Líder:
dyingdreams
Política de associação: Aberta
Criado em: 4 Jan 2008
Descrição:
Política de associação: Aberta
Criado em: 4 Jan 2008
Descrição:
For all the people who see socialism and other forms of collectivism for what it is.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy."
Winston Churchill, 1948
"The common features of all collectivist systems may be described as the deliberate organization of the labours of society for a definite social goal. In many ways this puts the basic issue very clearly. And it directs us at once to the point where the conflict arises between individual freedom and collectivism. The various kinds of communism, fascism, etc., differ between themselves in the nature of the goal towards which they want to direct all efforts of society. But they all differ from individualism in wanting to organize the whole of society and all its resources for this unitary end, and in refusing to recognize autonomous spheres in which the ends of individuals are supreme.
Friedrich August von Hayek, The Road To Serfdom
"We have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand "I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or "I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!", "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society, and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families; no government can do anything except through people, and people look to themselves first."
Margaret Thatcher, Interview as Prime Minister of the UK
"The usual terminology of political language is stupid. What is 'left' and what is 'right'? Why should Hitler be 'right' and Stalin, his temporary friend, be 'left'? Who is 'reactionary' and who is 'progressive'? Reaction against an unwise policy is not to be condemned. And progress towards chaos is not to be commended. Nothing should find acceptance just because it is new, radical, and fashionable. 'Orthodoxy' is not an evil if the doctrine on which the 'orthodox' stand is sound. Who is anti-labor, those who want to lower labor to the Russian level, or those who want for labor the capitalistic standard of the United States? Who is 'nationalist,' those who want to bring their nation under the heel of the Nazis, or those who want to preserve its independence?"
Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises, Interventionism: An Economic Analysis
"In Germany and Italy the Nazis and Fascists did indeed not have much to invent. […] It was not the Fascists but the socialists who began to collect children from the tenderest age into political organizations to make sure that they grew up as good proletarians. [...] The means which the old socialist parties had successfully employed to secure the support of one occupation group – the raising of their relative economic position – cannot be used to secure the support of all. There are bound to arise rival socialist movements that appeal to the support of those whose relative position is worsened. There is a great deal of truth in the often heard statement that Fascism and National Socialism are a sort of middle-class socialism – only that in Italy and Germany the supporters of these new movements were economically hardly a middle class any longer. It was to a large extent a revolt of a new under-privileged class against labour aristocracy which the industrial labour movement had created. [...] The conflict between the Fascist or National-Socialist and the older socialist parties must indeed be very largely regarded as the kind of conflict which is bound to arise between rival socialist factions. There was no difference between them about the question of it being the will of the state which should assign to each person his proper place in society. But there were, as there always will be, most profound differences about what are the proper places of the different classes and groups. [...] Fascism and National-Socialism, on the other hand, grew out of the experience of increasingly regulated society awaking to the fact that democratic and international socialism was aiming at incompatible ideals. Their tactics were developed in a world already dominated by socialist policy and the problems it creates. They had no illusions about the possibility of a democratic solution of problems which require more agreement among people than can be reasonably expected. They had no illusions about the capacity of reason to decide all the questions of the relative importance of wants of different men or groups which planning inevitably raises, or about the formula of equality providing an answer. They knew that the strongest group which rallied enough supporters in favour of a new hierarchical order of society, and which frankly promised privileges to the classes to which it appealed, was likely to obtain the support of all those who were disappointed because they had been promised equality but found that they had merely furthered the interest of a particular class. Above all they were successful because they offered a theory, or Weltanschauung, which seemed to justify the privileges they promised to their supporters."
Friedrich August von Hayek, The Road To Serfdom
"Socialism itself can hope to exist only for brief periods here and there, and then only through the exercise of the extremest terrorism. It is preparing itself for rule through fear and is driving the word "justice" into the heads of the half-educated masses like a nail, so as to rob them of their reason and to create in them a good conscience for the evil game they are to play. Socialism can serve to teach - in a truly brutal and impressive fashion - what danger there lies in all accumulations of state power."
Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human
"Among helpful and charitable people one almost always finds that clumsy deceitfulness which first adjusts and adapts him who is to be helped: as if, for example, he “deserved” help, desired precisely their help, and would prove profoundly grateful, faithful and submissive to them in return for all the help he had received – with these imaginings they dispose of those in need as if they were possessions, and are charitable and helpful at all only from a desire for possessions. They are jealous if one frustrates or anticipates them when they want to help. A man who says: “I like this, I take it for my own and mean to protect it and defend it against everyone”, a man who can do something, carry out a decision, remain true to an idea, punish and put down insolence, a man who has his anger and his sword and to whom the weak, suffering, oppressed, and the animals too are glad to submit and belong by nature, in short a man who is by nature a master – when such a man has pity, well! That pity has value! But of what account is the pity of those who suffer, or worse, of those who preach pity.”
Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil
"The burning conviction that we have a holy duty toward others is often a way of attaching our drowning selves to a passing raft. What looks like giving a hand is often a holding on for dear life. Take away our holy duties and you leave our lives puny and meaningless. There is no doubt that in exchanging a self-centered for a selfless life we gain enormously in self-esteem. The vanity of the selfless, even those who practice utmost humility, is boundless."
Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements
"Yet after [decades] of experience with socialism, it is safe to say that most intellectuals outside the areas – Eastern Europe and the Third World – where socialism has been tried remain content to brush aside what lessons might lie in economics, are unwilling to wonder whether there might not be a reason why socialism, as often as it is attempted, never seems to work out as its intellectual leaders intended."
Friedrich August von Hayek, The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism
"When I say capitalism, I mean a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated laissez faire capitalism, with a separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church."
Ayn Rand, during first television interview in 1959
And since this is still a music site, for the current somewhat weekly updated video I bring you a cover by Haley Klinkhammer of Forever And Always by Taylor Swift. Enjoy!
You can find the past videos here.
Don't forget to check out the Collectivist Hall of Fame and feel free to take a look at the Recommended Books section (updated: 19/10/2009).
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask them. My time is limited but I will certainly do my best to answer them as soon as I can whenever they arrive. You might wonder what's in it for me perhaps and why I put any time into something like an Anti-Socialist group on last.fm, or why I am happy to answer any question you or anybody else might have about the matter. To that I say that my freedom leads to yours, and yours leads to mine. It is with the purpose of expanding and maintaining my own freedom that I encourage others to do the same.
I'm currently in the process of writing my final thesis (Capitalism: The how and why of the free market morality). If you have any interesting or unusual articles about capitalism, the free market or libertarianism (for example about the positive effect of big game hunting on private reservations in South Africa towards the conservation of large African mammals, private charities, mercenaries compared to government forces, etc.) or about disastrous socialist measures (for example about hyperinflation and nationalisation in Zimbabwe, the maximum prices for milk and theft of private land in Venezuela, the effect of European agricultural subsidies on third world farmers, etc.) feel free to post them in our forum or PM them to me directly. Preferably articles with decent sources and some data, but if not present in the article itself I'll try to find that kind of stuff myself based on what I read in it. Any suggestion is appreciated. Thanks :)
Winston Churchill, 1948
"The common features of all collectivist systems may be described as the deliberate organization of the labours of society for a definite social goal. In many ways this puts the basic issue very clearly. And it directs us at once to the point where the conflict arises between individual freedom and collectivism. The various kinds of communism, fascism, etc., differ between themselves in the nature of the goal towards which they want to direct all efforts of society. But they all differ from individualism in wanting to organize the whole of society and all its resources for this unitary end, and in refusing to recognize autonomous spheres in which the ends of individuals are supreme.
Friedrich August von Hayek, The Road To Serfdom
"We have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand "I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or "I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!", "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society, and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families; no government can do anything except through people, and people look to themselves first."
Margaret Thatcher, Interview as Prime Minister of the UK
"The usual terminology of political language is stupid. What is 'left' and what is 'right'? Why should Hitler be 'right' and Stalin, his temporary friend, be 'left'? Who is 'reactionary' and who is 'progressive'? Reaction against an unwise policy is not to be condemned. And progress towards chaos is not to be commended. Nothing should find acceptance just because it is new, radical, and fashionable. 'Orthodoxy' is not an evil if the doctrine on which the 'orthodox' stand is sound. Who is anti-labor, those who want to lower labor to the Russian level, or those who want for labor the capitalistic standard of the United States? Who is 'nationalist,' those who want to bring their nation under the heel of the Nazis, or those who want to preserve its independence?"
Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises, Interventionism: An Economic Analysis
"In Germany and Italy the Nazis and Fascists did indeed not have much to invent. […] It was not the Fascists but the socialists who began to collect children from the tenderest age into political organizations to make sure that they grew up as good proletarians. [...] The means which the old socialist parties had successfully employed to secure the support of one occupation group – the raising of their relative economic position – cannot be used to secure the support of all. There are bound to arise rival socialist movements that appeal to the support of those whose relative position is worsened. There is a great deal of truth in the often heard statement that Fascism and National Socialism are a sort of middle-class socialism – only that in Italy and Germany the supporters of these new movements were economically hardly a middle class any longer. It was to a large extent a revolt of a new under-privileged class against labour aristocracy which the industrial labour movement had created. [...] The conflict between the Fascist or National-Socialist and the older socialist parties must indeed be very largely regarded as the kind of conflict which is bound to arise between rival socialist factions. There was no difference between them about the question of it being the will of the state which should assign to each person his proper place in society. But there were, as there always will be, most profound differences about what are the proper places of the different classes and groups. [...] Fascism and National-Socialism, on the other hand, grew out of the experience of increasingly regulated society awaking to the fact that democratic and international socialism was aiming at incompatible ideals. Their tactics were developed in a world already dominated by socialist policy and the problems it creates. They had no illusions about the possibility of a democratic solution of problems which require more agreement among people than can be reasonably expected. They had no illusions about the capacity of reason to decide all the questions of the relative importance of wants of different men or groups which planning inevitably raises, or about the formula of equality providing an answer. They knew that the strongest group which rallied enough supporters in favour of a new hierarchical order of society, and which frankly promised privileges to the classes to which it appealed, was likely to obtain the support of all those who were disappointed because they had been promised equality but found that they had merely furthered the interest of a particular class. Above all they were successful because they offered a theory, or Weltanschauung, which seemed to justify the privileges they promised to their supporters."
Friedrich August von Hayek, The Road To Serfdom
"Socialism itself can hope to exist only for brief periods here and there, and then only through the exercise of the extremest terrorism. It is preparing itself for rule through fear and is driving the word "justice" into the heads of the half-educated masses like a nail, so as to rob them of their reason and to create in them a good conscience for the evil game they are to play. Socialism can serve to teach - in a truly brutal and impressive fashion - what danger there lies in all accumulations of state power."
Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human
"Among helpful and charitable people one almost always finds that clumsy deceitfulness which first adjusts and adapts him who is to be helped: as if, for example, he “deserved” help, desired precisely their help, and would prove profoundly grateful, faithful and submissive to them in return for all the help he had received – with these imaginings they dispose of those in need as if they were possessions, and are charitable and helpful at all only from a desire for possessions. They are jealous if one frustrates or anticipates them when they want to help. A man who says: “I like this, I take it for my own and mean to protect it and defend it against everyone”, a man who can do something, carry out a decision, remain true to an idea, punish and put down insolence, a man who has his anger and his sword and to whom the weak, suffering, oppressed, and the animals too are glad to submit and belong by nature, in short a man who is by nature a master – when such a man has pity, well! That pity has value! But of what account is the pity of those who suffer, or worse, of those who preach pity.”
Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil
"The burning conviction that we have a holy duty toward others is often a way of attaching our drowning selves to a passing raft. What looks like giving a hand is often a holding on for dear life. Take away our holy duties and you leave our lives puny and meaningless. There is no doubt that in exchanging a self-centered for a selfless life we gain enormously in self-esteem. The vanity of the selfless, even those who practice utmost humility, is boundless."
Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements
"Yet after [decades] of experience with socialism, it is safe to say that most intellectuals outside the areas – Eastern Europe and the Third World – where socialism has been tried remain content to brush aside what lessons might lie in economics, are unwilling to wonder whether there might not be a reason why socialism, as often as it is attempted, never seems to work out as its intellectual leaders intended."
Friedrich August von Hayek, The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism
"When I say capitalism, I mean a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated laissez faire capitalism, with a separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church."
Ayn Rand, during first television interview in 1959
And since this is still a music site, for the current somewhat weekly updated video I bring you a cover by Haley Klinkhammer of Forever And Always by Taylor Swift. Enjoy!
You can find the past videos here.
Don't forget to check out the Collectivist Hall of Fame and feel free to take a look at the Recommended Books section (updated: 19/10/2009).
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask them. My time is limited but I will certainly do my best to answer them as soon as I can whenever they arrive. You might wonder what's in it for me perhaps and why I put any time into something like an Anti-Socialist group on last.fm, or why I am happy to answer any question you or anybody else might have about the matter. To that I say that my freedom leads to yours, and yours leads to mine. It is with the purpose of expanding and maintaining my own freedom that I encourage others to do the same.
I'm currently in the process of writing my final thesis (Capitalism: The how and why of the free market morality). If you have any interesting or unusual articles about capitalism, the free market or libertarianism (for example about the positive effect of big game hunting on private reservations in South Africa towards the conservation of large African mammals, private charities, mercenaries compared to government forces, etc.) or about disastrous socialist measures (for example about hyperinflation and nationalisation in Zimbabwe, the maximum prices for milk and theft of private land in Venezuela, the effect of European agricultural subsidies on third world farmers, etc.) feel free to post them in our forum or PM them to me directly. Preferably articles with decent sources and some data, but if not present in the article itself I'll try to find that kind of stuff myself based on what I read in it. Any suggestion is appreciated. Thanks :)
Discussões ativas
 Flijoye comentou sobre
“Video: Berlin Wall” (1) 19 dias atrás |
 dyingdreams comentou sobre
“Work in progress” 19 dias atrás |
 blackless comentou sobre
“The significance of socialistic theories.Positive and negative.” (7) 22 dias atrás |
|
dyingdreams comentou sobre
“Subsidies” (8) 22 dias atrás |
  c4t2007 comentou sobre
“Mercenaries” (2) Mês passado |
Últimos posts
-
Best of 2009
por changeable |
23 Dez 2009 | Adicionar comentário
-
Black metal movie "Until the Light Takes Us" 4/5 stars
por Conservationist |
8 Dez 2009 | 11 comentários
-
Death Penalty
por c4t2007 |
21 Set 2009 | 33 comentários
Principais artistas da semana
Artistas relacionados
-
Iron Horse
-
Bobby Prins
-
Boerenzonen op Speed
-
Old Crow Medicine Show
-
K3
-
Kings of Convenience
-
Eva De Roovere
-
Frédéric Chopin
-
Ry Cooder
-
Jules de Corte
-
Trampled By Turtles
-
Frank Boeijen
Caixa de mensagens
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
I'll reply asap, just dropped by/only have time to post a new video atm :)
-
moismyname escreveu:
He's of little significance for Philosophy in general, but perfect for delivering dangerous half-truths to people with limited philosophic insight and swollen egos to feed their ethical egoism on. You seem just the candidate, from what I can tell your self-perception is rather optimistic, to put it mildly, and the fact that you can take Ayn Rand seriously proves that you're not the luminary the world of philosophy has been waiting for. You should stick to Murray Rothbard and his anarcho-capitalists, at least he admits that morality is normative (which trashes Nietzsche's idea that his so-called master morality is somehow higher than his so-called slave morality).
-
moismyname escreveu:
Sure, Nietzsche never mentions doing things in numbers, he's rather fixed on his romanticized idea of the outstanding individual, and I have no doubt that he would be the last to sanction a labourer uprising, but it is the very essence of his morality that it is not immoral to strive to enhance one's power. I personally wouldn't even agree with that. I actually have read Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Beyond Good and Evil and some other of his works, I've also been to lectures and seminars on Nietzsche's philosophy. I'm obviously not as easily impressed as you are. He has his moments, and he certainly has a way with words, but all in all his philosophy is partially too vague to be of any philosophic value, partially downright inconsistent and arbitrary, as any serious analytic inquiry shows.
-
moismyname escreveu:
If homesteading is what just property is based on, I suggest we make all land and resources public property and then start homesteading away, because as things are, 99.9% of all land and resources did not come into private property by "occupation and use", it was taken by the intrigues of the powerful, i.e. by force. But even if that where not so, the person born into poverty would still have little reason to accept a lifetime of unnecessary hardship to the benefit of his capital owning employer on the grounds that his forefathers did bad business. He would be well advised to do whatever is in his power to improve his situation, including gathering together with others of similar situation, using shear numbers to control the forces and using those forces to get at the resources that would otherwise be refused to him. And by doing so, he would be acting Nietzsche's will to power and abandoning the slave morality you claim of him, taking the reins of his life into his own hands.
-
moismyname escreveu:
A long reply, dyingdreams, but if you take away the unfounded allegations, the polemics and the pseudo-intelectual name-dropping, you haven't said much. You have yet to explain why questioning existing ownership structures is "moaning" where questioning existing political power structures (democracy) is not. You have yet to explain why "Guess what, life itself isn't fair" applies when it comes to unequal material conditions, but if majorities use their power of numbers in their own interest to overrule actions of individuals, there is need for intervention. You have yet to explain why a right to property is a moral obligation, while everything else is beyond good and evil. You have yet to explain why your principle of "you leave me alone, I leave you alone" allows you to use force against me if I dare to use certain resources for my own gain that are not being (adequately) used by you.
-
Fr0mN0where escreveu:
Well I think Pewizzle has cleared that up then;-)
-
Pewizzle escreveu:
socialism, what a nice guy
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
[I have never taken anything away from you.] Never said that you did, but you would if you could and people like you have, based on the same premises, which is enough for me. [Please stop accusing me of imposing my morality on you] Merely stating a fact, I say: you leave me alone, I leave you alone. You say: pay me and my mob to arrange affairs collectively like we see fit or we'll rob you anyway. I don't impose anything on you by telling you to back off, you impose on me by making me pay for stuff you want. [I never denounced individualism, but you always chose to close your eyes to that] The fact that you can't make the cause and effect link between not being free to own capital and consequently not being free as an individual to arrange your affairs like you want isn't my fault. Freedom has no "but"s imposed by you. [I accept the point about the morality of the majority of Germans in the third reich leading to the holocaust] yet you draw nothing from it when it suits you not to.
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
If interested in how property acquiesence works, this is a good place to start. That's the capitalist ideological version of it though, in terms of will to power it works by me pointing my gun at you and taking whatever I want from you and making that a basis of my property claim, or like you pointing a gun at me (through use of the state to hide behind) and taking what you want from me. But again, that as such is only one part of the question, which again is why I combine the two into cyclical and systemic instead of "photographic" thinking. As I mentioned before, a nice metaphor to this is "also sprach zarathustra", which is where the idea to move away from classic singular ideology towards dual ideology (theoretical and practical) came from. As such, even though it might appear to you to be otherwise, there is no contradiction involved in that :) It's merely a recognition of both logic, human imperfection and reality as the final arbiter :)
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
[I don't remember signing any voluntary agreement that someone else gets to own Mars and I waive any claims that I may have] The agreement isn't yours to give as far as property is concerned and you have no claims on "unowned" things as such. I don't need your agreement to own my computer, whether you agree to that or not does not concern me at all. However, in this case they haven't acquired the property over either the moon or mars and therefor they can't sell it since they do not own it. [Or is it a matter of being first? In that case I claim the rest of the universe!] It doesn't work that way :) It is a matter of being the first to homestead it though. [Are you going to tell me that if Friday was also shipwrecked and landed on the island 2 minutes earlier than Robinson, just enough time to scribble some signs on some bark, he could still effectively demand 100 hours of labour per week from him?] It doesn't work that way (neither from capitalist morality nor from the will to power).
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
[I agree that robbery is wrong, I don't agree that every property claim is legitimate] I agree, property obtained through robbery is illegitimate (at least in a moral sense). [taking a provision from it's fruits as governments do, isn't robbery] You say it isn't and you are free to do so, it's your opinion, so pay the government for its services to you. I however don't buy stuff I don't want from private companies and don't want to buy stuff I don't want from the government at gunpoint either, merely because a mass of people like you say that's ok because otherwise you wouldn't be able to handle life so the government like a deus ex machina has to do it for you. [You know, these days you can buy property on the moon and on Mars.] They can't sell it, neither morally nor legally and completely in line with capitalist ideology and principles of ownership acquirement.
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
That's why I combine the will to power to capitalist ideology: one strives after the übermensch (the realisation of master morality) through matching its characteristics as far as possible and at the same time promote their advancement, fully realising that "the übermensch" is far away but you can nonetheless aim for it. But here's the catch: there's a huge difference in me promoting what I say and you promoting what you say. I promote reality beyond good and evil, you - unhindered by any economic insights - promote a counter-reality of unattainable utopia. I have no doubts that you misunderstand 90% of what I say as mysticism instead of metaphor, so I can only suggest you to try and read at the very least "beyond good and evil" and "also sprach zarathustra" to grasp a bit of the concepts used, although I know that you won't :) That at the same time is also why I decided to write my thesis on it: it'll save you from having to write x amount of books to get the basics under your belt :)
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
So when I say that as a thinking human being I strive after a world based on those realities instead of the one where people like you would be/are calling the shots and are still tribal and feral enough to think that by making offerings to the gods of "democracy" or "social economy" you can stop earthquakes from occuring, then moaning has nothing to do with it at all, I'm sorry you perceive it as such but at the same time I realize that's perhaps all you're capable off at the moment. I said before that I have no illusions about it: taxes are paid at gunpoint, I've paid them as well even though they're robbery and I oppose them. Why? Because that's simply the way the world works: might makes right. But only in one sense. That kind of "right" (in the sense of "not wrong") is a temporary matter of power play, as such it is connected but not identical to the moral "right", only in part.
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
I base what I say on realistic mechanics and observations (people aren't equal, an incentive personal gain is the best driving force, which leads to the betterment of others as well but that's as far as I'm concerned pleasant yet irrelevant as such). You base yourself on wishful thinking and mere opportunism at best (people are equal, I have a moral right to tell others who are more capable than I am to tell them what to do and how to do it, people aren't capable of taking care of themselves but they are capable of voting absolute power in the hands of those who'll magically refrain from abusing such powers and safeguard them from the dreadful consequences of companies trying to sell their products, you can plan an economy consciously, the majority is always right, the list goes on...). But me denouncing your slave morality doesn't equal moaning or crying about it, perhaps you can't understand that exactly because of your kind of morality and the effects it has on your way of life.
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
[you've admitted to everyone but yourself that your proposed world order is morally flawed] Unlike what the plebs would have you believe, morality and ethics aren't limited to vulgar preaching of solidarity and irrelevant ramblings about utopia. Similarly, plastics are used to make more than toddler's toys. Morality can be/is perfectly in line with saying that reality is what it is whether you like it or not; perhaps it isn't your morality but it's mine. You're the one wishing to rule out reality and human nature to make it work this time with your collectivism, not me. Don't mistake the fact that I say that things are what they are with their ultimate legitimacy; this is not the omega point of time where everything is set in stone, everything is a flux and so are the forces that guide it. That's the problem with people like you (socialists of all sorts) I think, somehow you seem uncapable or unwilling of systemic thought but can only grasp seperate disconnected subjects and instances.
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
[you're the one moaning the loudest about how you dislike how things are right now, that rather disqualifies you from the "Guess what, life itself isn't "fair"" argument] Actually no. I don't think I've moaned that much actually, if anything I've said several times that I hold no illusions about current situations and such. I merely observe that people like you force their more ambitious and successful counterparts to sustain them and their wishes, not based on your personal competence but on your total biomass. Somebody who gets robbed and says so isn't moaning as far as I'm concerned, it's just stating a fact without much else to it. Also, there's a vast difference between the way you approach the matter and the way I do. You come at the question from a point of inferiority, like a bunch of rats having to team up to take down the lions who outclass them so you can take some of their meat, and I look at it as shaking off rats who I basicly have nothing to do with but.keep clinging on.
-
dyingdreams escreveu:
Sorry for the wait, time limited. [I am not convinced that a low rate of tax does necessarily result in more taxes being collected.] It's not a matter of opinion, it's a demonstrated fact, plenty of stuff to find about this online as well without a doubt. I don't quite follow your logic sometimes. I never said that robbery is justified by making it smaller, I only said that less robbery is preferable over more just like I'd rather lose 1 finger than 5 and in the same way prefer 10% over 50% taxation while still holding that losing 1 finger isn't something to applaud and that taxing people with different percentages under the guise of equality is retarded. I never said anything about lower taxes suddenly not being wrong, they're still robbery at gunpoint. But I prefer a tax rate of 10% over one of 100%, I don't get what you don't get about that?
-
moismyname escreveu:
(v) You don't remember me dismantling anything you've said because you return to your simplistic "capitalism=individualism=good, socialism=collectivism=bad" starting equations every time your reasoning is in trouble. But your right, I've done you wrong, sometimes you do come up with good arguments.
-
moismyname escreveu:
(ii) Please stop accusing me of imposing my morality on you. I have never imposed anything on you. If anyone is trying to impose their morality, it's you, by disguising it as inviolable rights. I'm the moral relativist, remember? (iii) I'm actually not a complete moral relativist, I just happen to be someone who sees the logical flaw of using one majority morality to denounce another. In any case, I challenge you to show me where solidarity and compassion for their own sake were central for my argumentation. Of course I also never denounced individualism, which is the central theme of the libertarian socialism I have been advocating, but you always chose to close your eyes to that. (iv) I accept the point about the morality of the majority of Germans in the third reich leading to the holocaust.
-
moismyname escreveu:
To me and to most, that would seem arbitrary and unreasonable considering the unequal implications. In any case, Robinson is hardly going to accept it, and I don't see how one could blame him. By extension, the same applies to all land and it's resources. I wasn't asked when the contracts were drafted that would keep these things away from me, therefore the only reason I might have to accept those contracts is because society. i.e. it's majority, tells me to. But you've made quite clear that that's no argument for you.... A few more things that come to mind: (i) Please stop accusing me of taking things away from you. I have never taken anything away from you. If anyone has, it was your government, backed by the majority of your country. I have just been arguing that it was justified (in principle).
Rádio do grupo Anti-Socialism
Novos membros (239)
-
Dagne_
Quarta à noite
-
DickWhiteman
Quarta de manhã
-
AngerWithin
Segunda à noite
-
maskimer
Segunda à noite
-
musicfan1994
Domingo à tarde
-
dml23
Sábado à noite
Atividade recente
-
changeable adicionou o artigo Best of 2009 a este grupo. Quarta à noite
-
Dagne_ se juntou a este grupo. Quarta à noite
-
DickWhiteman se juntou a este grupo. Quarta de manhã
-
AngerWithin se juntou a este grupo. Segunda à noite
-
maskimer se juntou a este grupo. Segunda à noite
-
maskimer se juntou a este grupo. Segunda à noite
-
musicfan1994 se juntou a este grupo. Domingo à tarde
-
dml23 se juntou a este grupo. Sábado à noite
-
Lietvyris saiu deste grupo. Sábado à tarde
-
Um usuário excluído se juntou a este grupo. Semana passada
