I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but could you give some examples of things you might want do do, that you don't think you could do in a socialist, communal society?

Have you been reading the thread? It is full of them.

-S

Get more money, own a better car than my neighbor, get a good education, have Success in life. Something not everyone can have in a commie/socialist government/economy.

He said "do do". Tee hee.

In my mind, even this is too narrow. My thoughts are to go through life feeling I accomplished something. The idea of being just another number is just that - nothing. You are wasting space, food, and adding to global warming just by existing if you choose a system where you are told what to do, and told to get back in your cage. Only the truely free can be free to accomplish the truely extrodinary.

I wrote above about how this mentality is affecting people who have lived under this system for so long. It is nothing more than a jail cell, and being outside that jail is an impossibility for some people. They can't handle it mentally.

-S

PS. Even the state has no capability to imagine what it is that is best for its people. Only the people can do that.

Under capitalism you can get a better car than your neighbor if you sit on your arse all day and own a factory.
Your neighbor works hard 12 hours a day on a factory floor, but he still earns far less than you and his car is crap, even tho he actually works far more than you.

Under socialism the only way you can get a better car than your neighbor is if you actually chose to do harder work than he does.
Now everyone owns a percentage of the factory, so no one can earn money by just owning something that makes money for them by exploiting the workers. Instead of the factory exploiting the workers, the workers exploit the factory. The more hours work you do, and the harder the work, the bigger the percentage of the factory you own and so the more money you make.

True, I just ran out of time. Had to post short.

I guess you still don't get it. The guy with the factory already risked his butt and all he had on a gamble of trying to make something. He can sit on his butt the rest of his life if he wants, but I have never known a person who created something like this to sit idle. They are out creating something new and wonderful. This one guy has created two things now, and will probably increase things exponentially until he has a major industrial base going for him. Back in the Socialistic / Communistic idea - all your guys still have only 1 factory to the 10+ that the capatalistic guy has.

This is the very reason the US outproduced its rival in every way shape and form. Russia could never hope to hold a candle to the economic might of a private system. There is no incentive.

-S

If one sees the value of life only in goals defined by a purely materialistic philosophy, a debate like this necessarily must go like it does. The definition of "success" as given in this thread also is very poor and self-limiting, imo. It does justice to trained doves in experiments, maybe, but not to humans. It may be true that many humans live in so poor codntions that material needs rank highest for them, necessarily. This does not mean that man is not capable of wishes leading beyond this. This "beyond" is what makes man seperate from animals. so focussing on materialistic concepts exclusively only means to limit man to his animalistic origin in the past. No wonder then that it is often argued that business shouold mimic the survival of the fittest as being illustrated by preadator and prey in nature. But that is a poor vision of man. no, it is no vision at all. It just rules that it shall never be different.

It is sad if people are living a life i so great poverty that they cannot afford to think about the "beyond". But all hope truly is lost oif people live in wealth but refuse to think about it voluntarily, and even try to convince others that it is useless, although they have the option to do so.

But those doing this are the same who often complain about decreasing values and lack of moral. It is exactly the attitude of mind that makes the West so weak and vulnerable towards ideologies (like Islam and any form of fundamentalisjm in general) that are strong in morals, even if rigid morals, it is what has hollowed out the West and made him loosing the right to claim cultural and/or ethical superiority. Poverty corrupts morals when you need to rob or hide your pride to get together the food and money you need to keep your family alive. wealth also corrupts morals - when enough is never enough, and wealth is all that counts in life.

"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." - America and Europe have choosen for Money. That's why our community now fall victim to foreign Gods like Muhammad's Allah. Man wants more than just bread and gold. Western materilaism doe snot feed this most essential need. So people start looking elsewhere - even in totalitarism if only it promises them leadership on the ground of strong morals.

I find it ironic that some people cannot see that they may criticise Islam, but make it strong themsleves by hollowing out the rich ethical and philosophical heritage of the West - by reducing it to purely materialistic terms and capitalistic temrinology. However- ignorrance is no excuse and does not save you from penalty. Islam cannot be driven back by dollars and militaries.

We rot from within, and die of our own greed and lacking restraint, while still emitting a superficial shine. It's not the shine of a bright mind, but cold gold only.

You are officially the most materialistic person I know.

What the hell? Whats with this idea that the more **** you own, the more people you exploit, and the fatter your wallet, the bigger success you are in life. It's despicable.

Please read all of the replies!:up:

Well, tell me what your idea of sucess is.

Pretty much everything OPPOSITE of what I mentioned. The more people you help, the more wealth you spread, the better person you are. I don't care how nice your car is, how big your house is, if I see someone driving a Ferrari around, I dont think "Wow what a success he must be." No, I think "Wow, what a jackass."

The problem, as I see it, is corporatism, not capitalism. Corporations are an artificial structure expressly designed to avoid individual or collective liability for corporate actions. I believe multi-national corporations actually prefer authoritarian governments because they provide labor peace through suppression of the labor force. Since they are, technically, citizens of the country of their incorporation, they are heir to all the rights of property available to such citizens. Simultaneously, because they are not real persons, they do not serve in the armed forces , but can obtain contracts from that government for profit. Their only alliegance is to their board & shareholders and their only motive to make the greatest amount of profit possible. When you have Jack Welch, former Chairman of GE, wishing in an interview that their factories could be built on barges so they could be towed to the part of the world where labor is cheapest and you have a race to the bottom. Now with those corporations hiring their own mercenary armies, they are becoming de facto states themselves.

The demographic fact is that overpopuation, resource exhaustion & the nature of corporate growth are leading to a two-tier society with the wealthy power elite living in their private reserves, deaf to the cries of human suffering from the vast majority living in grinding poverty and despair. At least with feudalism & the Divine Right of Kings, there was noblesse oblige. The nobility had a religious obligation to care for the poor & downtrodden, even though it was more honored in the breach.

Regarding communism, I believe it's failure is directly related to the absence of Zen thinking among communists. A Zen Communist, on taking power, would immediately give everything to the poor, send the government home, declare Communism achieved and resign his office. Thus the state would wither away.

"Zen Communism"...? :lol:

Hey, a Zen Nazi would have been a Zionist. Don't like the Jews? Send them where they want to go & they'll pay you for the privelege.

A Zen christian thanks god for this life.

A Zen Muslim would annoy the hell out of you on your doorstep like the Baptists, Pentacostals & Jehovah's witnesses do.

It's the Wei Wu Wei, the "doing without bothering".

:lol:
That are without doubt the queerest explanations of wu wei and zionism i ever red anywhere! Good one!

Of course, even if you expand te definition of success to academic or cultural achievements, there are still reasons to oppose socialist government, as they generally seem to require so many restrictions on personal freedom that those things, too, become harder. Of course, it would be unfair to attack socialism specifically for this, as it is but one of the systems that restrict too much. But it is one of them.