Communist Propaganda?

Comments

thegent's picture
Discord user

Communist Propaganda? facts are facts..

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
GKhan's picture

So you are saying we need to go to the stars. Unless the universe is finite.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
GKhan's picture

But seriously, what about innovation, tech and virtual wealth? We don't even have the physical currency for the amount of virtual currency in the world today. Not saying he is wrong but he's way to general in his arguement.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

Tech doesn't really offset capitalist exploitation it just makes it more efficient. Same goes for virtual wealth. His argument is general because he's talking about the future of our existance on the planet. Capitalism as an over-arching ethos seems like a fool's errand to me. It's great for the 1%, that's about it. It doesn't seem to have any future thinking attached. At least that's how it is with this neoliberal form of capitalism we've had rammed down our throats.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

Capitalism is great for those willing to work for what they have. That's more than 1%.

 

If you arn't willing to work for what you have then you want socialism.

 

If you do not possess the type of intelligence that is conducive to strong survival traits. Then you want socialism.

 

If you are more of a deep thinker than a quick thinker. Then yes you will despise capitalism and spend an inordinate amount of time finding flaws rather than spending that time building your dream.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

That's typical thinking of someone who lives under the umbrella of a developed country that's benefited so much from the exploitation. Sure it's great for you but is it great for South American countries who've been getting dicked by the CIA on behalf of US capital interests?

 

The video isn't so much about finding flaws in capitalism (none of which you've addressed) as it is about critiquing it as an unsustainable overarching ethos for society going forward.

 


There's no reason we can't use capitalism for the benefits you've listed (summed up as merit-based material reward) but under a different regime that's less exploititative, more sustainable & far better for the 99%. Capitalism can be a tool we use rather than an out of control juggernaut that determines our future.

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

The fundamental problem I have with all of this horse shit is that it's scarcity based. Which is the lense of how the majority view life. Through limitation  instead of opportunity.

 

The point of capitalism is that it's a freedom based market. Prices and good are negotiated between the buyer and seller. It's the responsibility of the buyer to negotiate the price. It's the responsibility of the seller to agree or disagree to the price.

 

If you remove or change capitalism human behaviour will not change.

 

Humans are exploitative creatures by nature. It just depends on which degree.

 

10'000 + years of evolution cannot be changed that easily.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

Yeah all creatures on this planet are exploitative by nature but we have civilisation & can control of our destiny.

 

"we have a freedom based market" - that's just sloganeering & a misconception IMO. It's neither here nor there when talking about the planet surviving the next few centuries.

 

I agree human behaviour won't change just by adjusting the role of capitalism - we'll always seek to serve the interests of ourselves & families first... but that's not an argument against making adjustments to improve things. Human traits should always be considered for any successful regime.

 

OP is talking mostly about sustainability on a planet with finite resources, & comparing capitalism to 'planet cancer', not capitalism to USSR-style communism.

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

We'll be fine. If we can get colonies and astroid mining in the next few centuries that will be a much more important tool for survival.

 

By that time or close after I think the choice for our goverments will be either capitalism or totaltarianism.

 

Capitalism is much better.

 

Socialism encourages too much dependancy on the government. Which weakens the power of the people and invites far more abuses on upon us.

 

If you have your own land or your own money and youare prepared to defend it. You have much more control over your quality of life.

 

What he is proposing is to rid the world of capitalism completely.

 

He calls it cutting out cancer.

 

I call it throwing out the baby with the bath water.

 

Even if the whole world conformed to a new way of living. The top tier of the 1% will be completely immune.

 

They are above the law, because they control who makes laws. Whatever mess we are in they encouraged so we make drastic changes to our way of life and turn over our freedoms willingly.

 

Power cannot be taken. It can only be given.

 

I choose annhiliation over them destroying the individual.

 

No it's not solganneering or miscinception. If capitalism isn't working out for you the way you want it to. You arn't doing it right.

 

Which is an easy mistake that millions make.

 

Working hard is a large part of it. But you have to have a certain kind of intelligence. You have to spot the correct things to focus on, put your hard work into those things. And be preapared for fierce and crafty competition from others.

 

 

 

 

 

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

We'll be fine

he says, meanwhile the Bolivian government has just been overthrown again by the CIA backed fascists (on behalf of American capitalist interests) & the first thing the new US-backed govt does is take Bolivian natural resources from the people.

 

Socialism ... weakens the power of the people

Actually it's the opposite. This is by definition & when put into practice.

 

...your life living under the umbrella of a powerful capitalist country seems to be your focus here. That's not the point of the video. I'm not sure you're capable of looking at the planet as a whole nor realise what capitalism does around the world outide your bubble.

 

Being rewarded for working hard & making smart choices is not unique to capitalism. It's the natural outcome of any merit-based society, of which all are to more or lesser extents. Capitalism alone doesn't necessarily increase social mobilty. You may be confused by the fact that most developed countries are capitalist & tend to have higher social mobility at this point in history. You're conflating things to suit your argument IMO & again, ignoring the topic of the video which is what's good for the planet & our future on it.

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

Nice try.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

You didn't even try. You just pushed out your preconceived capitalism>socialim talking points & missed the point of the video.

I'm going to assume that your answer to the title of the video is a big fat YES.

 

Couple of take aways, just to be critical of your comments:

- you don't give a shit about people in other countries who are being exploited for capitalist interests of more powerful countries.

- you refuse to consider criticisms of capitalism & prefer to look after number 1 at any cost.

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

You can presume whatever you want.

 

The truth is we agree to disagree.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

We disagree on the straw man you've been trying to establish, which is unrelated to the video.

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

Look out for number 1 at all cost. Yes. I shamelessly stand on that. All of you before me.

 

I can accept that.

 

Can you accept that your  focus is to not lose an arguement at any cost?

 

I don't think so.

 

Surprise me.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

I accept that but not at all costs. I'll argue honestly & admit when mistaken but love a good scrap so will go hard. It's a good way to learn.

 

It's hard to argue about this topic of capitalism because it's pretty vast & a little subjective, it needs framing to get anywhere. I don't disagree that for us as individuals in 1st world countris it works pretty well. I think we can do better but can't argue we're lucky to be in the position we're in, all things considered.

 

Suprise me & commit to the notion that capitalism as an overarching ethos is the best way forward for the planet, incl all life on it.

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

You didn't even need to accept that. I know it's true.

 

However, I will respect that you can admit that.

 

The planet is not in trouble. In the 70's it was global cooling. In 2000 it was Y2K, then 2012. The global warming becomes mainstream.  I'm not buying into any of this doomsday garbage.

 

Capitalism isn't perfect. But it is the best we have. China can suck a dick. Russia should ally with us. The middle east needs to take it's non conformists back into their shitholes since they love their way of life so much.

 

What was the point of me stating all of that?

 

To show you how deeply I hold my values. You won't change my mind.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

I'm not saying the planet is in trouble but we're losing a lot of life on it with our exploitation. Roughly 0.1% of life goes extinct each year. I prefer a planet teaming with life.

 

You're an ideologue & I have no interest in what you think about China, it'll no doubt be based a life of being subjected to the most sophisticated propaganda apparatus in history. Russia would love to be allied but for mainly capitalist reasons they are seen as an enemy. Same as China. The US government is so cucked to capitalist interests they create enemies where none exist to prop up the weapons industry & expand American capital. Future Americans will suffer because of this IMO.

 

Capitalism isn't perfect. But it is the best we have.

I disagree. We can agree to disagree on that. 

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
backdraft's picture
Beta TesterDiscord userImage gallery

What do you think about the scenario when AI and robotic takes most of the world's jobs. That is coming like it or not. Maybe in the next 100 years. Robots will build your house, grow your crops, make your cars and gadget with minimal human involvement. 

 

How do you think capitalism will thrive when technology reaches this point?  Think about it, we would have all the basic needs for everyone on the planet but very few would be able to take advantage of that because of a broken system we invented. Capitalism has and still does serve a purpose but at some point we have to evolve beyond that otherwise it will be a pretty bleak future for 95% of the world.  

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

I don't necessarily agree with the premise. Machines taking our jobs has been happening since at least the industrial revolution. We just find new ways to be useful, charge money for it, & it's a job. 'Better everything all the time' creates jobs.

 

I love the idea of not working but there would need to be replacements that are just as fulfilling. Some lucky people would do their job for free given a choice. The rest of us are wasting a big part of our lives. We could be doing all sorts of more useful or entertaining things with our time.

 

Predicting the future is difficult & sketchy. All you can really do is look at history & extrapolate. It's hard because it's often shaped by unforeseen events. The rate of technological advancement is exponential & some groundbreaking tech comes along that changes our lives a lot, like air travel, personal vehicles, personal computers, internet, mobile phones, etc. I have an idea of what I think the next 50 years looks like & a vague idea of the next 200.

 

The future of capitalism rests a lot on geopolitical rivalries. To escape the global capitalist system we need for the European-based (incl American) colonialist empire types to fade away a bit. The next phase is a bilateral world order with China & America on each side. China is more into 3rd world stuff while America will be pushing capitalism & trying to maintain power. That's probably what the next 50 years will be like, our countries won't be able to escape the oligarchs in that time unless America collapses far worse than the Great Depression.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
backdraft's picture
Beta TesterDiscord userImage gallery

I can't imagine how this wouldn't happen. Sure it's sci-fi at this point, our robots are dumb and clumsy, but it has to evolve because there's a demand for it. Ironically powered by capitalism and the need for ever-cheaper labour.

AI has been the missing link here and it's picking up speed at quite a rate. Pair this with quantum computing and you'll be getting general-purpose robots in no time.  Don't think 100 years is unreasonable to expect something like a T-800 intelligence, hopefully without the killing part.    

 

I'm sure a lot of new jobs will be created as a side effect but will it be enough if you lose every basic labour / menial job that a machine can do? 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

It's a good question. So far what I've seen with AI development is more tools to make our existing jobs more effective & our lives more convenient. 100 years is a long time in tech now though & there's that 'singularity' concept to consider. The result of machines designing & building machines smarter than themselves is hard to fathom. It'll depend what we tell the machines to work on.

 
In 100 years I could imagine super high tech cities in developed nations existing alongside basic old school living in the rest of the world. Kinda like it is now. Convenience is a big deal in the cities, China seems to be leading the way with this, I'm not shilling but you can get a super wide range of things delivered to your location within minutes or a few hours in the large cities there. That gives clues to where things are headed.

 
100 years is only a short period in social/political organisation though. We have inherent selfish traits as a result of our thousands of years of tribal, nomadic existance. I'd expect politically for things to be similar to how they are in 100 years within the capitalist countries, with a ruling class looking to maintain their position of power - not a utopia for dystopia or the rest of us, just a lifestyle that's less labour intensive & has more options.

 

To project into the future we can only look at history & extrapolate from the pattern. I don't think religion & underlying philosphies will go away in 100 years. So whatever tech comes about will fit into our existing outlook. Blahblahblah lol

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
backdraft's picture
Beta TesterDiscord userImage gallery

"The result of machines designing & building machines smarter than themselves is hard to fathom."

 

That might become a reality fairly soon. We are already seeing the first steps where AI outsmarts us in more than just mere chess games. The problem solving capabilities of quantum computers are so significant compared to classical computing that you can reduce thousands of years of computing time to mere hours or minutes. How well we can harness this computing power is up to the AI. It might be a slow incremental process or it might take us by surprise.

 

"100 years is only a short period in social/political organisation though. We have inherent selfish traits as a result of our thousands of years of tribal, nomadic existance."

 

True, but these things will force us to change. Either that or we will be in for a shitty time.  Yes, we have that tribal instinct but that's mainly to do how were brought up and the societal influences. Monkey see, monkey do. Even though were just highly evolved apes we can still outgrow that programming. All it take is one big disruption and the next generation can take a totally different direction. Just hope it's something more subtle than WWIII. 

  

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

"I think we can do better but can't argue we're lucky to be in the position we're in, all things considered."

 

Of course we are blessed. Every time I can think of it I am grateful to be born in a 1st world country. And I'm also grateful for the clean water we drink.

 

I didn't move an army over to take these things from everyone else. And I will embrace death before "white guilt"

 

Other people's problems arn't mine.

 

Why? Because I'm selfish.

 

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

It's good you can see that. Everybody is, it's likely a survival mechanim. Cheers.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

Nobody has any interest on what you think of China either. They are suckering investments out of tons of countries because their finances are not stable.

 

I think we should just let it break, but that's not conducive to the New World Order. So traitor nations like Canada will feed their deficits and put pillars underneath them, because Canada enjoys being a liability under the thin facade of equality for all.

 

 

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

The "New World Order" is a meme.

The current world order is a neoliberal shit hole that was mostly forced down out throats by the Americans on behalf of American capitalist interest. It's really that simple.

 

The next world order will be more multilateral. It's already begun. Power is moving Eastwards & within 10-20 years we'll see a more bilateral global power balance America and China. China isn't interested in a new cold war, unlike the Americans, but power is power & the economies of the 2 countries are much larger than anything close to them so that's what's gonna happen. It's a result of the retarded zero-sum game the Americans play.

 

China is not sucking investment from other countries they're just part of the global financial system that was created by the Americans after WWII. They lend a lot to 3rd world nations & unlike the Americans they don't interfere in internal poitics of those nations (much). Their main political demands with partners are respect for their sovereignty & recognition of the One China policy (incl Taiwan). Meanwhile America is willing to sanction its own allies, even the most loyal ones like Germany.

 

Canada is a loyal servant of the current US-led neoliberal world order.

+1
-1
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

New World order is not a meme, It is a term to describe the enslavement of every man woman and child condoned and expediated by the U.N. Under the control of the .1%

 

You are correct that the elite are trying to maintain and grow their comforts at the expense of everyone on the planet. Human enslavement is their ultimate trophy.

 

They don't NEED more money. They already own everything. What they want is the entire planet working for them, and they want to be able to openely gloat about it. Which they can't have until they have complete control.

 

Birth certificates, Social security, chequing accounts, etc are all tools of this enslavement.

 

You cannot dominate the world by force. Many have tried, few have come close, none have succeeded.

 

However, incrementalism with a pace regulated by the development of technology and human trends,  (Which are carefully cultivated and engineered by said elite.) will gradually make people feel comfortable giving up their rights.

 

Hitler once stated that children are to be declared a national treasure. If the people accept this, they will also endure nearly any hardship or deprivation if they are told it's all for the children.

 

We see this card played almost weekly across the globe.

 

The division of men and women, The forced obsolesence of men, non binary gender indoctrination, changing the definitions of terms in dictionaries, text book revisions every few years, alternate history that demonizes the United states. (Canadians dont even know what the war of 1812 was actually about) Hint it wasn't the states trying to take over Canada.

 

The creation of the welfare state, and then liberals stepping in claiming to provide more of these programs at te expense of the taxpayer, when they created this problem to begin with.

 

It's all connected. This is just off the top of my head.

 

The number one thing they need to do to secure this ensalvement is to make the United States collapse, and annex it, destroy it, or rewrite it's constitiution particularly to remove freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of association, and the right to bear arms.

 

That's why republicans will fight TO THE DEATH, when these issues are even remotely infringed.

 

To many we look like tyrants. The elite help paint that picture too so our movement doesn't grow. If everyone was willig to take action on the planet, with a month or two we would have all the elite excuted and their wealth redistributed (Which is a new problem yes, but a better one.)

 

 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

It's all connected

I disagree. It's connected only insofar as it's humanity doing its thing.

 

The number one thing they need to do to secure this ensalvement is to make the United States collapse

That's just a hook. It tickles your fear bone.

 

I'm familiar with all this stuff you're talking about, I was looking into it over a decade ago. It's mostly rooted in 1980s & 1990s American right wing radio. They often used religion too although that's not so popular these days. Most of them were using fear to sell gold, silver & other survival stuff. Alex Jones copy pasta'd the schtick & took it into another dimension.

 

If you step back and only base your opinions about how the world works on facts, rather than have it described to you by people who are selling advertising space I think you'll come to different conclusions.

 

You mention "they" want to annex America... who is "they" ?????

Do you realise how preposterous that sounds?

 

Yeah I know about how birth certificates work etc.

 

The UN is a body of nations, it's quite democratic but not altogether uncorrupt. It was the US who was the major driving force in setting it up & has been the major beneficiary of it.

 

The world order is mostly influenced by the US as it was the only major power after WWII to remain unscathed. This is shifting & the world is shrinking. There's no 1 set of "they" behind a curtain steering things, there are competing interests at all levels.

 

If you wanna know how the world really works you gotta look at it with an open mind & base things on what you can verify, not as an American under attack.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture
front page

It's all connected

I disagree. It's connected only insofar as it's humanity doing its thing.

 

On the surface it looks like that. But human behaviour at large is being influenced by high society with disturbing efficiency.

 

I will refer to my previous statement.

 

 -However, incrementalism with a pace regulated by the development of technology and human trends,  (Which are carefully cultivated and engineered by said elite.) will gradually make people feel comfortable giving up their rights.

 

"That's just a hook. It tickles your fear bone."

 

It's the truth. You cannot openely dominate when weapons are still in the hands of the people.

 

Can the people win against the combined might of the U.S? No, if the whole military is against the people. Which they are indoctrinated to obey the people if it comes to such an extreme.

 

But the U.S. cannot nuke or bio weapon it's own soil. Bombardments will have to be used sparingly, and the prospect of bloodshed creates politcal barriers that deter open warfare as is being speculated.

 

But, if people arn't armed. Then there is no bottom line preventing the corrupt facets of the U.S. government from justifying such a purge. Calling freedom fighters terrorists and such. Saying it's for "The greater good" "The children" "Security and safety" or any number of human exploits that can be used here.

 

I would also like to direct everyone to this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Remonstrance

 

This is an old example of what I'm talking about. Look at the similarities to these grievances and the connection to the status quo now. Same plan, new faces.

 

It was incidents like this that inspired the constitution we have. It removes many tools from Tyrants. Now it's a game of the charasmatic to see how far these statutes can be infringed or outwright undermined.

 

The only answer that works, is ZERO tolerance of even suspected infringement under threat of violence.

 

As far who is "They" that would annex the states. Anyone capable that does not have a U.S. constitution will do.

 

The American constitutioon is the largest barrier between the elite and their prize.

 

"The UN is a body of nations, it's quite democratic but not altogether uncorrupt. It was the US who was the major driving force in setting it up & has been the major beneficiary of it."

 

The Rockefellers donated the land that building sits on. (No, it wasn't a donation.) They control the U.N. Not the U.S.

 

And by benefitting, do you mean all of the weapons, equipment, and manpower that the States sends and is still not fully renumerated for?

 

"The world order is mostly influenced by the US as it was the only major power after WWII to remain unscathed. This is shifting & the world is shrinking. There's no 1 set of "they" behind a curtain steering things, there are competing interests at all levels."

 

Why do these  have to be mutually exclusive? Use the cowtowing poliiticians to carry out their agendas, they take all the flak, at the same time work on how to dismantle the country you are using as your scape goat.

 

If you can demonize the country, that withers resistance and eventually gains support from otherwise good people for it's destruction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

The American constitutioon is the largest barrier between the elite and their prize.

LOL. The US constitution was written by land-owning, slave-owning elite. There's nothing in there that guards againt the plutocrats, it's bloody obvious because that's who's running your country already.

 

The Rockefellers donated the land that building sits on. (No, it wasn't a donation.) They control the U.N. Not the U.S.
See, this is where you dive off the cliff of logic. The Rockafellars, like basically all oligarch families engage in philanthropy for various reasons, often to build their brand but with something that benefits them. I can't tell you why they donated that land but I can tell you that they do not control the UN. The UN is just a place for countries to meet & organise. As an organisation it's quite democratic, with some corruption & less-than-perfect structure.

 

The OPCW is an example of a UN body which normally does good work to suppress chemical weapons. Recently they released a report about an alleged CW attack in Syria, the report was corrupted by the US government & Syria was blamed. There were zero Rockafellers involved. This is typically how the UN runs these days, the US should really just pullout because it uses it as a tool for its own interests too much. The UN is still the premiere organisation for global cooperation. If cooperating with other countries is a threat to your country that doesn't say a lot about your country.

 

Seriously though, there is no shadowy global "they" manipulating the UN. There are just interests, like most things. It takes years to build up a picture of how the world runs based on facts IMO. Economics is hard. There is no magic "they" who hold the power IMO. People who tell you there is are either selling something or heard it from someone who was selling something.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Dagambit's picture

If you don't work for, help build it, invest time in it; then you don't respect it. ~ me (like just right now)

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down