Free Market Capitalism and it's failure in the 21st century - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The non-democratic state: Platonism, Fascism, Theocracy, Monarchy etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By starman2003
#13650990
You're right about one thing: "god" is a myth. To a considerable degree (since moses vs pharoah) it was used to counter the authority of great men. But now that anyone with half a brain knows "god" doesn't exist, that means man is the answer. Ergo, we should venerate great men; they're all there really is to guide us. The average joe is anything but the answer. Given the tremendous variation in capability and sense of responsibility, equality makes no sense and is a dangerous luxury.

I do not believe that by lending all power to a central authority on the basis of social order (or whatever else) that you can save the world from environmental degradation, political corruption, poverty, or war.


In fact there's ample evidence that authoritarianism can achieve all those things and more. China can force people to limit the size of their families; it also has a big reforestation program. As for poverty, Hitler ended the depression in Germany; the German proletarians appreciated the loss of "freedom to starve." In the second century, Aristides eloquently praised the Roman Empire at the height of the Pax Romana, nearly two centuries after the triumph of Caesarism. The latter had meant an era of relative peace and prosperity.
User avatar
By El Gilroy
#13651028
Centralised political power can indeed accomplish great things, there's no questioning that. The problem is in making that power do good, instead of growing corrupt and self-serving.
By Preston Cole
#13651122
hun27 wrote:Let me make this clear: that I'm completely against mankind's "old-world" conservative allegiances (i.e. the allegiance/allegiances one might hold to race, religion, and/or nationality).

Then you have no justification of being in this subforum other than trying to provoke people. Go to the Liberalism or Anarchy forums.
User avatar
By Rei Murasame
#13651168
Poor dear. They've been bad-cop to you, so I'll be nice and be good-cop for a second. I'll try to really not use any special terminology either, just for this post. My attempt at the 'convert a liberal' post:

hun27 wrote:I want to know what you and other like-minded authoritarians know/think. I.e. convert me to your way of thinking

Okay.

The crisis of liberal-democracy is that crisis where it becomes 'so open' (it was actually always that absurdly open, just you didn't know it) that it actually cedes control of its evolution to outside forces who are not the demographic that it was supposedly designed to cater to (it was actually never designed to help you in the first place, but I won't cover that in this post since I want to restrict myself to only addressing your question at the moment). At that point - if it wasn't already working against your interests before that - it begins to earnestly work against you.

Quite a number of the values that liberals describe as liberal values are not actually the exclusive property of liberalism, but rather, are values that just so happened to come into being during the time that your country has been under liberalism. Name a few things that you think are nice to have in a society - other than ways of governing - and there's a high chance that these things are not dependent of liberalism for their existence.

On the issue of economics, the reason that the State needs to be strong is because it has to have the ability to fund and support itself (feel free to ask me how a State can do that if you are unsure) so that it can act as a mediator between employers groups and trades unions without leaning too hard in one direction or the other. It needs to also be able to penetrate society and establish social institutions and foster dependencies so that it can give meaning and direction to the actions that we take (methodological motivationalism?).

Why do we propose [neo]corporatism?

  • 1. A mature labour movement coupled with transparent and rational management mediated by an ascendant State can cooperate for:
    • quality improvement and
    • raising productivity in an industrial economy.

  • 2. Full employment policies create:
    • employment opportunities and
    • foster social integration.

  • 3. Welfare of the employees is promoted, which:
    • protects their health and safety and
    • enhances national competitiveness.

All this should lead to a balanced development of the national community, and enable the defence of your culture and way of life, whatever the way of your people happens to be.

We will of course assume that your way of life would be tailored toward making sure that there are as few internal contradictions as possible in the system, and that undermining the system would not be glamorised. That is obvious and only natural, and can very well go unsaid in this post, given that we are in the Platonism & Dictatorship subforum, after all.
User avatar
By starman2003
#13652095
Centralized political power can indeed accomplish great things, there's no questioning that. The problem is making that power do good, instead growing corrupt and self-serving.


I can't imagine our democracy giving way to authoritarianism unless there is some severe crisis only the latter can handle. Often, the whole raisen d'etre of dictatorship is an ability to deliver where democracy cannot. It can hardly expect to retain support if it did no better i.e. didn't accomplish great things. ;)
User avatar
By ihofidel
#13662488
To be able to have a front seat view of the failure of capitalism in the 21st century, compare China with USA. USA is now indebted to China to the amount of 200 billion dollars. One does not have to examine the intricacies of its failure. A simple profit and loss accounting to which China strictly adheres to is sufficient.
User avatar
By El Gilroy
#13662646
Stop this nonsense, ihofidel. Everyone knows that the USA are in debt not because of capitalism being a bad idea, but because of the liberals!
User avatar
By starman2003
#13663121
Of course. The problem is democracy. To win elections, politicians have to blow money we don't have, hence borrow from China. Btw how do you think the latter became so competitive lately? By paying its workers more than proles get here?
User avatar
By ihofidel
#13663130
El Gilroy, the war in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan are the causes why America is in debt. Not the Liberals. America blew 400 billion dollars in the war in Vietnam. President Clinton achieved a 700 billion surplus when he was in power. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are now siphoning all its resources and causing staggering deficiits.
User avatar
By El Gilroy
#13663388
What a load of bull! Clinton faked the statistics! The wars never cost more than they prevented in damage! It WAS the liberals' fault! Still IS!







:lol:
User avatar
By ihofidel
#13663480
They were not bull, Gilroy. They were true. 700 billion dollars in surplus. He cannot increase taxes. The Conservatives dominated Congress. Hence, a lot of foreign investments poured. So there were lots of revenues.

Canada now has a 25% tax rate. Canada will follow suit. But the problem is that there are racists in the liberals who wants to reserve investment opporunities only for white Canadian citizens and ban foreign and US investors. 40-60 percent capital sharing which is absurd. Why would I invest in a company where I have to share 60% of profit. Absurd. So there is a problem, Gilroy. They are those hiding under ultra-nationalistic sentiments that "Canada for Canadians". They are the cause ofthe 800 billion dollar debt Canada is now in..Judgment day is not all about praying. "You can know one by his fruits(deeds) and by the words coming out of his mouth"-God.

A lot of these Canadian liberals were either busted Chinese or Cuban spies. They are aware that they are committing the crime of economic sabotage. But they are zealous Cuban or Chinese spies who either were indebted to their respective foreign spy agencies or blackmailed into submission. A lot of them in British Columbia have resigned in order to evade scandals.
Last edited by ihofidel on 23 Mar 2011 19:59, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
By ihofidel
#13663574
There are no communists nor socialists in CSIS- W.E. "The Liberal Party, a haven for Cuban and Chinese spies, is riddled with closet communists. Socialists for convenience knowing fully well that they cannot gather even a few constituents if they openly espouse extreme Leftism or communism. The public does not know this. Today, the Conservatives are in power and from now on will always be in power."-W.E., former director, Canadian Security and Intelligence Service and appointed by the Liberal Party. (W.E. my mentor has a long history of s******g a lot of Liberals including the Cuban agent par excellence, Barack Obama.)
User avatar
By starman2003
#13664208
Sure the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were a terrible waste of money. Still, they only exacerbated the problem. The bulk of debt is due to social spending, much of it on people in the last 1-5 years of their lives.
User avatar
By ihofidel
#13664219
Imagine a laid off worker in San Diego California who receives his monthly 600 dollar welfare check. Will he attempt to find another job? The hell, NO!! God-saved George W. Bush is a weakling. He easily succumbed to Barack Obama's threats and intimidations. George by the way was the one who institutionalized the monthly welfare check.
User avatar
By starman2003
#13665243
$600/month is peanuts compared to what an employed person can make. And you shouldn't confuse welfare with unemployment compensation. The remarks about bush and obama are strange...
User avatar
By ihofidel
#13666288
You should have presumed that welfare was different with unemploymennt insurance. I am now on welfare. But I started out with unemploymen insurance for 3 months. I can easily find a job but Royal Canadian Mounted Police gave me advice to lie low given that there are violent Russian and Chinese moles in the workplace like MSantor. The 'opportunistic Bush' who wanted "to make history" really started and institutionalized the 'welfare check'. The bill was going to be passed by the Liberals anyway if he did not. So he made history.
User avatar
By starman2003
#13666305
So one can't get a job in Canada because of Russian and Chinese moles? :lol: There has been welfare in the US for a long time--forty years the very least, long before shrub.
User avatar
By ihofidel
#13666306
They have gotten all the good jobs. Even my Chinese mole relatives earning 25 dollars an hour while professing that they are Chinese sympathizers in the workplace and work clandestinely for them have them. Give you an example: Orlino Dallo, a registered nurse in Toronto. He is my cousin. He has gotten all the good jobs while I am unemployed. I was a lawyer in the Philippines. No welfare as high as Bush has been providing. Nobody can survive during the heydays of McCarthysm. Now welfare recipients bet all their money in racehorsing. Compliments of George Bush.
User avatar
By starman2003
#13667155
Now welfare recipients bet all their money in racehorsing.


Sure. :lol: Horseracing btw.

Compliments of George Bush.


Sure....

Yes, and it did not order a ceasefire. Did you ev[…]

@Rugoz You are a fuckin' moralist, Russia could[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

A new film has been released destroying the offici[…]

Before he was elected he had a charity that he wo[…]