what's wrong with economics

[DotCommunist]

In the galtian paradise we are all managers.

 

[DotCommunist]

Lazy. Wants it all handed to him on a silver platter.

like jon the baptists head. Or an arse.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

In the galtian paradise we are all managers.

And we get to go on strike. Oh yes, the managers go on strike. How can the workplace possibly survive? How can a building exist without the landlord demanding the rent? It will crumble into the sand.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

We do not need money.

How do I know?

Because we do not have money. Money does not exist. If you think it does, show me some.

Here we go. Should I bother with the next 4 pages?

 

[gamerunknown]

The more sensible among them note, quite rightly, that the terms "right-wing" and "left-wing" are obsolete today.

I don't feel this is the case. A two-dimensional map of political allegiances can have good concurrent and predictive validity for an individual's commitment to economic egalitarianism. It also cuts through the co-option of the term "anarchist" by Nationalists and Capitalists.

You mean, after ten decades of the superficial popular opinion seeing them as absolutely opposed to each other.

It's necessary to distinguish between the "Soviet" state and conditions of actual communism and free association. The latter would be diametrically opposed to both fascism and "Communism". Hitler points out in Mein Kampf that he appropriates the techniques of the socialists in order to confuse liberals and encourage mass participation. Though that was written more recently than a century ago...

The Jewish doctrine of Marxism repudiates the aristocratic principle of Nature and substitutes for it the eternal privilege of force and energy, numerical mass and its dead weight. Thus it denies the individual worth of the human personality, impugns the teaching that nationhood and race have a primary significance, and by doing this it takes away the very foundations of human existence and human civilization. If the Marxist teaching were to be accepted as the foundation of the life of the universe, it would lead to the disappearance of all order that is conceivable to the human mind. And thus the adoption of such a law would provoke chaos in the structure of the greatest organism that we know, with the result that the inhabitants of this earthly planet would finally disappear. Should the Jew, with the aid of his Marxist creed, triumph over the people of this world, his Crown will be the funeral wreath of mankind, and this planet will once again follow its orbit through ether, without any human life on its surface, as it did millions of years ago. And so I believe to-day that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator. In standing guard against the Jew I am defending the handiwork of the Lord.

There's no denying that conditions were miserable for workers in "Soviet" Russia and Nazi Germany, but I don't think that has any ramifications for people's stances on economic equality (other than the fact that it should get them to re-evaluate parliamentarianism and vanguardism).

 

[Frances Lengel]

It's precisely this need/desire for such an anti-social context (a space where not only rights but individuals are free floating) that makes 7000miles at heart a people hater. One thing we can say about people is that we are connected and dependent; rather than trying to escape this necessary state of affairs 7000 would do much better to embrace it.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

A purple people hater?

 

[redsquirrel]

So what does mean you own it?

Committing mass murder of all useless savages cluttering up the place and not putting the land to it's proper use.

 

[treelover]

Ugh.

Someone who chooses to work has not been coerced in any shape or form. Having to work is not slavery. Slavery implies you are forced into a choice by a third party, which you are not. You have many choices and working is one of them, I talked about this several times already if you went back and read my posts. If you are trying to interfere with someone choice to work, you are forcefully trying to rule them. Which is a form of coercion.

Disgusting, where you Frank Fisher on Guardian CIF?, who was happy to see people starve.

 

[tbtommyb]

Like I said before, people are missing my points. What I was trying to say was that simply because someone at one point in the past was on land that doesn't mean its theirs for good. If they built a house and lived there consistently, or owned the deeds etc. its their land. If they built it in 1000 BC and left it a year later without writing any kind of legal or similar document whats the issue with someone taking it over in 2014? They are no longer occupying it, are long dead, and don't have the rights to it any longer.

What if the people from 1000BC did have a legal document? Would that still apply today?

Also why are you using 1000BC? What if people were living on the land in, say, 1492?

 

[fractionMan]

A timely tweet

 

[kabbes]

15% think it is ok to search for control variables, thus showing a total and utter lack of understanding of the very statistics they are supposed to be using.

Not the worst element of that response, but one worth pointing out.

 

[Quartz]

What if the people from 1000BC did have a legal document?

If you adjust that to 1000 AD, I have heard that some 999 year leases have come up for renewal.

What if people were living on the land in, say, 1492?

Forfeit by right of conquest. Historically, conquerors have no obligation to the conquered that isn't voluntary. Kill or enslave the men, rape and enslave the women, and seize the land to reward your own troops was pretty much the norm until relatively recently.

 

[butchersapron]

A made up term - it's a not game of risk you buffoon.

 

[phildwyer]

I don't feel this is the case. A two-dimensional map of political allegiances can have good concurrent and predictive validity for an individual's commitment to economic egalitarianism.

Not really. Fascists claim to be committed to economic egalitarianism.

But a worse problem with the left/right terminology is that it allows pro-capitalists who take up liberal positions on identity politics to classify themselves as Leftists.

It also cuts through the co-option of the term "anarchist" by Nationalists and Capitalists.

Can't say I've noticed much of that.

 

[tbtommyb]

Forfeit by right of conquest. Historically, conquerors have no obligation to the conquered that isn't voluntary.

Sounds like a post hoc justification.

 

[Poi E]

Historically, conquerors have no obligation to the conquered that isn't voluntary.

Of course not. Killing tax payers is self-defeating.

 

[J Ed]

But a worse problem with the left/right terminology is that it allows pro-capitalists who take up liberal positions on identity politics to classify themselves as Leftists.

A shtick which is running out of steam

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Forfeit by right of conquest. Historically, conquerors have no obligation to the conquered that isn't voluntary. Kill or enslave the men, rape and enslave the women, and seize the land to reward your own troops was pretty much the norm until relatively recently.

Probably true of Genghis Khan and the Golden Horde. But, for instance - your Empire; it concluded treaties with indigenous people in places like North America.

 

[butchersapron]

Probably true of Genghis Khan and the Golden Horde. But, for instance - your Empire; it concluded treaties with indigenous people in places like North America.

No such place.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Controversial.

 

[seventh bullet]

You could've wiki'd it.

 

[butchersapron]

Controversial.

Just every thread. Every post. So god....bland. So internet.

 

[Quartz]

Probably true of Genghis Khan and the Golden Horde.

And the Romans and the Huns and the Vandals and the Angles and the Saxons and the Vikings and the Greeks and the Assyrians and the Babylonians and the Egyptians and the...

But, for instance - your Empire; it concluded treaties with indigenous people in places like North America.

Also a very Roman practice.

 

[tbtommyb]

You could've wiki'd it.

that north American doesn't exist?

 

[seventh bullet]

that north American doesn't exist?

The Khanate that emerged from the division of the Mongol empire after Genghis Khan's death, named the Golden Horde by the Russians years after it ceased to exist.

 

[tbtommyb]

The Khanate that emerged from the division of the Mongol empire after Genghis Khan's death, named the Golden Horde by the Russians years after it ceased to exist.

Why does that mean it didn't exist?

 

[butchersapron]

I was talking about North America btw

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The trolls are bickering amongst themselves about the objects of their troll-icity.

[tbtommyb isn't one of them, btw]

 

[gamerunknown]

Not really. Fascists claim to be committed to economic egalitarianism.

It would be absurd to appraise a man's worth by the race to which he belongs and at the same time to make war against the Marxist principle, that all men are equal, without being determined to pursue our own principle to its ultimate consequences. If we admit the significance of blood, that is to say, if we recognize the race as the fundamental element on which all life is based, we shall have to apply to the individual the logical consequences of this principle. In general I must estimate the worth of nations differently, on the basis of the different races from which they spring, and I must also differentiate in estimating the worth of the individual within his own race.

After socialism, Fascism trains its guns on the whole block of democratic ideologies and rejects both their premises and their practical applications and implements... it asserts the irremediable and fertile and beneficent inequality of men who cannot be leveled by any such mechanical and extrinsic device as universal suffrage.

Perhaps you could point me to where fascists argue for economic egalitarianism?

I agree that "Nationalist Anarchism" and "Capitalist Anarchism" are rare. I've only encountered one of the latter offline and none of the former, but the latter seems to attract a considerable cachet online. National Action may be exhibiting some of the trends of the former.

 

[tbtommyb]

I was talking about North America btw

Oh cool, do you reject the existence of all continents or just that one?