Originally posted by XanthosNZCommunism, capitalism, they're both pretty much the same thing. It's
Communism, that's an excellent idea. I wonder why no one tried that in real life. Oh wait.
just a matter of how you do the sale. Either I propose to you things you
don't need in exchange for things you don't need, giving you the sense
of being in control of your own situation and on top of things that really
matters when in fact you're not. Or, we all live under the same basic
rules, being taken for what we don't need to help those who need it.
We both know that communism hasn't really been done. Humanity has a
long way to go before we can selflessly give away what we have to serve
the larger group, humanity. Isn't that just hilarious? How we try to grab
as much as we can without giving anything more than absolutely
necessary, but we take from the rest of humanity of which we're already
part? Thus, eventually we have to give back. At that moment we're acting
like good commies, but we resent being good commies so as soon as
some balance is restored (or we cheat ourselves to think thus) we start
taking again. Taking. Taking. Taking. Mine I tell you!!! MINE!!!
Blow up the illusion of control and you may experience things of true
importance.
Originally posted by stockenComplete opposites.
Communism, capitalism, they're both pretty much the same thing. It's
just a matter of how you do the sale. Either I propose to you things you
don't need in exchange for things you don't need, giving you the sense
of being in control of your own situation and on top of things that really
matters when in fact you're not. Or, we all live under the same
Blow up the illusion of control and you may experience things of true
importance.
Communism relies on force and threats of force to enslave men, the other relies on individual rights and voluntary trade i.e the non-initiation of force.
Edit: Stocken can you post your address, in the interests of seeing you practice what you preach (that is to prove you're not a lying hypocrite) we will start an advertising campaign directing needy people to your door.
Originally posted by WajomaEven in our great capitalistic societies we're forced to use force (ti-hi) on
Complete opposites.
Communism relies on force and threats of force to enslave men, the other relies on individual rights and voluntary trade i.e the non-initiation of force.
occassion. You know. To preserve the "democratic" way of life, we sometimes
have to do things that aren't all that... democratic. Life. 🙂
Originally posted by stockenForce is justified in response to an objective threat. In fact more than justified, obligatory would be a better word.
Even in our great capitalistic societies we're forced to use force (ti-hi) on
occassion. You know. To preserve the "democratic" way of life, we sometimes
have to do things that aren't all that... democratic. Life. 🙂
It is the initiation of force that is immoral. That includes someone making threats or waving a gun at you.
edit: keep trying ti hi
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
Originally posted by WajomaIt's a shame that that not many people actually donate their organs when they die, um, religion might get in the way, pride, and a number of other things.
Bravo, that man.
But I think that respecting these beliefs is important, having control over own body, even in death, is a fundamental pillar of individualism.
One way to alleviate the shortage of organs would be to allow for their private sale. For example, if I get on the Internet and find a young fellow in Tel Aviv or Brazil City who would be willing to sell me his organ, and I'm willing to fly him to Dallas, Texas so that I can receive the transplant, why shouldn't I be able to? Both parties are satisfied with the transaction, however, the reason we can't consummate the deal is that it interferes with the medical establishment's monopoly on the way these things are done. They don't want to compete and lose the stranglehold on the power and the money. Moreover, they will squeal that the buyer and seller are incapable of making these decisions and how it's unfair to poor people who do not have the means and that the market would soon return to the wild, wild west, blah, blah, blah. I say get rid of the bureaucracy and the rest will follow.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterYes, the medical corporations have a monopoly, it needs to be nationalised like it is here.
One way to alleviate the shortage of organs would be to allow for their private sale. For example, if I get on the Internet and find a young fellow in Tel Aviv or Brazil City who would be willing to sell me his organ, and I'm willing to fly him to Dallas, Texas so that I can receive the transplant, why shouldn't I be able to? Both parties are sat ...[text shortened]... d, wild west, blah, blah, blah. I say get rid of the bureaucracy and the rest will follow.
If you actually wanted a few organs, I'd suggest China, they even do (well did certainly...) sell the organs of their prisoners.
Originally posted by mrstabbycommunism is bad because it cannot possibly do what it preaches. sure it would be nice if we didn't have filthy rich bastards and homeless guys. sure it would be nice if things would belong to the people and nobody would have much more money that he/she could spend in several lifetimes.
No, that‘s totalitarianism. There are many different types of communism (such as Luxemburgism), though everyone assumes that Stalinism is synonymous with communism.
however i don't think communism is doable, not now, not ever
Originally posted by WajomaNo, sometimes we force people to do things against their will even
Force is justified in response to an objective threat. In fact more than justified, obligatory would be a better word.
It is the initiation of force that is immoral. That includes someone making threats or waving a gun at you.
edit: keep trying ti hi
without having been provoked. Like when we say this or that person must
join the military and protect our nation. If they don't they will find
themselves serving time for X number of months. Having your ostensible
freedom taken away is an act of force against you. If I like to do drugs,
harms no one while I do yet am caught doing it, then I will also be
submitted to force and thrown into custody. That's force necessary to
maintain order, yet totally unprovoked as I haven't yet disrupted the
order.
The only perfect society would be one where the citizens are aware of the
sacrifices needed to maintain order and willing to do so. That's not going
to happen any time soon, because we tend to mix into the pot personal
feelings and a desire for control which doesn't stop at controlling
ourselves but those around us. How we achieve that control, be it through
actual physical force, manipulation or rigid laws, is besides the point.
They're all equally abhorrent.
I've tryied to stay out of these forums for such a long time and I was doing so good at it and then I had to read this retarded thread.
Wow there is just so much wrong with all the stuff you just said I'm not really sure where to begin.
But A: your talking about a philosophy of death. Your philosophy in this thread is one of self sacrafice and death. You want to force someone to give a part of themselves and give it to someone who needs for no other reason than they need it. You might as well say that if you and a someone else were together isolated from the rest of the world and you only saved up enough food for yourself while the other person save 0 food and you only had enough for yourself in your mind the correct thing to do would either be let yourself die so they could live or share the food so you both die together. Sacrifice and death are the only two parts of your senerio.
The needs of the many outway the needs of the few? Star trek was wrong because would you rather have 1000 retards who cant feed themselves and die or one genius who can fend for himself?
Communism and capitalism only have one thing in common and that is that they need the participation off all to work and capitalism atleast can weed thru the parisites by just letting them fend for themselves or die. communism all you will do is sponge off of the workers and thinkers untill you have completly drained them of life and you all die, it make take days months years or centuries but death is the only result.
Forcing people to go into the military? A draft is nothing more than a payment you have to make inorder to stay free in a country it is the price you pay to live in that country if you do not which to pay that particular price go to or start a country that meets your needs. Sometimes a counrty needs people to fight to help the very survival of the country, if they dont the country and it citizens dies. "you can't have your cake and eat it too" in other words you can't have the protection of a country to protect you and harbor you without ever having to expect ot pay something. You cant go to a hotel stay for the night and then the next morning when you get the bill refuse to pay because you dont feel like paying the bill, the hotel did its part of the bargin so you need to fufill your part.
And back to the organ if your organs failing so what? i would feel bad, But you have no right to my liver just because you need it. my organs are mine unless i willingly want someone to have them i will not give them up.
And just remember when you become your brothers keeper you become a slave to a slave to a slave.
here's a good clip to help illistraight some of these points.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
Originally posted by Hank ReardenThe point is that you would be forced to do this, you wouldn't be given a choice, what they would be forced to defend is immaterial.
Forcing people to go into the military? A draft is nothing more than a payment you have to make inorder to stay free in a country it is the price you pay to live in that country if you do not which to pay that particular price go to or start a country that meets your needs. Sometimes a counrty needs people to fight to help the very survival of the cou like paying the bill, the hotel did its part of the bargin so you need to fufill your part.
edit: I'm not saying that a draft couldn't be justified, but it certainly shows how in a capitalist society, in this circumstance, it couldn't say it was society without force.
Originally posted by stockenHow about the law or consent.
You know, I was thinking. I created yet another nonsense thread in the
nonsense forum and realised it's actually a good debate issue. Donating
organs. What gives you the right to say I can't have one of your kidneys,
say? Because you were born with it? I think not. If I'm about to die, then
I have as much right to that kidney of yours as you do since it can keep
us both alive and life comes before anything else.
Debate!
One have the right to say now but you also have the moral obligation to say yes.
It is the same when you are donating your organs to some one else.
But you can have found that out by talking to a doctor why didnt you?