Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 13 May '12 20:51 / 2 edits
    Why is it that collectivists:

    1. ......tend to celebrate "diversity", on the one hand, but then try to pound us all into the same square hole no matter what shape we may be on the other hand? For example, we must all have the same health insurance and be educated the same way and have the same type of retirement etc.

    2. ......tend to dismiss the notion that we all share a universal morality? Instead, they often insist that morals depend upon culture and that morality is really relative.

    3. ......tend to rail against corporations when corporations are nothing more than a form of collectism? I guess they prefer all these corporations to form one really large corporation called the government.

    4. .....tend to support social democracies? After all, freedom is dangerous. Free trade is but one example. One must centrally plan trade as well as any of our other activities. If not then how can these things be centrally planned if there is dissent of any kind? It would seem to me that central planners would constantly be changing directions based upon the whims of a democracy with no real goal to ever be attained, that is, if it were a true democracy. Could it be that all this support for social "democracies" is nothing more than lip service since these democracies all tend to churn out the same types of leadership that are headed in the same direction in terms of central planning? After all, central planners must save us from ourselves. There is an economy to save and envirnoment to save etc. It seems to me that if there is but one direction in order to "save" us all, what is needed is a dictator.
  2. 13 May '12 20:54
    I don't know any people who label themselves as "collectivist". Who is this aimed at specifically?
  3. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    13 May '12 20:56
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    I don't know any people who label themselves as "collectivist". Who is this aimed at specifically?
    People who want to increase taxes on the rich.
  4. 13 May '12 20:58
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    People who want to increase taxes on the rich.
    You mean intellectuals?
  5. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    13 May '12 21:00
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    You mean intellectuals?
    Yep, them ivory tower smarty pants liberals are part of the conspiracy, everybody knows that.
  6. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    13 May '12 21:05
    Originally posted by whodey
    Why is it that collectivists:

    1. ......tend to celebrate "diversity", on the one hand, but then try to pound us all into the same square hole no matter what shape we may be on the other hand? For example, we must all have the same health insurance and be educated the same way and have the same type of retirement etc.

    2. ......tend to dismiss the notion ...[text shortened]... hat if there is but one direction in order to "save" us all, what is needed is a dictator.
    Whodey, what do you think of this:

    One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of
    our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can
    serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern
    society in general.

    But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century
    leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today
    the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be
    called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in
    mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types,
    feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and
    the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these
    movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing
    leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological
    type, or rather a collection of related types.
  7. 14 May '12 01:54 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Whodey, what do you think of this:

    One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of
    our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can
    serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern
    society in general.

    But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century
    le movement or an ideology as a psychological
    type, or rather a collection of related types.
    Collectivism is a mindset that we should empower government to "fix" all of our never ending problems.

    Here is a taste.

    http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/texting-while-banned-jersey-town-152720795--abc-news-topstories.html

    They have passed a law in Jersey that says you cannot text on your cell phone while walking. The fine is $85. This was all due to a few fatalities related to people texting on their cell phones when walking.
  8. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 May '12 02:28
    Originally posted by whodey
    Collectivism is a mindset that we should empower government to "fix" all of our never ending problems.
    "All" problems? Have you ever met anyone who thinks government should address "all" problems?
  9. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 May '12 02:40
    Originally posted by whodey
    They have passed a law in Jersey that says you cannot text on your cell phone while walking. The fine is $85. This was all due to a few fatalities related to people texting on their cell phones when walking.
    Actually, that law is about jaywalking and about texting while crossing a highway. You seem to have been trying to disguise this fact, or was it just accidental on your part?

    That aside, if someone disagrees with the enactment of that law in Jersey, does that mean they are not "collectivists"?
  10. 14 May '12 12:02
    Originally posted by FMF
    "All" problems? Have you ever met anyone who thinks government should address "all" problems?
    The government has conditioned people to look to one man for all the answers, the President. In fact, most people have no idea who their Congressional representatives are, nor do they care. As a result, many do not even vote unless it is a presidential election.

    The consequences are both good and bad for statists. The good part is that they condition people depend on one man who many jokingly call the "messiah". This fostering of dependence bolsters their power. They look to him for jobs, they look to him for low gas prices, they look to him for health care, the look to him for retirement, they look to him for pretty much everything. The bad part is that issues that the president has virtually no power he over gets blamed for. For example, Obama can sit there all day till he is red in the face trying to splain he cannot single handidly lower gas prices and the masses will have no part of it. This discontent will be seen in the polls come November.
  11. 14 May '12 12:07
    Originally posted by FMF
    Actually, that law is about jaywalking and about texting while crossing a highway. You seem to have been trying to disguise this fact, or was it just accidental on your part?

    That aside, if someone disagrees with the enactment of that law in Jersey, does that mean they are [b]not
    "collectivists"?[/b]
    It was just an oversight but the point has still been made.

    The issue here is that the trend is statism. You may not be a statist on every issue, but by in large it is a mind set that lends itself to issues such as this. It is also cumulative. Once a statist policy has been embraced there is usually no going back. Then at the end of the day you have laws and regulations for pretty much every activity during the day.
  12. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 May '12 12:10
    Originally posted by whodey
    The government has conditioned people to look to one man for all the answers, the President. In fact, most people have no idea who their Congressional representatives are, nor do they care. As a result, many do not even vote unless it is a presidential election.

    The consequences are both good and bad for statists. The good part is that they condition pe ...[text shortened]... the masses will have no part of it. This discontent will be seen in the polls come November.
    What about the question I asked?
  13. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    14 May '12 12:12
    Originally posted by whodey
    Then at the end of the day you have laws and regulations for pretty much every activity during the day.
    Pretty much every activity during the day?
  14. 14 May '12 18:53
    Originally posted by whodey
    It was just an oversight but the point has still been made.

    Then at the end of the day you have laws and regulations for pretty much every activity during the day.
    Yes, but oh how we party at night
  15. 14 May '12 21:12
    Originally posted by whodey
    Why is it that collectivists:

    1. ......tend to celebrate "diversity", on the one hand, but then try to pound us all into the same square hole no matter what shape we may be on the other hand? For example, we must all have the same health insurance and be educated the same way and have the same type of retirement etc.

    2. ......tend to dismiss the notion ...[text shortened]... hat if there is but one direction in order to "save" us all, what is needed is a dictator.
    You know, I celebrate my free market right to purchase Hunts tomato sauce while someone else might opt for Del Monte, but I don't really see that as an expression of "diversity."

    Number 2 is actually a good point I raise with Marxists all the time. In fact "dialectical materialism," if accepted as true, hits me as evidence of intelligent design.

    To the extent that corporations are governments, they are dictatorships. Maybe that's part of the problem.

    And pragmatic socialists opted for social democracy precisely because they saw some of the evils of central control, even before it took over a government, and determined that process was more important than results. It's not about "central planning" per se. Socialism is about moving away from the profit motive in social and economic organizing, and towards a more conscious collective action. Social democrats simply want it to be accomplished through a democratic process and are willing to chance that it will never be accomplished - because liberty and democracy are more important.