For those who say the Occupy movement didn't inspire good ideas

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for kuraimen
kuraimen

28078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#202 kuraimen
Member since 2010 • 28078 Posts
[QUOTE="Vuurk"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] so the butcher the baker and the candle stick maker know what about how i should design accounting systems, or how toxic waste is to be disposed? that does not seem like a body filled with relevant information for what they have been tasked with. that sounds just like what we have now, either lobbyist writing the regulations for the uninformed or the uninformed just doing a piss poor job regulating what they know nothing about.

Well it depends, such a system has to be coupled with good education otherwise it wouldn't work. Not only that, the size of the communities have to be kept within some boundaries. Big communities have no way to reach consensus but small ones do. Early societies worked that way and people within the community understood that it was important for them to listen to those experts within the communities on the subjects they were expert at because it was all in their benefit (a thing that can't possibly happen now since we are not structured in communities but cities or states or countries). With very big communities that becomes impossible but not with small ones. That's why I think new research in cognition and anthropology could be very valuable to design a new system like that.

I'm sorry mate but you need to face reality. We have a global economy now. The idea of communism is over. If you want to live in a small tribe and not trade with the outside world then I suppose it could work, but no industrial nation will ever succeed under communism. Capitalism is the best economic system to date. We should work on fixing our capitalist system rather than trying to implement a new economic system.

Who said there would be no trade with the outside world? I'm basing my ideas on knowledge on how small societies lived in the past which was closer to egalitarian communities (but trade was also present). Of course I'm not saying we should go back to being exactly the way we were before but with the new knowledge we have we can come up with a system that comes closer to that (more natural). I once made a thread about an economist (Manfred Max Neef) who had ideas for an economic system that brings humans societies closer to that notion. It's not going back to tribes, it's bringing knowledge about the most natural social structures into modern societies. I think they could work better that way.
Avatar image for kuraimen
kuraimen

28078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#207 kuraimen
Member since 2010 • 28078 Posts
[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] no man can know near enough to know a little about everything, it would be impossible to have a society of people who have a working understanding of everything.

Yeah I'm not saying that. I'm saying we need communities where people trust each other enough to trust the opinions of experts on specific subjects. With very big communities trust becomes weaker.

and where will a few hundred million find the time to get to know care and trust each other?

I'm not talking about a few hundred millions I'm talking about communities small enough that allow people to know and feel closer to each other. Tens, hundreds or a few thousand tops. Look at it this way, those communities will serve the purpose of families in todays societies but expanded to the community level. The problem with family is that it's too small and isolated. Communities at least bring together neighbors and extended families. Also a family has very little power to produce or handle complex problems by themselves but a community would be much more capable and provide a greater diversity of talents within the population. Also communities would have to be able to interact with one another. That's where trade comes in. Max Neef as well as others who have studied early societies recommend that tribes shouldn't be competing one with another to produce the same kind of stuff but they should work as complements, so you make communities dependent one from another to make a cohesive structure but also very autonomous in how they will solve their own problems internally. There are examples in history of societies that worked similarly of course theory is not the same as practice so things won't work exactly as expected all the time but no system is perfect not even the current capitalist system is theoretically perfect.
Avatar image for kuraimen
kuraimen

28078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#209 kuraimen
Member since 2010 • 28078 Posts
[QUOTE="Vuurk"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="Vuurk"] I'm sorry mate but you need to face reality. We have a global economy now. The idea of communism is over. If you want to live in a small tribe and not trade with the outside world then I suppose it could work, but no industrial nation will ever succeed under communism. Capitalism is the best economic system to date. We should work on fixing our capitalist system rather than trying to implement a new economic system.

Who said there would be no trade with the outside world? I'm basing my ideas on knowledge on how small societies lived in the past which was closer to egalitarian communities (but trade was also present). Of course I'm not saying we should go back to being exactly the way we were before but with the new knowledge we have we can come up with a system that comes closer to that (more natural). I once made a thread about an economist (Manfred Max Neef) who had ideas for an economic system that brings humans societies closer to that notion. It's not going back to tribes, it's bringing knowledge about the most natural social structures into modern societies. I think they could work better that way.

You're not really saying at all how this economic system would work though. Also, when I'm speaking of economic systems, I'm talking about what is functional and practical for industrial nations. Communism is not possible (to be effective) in a society such as the U.S., Japan, Canada, China, or Russia, Australia, India, etc etc. I think you're failing to face reality and actually think about whether or not your conceived economic system would actually be possible in the real world. (not on some theoretically fantasy world level.)

The Manfred Max Neef thread I made explained the principles of such a system in detail (well and the video I linked to explained even further.). I even think you participated on that thread but I could be wrong. Also the ideas expressed in the OP on those links are also useful to start imagining a system such as that one. I think it is completely possible for a system like that to happen in the real world but the transition needs to be gradual.
Avatar image for kuraimen
kuraimen

28078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#210 kuraimen
Member since 2010 • 28078 Posts
[QUOTE="Vuurk"][QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] and where will a few hundred million find the time to get to know care and trust each other?

I'm not talking about a few hundred millions I'm talking about communities small enough that allow people to know and feel closer to each other. Tens, hundreds or a few thousand tops. Look at it this way, those communities will serve the purpose of families in todays societies but expanded to the community level. The problem with family is that it's too small and isolated. Communities at least bring together neighbors and extended families. Also a family has very little power to produce or handle complex problems by themselves but a community would be much more capable and provide a greater diversity of talents within the population. Also communities would have to be able to interact with one another. That's where trade comes in. Max Neef as well as others who have studied early societies recommend that tribes shouldn't be competing one with another to produce the same kind of stuff but they should work as complements, so you make communities dependent one from another to make a cohesive structure but also very autonomous in how they will solve their own problems internally. There are examples in history of societies that worked similarly of course theory is not the same as practice so things won't work exactly as expected all the time but no system is perfect not even the current capitalist system is theoretically perfect.

You honestly have yourself brainwashed into believing that a communist system would work? How did you do it? I've been trying to brainwash myself into believing that studying is more fun than playing video games but have yet to make any progress. Please let me in on your secret.

Not a single rebuttal, just an ad hominem as expected from someone who is blindly married to an ideology that he refuses to even question. And no that system is not communism, not every system that promotes cooperation and solidarity is communism. Communism has lots of flaws like I said before.
Avatar image for kuraimen
kuraimen

28078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#211 kuraimen
Member since 2010 • 28078 Posts
The funny thing Vurk is that you complain a lot about big government but a system such as the one I described takes power away from big government probably more than in any other country or society today and actually gives it to the population and the people. Yet you still refuse to even consider it.
Avatar image for kuraimen
kuraimen

28078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#215 kuraimen
Member since 2010 • 28078 Posts

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]The funny thing Vurk is that you complain a lot about big government but a system such as the one I described takes power away from big government probably more than in any other country or society today and actually gives it to the population and the people. Yet you still refuse to even consider it.Vuurk
Look mate, I'm a strong supporter of individual liberty. Communism and individual liberty can not coexist. Communism requires strong wealth redistribution. You're idea of communism is simply taking the authority away from the federal government and giving it all to the majority of the population. However, what about the individual ? What if an individual does not want to live in a society in which the means of production are publically owned? The individual is the ultimate minority. I do not support a system that merely adheres to the rights of the majority. It is individual rights which are most harmed by a communist system.

The individual is part of a social system no matter where you put him. He's either part of a community and dependent on others or part of a country and also dependent on others. As a social species humans can't work truly individually for anything so why pretend we could? and what if a person now wants to live in such a society but their freedom is limited by the current system? The same on that other system. People will just get used to it. I think that it could turn out to be much better than the current system for the vast majority of people so I don't think many will complain in the end.

Also living in communities doesn't mean minorities would get discriminated. On the contrary, people closer to each other discriminate less with a friend than a person they don't know so racism would be less within a community even if there are more diverse people. You also fight discrimination with education. Like I said before such a system would have to be accompanied by a very good educational system.

Avatar image for DarkOfKnight
DarkOfKnight

2543

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#216 DarkOfKnight
Member since 2011 • 2543 Posts
[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="Vuurk"]And Kuraimen quietly disappears from the thread as he realizes that his ideas about communism are flawed. What a surprise. Vuurk
Actually the problem is that I have a life outside GS :P

You just leave abruptly as the conversation starts to scrutinize communism? Idk about you but when I leave a discussion that seems to be going against me, I'll always let people know if I have to go and then I'll return later to address their points.

Communism has to one of the worst economic systems ever created. There is a reason is dying rapidly. Socialism isn't much above it.
Avatar image for kuraimen
kuraimen

28078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#217 kuraimen
Member since 2010 • 28078 Posts
Ok I have to leave now so I'm warning you! :P But anyways I think I laid out what I think well enough. You're welcome to disagree, I would hope with something more productive than ad hominems and fixed ideas about a term like communism but maybe I'm expecting too much. Either way have a nice time.
Avatar image for Animatronic64
Animatronic64

3971

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#220 Animatronic64
Member since 2010 • 3971 Posts

[QUOTE="Vuurk"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Actually the problem is that I have a life outside GS :PDarkOfKnight
You just leave abruptly as the conversation starts to scrutinize communism? Idk about you but when I leave a discussion that seems to be going against me, I'll always let people know if I have to go and then I'll return later to address their points.

Communism has to one of the worst economic systems ever created. There is a reason is dying rapidly. Socialism isn't much above it.

Communism never really existed. It's too idealistic. These so called "communist" parties and countries that exist/have existed are nothing more than an insult to the idea of true communism. More or less, it's always been about capitalism.

Avatar image for SpartanMSU
SpartanMSU

3440

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#221 SpartanMSU
Member since 2009 • 3440 Posts

If we're going to overcome the crushing socioeconomic inequality in the US, slacktivism isn't' going to cut it. We need something like the French Revolution where we just murder all of the rich people and redistribute everything they stole from us. It's just like all of the slacktivism about bullying. If someone is bullying you, man up and knock their teeth in. Don't create some lame "awareness campaign."bigfoot2045

Proof that the Occupy movements have started something...class warfare. You're fvcked up.

Avatar image for SpartanMSU
SpartanMSU

3440

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#222 SpartanMSU
Member since 2009 • 3440 Posts

[QUOTE="ristactionjakso"]

[QUOTE="bigfoot2045"]If we're going to overcome the crushing socioeconomic inequality in the US, slacktivism isn't' going to cut it. We need something like the French Revolution where we just murder all of the rich people and redistribute everything they stole from us. kuraimen

.......I wouldnt say the rich are the ones to be targeting. Corrupt government officials are more to blame than anything. Not just one of them like Bush or Obama. It's all of them.

As of right now we're governed by plutocracies that means the government and the rich are mostly the same.

Obviously then the best course of action is to give the government even more power. Great idea.

Avatar image for 00-Riddick-00
00-Riddick-00

18884

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#223 00-Riddick-00
Member since 2009 • 18884 Posts
Think about what the Occupy Wall street people wanted.. Then think about what the basis of Communism is.
Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#224 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

[QUOTE="Vuurk"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

cost to tax payers for occupied parks = ?

cost to tax payers for bank bailouts = ??

SEANMCAD

So they are hypocrits. Yes. I oppose both bank bailouts and sh*tty in parks.

again I ask.

If someone outside your house is sh*ting on your yard and is a hypocrite but IS calling the fire department because you house is on fire do your really care if they are sh*ting on your yard and are hypocrites?

You would rather see an entire forest burn then to support someone who sh8ts in a park and is a hypocrite?

I, frankly, dont believe it.

they are LITERALLY the only people who are getting media exposure who are saying 'we think bank bailouts are bad' and you are trying to shut them down.

Exactly!!! Preach, brother. The OWS are actually in the streets, being active while the others are just sitting on there sofas, grumbling.
Avatar image for freek666
freek666

22312

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#226 freek666
Member since 2007 • 22312 Posts

down with socialism

CAPITALISM HO!

Avatar image for RushKing
RushKing

1785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#227 RushKing
Member since 2009 • 1785 Posts

[QUOTE="bigfoot2045"]If we're going to overcome the crushing socioeconomic inequality in the US, slacktivism isn't' going to cut it. We need something like the French Revolution where we just murder all of the rich people and redistribute everything they stole from us. It's just like all of the slacktivism about bullying. If someone is bullying you, man up and knock their teeth in. Don't create some lame "awareness campaign."SpartanMSU

Proof that the Occupy movements have started something...class warfare. You're fvcked up.

It's only class warfare when money gets distributed down to the middle and lower class (the engine of the economy), and not when bankers rob us blind?
Avatar image for RushKing
RushKing

1785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#230 RushKing
Member since 2009 • 1785 Posts
[QUOTE="RushKing"][QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]

Proof that the Occupy movements have started something...class warfare. You're fvcked up.

Vuurk
It's only class warfare when money gets distributed down to the middle and lower class (the engine of the economy), and not when bankers rob us blind?

Bankers aren't robbing you. (other than the fed). The government is robbing you. If you don't want the government robbing you then stop electing dumb*ss politicians who bailout the losers and spend money irresponsibly. You're probably one of those people who support the auto bailouts though because "all of the jobs" it saved.... the irony.

Nope, I think americains should have direct control over what our tax gets spent on.
Avatar image for RushKing
RushKing

1785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#234 RushKing
Member since 2009 • 1785 Posts
I honestly think we should just seize the banks and nationalize them.
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#239 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

[QUOTE="Vuurk"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

I am going out on a limb here when I say 'all' but here goes. I think ALL OWS people know this. We really dont see any difference between the goverment and the banks in this context. The reason banks are targeted is becuase banks are the ones with the power. In real terms Goverment doesnt rule over business, business rules over goverment.

SEANMCAD

Yet, it is the government who authorize those bailouts. You should be occupying D.C., not wall street.

your not following me.

we believe that corporations run the goverment and the goverment is just a proxy.

everyone with power in the goverment has vested intrests in corporate. The guys who 'authorize it' often just got off the phone with Chase with the instructions on what to do. I exragate to make the point but its not far off.

Not to mention that if hte bail out didn't take place.. The executives responsible will get off scott free with a nice bonus.. And the loss would be put upon every one else in the lower level workers and lowly customers.. It was a no win situation, the bail out was the lesser of two evils at the time unfortunately.
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#241 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

your not following me.

we believe that corporations run the goverment and the goverment is just a proxy.

everyone with power in the goverment has vested intrests in corporate. The guys who 'authorize it' often just got off the phone with Chase with the instructions on what to do. I exragate to make the point but its not far off.

SEANMCAD

Not to mention that if hte bail out didn't take place.. The executives responsible will get off scott free with a nice bonus.. And the loss would be put upon every one else in the lower level workers and lowly customers.. It was a no win situation, the bail out was the lesser of two evils at the time unfortunately.

not really.

Think about this.

people who had house loans failed.

banks who packaged bad loans as good loans failed.

Who is less 'guilty'? well actually the home buyer.

Give the money to the banks so the loans dont go bad, or give the money to the people so the loans dont go bad. Both will inject back into the economy, so the only choice is who is more guilty. The guy selling grass as pot or the one who bought grass thinking it was pot

Yeah except fact that there were numerous scandals in which banks specifically used deception in giving people bad loans as well.... And it wasn't just home loans it was countless other problems it would have caused..
Avatar image for Jacobistheman
Jacobistheman

3975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#242 Jacobistheman
Member since 2007 • 3975 Posts

The point of a movement is not to inspire ideas, its to inspire actions. The Occupy movement did neither.

Avatar image for SUD123456
SUD123456

7062

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#244 SUD123456
Member since 2007 • 7062 Posts

[QUOTE="00-Riddick-00"]Think about what the Occupy Wall street people wanted.. Then think about what the basis of Communism is.SEANMCAD

Occupy movement wants two of the following. please read closely and carefully.

1. stop giving large corporate handouts using public money.

2. have the wealthy pay the same tax % as everyone else (in some realms this is called a flat tax)

you call that communism?

why do so many of your SUPPORT the one aspect of our economic system that IS NOT captialism, that being giving away public money to private companies.

please explain in detail

We have an Occupy Movement in Canada.

We did not bail out our financial institutions. No Canadian banks were seriously threatened by the meltdown. We did bail out the auto industry and are being repaid. All indications are we will make a small profit on that exchange.

We have a progressive tax system. We have a surtax on higher amounts. There are few deductions in the Canadian tax system. If you are a high income person in Canada you pay a higher % tax. Period.

By your own logic there is no point to the Occupy Movement in Canada.

Avatar image for Legenkiller59
Legenkiller59

6464

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#245 Legenkiller59
Member since 2008 • 6464 Posts

i highly agree