated and shared. Builders face an ongoing challenge of dealing with their own progression of success; as they get better at doing things, the expectations and standards of access among the people rise, and new challenges in quantity and quality of production, freedom, and ethical ideals are opened up.

    Bullies have the strength of not needing agreement; they just decide to do things and if others don't like it, such opposition is crushed. This strength builds up as rivals are defeated and coercive power consolidated. Bullies face an ongoing challenge of both other Bullies as well as the spiraling inefficiency of coercion itself, namely: people working against each other is inherently and dramatically wasteful and difficult (relative to people working with each other).

    Historically, the Builders correspond to the principles, and practitioners, of cooperation, while the Bullies correspond to the principles and practitioners of competition:

    cooperation: two or more sentient actors working with each other to achieve a shared goal
    competition: two or more sentient actors working against each other for achievement of an exclusive goal

    All coercive systems, including (but not limited to) capitalism, follow some variation of the competitive approach (the Bullies) at the highest level.
    That you for that explanation, that helps me understand what you are saying. Which is always what I am thinking but you put it into better words than I could.

    After redaing through the "why do people hate communism and socialism" thread and now this I am think that those builders and bullies should just exist separately. You choose what society you live in. Right now you can choose 100% income sharing communities here in the US, but you still have to participatr, to a point, in the capitalist system that exists outside the community.

    If separated however, the bullies would run out of victims at some point and they woud have to turn on each other, which does happen now to an extent. Who would be left to give the Koch brothers a wedgie or two?

    "You know, when they came and took away my fourth amendment I kept my yap shut, what the hell, I really didnít have anything to hide anyway. When they grabbed up my second amendment I sat still and bit my tongue because, truth be told, Iím allergic to guns. But here we are, you with your cold hard fingers wrapped around the neck of my first amendment and Iíve got to shout as loud as I can, because if I donít, before you know it, you wonít let me say nothing at all"
    --Randolph J. Dworkin

    ďReading makes a full man, meditation a profound man, discourse a clear man.Ē
    -- Ben Franklin

    "It has been said that something as small as the flutter of a butterfly's wing can ultimately cause a typhoon halfway around the world"
    -- Chaos Theory

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    EUSSR
    Last Seen
    03-24-14 @ 01:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,851

    Re: Should capitalism be voluntary?

    Quote Originally Posted by cmakaioz View Post
    Historically, the Builders correspond to the principles, and practitioners, of cooperation, while the Bullies correspond to the principles and practitioners of competition:
    The funny thing is that they switched names. The Builders are called bullies, morons and marginals, and Bullies are called Builder(berg)s. Totally in accordance with Newspeak and Doublethink.

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    If you want to opt out, I suppose you can go to North Korea.
    No, thank you, that's a 'false dilemma'.
    Last edited by Canell; 03-16-12 at 03:06 AM.

  3. #23
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    15,267

    Re: Should capitalism be voluntary?

    Quote Originally Posted by cmakaioz View Post
    This is exactly the kind of meaningless drivel which works against recognition of basic reality on the ground.

    No, capitalism is absolutely NOT "nothing more than freedom in the field of economics."

    Capitalism, while having some range, is still specific:

    Capitalism is any of a range of systems in which production and distribution are carried out on a competitive basis, primarily for the sake of consolidation of private profit.

    There's a lot of room in there for variation and experimentation, for different flavors of capitalism, but capitalism is not just whatever the hell people decide to call capitalism, and it sure as hell has nothing to do with freedom in economics. Quite the contrary, in fact, as capitalism requires and reinforces a wide range of fundamentally coercive political and economic relationships. Once again this is all independent of anyone's FEELINGS.

    The religious libertarian ideal -- of an imaginary free market and idealized buyers and sellers -- not only has never existed, but is incapable of ever existing. The basic prerequisites of a genuinely free market are among the same conditions which would preclude the capitalist (one whose primary income is from holding title to something) from existing in the first place.

    The capitalism we actually have and live under is an entirely different beast.
    Actually, that is meaningless drivel. Capitalism is economic liberty. It is free people engaging in uncoerced, voluntary trade.

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 09:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

    Re: Should capitalism be voluntary?

    Quote Originally Posted by Canell View Post
    Hi, fellows!

    We live in world where the default ideology is capitalism (well, corporatism disguised as capitalism, imho, but that's another topic).
    Do you think that's right? Did you ever vote to be capitalist or socialist or whatever? What does legitimate the system for you?
    You didn't define capitalism. However, it matters not, since in my opinion everything should be voluntary. So, whatever it is, this capitalism of which you speak, it should be voluntary as well.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •