Author Topic: Capitalism is a pain in the arse  (Read 3558 times)

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #90 on: January 13, 2003, 07:00:48 AM »
Holden are you comparing what I call "pure" capitalism ala Manchester as said Blitz  with communism as applied in former USSR ?

The truth IMO is that the right setup is somewhat on the middle between capitalism and socialism (I say socialism not comunism it not the same thing for me)

In fact it look to work for most European country.

Speaking of France I'm glad the comunistes fighted in the 30's for a lot of social right but I hate their tentative to take over France after 1945.

Btw as strange as you can imagine I fully agree with GRUNHERZ concerning the "socialism" like it was in western Europe you can name a country  a "people  republic of whatever" it's just a dictature nothing like the theorician dreamed.

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #91 on: January 13, 2003, 07:28:06 AM »
Capitalism is such a vibrant system that it can flourish even with societal controls on child labor, safety controls, work week length, and a governmental control of monopolies.

Marx and Engles threw the baby out with the bathwater and discarded the only proven economic system for a pie in the sky Rodney King philosophy, "Why can't we all just get along?" when all that was needed was to control the excesses of the Manchester system.  

A level of socialism can be supported by the economic foundation built by capitalism, and should be.  Most people, if they can afford altruism, do help.  It is probably incumbant upon society to emulate the better thoughts of its citizens.  

But it should never be forgotten that the foundation upon which all is built is a capitalistic system, and the level of societal altruism that can be acheived is only that which can be supported by the foundation.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2003, 07:35:53 AM by Holden McGroin »
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Dowding

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6867
      • http://www.psys07629.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/272/index.html
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #92 on: January 13, 2003, 07:42:11 AM »
Quote
As for socialism vs capitalism, the bottom line is that capitalism works and socialism goes bankrupt.


Replace 'socialism' for 'communism' and I would agree. Britain has a moderately socialist government and is doing fine, thanks.
War! Never been so much fun. War! Never been so much fun! Go to your brother, Kill him with your gun, Leave him lying in his uniform, Dying in the sun.

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #93 on: January 13, 2003, 07:43:11 AM »
So we agree on our vision of a reasonable capitalism
not a feudal system in disguise like it was in England.

I think that a pure (as defined previously) capitalist system is as oppresive as a comunist system.

I'll refrain to post more as you will have to learn french to follow the discution (I'm to lazy to translate my exact prose :D)

Offline Naso

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1535
      • http://www.4stormo.it
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #94 on: January 13, 2003, 07:51:21 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by blitz
That's not like it works  Gruen , your'e pretty funny :D


Pretty sure ya know Silvio Berlusconi from Italy.

At first he formed a large media imperium.

Then he jumped in politics controlling nearly everything l what people could read in the papers or seh on tv.

Now he's chief of italy government.

Yet, he begins to change the whole system to his needs.

That's a classic 1, hope italian democrats can fight him back

Regards Blitz


Things are worse than you painted, Blitz.

Italy it's on the way to become a new South American dictatorship, with a strong propaganda system....

Or a new fascist state...

Or simply dissolve...

:(

Offline Naso

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1535
      • http://www.4stormo.it
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #95 on: January 13, 2003, 09:34:14 AM »
Can someone please cut and paste here the definitions of the tree terms:

1) Capitalism
2) Socialism
3) Communism

from his dictionary or encyclopedia?
(want to see the differences between edictions/states)

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #96 on: January 13, 2003, 09:35:09 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
That of being civil in other forums but not necccesarily so in o'club. I'm commited to being civil in the other forums in the future, are you?

Why is so hard for you to undrstand that I think we should act civily in the main community forums but  have more freedom in the unregualted off topic forums that often feature heated poilitical debate and off the wall bizzare topics.


If you're so serious about avoiding the pain and hurt of harsh words being needlessly inflicted upon our fellow BBS members then you'd be polite in ALL the forums. The O'Club wouldn't be a spew zone for you.

But clearly, your wish is that some topics... chosen by you... should be protected from harsh words while others... chosen by you... should be "free fire zones".

Quote
Grunherz     Not really. The BBS type things and the internet in general are becoming just another forum for people to communicate and interact and be "with" other people. Its now no diffrent than talking to friends on the phone or writing letters to family or incresingly just hanging out with your internet buddies so to speak. Now of course there is a difference that people bring up, if you dont like it just go to next wepbage or leave alltogether but so can you do in real life, at the expense of giving up participation in that community. However doing that largely acts to condone the abusive behavior because its seen as an effective arguing tacitc, it ridicules people till they give in, give up or get out - and thats bad. You miss the point it's not about the game its about people.

 


Aren't you missing the point Grun? It's about PEOPLE.

Aren't you afraid of hurting the feelings of the communist sympathizers? They're people too... just like people overly concerned about a possible minor flaw in the flight model of a certain 60 year old warbird.

Oh, the humanity!

Wait... you're only concerned about the humanity of folks you choose to be concerned about. Burn the rest of those witches...but be sure to do it in the O'Club!

Are you saying that all the incivility directed towards people overly concerned about a possible flaw in the ballistics model of the 20mm cannon of a certain WW2 combatant country would be perfectly acceptable if said incivility was posted in the O-Club?

BTW... I think the O'Club banner says "Open forum for off-topic and less serious discussions", not "place where you can freely use vulgarity to insult other posters that don't agree with you".

Further, if you can find ANY source, ANYwhere of me saying something like this:

Quote
Grunherz:  diddly You squeak, go to hell you whoopeeed communist.
[/color]

I will cheerfully pay your AH subscription for 6 months.

How's that for a civil offer?
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Naso

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1535
      • http://www.4stormo.it
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #97 on: January 13, 2003, 09:43:37 AM »
I'll paste here my finding:
(Sorry it's in Italian :) )
Amaizing the difference in lenght of the 2 terms.

capitalismo
capitalìsmo, sm. - Sistema economico-sociale caratterizzato dalla proprietà privata dei mezzi di produzione e della conseguente separazione tra classe dei capitalisti e classe dei lavoratori.
INGL: sm. capitalism.
ENC. - Sistema economico fondato sulla proprietà privata dei mezzi di produzione, dall'offerta di forza lavoro da parte dei lavoratori salariati, da rapporti regolati da leggi di domanda-offerta. Nato in Europa tra il XVI e il XVIII sec., nel XIX sec., in America, Germania e Inghilterra, sorsero le prime forme di consorzi industriali (trust), tipiche del capitalismo moderno. Avversato dal marxismo, attualmente anche nei paesi definiti capitalisti, il sistema è limitato da inteventi dello Stato nell'economia.


comunismo
comunìsmo, sm. - Sistema politico, sociale ed economico basato sull'abolizione della proprietà privata dei mezzi di produzione e dei prodotti del lavoro. Ha assunto caratteristiche diverse nei tempi, da Platone a Tommaso Moro a Campanella; è passato da una concezione utopistica e di esaltazione della natura a un significato più storico e rivoluzionario, a seguito della rivoluzione industriale del XVIII sec. I primi teorici furono i socialisti utopisti come Babeuf, Saint-Simon, Fourier, Proudhon, Owen; il pensiero comunista fu poi precisato ed enfatizzato dall'opera di K. Marx e F. Engels, con un'analisi critica del sistema di produzione e sociale del capitalismo. Con l'opera Il Manifesto del Partito comunista (1848) venne esposta una prima strategia politica mirante, nel tempo, alla creazione di una società senza classi. In questa società, non esistendo più classi sociali distinte, lo Stato stesso deve cessare di esistere, a favore della dittatura del proletariato e per mezzo della salita al potere della classe operaia. Tale strategia fu accettata nel 1871 dalla Prima Internazionale. La Seconda Internazionale (1889) riorganizzò partiti e sindacati europei in modo riformista. Fu dominata dal pensiero di Marx e si proponeva di abbattere il sistema capitalistico così come di migliorare le condizioni del lavoro e di promulgarne una legislazione internazionale. Nel 1919 la corrente rivoluzionaria, guidata da Lenin, si separò formando la Terza Internazionale cui aderirono sessanta partiti rivoluzionari. Essa fu fortemente accentratrice e si oppose con forza ai partiti socialdemocratici e riformisti. Fu sciolta da Stalin nel 1943. La Quarta Internazionale fu fondata a Parigi da Trockij dopo il distacco da Stalin, ma ebbe scarso successo. Il comunismo è stato quindi adattato e modificato, secondo le varie situazioni storiche, dal leninismo e dal maoismo in Russia e in Cina, nonché nei numerosi tentativi di socialismo reale fatti in Europa orientale, Africa e Asia nel XX sec. Il fallimento dell'esperienza sovietica ha prodotto una crisi del comunismo, culminata alla fine degli anni '80 nella dissoluzione del blocco comunista legato all'Unione Sovietica.
INGL: sm. communism.
ETIM: franc. communisme.


socialismo
socialìsmo, sm. - Nel suo significato più generale, ogni dottrina che predichi una riorganizzazione della società su basi collettivistiche, che metta la società e non l'individuo al centro delle attenzioni. Il termine si diffuse in Inghilterra alla fine dell'Ottocento. Il significato vago si rifà a qualsiasi aspirazione, ideale, tendenza o dottrina che prospetti un cambiamento della società in senso collettivistico. SIN: marxismo, collettivismo.
INGL: sm. socialism.
ENC. - Termine con il quale si indicano, dal XIX sec., quelle teorie e azioni che prevedono un sistema-economico politico fondato sulla socializzazione dei fattori produttivi e sul controllo statale dei settori economici, al fine di promuovere una maggiore giustizia sociale e l'emancipazione dei lavoratori. In contrapposizione con l'individualismo, già nell'antichità si possono trovare tracce di lotte sociali (guerre sociali in Grecia e a Roma, guerre servili) e che continuarono anche nel medioevo, segnando il progressivo potenziamento e l'affermazione della borghesia (tumulto dei ciompi, Jaqueries, guerra dei contadini). I primi socialisti, detti utopistici, furono borghesi e si prefissero come obiettivo quello di creare una società futura, attraverso la realizzazione di alcune comunità modello; si diffusero così in Francia le teorie di Babeuf, Saint-Simon, Fourier, Blanqui, in Gran Bretagna di Owen e in Germania di Lassalle che possono essere considerate come un approfondimento di elementi presenti nel pensiero illuminista. L'idealismo delle teorie portava spesso a posizioni utopiche che segnarono il fallimento dei vari tentativi (atelier di Blanc, cooperative di Owen). Il rafforzamento del movimento operaio, nel corso del XIX sec., consentì la formazione di un socialismo pratico, soprattutto grazie al lavoro di P. G. Proudhon, progenitore del futuro movimento anarchico e di Marx ed Engels. Questi due furono gli artefici del socialismo scientifico che prevedeva la conquista del potere da parte della classe operaia, oltre alla socializzazione dei mezzi di produzione e di scambio e che fu all'origine del movimento comunista. Esso si diffuse in tutta Europa, accompagnandosi allo sviluppo delle società industriali nei vari Paesi, grazie alla prima Internazionale (1864-1876) e alla seconda Internazionale (1889-1914), imponendosi anche politicamente, grazie alla formazione di partiti socialisti (in Francia, Inghilterra, Italia e Russia); dal 1899, quando apparvero le tesi di Bernstein, il socialismo incominciò a orientarsi (revisionismo) alle riforme e alle conquiste sociali, anziché alla rivoluzione, e a un progressivo avvicinamento del proletariato alla borghesia. Fino al 1919 socialismo e comunismo erano considerati congiuntamente, mentre dopo la contrapposizione della terza Internazionale alla seconda Internazionale e in seguito alle numerose scissioni nei movimenti socialisti, i due termini indicarono concezioni separate e, a volte, contrapposte. In contrapposizione al comunismo, il socialismo esclude la presa del potere da parte dei proletari tramite dittatura, non riconosce che alcun partito eserciti tale dittatura in nome dei proletari, non ammette che ci sia radicale differenza tra classe elitaria e maggioranza, pretende il rispetto delle regole democratiche, esclude la subordinazione della vita culturale alle esigenze del partito. Da allora, ogni movimento che accettava la lotta parlamentare venne detto socialdemocratico, creando una nuova accezione del termine; nel corso della lotta al fascismo, molti partiti confluirono nella opposizione al regime, nell'alleanza con i vari fronti popolari o nella resistenza. Nel primo dopoguerra i partiti socialisti occidentali costituirono l'Internazionale socialista (1951), alla quale, dopo gli avvenimenti ungheresi, aderirono anche quei partiti socialisti che, come quello italiano, avevano privilegiato la collaborazione con le forze comuniste. Dopo l'occupazione dell'Ungheria (1956) molti partiti socialisti che avevano appoggiato il comunismo si spostarono su posizioni socialdemocratiche.

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #98 on: January 13, 2003, 09:50:33 AM »
@Toad : do this post count for your offer ? :D

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #99 on: January 13, 2003, 11:59:01 AM »
[q]Like a centralized run and planned econmoy.[/q]
As long as the planners aren't incompetent, I wouldn't really see a problem with this either.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean here.  I would look at this as the government saying 'we need XXX companies to make widgets (for instance), and then the companies come forward and say "ok, I'd like to get a contract to make widgets".  Thats how the U.S. does it.
[q]Like extreme forced redistribution of income. [/q]
Sorry Grun, I guess the communist in me just can't sympathise.  As long as the forcee is left enough to live comfortably on (he doesn't have to be reduced to a level BELOW everyone else)...  I wouldn't really have a problem with it.
[q]Like tight control of press, and no freedom of press.[/q]
Again, it may not be 'governmental'.. but the same corporations that purchace politicians own the media.  I'll honestly have to check some statistics here.. but I've read some pretty interesting things about our media.
[q]Like tight restrictions on fredom of movement. [/q]
Elaborate this for me please?  How do they stop people from moving around?
[q]Like tight controls on freedom of emplyement and carreer choice. [/q]
You've got me there, a government with strict controls on employement and career choice is definately one of the aspects of a communistic society I'm not a big fan of.
[q]Like tight controls on labor rights and collective barging.[/q]
Sorry Grun, but this is laughable.  I guess you hadn't heard the Bush Administration forbade any Unionizing of the baggage screeners now working across the country, huh?  And that is just one of the more recent examples.  Walmart, for example, the largest retailer (hell, largest company) in the world, has successfully resisted any attempts by its employees to unionize.. I can't imagine why.  It might impact their profit margins.
[q]Like no real attempt at democracy.[q]

Main Entry: de·moc·ra·cy
Pronunciation: di-'mä-kr&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy
Date: 1576
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority
5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges

Well, the U.S. meets number 1, maybe(2 and 3 weren't really applicable).  Doesn't meet 5, 4's up in the air.  I would say it doesn't meet number 4, some people would say it does.

Main Entry: plu·toc·ra·cy
Pronunciation: plü-'tä-kr&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Greek ploutokratia, from ploutos wealth; akin to Greek plein to sail, float -- more at FLOW
Date: 1652
1 : government by the wealthy
2 : a controlling class of the wealthy

I think the U.S. definately meets numbers 1 and 2 here.


Actually, did you read my post on *my* utopia?  Does that sound like an evil communist utopia to you?  It might, I really haven't given much thought to it to be honest.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #100 on: January 13, 2003, 02:11:33 PM »
*As long as the planners aren't incompetent, I wouldn't really see a problem with this either. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean here. I would look at this as the government saying 'we need XXX companies to make widgets (for instance), and then the companies come forward and say "ok, I'd like to get a contract to make widgets". Thats how the U.S. does it.


Ok Urchin how eaxctly would the government forsee any neccesary change or forsee the development of new techologies - which it would need to do every time before ordering the production of something and anything.

Plus imagine how slow government processes are and all the interests that they are beholden too, why do you think that would change under a communist system as you want. History certainly does not support you there.

Also the government would naturally want to make evertyuing as efficient and stanaradized as possible,  so they would order only one type of everything this would reduce variety and innovation. Ever heard of the Trabant?

That just doesnt work for more reasons than I have time or breath to explain, but the above three are some of the more common problems.



*Sorry Grun, I guess the communist in me just can't sympathise. As long as the forcee is left enough to live comfortably on (he doesn't have to be reduced to a level BELOW everyone else)... I wouldn't really have a problem with it.

Problem here is it stifles innovation and incentive to take risks. Communist economies were incredibly stagnant and lacked risk taking. Risk taking with capital and is what with the hope of great rewrd is what drives the world economy now. Do you think bill gates would have risked creating microsoft if he would only be living like a carpenter.  Think about it this way why would people go to med school for many years and give up the income of working those years when they could only earn the same living as a carpenter - no offense to carpenters of course.


*Again, it may not be 'governmental'.. but the same corporations that purchace politicians own the media. I'll honestly have to check some statistics here.. but I've read some pretty interesting things about our media.

Well first of all the problem of press freedom can be put into simple terms: Offical Governemt News Channel.  Basically every communist regime really really tried hard to limit news coming in from anywhere else and especially no criticizm of the government. Say whatever you want about businesses owning news channels or papers -who else would BTW-  but there is no end to critical viewpoints in the press towrds the governemt and leadership.

But lets put some perspective here and apply it to your example of an all knowing all seeing central decision making comitee. Your idea clearly implies assume that the comitee always acts in the best interest of the most people or even everyone. Why would any rational person then have anything to criticize the government for in a newspaper editorial for example. That might seem laughable or absurd to you now, but many people heve paid the price for doing just that in one of your communist wonder societies.  

*Elaborate this for me please? How do they stop people from moving around?

I'll get back to this later.

*You've got me there, a government with strict controls on employement and career choice is definately one of the aspects of a communistic society I'm not a big fan of.

I'm happy we agree on this but allow me to expand. Getting back to your all knowing comitee again.  One of the things that people might miss reading this point is how ominous the implications of these polices were. For example one of the things that could have happend is rougly like this. Lets say you took an aptiude test in school which showed you were going to be a great engineer, and then the all powerful comitee condicuted an ecomomic forecast that said there was a need for more engineers. Thus controlling all education and education money - remember education is "free" - they could force you to study engineering even if you really want to become an artist despite your aptitude test.  Plus imagine the quality of the product or service rendered by somebody so forced.

 
*Sorry Grun, but this is laughable. I guess you hadn't heard the Bush Administration forbade any Unionizing of the baggage screeners now working across the country, huh? And that is just one of the more recent examples. Walmart, for example, the largest retailer (hell, largest company) in the world, has successfully resisted any attempts by its employees to unionize.. I can't imagine why. It might impact their profit margins.

This is actually the easiest one to defend. Since the all wise  governmemt planning comitee makes all ecominc decision they are in effect the big bad evil corporate managers that union types hate so much. And since in every communist state I know of there were only government unios allowed, I think the problem becomes quite clear. How much would a union hold the workres rights and interests to heart if it was in fact owned and operated and directed by the managers. And just because the system is called "communism" or "socialism" dont think that the usual labor/management conflicts go away, they dont.   Now do you understand all the fuss raided in communist Poland about the Solidarity labor rights movement - when the central comitee finally gave in that lead directly to the fall of the communist regime some years later.

* As for democracy.

Communist states usually run one candidate per post, These candidates are picked by a small governing eliete and there is no choice of differeing viewpoints. Moreover these peopleThe people then "elect" these candidates in "elections". Say what you want about the money and connections needed to run for president in the USA but I see 4 or 5 democrats vying for the nomination. Also dont forget Bill Clinton, love him or hate him, was the poor son of a drunkard father IIRC and he maged to be Governor and President because he is very driven and intelligent.


* Back to travel restrictions.

Now Imagine you were an intellugent person, a hard worker and very ambitious and you wanted to make something out of yourself and believed in freedom of expression and  freedom to persue your intersts. Imagine you were living in such as state as you described Urchin, with limits to carrer chocie, earnings, carrer fulfilment, labor rights, advencement and expression. Then imagine just accros the border in the next sate there was another system that let you excercise many of those ideal to a far greater extent.

What would you do?

Can you understand why your comitee would then want to restrict your movement so not to lose an intelligent driven individual to a possible competitor?

Can you undertand the traver and movement restrictions?
« Last Edit: January 13, 2003, 02:17:18 PM by GRUNHERZ »

Offline blitz

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1007
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #101 on: January 13, 2003, 02:20:17 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
When I go ballistic and go too far on people, yes I know it will probably hurt my image but I just cannot let some statement like blitz's of Castro and Che being "good" people go without challenge. Yet being polite and telling him the obvious about Cuba's terrible economic standards or human rights record seems pointless because everyone knows that yet he still sees those people as Heroes. And I have interacted with plenty of people just like him, no matter how much reasonable evidence you give them they just trott along and think communism is just gee golly the most bestest thing ever. They may acknowlege that it hasnt worked before, but you know what they just ask for another chance or say capitalism is evil - just like blitz.   And thats what he is asking for whether he realizes it or not.  


Heh, Gruen, ya ever been in Kuba? Doubt it.
I was in 1989 and even tho i don't agree with many aspects of Kuba politics ( human rights, free spech etc.) i saw many good aspects for a land of the third world.
Absolutely no starvation, free education for all, free medical help for all. Gone trough the most dark areas of Havanna in the middle of the night, was absolutely out of tourist area and noone did a harm to me.

Now if ya look to other countries in that part of the world the bigest difference is:
Theres a few rich, a very small middle class and many ,many very poor people, murder, violence, no rights for the poor.

These rights youre talkin about didn't exist for people who don't have enough to feed their children, punt!

How was the life for most of the people of china before Mao tse Tung came?
Didn't most of them lived like slaves same as in Russia before 1917?

I say it again because you need that obvisiouly:

KOMMUNISMN FAILED BIGTIME ALL OVER THE WORLD AND WILL NEVER WORK BUT THERE WAS A REASON WHY IT EVER CAME UP AND THAT REASON WAS THE HORRIBLE WORKIN AND LIVIN CONDITIONS ALL OVER THE WORD WITH CAPITALISM SYTEM IN THE 18TH AND 20TH CENTURY, PUNT !

And yes i admire some people who was willing to give their lives for a great  idea that will never work as intened but they tried there best to make it work. And yes, Fidel Castro & Che Guevara are 2 of them.

Regards Blitz

Sidenote: What i remember very good from Kuba holyday 1989 is ,that most young people seemed to be bored to death, all dreamin from Miami but older people was very different.
They still loved 'Fidel' but 'The Che' was like a God to them.
No idea how its now.

Offline blitz

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1007
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #102 on: January 13, 2003, 02:28:38 PM »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by blitz
That's not like it works Gruen , your'e pretty funny  


Pretty sure ya know Silvio Berlusconi from Italy.

At first he formed a large media imperium.

Then he jumped in politics controlling nearly everything l what people could read in the papers or seh on tv.

Now he's chief of italy government.

Yet, he begins to change the whole system to his needs.

That's a classic 1, hope italian democrats can fight him back

Regards Blitz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Quote
Originally posted by Naso
Things are worse than you painted, Blitz.

Italy it's on the way to become a new South American dictatorship, with a strong propaganda system....

Or a new fascist state...

Or simply dissolve...

:(



Blitz :(

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #103 on: January 13, 2003, 02:29:55 PM »
Honestly blitz you need to be shocked out of this idea, Let me try my best here...

Blitz said:

"And yes I admire some people who was willing to give their lives for a great idea that will never work as intened but they tried there best to make it work. And yes, Adolf Hitler & Heinrich Himmler are 2 of them."


Just replace the wealthy or capitalist class in your argument with jews in this one and it still works perfectly. Both policies led to vast human misery and death, both had good medical systems and low crime rates, both restricted free speech, both tried to improve the lives of their favorite class/race of people and arguably did to some exent, but at what price?

But somehow I doubt this staement would be so popular with you, although it perfectly matces your beloved ideology.

How bout you go into the streets of berlin and say that thing up there, yell it, yell it really loud so everyone can hear you - then yell again.

« Last Edit: January 13, 2003, 03:12:02 PM by GRUNHERZ »

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Capitalism is a pain in the arse
« Reply #104 on: January 13, 2003, 03:37:24 PM »
I would edit that post fast GRUN.



I guess Blitz reaction and I just want to warn you : he will more than over-pissed  don't forget you are speaking to a german citizen.



And some things canno't be said to a German and I strongly believe that your post enter this category.

It would be better to delete this sentence quick.


I guess you never had a discution about recent history with a German .