- Capitalism and Alternatives -


Posted by: David ( USA ) on December 23, 1999 at 10:37:25:

In Reply to: Care to justify this? posted by Nikhil Jaikumar on December 22, 1999 at 20:47:47:

: : Ahh yes, Barries statistics. The ones he misinterprets and bends to his own machinations at will.

: When Barry cites statistics, they're 'machinations', but when you cite statistics they're valid? Care to justify this?

Actually, if you reread what I said his citing of statistics were not machinations, it was his machinations to which he applied them. Anyways, would you care for me to go through every post by socialists and capitalists alike and find gasp biased use of words?

: :You are going to here his most treasured stats relating to how many people have B.A.s and how many jobs do not require B.A.s. The similiarity he attributes to a capitalist-bourgeoise conspiracy to keep the working man down.

: Actually, whether or not you see it as a 'conspiracy' - and I don't, not really- Barry's statistics are valid, convincing, and deeply troubling. You ought to recognize that and at least give Barry his due. Don't you find it troubling that vast numbers of people work in low-paying, unskilled jobs? And that people like you and me do not (at elast, we have the oportunity not to)? Unless you think that you are in some way BETTER than the California grape picker, then such a contrast will inevtiably be highly troubling, whether or not you accept job rotation. I suppose the real question to ask is, is teh skilled worker somehjow better or more deserving than the unskilled one. And anyone who asnwers "yes" is the one who is REALLY flirting with fascism.

First off, I think his stats are very poignant, however it is relative to how you interpret them. I showed the stats to my sister and her take on it was that it was more of an effect rather than a cause. It is debatable.
Secondly, I do not think myself "better" than a california grape picker or a tool and die maker. First off, I would have to have a standard by which to compare and then a concept of what exactly better would be. I may be more proficient at music than some people, but that does not make me better. There are some people who are intrinsically better at music than I am. For instance, I lack a sense of perfect-pitch, which means that if you asked me to sing a G#, I would probably be close but not get it right on. I cannot say whether or not some people are more skilled intrinsically. I think that it has a lot to do with their upbringing. A child who is raised by parents who take an interest in their education and expose them to various influences would probably have a more developed brain than someone who spent their childhood in front of the television.
Thirdly, in response to your comment as to who is more deserving I think that the person who is better at something is more deserving. Essentially, based on merit, rather than need or connectiosn for that matter. If I were in contention for a music scholarship to Juliard and someone who was given the scholarship because their uncle was a friend of the directors niece, I would feel wronged. Similarly, I would expect them to feel the same were I given the scholarship because of any connections I had.

: : The thing is though, is that college does not guarantee you a job (try getting one with a major in philosophy...I have some anecdotal evidence for that one...)

: Yes, but a college education si clearly a Good Thing, at least for teh majority off people who would like to have one. If it is a good thing, then why shouldn't it available to anyone who wants one? I think that anyone who says that there's nothing wrong with poverty or lack of education should follow his beliefs and refuse to be wealthy or educated hismelf. Otherwise, he is being merely hypocritical; adbocating one standard for himself, another for the poor.

I agree, there is no doubt that certain people have greater oppurtunities based on the virtue of their position or family. Consequently, I have more respect for a poor person who rises above their circumstances and becomings something great.
In fact, twice a week I go into the innercity to an underfunded school and tutor 6th graders in music. I work with about 5 students who've taken interest in music but because of the poor condition of their school they only get music classes twice and week and they have to share instruments. I even let them use my instruments and provide them with musis to play. I enjoy doing it alot, it is really quite rewarding. In fact, two of my students are exceptionally gifted and I expect that they will become very fine musicians. It is my way of providing oppurtunity to those who've not been given it.

: : : In the past (such as here and here), David---when confronted with those authorites---readily admited that HE has no authorities to back his statements up.

: : That was because I was arguing the ethics of a system, not the practical real life workings of one. I was asking Barry to justify his premises, something he just writes off a Randian-Ploy (perhaps he should by a book on philosophical debate).

: : : However, growing frustrated with defending the indefensible (capitalism), David now simply calls me a fascist. Which is entirely in the spirit of Ayn Rand's les-than-vigorous 'epistolmology.'

: : Well Barry, by the same standard everyone seems to hold to Frenchy, I would be perfectly right in calling you one.

: Nonsense. Frenchy endorsed colonial theft of land, physical assault on people who suggested socialistic ideas to peasant, teh superioirty fo some cultures over others, the idea taht weapons of mass destruction are 'good', the idea that the poor are deserving of their misery, etcetra. I can supply you direct quotes from Frenchy on any of these if you want. All of these are essentially teh same ideas shared by fascists and others of the extreme Right.

I am not even going to try to denfend this one. Sorry Frenchy, you're on your own.

::I would also like to bring to my defense that fact that Barry is a majoritarianist.

: :

As I said here, the MAJORITY of people must want socialism before it can happen. Only the MINORITY (cancer cells) will be treated with force. The socialism that the majority wants will be 'implemented' by majority rule (which, admittedly, is called 'force' by those in the minority who are sore losers).

: :

: : Ah yes, Barry's sore losers. Basically mob rule. His only defense of it is going on the offensive and saying "Well, you do like this minority rule?!?!"

: I've already criticized Barry in that regard, but I really don't think what you advocate is any better...

What is it that I advocate? The protection of individual rights. Let people be their own masters, let them govern themselves, let them interact freely with one another, let them achieve that which they can achieve.

Follow Ups:


The Debating Room Post a Followup