Is capitalism the biggest failure in human history?

Taytaz, As a theist and Catholic I believe wholeheartedly that there is nobility in every human soul but as even the Catholic Church proves (and it's probably the single biggest world wide organisation) there are bound to be some bad apples in any barrell...

SaraDroz wrote:Taytaz, As a theist and Catholic I believe wholeheartedly that there is nobility in every human soul but as even the Catholic Church proves (and it's probably the single biggest world wide organisation) there are bound to be some bad apples in any barrell...

So as theists and catholics we can agree that it is possible to handpick a perfect barrel?

you mean eliminating 'bad' apples? or taking all the good apples to live on some awesum island?

no, just choosing the good apples to be in the government, and allowing bad apples to be where they won't take millions of lives

It is possible to 'handpick' of course but that leads to elitism and not communism. A utopia for the few is NOT a utopia and certainly I would not be happy to rest in such a utopia while others still needed wisdom and help outside of the elites private world. If that is communism then no wonder it failed for the aim of all decent Christians is to help others - it is our duty...

I attended an interesting lecture at Uni about a year ago on 'Marxism and God'. The basic gist of the speakers point was that Marx agreed with Nietzsche that "God is dead" and was essentialy replacing God and the utopian ideals of religion with the party to create a manmade 'heaven' on earth. I have to say that I find this highly persuasive...

I have read 'Das Kapital' - have a copy here - and certainly Marx was wrong in his historical analysis. His economic analysis has been tested and it also fails as people have no real incentive to better themselves. His utopian dream has only ever been truly realised by a few groups of 'hippies' or Monks in Monestries... Yes for an elite it is possible but for a society or a nation not and it the duty of all to help raise the common standard and not to withraw into and elistist utopia.

Pliped wrote:Animal Farm by George Orwell.......end of for me really

To repeat what I've said to shadow before;

If you took your negative image of communism from this book, you interpreted the book very, very badly.

which leads us into a debate about the necessity of democracy in any government. Forms of Communism do not ALL require democracy or people in power. Take this as an example, you pick 10 of the most decent people one earth and put them in charge of a 20 million person community.

Acting with the people's interests in mind, and with enough checks and balances to prevent dictatorship, a benevolent oligarchy can arise, and implement the perfect communism. These would be servants of the people, like ghandi

As for Marxism and god, I prefer not to attempt to mix the two. Communism is not necessarily conformist in it's nature, however.

Tay hon your theory then is not Marxism (where theoreticaly the state will dissolve) but a kind of Platonic Philospher-King idea.

Certainly this would seem an ideal and would probably work upto a point... You must remmber though that govern 20 million people you will need a Government beaurocracy and civil servants to run things and each of them will also have their input into the governmental machine. Also I would ask how you chose the elite 10 and who we lead or watch them to make sure they didn't fall into corrupt or lazy ways? I am struggling with exactly these problems in my MMORPG guild at the moment and about to refine the laws there but am unsure how is best atm...

Ok.
E.g. I would chose Stan as 1, he declines offers to run as president, seems not to be overly ambitious or want power and genuinely puts ideas into the community.

I would not chose 'mr x' because he is driven by self-betterment, profit and is never selfless, that is the keyword, selfless

Ps. What mmorpg?

If you chose those who don't want to run things then you will get nowhere as they will do nothing...

MMORPG = Multi person online roleplay game (or something like that).

I'll rephrase, which mmorpg
Massively multiplayer oonline role playing game

Well, I wioll amend my previous statement, ensure motivation first, does not have to be political motivation as politics is eliminated, only actual work and help is needed

Yea but you rarely get that without ambition...

Rarely, 10 out of 20 million, quite rare

how would you choose the people to run your country taytaz? democracy?

Nope, the dictator/leader would chhose, then bail

Capitalism sucks.

But as said the bulldog:
"Capitalism is the worst economic system, except for all the
others."


So, I'm Social Liberal. So I believe the government has to provide all the liberties to the citizens, and provide good and social advancements.

I would describe myself as a benign democrat and certainly a member of any group that that I belong to who tries her best to encourage and promote that group. That's how I would describe myself... and to a certain extent it's true, however...

This is a dog eat dog world; eat or be eaten... those are the basic facts of natural selection of the fittest. Certainly joining together and working as a unit makes sense and that's what any society/eCountry/Guild is about. The ideal that Brother Taytaz speaks of in fact happen in RL - the person with the greatest abilitiy and most ambition choses his/her cabinet... Even within a group working together there will and should be competition for the top post. This is both natural and healthy in my opinion as it encorages new members of a group to strive and help others... With an unremovable dictator nobody has an incentive to excel...

Certaily parties and societies are good but the incentive must be there for new people to one day reach and taste influence so a dictatorship for life will always fail as an ideal UNLESS the dictactor is by definition not a dictator ie. has no power to order.

I have been Master of my guild for 2 and 1/2 yrs now and I had on re-election after I took executive command for 2 weeks during war. Now I do not vote on anything other than guild rules. I retain the right to to assume executive command at any time (for now - soon to be changed) but only during crisis and then must face a re-election against any who wish to stand... Am I a dictator? No because you cannot rule by telling people what to do - they will walk away (well they weren't alowed to in the USSR I think) - you MUST rule by consus.

The one thing that, to me, is fundamentally wrong with capitalism is that it values money more than people. Why should pieces of paper, metal, or numberso n a computer screen be worth more than opressed workers in the third world. I don't think that the communist economic model is particularly brilliant, but at least it attempts to do what capitalism does not - put everyone on the same level.

Ok Sara, just 2 things:

1st. Rule by consensus isn't an economical value/issue/whatever.
2nd. Democrat isn't exactly a political definition.

Socialism = Government type and social policy
Communism = Economic system

Capitalism works because it's based on encouraging people to be self-centred and greedy, and people have those qualities innately. It works better in larger societies, where people don't know each other, and so don't feel personally involved in their exploitation.

Communism doesn't work because there's always /someone/ who can't control their greed, and the system gets corrupted too easily. Although if you operate in much smaller groups (eg. communes), there's much more chance of it working - everyone knows each other, and has less incentive to 'cheat'

^^^
Exactly. The problem is that these theories rely on people, and people have qualities that suit capitalism, and whilst the ideals of capitalism are quite good, what works on paper doesnt work in practice.

Oh great.

So be greed is good?

No Brem (my favourite person ) consensus means many things but in the context in which I used it means that the leader (or whatever his/her title is) is seen not to order the community (group, society) but to lead them in forming their opinions and act, as it were, as a non-voting chairperson.

My point and context was in reference to Taytaz dictatorship proposal only.

Brem, no, totally not, greed sucks, but people as whole are greedy, which is encouraged by, and encourages, capitalism. Unless you can change people's basic values and attitudes, only capitalism or rule through force are viable options. Both suck, but capitalism sucks in a more comfortable way...

I see.
One thing thought:
Communism isn't dictatorship, it may be, but not in essence.


Kittten, I agree with you.
Capitalism is awful but is the best system around.

I got a new nickname! Brem.

=D