- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Your position equates all societies as moral equals.

Posted by: Frenchy on January 29, 19100 at 12:26:49:

In Reply to: We have freedom of speech here in America posted by Samuel Day Fassbinder on January 28, 19100 at 17:30:39:

: : : : Oh yeah, have I endorsed any EXISTING or PAST system of "communism"? Where? And what did I say about it? : See, Norman, I can post links about everything you said. Can you do the same for my posts?

: : You've never quoted Lenin or Marx to support your positions?

: SDF: I could quote either author and it wouldn't be because I was trying to show anything about anything more than "what Lenin said" or "what Marx said". Stoller quoted Hitler (in fact he quoted Hitler's DENUNCIATIONS of COMMUNISM) in support of the position that Hitler "wasn't on the left"; this does not make Stoller a Nazi.

It isn't as absurd as your implying to assume one who quotes Lenin and Marx and Bakunin and a few others with such depth of knowledge to support their views. If I quoted G. Washington, or heaven forbid, the Bible, do you think that those who would inevitably accuse me of jingoism or Bible Thumpery would be far from wrong? Look at past posts to see what I've been labled using Von Mises as an authoritative source.

: Go ahead, quote Marx if you want Norman. It's OK. We have freedom of speech here in America, and you can buy Marx's books openly in the bookstore without fear of immediate retribution. And, besides, your quote doesn't have to be an APPROVING quote.

I have, remember the challenge that K issued (I think it was K) daring me to show where Marx advocated violence? From his (Marx's) point of view he approved of violence in obtaining his social goals.

: : You've never illustrated your conception of an ideal society with examples including Pygmy tribes and American Indian tribes?

: SDF: No, I illustrated a point about this so-called HUMAN NATURE of ours with those examples. I showed how referring to "human nature" as an argument for LIMITING HUMAN POSSIBILILTIES was absurd, because there were so many different varieties of society that a concept of "human nature" would have to encompass them all. This was a disproof of the notion that "human nature" is CULTURAL -- people are who they are because they are Pygmy or Ik or Semai or Yanomami or American or Chinese, not because someone says "it is human nature to be (fill in the blank)". Ideal societies cannot thusly be rendered impossible with shallow arguments about "human nature," because culture is something we can KNOW and therefore DESIGN.

Hold on slick. If what you say is true, if human nature is nothing more than a reflection of society, and that, further, it is not possible to judge one society by the standards of another, you are only left with the conclusion that might is right.

That returns us to Marx and his advocating violence to achieve goals. Who can say that it's wrong to murder dissenters, or as the Communists put it, 'liquidate socially undesireable elements".
Your position equates all societies as moral equals.
That is demonstrably not true.
Visit some cannabils some day and see if, when you become the subject of intense scrutiny, you don't start believeing in morally repulsive cultural mores.

: Say Norman, what if you all of a sudden decided to say something about the WORDS on the PAGE as I put them down, instead of merely identifying my words with the stereotyped visions that dot your responses? Wouldn't that be something!j

I do Sam. What I don't do is allow myself to be dazzled/buffaloed by your brilliance. Part of the freedom of speech that you allude to is the freedom to say 'I will not accept your definition of X and/or Y.' You say there is no such thing as human nature, I say there is. Irreconcilable differences? Probably.

: : If you disavow present and past Communism/Socialism I suppose that means you endorse future Communism, which only proves what Gort said (I think it was Gort...) sometime ago regarding the failure of you guys being able to show actual working models of Communism, other than the models that exist between your ears. Socialism Delenda Est. (That's the Ablative Absolute construction for you Latin fans out there.)

: SDF: If it's only within my ears, then why are you so afraid of it?

Ahh, the results of what is between your ears are plainly evident
(OOOPS!! You didn't catch it! It's not Ablative Absolute, it the Passive Periphastic construction, another way of saying a Gerundive + Sum, indicating necessity or obligation).

PS, If all societies are equal, morally, why in the world is the 'freedom of speech' anything to crow about? Could it be that those w/o this freedom are oppressive and not in fact equal?
PSS, just a thought here, but I wonder if your a bit frightened yourself at admitting that there may be a God after all?

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup