Capitalist vs. Socialist vs. Creationist

[SPMiller]

How is libertarian socialism is top-down?

(Trick question: it isn't.)

 

[Ruv Draba]

Economies will occur spontaneously in human groups, but not always the ones we want. Economies can also be seeded and regulated, but not always as efficiently or as robustly as we'd wish.

Economies help deliver the necessities of human existence, such as shelter, food, health, security and freedom; so we have strong moral reasons to intervene when economies fail to support their own people. But we also have ethical reasons not to intervene too much, since we know that competition is a key mechanism for robustness, efficiency and innovation.

Between these extremes of moral and ethical failure are a range of policy options, and more or less viable economic strategies. And whether strategically or tactically we are the authors of our own economic history, so the comparison to creationism is entirely specious.

 

[blacbird]

A blending of the two? Like in China, where an oligarchy and their connected friends get all the goods, and the average joe gets the shaft?

The Average Chou, in China, is doing far better than he was thirty-plus years ago, when it was an actual communist country in practice as well as in name. Now, the system today there is by no means is perfect, or even close to desirable, by Western standards, but if you're going to deny that it hasn't improved a LOT, we have nothing further to discuss. It has improved so much, in fact, that we no longer worry much about the military threat from China, but about the economic one.

And if you want a contrast to the flip side of that either-or good-evil black-white dichotomy you so love to bring to the table, you have Dickensian England, the early years of the Industrial Revolution, where laissez-faire pure capitalist economics ROOLD. Yeah, that was a jolly good time for all, wasn't it?

caw

 

[Death Wizard]

Neither pure capitalism nor pure socialism work very well. A blending of the two produces the best results for the majority of people.

Agreed. And Creationists are complete loons.

 

[benbradley]

 

[maxmordon]

So, let me see if I understood the video; capitalists are too busy earning money to study books, right?

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

'No,' says the capitalist, 'it belongs to the poor.'
'No,' says the creationist, 'it belongs to God.'
'No,' says the socialist, 'it belongs to everyone.'

If only we could reject those answers and instead choose something different... choose the impossible...

Zoombie, would you kindly not to tell the rest the video game I am referencing?


Anyhow, this video simply compares socialism and creationism as something based on "faith" rather than the survival of the fittest. In which no way both bits leaves the person harmless; in one you're not entitled what you made and in the other one one must be kicked so other one must be the kicker. The world has too many "-isms" don't you think? Do we have "Ismism?" Are we or have we ever been Ismists? Anything that is not regulated somehow leads to chaos, anything that is overly regulated leads to castration...

 

[SPMiller]

I'm not Zoombie.

Bioshock.

 

[Cranky]

Agreed. And Creationists are complete loons.

I'm gonna remind you, DW, as well as a general reminder for all: we've got members of all sorts of religious denominations/politics, etc.

That sort of comment AIN'T gonna fly, here.

 

[rugcat]

I'm gonna remind you, DW, as well as a general reminder for all: we've got members of all sorts of religious denominations/politics, etc.

That sort of comment AIN'T gonna fly, here.

Creationist thinking is not specific to any particular denomination, although it is associated more strongly with some than others.

Not everyone who believes in creationism, or its cousin, ID, is a loon -- mistaken, imo, but live and let live.

But when someone talks about creationists, it's usually a reference to the young earth variety, those who deny all scientific validity and insist the earth is 6000 years old. (Such as some on the Texas BOE board)

I understand not wanting to insult people's religious beliefs. But is every religious belief, no matter how far removed from reality, exempt from ridicule because it has a religious foundation?

How about the Breatherians, from another thread?. How about various cult members, like Heaven's Gate the suicide cult that expected to be transported to another dimension by alien beings?

(I actually met the members of that cult when they stayed for a few weeks in Alta, Utah, before continuing on to California and infamy. They were quite nice people, if a little odd. Of course, there aren't any of them left to be offended by anyone.)

 

[blacbird]

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?

'No,' says the capitalist, 'it belongs to the poor rich.'
'No,' says the creationist, 'it belongs to God.'
'No,' says the socialist, 'it belongs to everyone.'

fixed.

caw

 

[Zoombie]

I'm not Zoombie.

Bioshock.

Wait, you're not me? Shit, I...I got confused.

 

[Don]

In relation to the video, it's worthy noting that the huge, top-down driven, authoritarian entities called corporations have been learning over the last few decades about empowering workers, worker responsibility, quality teams, and profit sharing, all as part of their efforts to make their organizations more efficient. They've discovered that by pushing decision-making down to ever-lower levels in the organization, they empower the workers to become decision-making partners in their own success. Some corporations have carried it almost to "Let My People Go" extremes, and profited mightily from the transformation. They, too, have discovered that the greatest success comes from a bottom-up structure and a model of cooperation rather than the iron fist of centralized planning and control.

If the oft-cited example of the USA vs. USSR doesn't make a convincing case in one's mind, perhaps noting the history of Apple vs. IBM does.

Apparently, those once all-knowing, all-powerful critters called chairmen and board of directors have been learning lessons that those who control the political reins of power have no interest in grasping.

 

[robeiae]

How is libertarian socialism is top-down?

(Trick question: it isn't.)

Are you quite certain of that? Remember, we're not talking about Candyland here.

 

[SPMiller]

Are you quite certain of that? Remember, we're not talking about Candyland here.

RYFW

And yes, quite certain.

 

[robeiae]

RYFW

Okay?

And yes, quite certain.

Provide some details, then. Make an argument. Demonstrate it. Give some examples of countries that operate under such a system.

The core component of socialism is, again, organization. Organization of elements in a functioning economy and--necessarily to some degree--organization of the economy as a whole.

 

[Don]

Okay, I'm stuck on this "libertarian socialist" thing, because those seem to be two words in contradiction with each other. Sure enough, when you look at what Wiki has to say:

...libertarian socialists believe that "the exercise of power in any institutionalized form– whether economic, political, religious, or sexual– brutalizes both the wielder of power and the one over whom it is exercised."

Okay, that's basic libertarian creed. Power corrupts.

But then there's this:

Libertarian socialists generally place their hopes in decentralized means of direct democracy such as municipalities, citizens' assemblies, trade unions and workers' councils.

Every one of those structures has leaders who wield coercive power, and "democracy" is a codeword for majority rule. Can I opt out of these coercive organizations, either permanently or on a decision-by-decision basis?

I have no problem with "pizza socialism" when everybody decides to chip in for a pizza, but those who don't want pizza are welcome to order a meatball sammich and pay their own bill. OTOH, if everybody is forced to eat pizza, or pay for it even if they get a sammich, I see a problem.

Now I'm well aware that Wiki is not definitive on any subject, but unless this is way off in left field, I can't see a way reconcile those two terms.

From what I understand, libertarian socialism would be a massive Tragedy of the Commons just waiting to happen.

 

[Cranky]

Creationist thinking is not specific to any particular denomination, although it is associated more strongly with some than others.

Not everyone who believes in creationism, or its cousin, ID, is a loon -- mistaken, imo, but live and let live.

But when someone talks about creationists, it's usually a reference to the young earth variety, those who deny all scientific validity and insist the earth is 6000 years old. (Such as some on the Texas BOE board)

I understand not wanting to insult people's religious beliefs. But is every religious belief, no matter how far removed from reality, exempt from ridicule because it has a religious foundation?

How about the Breatherians, from another thread?. How about various cult members, like Heaven's Gate the suicide cult that expected to be transported to another dimension by alien beings?

(I actually met the members of that cult when they stayed for a few weeks in Alta, Utah, before continuing on to California and infamy. They were quite nice people, if a little odd. Of course, there aren't any of them left to be offended by anyone.)

Exempt from ridicule? Not necessarily, I'd say. But blanket "Creationists are complete loons" isn't exactly substantive. And as you point out, not all Creationists are created equal. (Ha!) Since there *are* members here, and hell, my own SIL (who is most assuredly NOT a loon, thanks), who believe in it, I'd like to see something more than dismissing them as crazy. Refute the position without the name calling, and I'm cool. Therein lies the important difference.

 

[robeiae]

Okay, I'm stuck on this "libertarian socialist" thing, because those seem to be two words in contradiction with each other. Sure enough, when you look at what Wiki has to say:

Okay, that's basic libertarian creed. Power corrupts.

But then there's this:

Every one of those structures has leaders who wield coercive power, and "democracy" is a codeword for majority rule. Can I opt out of these coercive organizations, either permanently or on a decision-by-decision basis?

I have no problem with "pizza socialism" when everybody decides to chip in for a pizza, but those who don't want pizza are welcome to order a meatball sammich and pay their own bill. OTOH, if everybody is forced to eat pizza, or pay for it even if they get a sammich, I see a problem.

Now I'm well aware that Wiki is not definitive on any subject, but unless this is way off in left field, I can't see a way reconcile those two terms.

From what I understand, libertarian socialism would be a massive Tragedy of the Commons just waiting to happen.

In my view, the term--"libertarian socialism" is essentially propaganda, insofar as it's being used to draw people in, sans an actual ideology that would be properly characterized as libertarian AND socialist. As you say, there's an auto-contradiction. Mostly, it's the same as the divergent point for modern liberalism and classical liberalism: does utilitarianism rule, or not?

 

[Death Wizard]

I'm gonna remind you, DW, as well as a general reminder for all: we've got members of all sorts of religious denominations/politics, etc.

That sort of comment AIN'T gonna fly, here.

Sorry.

 

[blacbird]

"democracy" is a codeword for majority rule.

Only in the dictionary used on your planet.

caw

 

[Cranky]

Only in the dictionary used on your planet.

caw

And in ancient Greece, JFTR. *raises eyebrows*

 

[Don]

Only in the dictionary used on your planet.

caw

What planet you from? Last I heard, Princeton was still on earth. Note #3.

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=democracy

the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives
a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them
majority rule: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group