Ah well - if that's the case, at least it's more straightforward than FA - the fucking morons in charge there can't be arsed to disallow even trying to comment on posts when you're blocked, so I had to take up watching/unwatching to figure out if I was blocked before commenting.
Ah well - if that's the case, at least it's more straightforward than FA - the fucking morons in cha
Ohhh, yeah. I have just been blocked by someone now. And the little box down the bottom disengages when they have blocked you. Preventing you from wasting your time in typing up a comment to them, to only find out you are blocked when you try to post it.
Huh. The way this site functions is very user friendly actually. Hmm. Rather happy to be using it more to be honest.
Ohhh, yeah. I have just been blocked by someone now. And the little box down the bottom disengages w
*noddles* And they have filters too, so I can filter out people who make shitty diaper pictures, as well as cub porn. Small price to pay for free speech ^.^
*noddles* And they have filters too, so I can filter out people who make shitty diaper pictures, as
It is sad when people group everyone that they target as 'them' into one category. Even when horribly misinformed and incorrect.
Tribalism appears to be getting more and more extreme. The 'us' and 'them' mentality, and needing to put people into boxes so that they can either join 'us' more effectively or be othered as a part of 'them' more efficiently.
Some people are probably like that as well, yes. It is sad when people group everyone that they tar
Oh, because in reality it was completely irrelevant to the submission.
Your statement was "Everyone I Don't Like is a Communist: A Childs guide to Online Discussion" which is something I have never said, nor something that is even related to this artwork.
It appeared to be a derailment tactic. To try and place false words and a false position in my mouth. So, I attempted to redirect the discussion to be more related to the work itself, and away from your bizarre derailments.
This work is short, it is directly related to communism itself. Communism. The actual thing. Not people who follow it. But the ideological view of governance that has killed more than any other.
Then, you derail it and appear to try and link it to me calling everyone that I disagree with communists. Something that I have not done.
So yes, my reply was more relevant than your derailment tactic.
Oh, because in reality it was completely irrelevant to the submission. Your statement was "Everyone
this is just comments on inkbunny not Online Debate Club Battle Royale where you lose life points for ethics violations, fucking lol. hell you brought up "tribalism" bizarrely when that couldn't be farther from the original topic
this is just comments on inkbunny not Online Debate Club Battle Royale where you lose life points fo
Stating random things that are unlinked to everything.
And tribalism is indeed linked. It is a rather important aspect of how communism works, and was also directly related to your comment as well. So, linked in two areas. More points for me. Linkage points.
Uh huh. Good work. Stating random things that are unlinked to everything. And tribalism is indeed
you're not really explaining anything. also it depends on the particular school of thought of communism, whether its pro or anti-tribalism. try reading a book.
you're not really explaining anything. also it depends on the particular school of thought of commun
Most of the versions of communism have resulted in purges of those who they believed (through tribalism) would not or did not fit in. Part of the reason for the huge death toll which this artwork is referencing. Interesting the linkage eh'?
Ohh. Interesting. I should "try reading a book". Hmm. I see. I have read several though. And often find that scientific articles are frequently better than books in many regards for many different subjects.
Perhaps you should try not attempting to derail an artwork through random unrelated comments? That might also be a good idea. I will read some more books. And you will stop posting random unlinked things on artworks that have nothing to do with what you are commenting?
Wow, interesting. Most of the versions of communism have resulted in purges of those who they belie
most of the versions of communism don't exist dude they're just theories of what capitalist societies eventually transform into thru socialist policies. it didnt matter whether the name on the tin said communist or capitalist. rapid modernization and industrialization had a body count everywhere it happened.
most of the versions of communism don't exist dude they're just theories of what capitalist societie
Oh my... is this the 'not true communism' comment then?
My my.
Then I guess the only thing to say is, every time it has been attempted it has killed millions upon millions and never worked. So... it might not be a good idea to attempt. Because human nature itself prevents the ideological concept from being pulled off completely and accurately as intended.
Even so. Doesn't remove the accuracy of any statement I have made, nor the artwork itself.
Oh my... is this the 'not true communism' comment then? My my. Then I guess the only thing to say
didnt fail, its still a work in progress. capitalist economies have not yet matured to provide the framework for classless society with well-distributed resources.
be sure to make a drawing about the millions upon killed by nationalist, capitalist, liberal and fascist wars/revolutions, imperialist colonization, slave trade, conquest of aboriginal lands too.
here's what human nature looked like before 'communism' entered the dictionary http://necrometrics.com/wars18c.htm its important to read the note at the bottom about considering world population and pre-modern times to get a better understanding about the relation between population and the number of deaths. http://necrometrics.com/wars19c.htm 19th century too just for fun so yeah sorry no im not nearly as worried about communism as i am about xenophobic reactionaries in 2017.
didnt fail, its still a work in progress. capitalist economies have not yet matured to provide the f
See this is a better approach than just saying random unrelated things.
But still, I disagree with you. Communism has failed every time it has been attempted. And the human condition is why it fails. It is basically good on paper assuming the best of everyone. But everyone is never the best. Human nature will always poison the well that communism is. That is why it will never work.
It goes against the foundational aspects of human nature.
The only way it could work is if we remove humans and create a borg like society. Then that might be possible.
And yeah, there have been many killed by all of the different governing regimes. The point of this, was regarding communism. Because people hold it up like it has never done anything wrong, despite killing millions of innocent people, in active by choice purges, every time it is attempted. Actively killing. By choice. Not even as a side result of a governance regime, but an active PART of the governance regime. To ensure that is can continue.
See this is a better approach than just saying random unrelated things. But still, I disagree with
Not sure why you keep stating things that are unrelated, but hey, it seems to be your go to.
I said it is unlikely to work due to human nature, and how humans in society act and interact. That isn't stating that it is bad, or good, because it is natural or unnatural. It is saying that it is unlikely to work. A completely different concept.
Well done linking an argument type I didn't use. Not sure why you keep stating things that are unre
you're also dismissing everything i say as ridiculous without really explaining why. instead you just keep bringing up this nebulous loaded concept of 'human nature' as proof of communism's failure. also you went from 'it will never work' to 'unlikely to work' because of 'human nature' between replies lol. i think this conversation is done. there really is no use engaging with mealy-mouth centrist-liberals like you. no real ideology, just accepting whatever the status quo teaches you in a given moment.
you're also dismissing everything i say as ridiculous without really explaining why. instead you jus
Essentially it is just survival of the fittest. If someone who is selfish can achieve more in a group or society, then that is a favourable trait that will be selected for.
I'm also not dismissing what you are saying, I am providing counterpoints to what you are saying.
Oh look, insults rather than an argument or addressing any points! Well done. Not only have you linked arguments I didn't make, statements that were seemingly purely to derail and other such actions. But now you resort to name calling, while also trying to say that you are somehow superior and I am inferior to you.
Well done. Fitting all of that into such a limited conversation.
Sorry I am tired. *Communism will never work due to human nature.* There you go. Back to it. Es
"Essentially it is just survival of the fittest. If someone who is selfish can achieve more in a group or society, then that is a favourable trait that will be selected for. " what is this a counterpoint to? communism? this is just reheated social darwinism.
anyways yeah... what name calling? the mealy mouth part? is even that too politically incorrect, too insensitive?
"Essentially it is just survival of the fittest. If someone who is selfish can achieve more in a gro
oh okay, sorry you feel so helplessly cynical about humans. i'm just gonna go back to talking dangerous altruistic ideas like nationalizing healthcare and basic income among my evil socialist friends k. can't be any more or less evil than fascism or communism in your eyes, cuz humans are selfish no matter what.
oh okay, sorry you feel so helplessly cynical about humans. i'm just gonna go back to talking danger
Not helplessly cynical about humans. Just a realist. There is a difference. I recognise how humans function, you ignore it. To each their own.
Oh no. Dangerously altruistic ideas. Nationalised healthcare, something that I am in favour of. The one buyer system, which can, if implemented well and properly, function effectively. But there does indeed need to be care and protections put in place.
Levels of socialism mixed with capitalism!? OH NO! Something else I like and approve of.
A basic income!? OH NO! Something else that, if implemented correctly and effectively with the appropriate restrictions put in place to protect it from those horrible selfish humans that I agree with again. Oh it is like you are just pointing at things and being like LOL YOU DON'T GET IT. Without asking me or discussing any of it. Well done again.
No idea what kind of pointless final comment you were going for. But you failed at it again. Well done.
Not helplessly cynical about humans. Just a realist. There is a difference. I recognise how humans f
yeah its easy to get things wrong online and seeing as we're now both advocating for social democracy i think my last comment worked well in probing for actual opinions beyond your red scare cartoon.
yeah its easy to get things wrong online and seeing as we're now both advocating for social democrac
Socialism without safeguards, and going full on socialism without some level of protections will never work.
There needs to be some level of safeguards. I like the concept of democracy with some level of socialism, to assist in looking after the lower classes especially. But, the right kind of safeguards need to be put in place to try as best as possible to prevent those who will abuse the system. Because... well... humans, many of them at least, are pretty horrible selfish creatures.
Communism will never work. Democracy with no safeguards will never work. Socialism without safegua
It might surprise you to know that there are non-Leninist communists. And that communism itself does not advocate for famines or the conditions that caused famines in those nations - those famines were due to the authoritarian nature of Marxist-Leninism and strong cultures of personalities around Stalin and Mao that let them command enough power to determine how farmers farm.
It might also surprise you to know that not all variants of socialism are state-centric. For example, Anarchism itself is by and large a left-wing movement.
Also, humans are not selfish - they are quite cooperative and trustful, capitalism wouldn't even be able to work if they were selfish because you wouldn't be able to stop them from forming a dystopian nightmare of powerful competing monopolies. Humans evolved as a species that highly valued altruism, the appeal to nature argument is perhaps the worst as to why 'socialism doesn't work'.
It might surprise you to know that there are non-Leninist communists. And that communism itself does
Also, humans are not selfish - they are quite cooperative and trustful, capitalism wouldn't even be able to work if they were selfish because you wouldn't be able to stop them from forming a dystopian nightmare of powerful competing monopolies.
You do know that we have an issue with powerful competing monopolies at the moment... yes?
I know these things. ~~~ Quote: Also, humans are not selfish - they are quite cooperative and
Not quite to a cyberpunkish Dues Ex level. I meant more like 1800s on steroids and meth, and also ingrained to the point where no system can fix it due to it being the natural state humans attempt to take.
Not quite to a cyberpunkish Dues Ex level. I meant more like 1800s on steroids and meth, and also in
But... there are some serious difficulties we are facing regarding major duopolies and things like that.
Humans, as individuals are helpful and good, but as a group are mobbish and selfish.
Yes, individuals are quite cooperative and trustful. However, as a group, that tends to go out the window.
Socialism as a major ruling way, doesn't work. Socialism with some levels of capitalism and appropriate restrictions and monitoring I believe is very good though.
Yeah it isn't to a cyberpunk level. But... there are some serious difficulties we are facing regard
It depends on how you are defining socialism - if you are talking about only state socialism then yes, no authoritarian (or I'd argue even centralist) ideology can work. But if you are talking about unionism - which respects the free market - I would disagree.
It depends on how you are defining socialism - if you are talking about only state socialism then ye
I think you can see how it unnerves me a little when I see people making blanket statements about all socialism being evil when they refer to only one type - I try myself to make it clear that I'm fine with market liberals, conservatives, and the like while still holding at arm's length fundamentalists, neo-reactionaries, and fascists.
A lot of people on here see things like this and go ham at people like me thinking they know what I believe and refusing to listen when I tell them otherwise! Its quite...tribalist!
I think you can see how it unnerves me a little when I see people making blanket statements about al
