My thoughts on A- Political beliefs

[DrewSTNY]

I'm Anarcho communist. I believe that we should unite as far leftists to fight against Fascism and the system. I believe that after revolution, we should use non authoritarian communism temporarily to teach the people and basically yse communism as a gateway to Anarchism. Because if we start off with a Anarchist world it will fail miserably.

PS, that pic is old as hell. That's when I was only into communism, just too lazy to take another picture and post it.

Ok, so you said non authoritarian communism. Does that mean the population can tell the communists to "fuck off" without getting re-educated??

Look at history, communism, socialism, fascism have all been tried and are used to beat down the masses. I say fuck all that noise because I highly doubt that there is such a thing as non-authoritarianism. Someone always wants to be in charge.

 

[Deleted member 125]

[USERGROUP=3]@Administrative[/USERGROUP] you want to look into this? Cheers and Merry Christmas

its being looked into, i doubt itll be very long before its resolved.

 

[Hobo Mud]

I don't always get political but when I do, I drink Dos Equis "Stay thirsty, my friends."

 

[Matt Derrick]

While I personally abhor capitalism and StP frowns upon just about anything right wing, I think it's important to have a civil discourse with those who have different ideologies than yourself. Believe it or not, it is possible to get through to such people, but that will never happen by insulting people on the internet. This is why we have the anti-flaming rules here on StP.

Remember, you can disagree, but you can't resort to name calling. Once you do, they automatically win. I think you'll find this to be true both online and in real life.

 

[Deleted member 125]

Actually I'm not even mad lol. Like a warning mark is gonna piss me off lmao. Wouldn't give a shit if I got banned, my life doesn't depend on a website that apparently allows Fascists on it which is the reason I'm deleting my account anyway. I advise anyone left to do the same. I actually recommended it to lots of different friends but I'll make sure to tell them they allow Capitalists and other far right extremists on.

I said I've never been a homeless traveler, never said I've never traveled in my entire life. There's a difference between traveling with money and staying in hotels then doing it broke and out in nature or out on the streets.

well yea it kinda sounded like you were mad because you ya know...took the time to pm somebody about it.

stp doesnt tolerate fascists on it. what it does its allow people who arnt completely arrogant and full of bullshit to offer a different opinion then somebody else. ide eat my hat if the site had any users who ide call fascists hanging around. youv proved more then once that you are not only ignorant but also want this community to serve you while contributing nothing, and even worse you have no humility about yer lack of experience in the lifestyle you seemed to be interested in.

yer posts where people challenge yer beliefs and give you opportunity to debate pretty much prove that you are a brat.

 

[DrewSTNY]

well yea it kinda sounded like you were mad because you ya know...took the time to pm somebody about it.

stp doesnt tolerate fascists on it. what it does its allow people who arnt completely arrogant and full of bullshit to offer a different opinion then somebody else. ide eat my hat if the site had any users who ide call fascists hanging around. youv proved more then once that you are not only ignorant but also want this community to serve you while contributing nothing, and even worse you have no humility about yer lack of experience in the lifestyle you seemed to be interested in.

yer posts where people challenge yer beliefs and give you opportunity to debate pretty much prove that you are a brat.

Will you send pics if I tell you I'm a baby eating fascist bastard??

 

[Weminuche]

I got questions for everyone who makes the blanket statement "I don't like capitalism." I know it can be extremely exploitative if used in an immoral way. But what about the positive aspects of it? Can't any system be abused if immoral people are in power?
I met and briefly worked with two young dudes from Al Salvador and Guatemala. They left their homes to come here to work and make money. They actually traveled across national borders to live in a capitalistic society and wake up early as fuck every morning to practice capitalism. I didn't hear them complain once.
What about the refugees who come here from war torn places. They realize that they are in a place where they can freely practice capitalism. They get jobs as uber drivers and at the airport (from what I've seen in my city). They wake up every morning and work their asses off to make a decent wage to support their families. Yeah it's hard but it's sure as hell better than what some of them were going through in their home countries. Do you guys think they hate capitalism?
There's this moving company in Denver that is one of the largest in the state. It's family-owned and the dude who runs it inherited it from his mom. He's filthy rich and his office is full of all the shit rich people think is cool. He buys old friggin humvees just for fun. Steriotypical capitalist right? But his business allows people like some of my friends to make money to support their families. He personally collected gym equipment in his office so his workers could workout for free. My friend who works there seems to like working for the guy cause he's cool to his employees.
I feel like this thread was mostly ugly shit that I don't want to get into. But it bothers me when people automatically make the jump from capitalist to racist/fascist. I personally prefer to work for the things that I have. Does that make me a capitalist? Maybe. Does that make me a racist/fascist tho? If so I'd much appreciate some explanation as to how. Thanks.

 

[CaptainCassius]

Doesn't like people telling him what to do, supports a system that tells him what to do. LOL the bright ideas by a Capitalist

I want to address this because I am not a statist. I accept that people should be allowed to form states or whatever associations they wish.

However; just because I support economic capitalism and a free market doesn't mean I support governments or associations telling me what I can or can't do without being part of that VOLUNTARY contract. State intervention in people's lives and economic policy, I believe, does more harm than good in most cases, and is a hindrance on growth and progress.

I am aware that in capitalism people essentially vote with their money, and as such those with more money and resources have more 'say' than those who may be disenfranchised or working for a wage.

Still

I believe it 'realistically' levels the playing field by ALLOWING opportunity for advancement.

For example starting your own business or providing a service for profit.

The whole you can't be a squatter and be a capitalist I don't believe to be true. Just because capitalism recognizes property rights doesn't mean that anyone is actually obligated to follow the laws set in place to protect those rights. Sure there may be consequences for that within a state or community but nonetheless it's all dependant on if those can be effectively affected on you.

Not to mention there are squatters rights. Reminds me of John Locke, with his requirement for 'owning' land being that one must 'mix his toil with the land'.

Liberalism on the broader spectrum is really quite 'left' especially when compared to feudalism and other political systems that have been in place. In the US I understand that those beliefs are more center-right probably.

Much more to be said and discussed I'm sure regarding practical application and philosophy; as I said, you could write volumes..

Again just my opinion.

@Matt Derrick
I'm sure has some very compelling points and arguments against capitalism that I am very much interested in hearing. Discussion of opposing viewpoints is very healthy and important, especially in democratic society.

Any links to your favorite threads on this topic would be appreciated.

Thanks

 

[Weminuche]

@CaptainCassius
"...effectively affected on you."

well done haha.

 

[DrewSTNY]

I want to address this because I am not a statist. I accept that people should be allowed to form states or whatever associations they wish.

However; just because I support economic capitalism and a free market doesn't mean I support governments or associations telling me what I can or can't do without being part of that VOLUNTARY contract. State intervention in people's lives and economic policy, I believe, does more harm than good in most cases, and is a hindrance on growth and progress.

I am aware that in capitalism people essentially vote with their money, and as such those with more money and resources have more 'say' than those who may be disenfranchised or working for a wage.

Still

I believe it 'realistically' levels the playing field by ALLOWING opportunity for advancement.

For example starting your own business or providing a service for profit.

The whole you can't be a squatter and be a capitalist I don't believe to be true. Just because capitalism recognizes property rights doesn't mean that anyone is actually obligated to follow the laws set in place to protect those rights. Sure there may be consequences for that within a state or community but nonetheless it's all dependant on if those can be effectively affected on you.

Not to mention there are squatters rights. Reminds me of John Locke, with his requirement for 'owning' land being that one must 'mix his toil with the land'.

Liberalism on the broader spectrum is really quite 'left' especially when compared to feudalism and other political systems that have been in place. In the US I understand that those beliefs are more center-right probably.

Much more to be said and discussed I'm sure regarding practical application and philosophy; as I said, you could write volumes..

Again just my opinion.

@Matt Derrick
I'm sure has some very compelling points and arguments against capitalism that I am very much interested in hearing. Discussion of opposing viewpoints is very healthy and important, especially in democratic society.

Any links to your favorite threads on this topic would be appreciated.

Thanks

I heard a good one the other day -

Both sides want money, the right gets it through selling things, the left gets it through donations and fund raising.

In recent decades, the US has followed classical liberalism in general. In 2008, many academics considered this form of government's economics collapsed, when in reality, it was just another bubble bursting. The current economic bubble appears to be crypto currency speculation. I think this crash will destroy nations, but it's too early to tell.

Imperfect as it is, any system that affords anyone the opportunity to freely decide their future is better then the dismal oppression that has been the norm for most of human history. This has been some form of capitalism, even if it's governmental. Just look at China and how successful it has been in the last 20 years. They have state capitalism which doesn't benefit the individual, but the net affect is more people's standard of living in that country has been raised significantly.

Matt may not agree with me, but even he is participating in capitalism with the sale of his book on Amazon.

I live in one of the most oppressive states in the country, yet, I can mostly ignore it. Unless they arrest me for growing food in my front yard, then it's war.

 

[dumpster harpy]

I also have a question for everyone "opposed to capitalism."

Can you define capitalism?

Or have you been mislead to confuse it with corporatism?

 

[Soulutions]

This is a few of the beefs I have with capitalism as of now.
1. Endless, literally, endless resource mining. The consumer culture( out with the old and in with the new, compulsively ) is undoubtedly what funds this economic system. This will occasionally lead to the u.s. military "Spreading Democracy and Freedom" in countries we have no business in, other than plunder. Africa for example. I know I can't say consumer culture is exclusive to capitalism but it is the most important cog, I'd say.
2. land owner ship and Usery
Land ownership, and why it's unreasonable, can get kinda dragged out. So, I'll give a summery unless someone wants the long version.
A landowner collects rent, every month, because he claims the Right to take your money for living on that particular piece of land. And what does this money represent? Nothing, neither labor done or risk taken. And if you want to say, "well he(land owner) is taking a risk by letting the renter stay on that land or in that house." If so then why isn't it the other way around? If the renter is a good Stewart of the land ( or house) and keeps the natural course of entropy or decay at Bay, then why wouldn't the land owner compensate them for keeping it in good shape rather than them having to do it for themselves

 

[Soulutions]

I also have a question for everyone "opposed to capitalism."

Can you define capitalism?

Or have you been mislead to confuse it with corporatism?

Without resorting to Google, my honest interpretation, which is only rudimentary, admittedly, would be so:
An economic system in which private citizen garnish the right to own land( private land ownership ) and have access to a free market (hypothetically. It's as fleeting as that socialist Utopia), wherein they can freely(again, hypothetically) do there business

 

[dumpster harpy]

Capitalism is the use of capital in exchange for goods or services. It's not a system or an ideology.

You are talking about Corporatism. The powers that be are very fond of twisting and abusing language to keep us fighting with each other. As long as potential radicals are trained to automatically equate the word capitalism with evil, we're not gonna get anywhere.

 

[Soulutions]

Capitalism is the use of capital in exchange for goods or services. It's not a system or an ideology.

You are talking about Corporatism. The powers that be are very fond of twisting and abusing language to keep us fighting with each other. As long as potential radicals are trained to automatically equate the word capitalism with evil, we're not gonna get anywhere.

No, now I have used Google and I was pretty damn close. Using "capitol," which itself is a pretty vague term, for the exchange of goods or services is closer to the definition of Economics, not capitalism.
But your right about language and how definitions arent universal

 

[Soulutions]

It is a system

 

[DrewSTNY]

This is a few of the beefs I have with capitalism as of now.
1. Endless, literally, endless resource mining. The consumer culture( out with the old and in with the new, compulsively ) is undoubtedly what funds this economic system. This will occasionally lead to the u.s. military "Spreading Democracy and Freedom" in countries we have no business in, other than plunder. Africa for example. I know I can't say consumer culture is exclusive to capitalism but it is the most important cog, I'd say.
2. land owner ship and Usery
Land ownership, and why it's unreasonable, can get kinda dragged out. So, I'll give a summery unless someone wants the long version.
A landowner collects rent, every month, because he claims the Right to take your money for living on that particular piece of land. And what does this money represent? Nothing, neither labor done or risk taken. And if you want to say, "well he(land owner) is taking a risk by letting the renter stay on that land or in that house." If so then why isn't it the other way around? If the renter is a good Stewart of the land ( or house) and keeps the natural course of entropy or decay at Bay, then why wouldn't the land owner compensate them for keeping it in good shape rather than them having to do it for themselves

Consumerism -

Have you researched Chinese companies in northern Africa? There is little regard for child labor.

How about gold and diamond mines?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/09/11/africas-child-mining-shame

Singling out one nation is disingenuous. While the US by and large involves itself in far too many other nations, Russia and China are both in the race to spread their power beyond their borders.

On the second point of property rights -

While first nation cultures did not treat property the same as European invaders, they did fight over territory. Try going into a neighboring tribe's territory without invite and you'll either find yourself enslaved or dead.

 

[dumpster harpy]

No, now I have used Google and I was pretty damn close. Using "capitol," which itself is a pretty vague term, for the exchange of goods or services is closer to the definition of Economics, not capitalism.
But your right about language and how definitions arent universal

Fair enough. It would be more accurate to say that capitalism is not any one system, but an umbrella term assigned to many systems. What I'm trying to say is that free market capitalism and state capitalism are entirely different things; and that because "state capitalism" is often shortened to just "capitalism," there are many who fall into the trap of associating the two.

 

[Soulutions]

Drew:
I never pegged Americans as the only "consumer culture." Just that capitalism needs a consumer culture to thrive.
And your rebuttal to land ownership is little more than a straw-man argument.

Malaclypse:
Your post is kinda confusing. But I think the word your looking for is agorism

 

[DrewSTNY]

No problem, Soul.

I know that the US isn't the only consumer culture out there and that capitalism thrives on goods sold, that is the definition in a nut shell. Doesn't necessarily mean that capitalism is bad, although I would prefer a barter based economy, but that can't be regulated and the governments of the world hate stuff they can't regulate.

As far as land ownership, without going into huge amounts of details, the point I made pretty much summarized North American First Nation people's ways of treating the land they lived on. I should have said borders have existed since the human race crawled out of the ooze and they have been fighting over said borders since the first border was established. I'm not saying land ownership is bad or good, but people want a place to call their own, keep their stuff on, and keep out those who they feel would take their stuff or do harm to their person. If you choose to be a nomad, then you borrow the land you occupy, but your property travels with you. With the rise of civilization, nomadic people seem to have been snuffed out or marginalized ie. The Roma come to mind first.