-Demosthenes-
Internet Revolutionist
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2005
- Messages
- 919
- Reaction score
- 7
- Location
- USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Me said:How do you ignore a poster? [Talking about Robodoon]
Herophant said:Well the fact is that your nation based on property rights grew from its original 13 states through conquest from Spain and Mexico? Not to mention a systematic process of ethnic cleansing in the case of those various "Indian" nations who were nearly all eliminated in one of the largest land grabs in modern history" (Cox 2004:598-599)
Michael Cox (2004) "Empire imperialism and the bush doctrine" Review of international Studies, 30
Herophant said:Well the fact is that your nation based on property rights grew from its original 13 states through conquest from Spain and Mexico? Not to mention a systematic process of ethnic cleansing in the case of those various "Indian" nations who were nearly all eliminated in one of the largest land grabs in modern history" (Cox 2004:598-599)
Michael Cox (2004) "Empire imperialism and the bush doctrine" Review of international Studies, 30
I'll generally agree.Dude the very basic premise of Marx's Communist Manifesto is that Socialism is a better economic system than Capitalism and the two can not coexist or intermingle
Isn't that more like a personal opinion?because the only economic system which is condusive to liberty is Capitalism
Must have missed the "proven" part. There have been many capitalistic dictators and authoritian regimes.something that has been proven with every system of Government to be created based on his tennants
Again, just another worthless personal opinion.Without life, liberty, and property a man can not truly be free.
So?Locke wrote the
2nd Treatise of Government which is the very basis for the United State's Constitution and Bill of Rights
The definition of a philosopher is not what people did in their name, its what they did, as far as I know Locke didn't theorise or philosophise how society works, as far as I know he philosophised about an individual. Marx was a social philosopher, his economic superstructure idea was enough to do that also contributed more.and you're going to tell me that he wasn't a social philosopher?
You're assuming I care what philosophy the US Constitution was based upon.If you don't know who Locke is or understand his philosophy then you have no idea what the U.S. is founded on.
I don't care what other people think of him. If you don't like him, then that's your opinion.Why do you cling so strongly to the ideology of a discredited philosopher (Marx)
No one is proven to be successful.when the ideology of another philosopher has been proven to be so successful (Locke)?
Which is the strict state control?As far as the media is concerned, democracy vs socialism refers to loose government control vs strict government control.
Ivan The Terrible said:A poster earlier said this,
The United States has never been a true capitalist society! How did we see it fail?
Loxd4 said:Socialism is supposed to be like a man-made-utopia.
fooligan said:Be careful whose Koolaid you're drinking.
Democracy refers to a system where the people elect their leaders.
Socialism is an economic system, where the government controls... well, everything economic and whatever else there is.
Socialism is a threat to any democracy because socialist governments are inherently iron-fisted when it comes to freedom. I.E. you have none.
FreeThinker said:Hay good job going from a debate about free market economy vs socialist to America was founded by landgrabbing savages.
Good job responding to someone else's post by needlessly attacking America.
You win.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Without life, liberty, and property a man can not truly be free. Locke wrote the
2nd Treatise of Government which is the very basis for the United State's Constitution and Bill of Rights and you're going to tell me that he wasn't a social philosopher? If you don't know who Locke is or understand his philosophy then you have no idea what the U.S. is founded on.
jfuh said:Same old denying facts all the time huh tot?
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Denying facts? Why is it the people who are the least educated in these matters are always the ones who love to use the term facts without actually presenting any?
Herophant said:Well the fact is that your nation based on property rights grew from its original 13 states through conquest from Spain and Mexico? Not to mention a systematic process of ethnic cleansing in the case of those various "Indian" nations who were nearly all eliminated in one of the largest land grabs in modern history" (Cox 2004:598-599)
Michael Cox (2004) "Empire imperialism and the bush doctrine" Review of international Studies, 30
Comrade Brian said:I'll generally agree.
Isn't that more like a personal opinion?
Must have missed the "proven" part. There have been many capitalistic dictators and authoritian regimes.
Again, just another worthless personal opinion.
The definition of a philosopher is not what people did in their name, its what they did, as far as I know Locke didn't theorise or philosophise how society works, as far as I know he philosophised about an individual. Marx was a social philosopher, his economic superstructure idea was enough to do that also contributed more.
You're assuming I care what philosophy the US Constitution was based upon.
I don't care what other people think of him. If you don't like him, then that's your opinion.
No one is proven to be successful.
Comrade Brian said:This garbage about the US not capitalist belongs in the Conspiracy Theory Forum.
Trajan Octavian Titus said::lol:
Good because it's correct.
No that's the lesson of history bub.
That's because they had no political freedom, without political freedom there can be no economic freedom and without economic freedom there can be no political freedom.
No it's not that's the lesson of history.
You can't say that Locke wasn't a social philosopher when his best known work is the very basis for Western society.
No Locke theorized how both government, society, and the individual in the society works, seriously don't comment on things you know nothing about.
You're saying that Locke wasn't a social philosopher yet you don't even understand that his works is what the American society is based on. :roll:
LOL People didn't discredit him history did.
History has proven that when a society is formed based on the ideas presented in the 2nd Treatise of Government then freedom and prosperity will be the result . . . do you know where America is?
Herophant said:Let my try to place the argument in context from my point of view.
Sorry for going of topic, but when i see something untrue i feel an urge to enlighten.
Falangist said:As for myself, my economic theory is largely national syndicalist, so I tend to be anti-socialist and anti-capitalist at the same time. I just don't think either is the answer.
Free Thinker said:As far as the media is concerned, democracy vs socialism refers to loose government control vs strict government control. That's what the media is trying to say in their own screwed up language.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:No actually the facts implicate Mexico, they attacked our soldiers first after all, Mexican forces moved over the rio grande to attack one of our forts if you really want to get technical. But it really doesn't matter due to American exceptionalism which I am a firm believer in. The Mexican tyrants should have left the Republic of Texas alone . . . nuff said.
Dude the very basic premise of Marx's Communist Manifesto is that Socialism is a better economic system than Capitalism and the two can not coexist or intermingle
Comrade Brian said:because the only economic system which is condusive to liberty is Capitalism
Isn't that more like a personal opinion?
Comrade Brian said:If you don't know who Locke is or understand his philosophy then you have no idea what the U.S. is founded on.
You're assuming I care what philosophy the US Constitution was based upon.
Comrade Brian said:Why do you cling so strongly to the ideology of a discredited philosopher (Marx)
I don't care what other people think of him. If you don't like him, then that's your opinion.
Comrade Brian said:No one is proven to be successful.
Ivan The Terrible said:The United States has never been a true capitalist society! How did we see it fail?
This garbage about the US not capitalist belongs in the Conspiracy Theory Forum.
fooligan said:Socialism is a threat to any democracy because socialist governments are inherently iron-fisted when it comes to freedom. I.E. you have none.
Falangist said:As for myself, my economic theory is largely national syndicalist, so I tend to be anti-socialist and anti-capitalist at the same time. I just don't think either is the answer.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:IE the majority of Indians were killed by disease accidently it was not intentional
Falangist said:As for myself, my economic theory is largely national syndicalist, so I tend to be anti-socialist and anti-capitalist at the same time. I just don't think either is the answer.
So you're a fascist.
National Syndicalism is the ideology of Falangists, and Falange is a form of Fascism.-Demosthenes- said:That doesn't make sense. Realizing that both systems put into their purest forms fail is far from fascism.
-Demosthenes- said:Around 90% of the Native American Population was already dead from Spanish disease and warfare, before Jamestown or Plymouth were even ideas.
That doesn't make sense. Realizing that both systems put into their purest forms fail is far from fascism.
Volker said:National Syndicalism is the ideology of Falangists, and Falange is a form of Fascism.
Trajan Octavian Titus said:Yes it does national syndicalism is a fascist ideology which was practiced in Franco's Spain. It's not racist fascism but it's fascism none the less. Look at his avatar.
-Demosthenes- said:What does that have to do with the fact that pure capitalism nor pure socialism can work very well?
Did I misinterpret what he said?
Red_Dave said:The problem with your argument about economic freedom is that capatalism argueably does not give people economic freedom. Under capatalim the economy is controlled by the leadership of corporations which are run for the benefit of the rich. The way in which the economy is controlled by a minority is undemocratic and creates a lack of economic and personal freedom in the lives of many people. Under socialism resources can be controlled by the people [Through the ballot box and other methods to varrying degrees, depending on the type of socialism] So in this sence socialism can be more democratic when it gives people the freedom to control the resources and buissnesses that have a major effect on there lives.
Nothing, but if you read the whole sentence, you see, he supports national syndicalism.-Demosthenes- said:What does that have to do with the fact that pure capitalism nor pure socialism can work very well?
Falangist said:To clear things up, yes I am a falangist, and my avatar is Engelbert Dollfuss. Fascism it is, but I am not racist. Nazism and fascism don't mix even though Hitler and Mussolini were allies.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?