Jump to content

No Holds Barred Thread - Post Anything That Is On Your Mind, Even the Politically Incorrect!


Ace Nova

Recommended Posts

Just now, soon said:

Peterson just doesnt understand the concept of Anti-Capitalism. Ive demonstrated that. Then you just say 'he's using it in his own way?' No, he needs to use its actual definition! :lol:

Id rather not just move on offering you more content when you just sweep entire essays out of the way with blanket sentences that dont speak to the content of my posts. Seems fair, right?

 

Why move on?  How do you feel about the Nordic system?

I'll address some of your extensive post...but I'm at work and on a cell phone so my posts aren't going to be as extensive as yours.

When you talk about helping the farmers out and sharing their risk, that is capitalism.

That is no different than someone investing stock in a company and sharing the risk.  Or better yet, workers themselves buying stock in their own company and sharing the risk BUT also getting profits back from the fruits of their labor.  That's capitalism.

Cutting out the "middle men" (in your case the distributors, chemical companies, etc) is no different than someone wanting to cut out the government red tape in many areas of free market.  

That's why what you're stating is not truly anti-capitalist.  Anti-big business maybe?  But not really anti-free market.   And we should really refer to it as "free market".  If you want to call it "free market with social safety nets" I'm ok with that too.

Again, how do you feel about the Nordic system?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

Why move on?  How do you feel about the Nordic system?

I'll address some of your extensive post...but I'm at work and on a cell phone so my posts aren't going to be as extensive as yours.

When you talk about helping the farmers out and sharing their risk, that is capitalism.

That is no different than someone investing stock in a company and sharing the risk.  Or better yet, workers themselves buying stock in their own company and sharing the risk BUT also getting profits back from the fruits of their labor.  That's capitalism.

Cutting out the "middle men" (in your case the distributors, chemical companies, etc) is no different than someone wanting to cut out the government red tape in many areas of free market.  

That's why what you're stating is not truly anti-capitalist.  Anti-big business maybe?  But not really anti-free market.   And we should really refer to it as "free market".  If you want to call it "free market with social safety nets" I'm ok with that too.

Again, how do you feel about the Nordic system?

 

How would living in an apartment owned by a single person who extracts my wealth when I could join with my neighbours to reject that, a rejection of big business? Its rejecting a capitalist relationship. Which is a lived manifestation of an anti capitalist view point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, soon said:

How would living in an apartment owned by a single person who extracts my wealth when I could join with my neighbours to reject that, a rejection of big business? Its rejecting a capitalist relationship. Which is a lived manifestation of an anti capitalist view point.

No, it's really not.  You can think it is but what you are doing is the textbook definition of capitalism.  You are choosing to join a "co-op" in order to preserve some of your wealth vs giving it to someone that owns the apartment.

That's no different than someone choosing to own a home vs rent it from someone.

I'm going to start calling you "Soon - The Anti-Capitalist Capitalist". :lol:

And when I was referring to rejection of "big business" I was referring to you choosing to use local farmers, cut out the other companies, etc...build up local communities, etc.... that is something  a Libertarian would do.

So maybe I should start calling you "Soon - The Anti-Capitalist Capitalist Libertarian"

:P:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

No, it's really not.  You can think it is but what you are doing is the textbook definition of capitalism.  You are choosing to join a "co-op" in order to preserve some of your wealth vs giving it to someone that owns the apartment.

The landowner is a capitalist. By not dealing with a capitalist... Rejecting the capitalist ....is Anti Capitalist.

"Choice" is a buzzword of neoliberal capitalism, but choice is not a patented offering from the capitalists.

3 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

That's no different than someone choosing to own a home vs rent it from someone.

Yes it is :lol: In both word and deed!

4 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

I'm going to start calling you "Soon - The Anti-Capitalist Capitalist". :lol:

The "s" is lower case.

I do not control the means of production. I do not generate capital. Which are the definitions of a Capitalist. But dont expect Peterson to inform you about that. Not only to protect his interests, more so because he has no idea what he's talking about :lol: The lie isnt birthed from malice, but by his own ignorance. He could stick to psychology and Id have nothing to ay about it.

4 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

So maybe I should start calling you "Soon - The Anti-Capitalist Capitalist Libertarian"

Social Libertarian would be just fine. Or "Child of God"

And I'll call you "Kasanova King, Duped by Peterson" :lol: or Child of God :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, soon said:

The landowner is a capitalist. By not dealing with a capitalist... Rejecting the capitalist ....is Anti Capitalist.

"Choice" is a buzzword of neoliberal capitalism, but choice is not a patented offering from the capitalists.

Yes it is :lol: In both word and deed!

The "s" is lower case.

I do not control the means of production. I do not generate capital. Which are the definitions of a Capitalist. But dont expect Peterson to inform you about that. Not only to protect his interests, more so because he has no idea what he's talking about :lol: The lie isnt birthed from malice, but by his own ignorance. He could stick to psychology and Id have nothing to ay about it.

Social Libertarian would be just fine. Or "Child of God"

And I'll call you "Kasanova King, Duped by Peterson" :lol: or Child of God :) 

Whatever.  :lol:

I'm not even going off of what Peterson said.  Although you've proven his quote to be 💯% accurate by your posts in this thread.  Thanks for validating exactly what he said. ;)

 

How do you feel about God giving people "free will"?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kasanova King said:

Capitalism! 

:P

 

No, free will is free will and capitalism is capitalism. (The things I never thought Id have to explain, smh) :facepalm:

People associating God and Capital makes me puke and belly laugh at the same time. Making it a health and safety concern. So knock it off with that nonsense!  :lol:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Len Cnut said:

I'm always terribly suspicious of these new kids on the block that inspire this 'fuck yeah' following based on spurious vagueisms and a percieved intellect that is often spurious and doesn't bear scrutiny.  They're often found selling glorified self help books backed up by distorted readings of various academia. 

I know that its true that Peterson is of a type. But I cant bring to mind any similar examples. Id love to look into some other right wing snake oil salesmen of his ilk. Do any suggestions come to mind?

Your posts on this subject are really great btw!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, soon said:

No, free will is free will and capitalism is capitalism. (The things I never thought Id have to explain, smh) :facepalm:

People associating God and Capital makes me puke and belly laugh at the same time. Making it a health and safety concern. So knock it off with that nonsense!  :lol:

 

I'll pray for you to see the light some day. 🙏

Edited by Kasanova King
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, soon said:

Well, first of all I will point out that Socialists identity as Socialists where as Anti Capitalist is a term that arose out of a disenfranchisement with both State Socialism and Capitalism. Since then the term has also found use as an umbrella term for the many streams of opposition to Capital or the current structure of Capital. Its one of those All Socialists are anti-capitalism but not all Anti-Capitalists are Socialists type thing.

One product of Capitalism is resistance to Capitalism. 

Why do you capitalise the word "capital" and do you use that term differently than how it is defined by Wikipedia? 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_(economics)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, soon said:

You may agree with me but Peterson doesn't. If you agree with me then he would consider you a 'cultural Marxist' and he'd be so upset that you'd get full on Kermit the Frog voice from Peterson. :lol:

 

^^^ Heres what I said. First I wanna make sure we are using language in the same way. When I say resistance to Capitalism is a 'product' of capitalism I do not mean to reference how capitalism seeks to commodify resistance (Che T Shirts for an example). I mean to invoke the Marxist notion that accurately observes that all the motives to resist are built into the DNA of what Capitalism is. Okay, lets say that all of Capital is one conveyer belt production line. Coming down the conveyer belt is smart phones, potato chips, hats, concepts of happiness, concepts of fulfillment, concepts of the uses of leisure time, and the cold hard realities of the workers and the widows of workers who died on the job. So one can look at what capital is producing and observe - without any outside motives - that it is right and good to resist agsint the plight of both the worker and the consumer.

So this wold be were Petrsons distortion would disagree with me. He claims that one can't resist capitalism if they live in a capitalist marketplace. But Im saying that its impossible to live in such a setting because Capitalism produces resistance to itself.

I do hope that you agree with my earlier statement, though!! For your enjoyment comrade https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm#007 :lol:

Maybe on some things. Its hard work setting up collectives, cooperatives, barter networks, CSA's, social centres, annual events , etc. And mainstream consumerism doesnt include all this voluntary labour. Its a tough definition to, to identify workers who are in favour of capitalism as being "Capitalists" because thats not accurate. But I accept that its come into common use to phrase it that way. Those living contently in a Capitalist marketplace have a consumer identity that is passive whereas anti capitalists see the experience of being a consumer as an active state of being.

We went over the last time I disproved your sig :lol:. Again, that would mean I am a Socialist/Commie. And even Cuba isnt a 100% "controlled" market. And to go back to my early point about Anti-Capitalism being different then Socialism, I know some old cranks from the Fifth International who will bang their fist on the table and yell at anti-capitlsits because they see them as destroying a unified front in walking away from Revolutionary Communism. "What does it even mean, these kids these days!?!?"(Peterson would agree with the revolutionary commies of the 5th :wow:)  So Anti-Capitalists sit in a awkward and far newer strain of resistance that is rooted in Marxist thought but not committed to all of its prescriptions.

All that said to answer your question about Government controlled markets, well... personally I think we need to take more control as a community. I also believe firmly in well regulated market which is for the foreseeable future provided for by the current structure of governance. For example, I choose to live in Co-Ops which means that I reject the gentry's ability to charge me above market rates (read: anti-capitalist). The markets rates are set by Canadian Mortgage and Housing Association. So we charge ourselves the true market rate, plus any agreed to overs to cover up-keep. So theres the blend of our collective controls of our living arrangement with the Bank Of Canadas numbers that are processed by CMHA. See, Anti-Capitalist, not anti-government, not anti-property. 

Or another example of how "control" plays out v Govt v market v consumers is Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) where a farmer and I agree to skip the grocer and deal directly with one another. Since farming has severe operating risks including things like draughts it can be cost prohibitive for small scale farmers to work using organic and bio dynamic methods. But we both desire for them to grow that way. So, I pay them upfront to fund their growing season. I share the risk with the farmer, which is what allows them to produce quality organic local foods outside of the Factory Farm economy. The farmer asks for a certain rate promising to try their best to give me a set amount of foods each week over the growing season. In sharing the risk, I might even get way more then was promised - I get an equal share of all thats produced! So I am living out a belief system that in this case has very little to do with the govt what so ever. Cut out the grocers, chemical industrial complex, shipping industry, factory farming - all of which are capitalist entities. Hence, Anti-Capitalist. Like, as I said to frame my point at the start: I still want the veggies. 

What you are talking about isn't "market price" since that is defined as what the market is willing to pay. What you are talking about is "fixed price", which is something different entirely. And how do you think the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Association determine that fixed price? 

To me this just sounds like hippies not willing or able to pay proper market price. 

Buying local produce is good, btw. Capitalists do that too, because it can be cheaper, because it is better for the environment, and because it can be better. You don't need to be against Capitalism to see its benefits. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

What you are talking about isn't "market price" since that is defined as what the market is willing to pay. What you are talking about is "fixed price", which is something different entirely. And how do you think the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Association determine that fixed price? 

Yes, the term is market rate. Its not the same thing as fixed price.

31 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Buying local produce is good, btw. Capitalists do that too, because it can be cheaper, because it is better for the environment, and because it can be better. You don't need to be against Capitalism to see its benefits. 

That can be true. I did not say that one needs to be agasint capitalism to see the benefits in buying local. My point was to do with commerce, about the method. The benefits were merely the motivation that initiated that exchange. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, soon said:

I know that its true that Peterson is of a type. But I cant bring to mind any similar examples. Id love to look into some other right wing snake oil salesmen of his ilk. Do any suggestions come to mind?

I just think they're like hustlers.  I don't think its specifically a right wing thing either.  The parallels I'm about to draw are not precise but there's a common thread there.  These people just have their little books to sell and they give a certain cross-section of the population what they want to hear and make a lot of money out of it, I don't think 99% of them honestly believe the shit that they are pimping, in fact I think for some of them whether or not they believe it has never even crossed their minds.  Take for example something like a lot of these televangelists, I'm talking now about people like Joyce Meyer, TD Jakes, whats that idiot from Singapores name?  I can't remember, anyway, some of these guys ride off the concept of 'prosperity gospel', to explain why they drive around in Ferraris and own mansions and private jets, cuz its what Jesus has given them, in fact its what he would want, backed up by some vague Bible quote that has nothing to do with any of it, I mean its just SO obvious.  SO much, perhaps even the key lessons of the life of Jesus, to me, were a specific rejection of the capitalist mode of thinking.  

Or even people like I think her name is Laura Southern?  And Tommy Robinson here in England, these people use the current climate to exploit the fears of the populous for, yeah, money pretty much.  I mean take Tommy Robinson for example, you think this guy gives a shit about the British population and British culture and respect for this way of life, this guys a fuckin' ex coke dealer/football hooligan, he's gone down for mortgage fraud, all kindsa shady shit.  There was actually a point where, out of fear, he was ready to jack this shit in, around about the time when he broke up the EDL...but then after a couple of months off he's back, and i think it's because, look, without this who is he?  Tommy Robinson the nobody, with it he don't have to work, he don't have to do anything for a living, he's funded by supporters and backers, it's a career, it's a life for him.  That Laura or Lauren bird is the same too, she was all over youtube making those race/muslim baiting vids then suddenly she disappears and 'oh don't worry youtubers, I'm making movies now, documentaries etc etc...so she's got herself a nice little earner out of all this youtube bullshit?  Katie Hopkins is another, Ann Coulter is another, these are people are just snakes and it's so obvious that I don't get how people don't see it.  

I really hate also that the notion of debate, discussion, these kinda muslim debates christian shit and such and such debates such and such shit has kinda degenerated to this playground level, you can see it in just the titles of videos 'BEN SHAPIRO EVISCERATES LIBERAL', or such and such 'DESTROYS CONSERVATIVE', its like people have taken the notion of debate from this exchange of information where two parties learn something and just turned it into this cheap WWE thing, its just pathetic and all it serves to do is expose the dishonourable motives of certain parties, shows what they're really about.  Its about winning, its about the satisfaction of thinking that you've made the other person look small in comparison to your towering force of reason, its cheap and it stinks.  When you are coming from that perspective you immediately devalue your own point because if your motives are not honourable how honourable can the information you present be?

And often they're not geniuses either as it's often presented.  And by that I don't mean uneducated, I mean original thought, which to me is the true yardstick of like...that other level of intellect.  And people see it in a lot of people where it isn't there, people like Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens, both of whom are reasonably intelligent guys but it's just academia.  I don't mean to run down academia cuz I think education is the most important thing in the world but again, if Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens are presented as the best minds of a generation then I don't have a lot of hope for that generation.  And of course, they too have books to sell.

Its all so cheap and uninteresting, just this perverse merry-go-round of people wanting to hear their preconceived notions corroborated and championed by what are essentially, as you say, snake oil salesmen.  I think a key life skill is the ability to assess danger or dishonesty, the ability to look at someone and listen to them and discern whether or not you are being sold pink lemonade posing as love potion number 9.  All these people have an angle and they're all out for your money and the lines are blurred now with youtube to a point because they have this thing in their back pocket where its like 'these are the honest men and women of public access', whereas on TV or the traditional news you kinda knew that behind this big machine is money.  News is not presented to us in order of importance, or gravity or humanity, it is presented to us in order of earning potential.  Like they teach you in any two bit salesman course, things are prioritised in order of which will make you the most money and if Britney Spears boob job will sell more papers than the fact thousands of people are being slaughtered and have been for years in Burma then its Britney's tits that'll make the front page.  If the youtube cowboys were a little less greedy they would be able to mask their motives too but they rarely can, or do.

This all sounds very cynical, there are good folks on these platforms too, don't get me wrong, I was just pointing towards some of the aforementioned.

Edited by Len Cnut
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, soon said:

Yes, the term is market rate. Its not the same thing as fixed price. 

It is not market price if it is below what the market would have paid if offered up to the market. It sounds to me you are describing a product offered up at below market price, probably because it is subsidised. And I believe the CMHA do offer homes to those who cannot or will not pay market prices, and they can do this because the subsidy is paid for indirectly through tax money in an, ironically, capitalistic society. It might not have to be fixed in the sense that it stays the same year after year, but more likely to be discounted some way resulted in a below market price.

Did you not want to answer my question on whether you use the term "capital" differently than how it is defined in economic theory? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Len Cnut said:

And often they're not geniuses either as it's often presented.  And by that I don't mean uneducated, I mean original thought, which to me is the true yardstick of like...that other level of intellect.  And people see it in a lot of people where it isn't there, people like Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens, both of whom are reasonably intelligent guys but it's just academia.  I don't mean to run down academia cuz I think education is the most important thing in the world but again, if Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens are presented as the best minds of a generation then I don't have a lot of hope for that generation.  And of course, they too have books to sell.

Stephen Fry might not be a genius in the sense that he has come up with something intellectually novel or innovative, but he is definitely extremely intelligent by normal definitions of intelligence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

22 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Fry is into Wagner so he gets a reprieve from me

He doesn't need a reprieve, there is nothing wrong with the fellow. And he is into the classics of literature, too. He comes across as extremely well-read and knowledgeable about the arts in general. A true polymath. But one should never confuse wisdom for intelligence. I happen to think Fry has both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

 

He doesn't need a reprieve, there is nothing wrong with the fellow. And he is into the classics of literature, too. He comes across as extremely well-read and knowledgeable about the arts in general. A true polymath. But one should never confuse wisdom for intelligence. I happen to think Fry has both.

He was a tea leaf you know, Fry? Spent time in Ashfield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

He was a tea leaf you know, Fry? Spent time in Ashfield.

No, I don't know what a "tea leaf" is because I am not English, you know. But after a quick google I now know you talked about Fry serving a sentence after having stolen something. And yes, that I actually knew, at least at some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...