BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


The legacy of Karl Marx...

 
  

Page: 123(4)5

 
 
jbsay
19:41 / 03.09.05
You're a fucking dope

Economics studies human action.

Allocating resources is a subdivision of the general category of human action.
 
 
jbsay
19:46 / 03.09.05
Quantum:

I'm well aware that everyone thinks that the US is capitalism incarnate. I'm saying that this is wrong.

Which of the 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto is not in effect in the US?

What % of the economy is directly or indirectly the public sector?

Does the US have low taxes?

Are businesses lightly regulated?

Does the US employ protectionist tariffs?

Would you say that the government does not intervene in the economy?

Explain the Kelo decision?

Explain conscription (the draft)

explain social security and other welfare/redistribution schemes

Sarbanes-Oxley?

IMF/Worldbank redistribution schemes?

Foreign "aid" by redistributing taxes and inflated dollars?

I can go on and on and on.

Point is, legally people may technically own private property.

But in reality the government calls all the shots.
 
 
jbsay
19:53 / 03.09.05
Dread,

Have you ever actually set up a community in the wilderness without any bourgeouis tools (no performance clothing or materials, etc.)

Try making your own clothes, your own shoes, building a log cabin, hunting with bows and arrows and spears, skinning and tanning leather, curing meat, farming, finding and working with metals, purifying water, etc. If you get a scratch and it gets infected, good luck making your own antibiotics. If you get careless with the water you'll catch a nice case of giardia. If a diseased mosquito bites you you're screwed.

This appeals to you? I'll bet you wouldnt survive the winter.
 
 
jbsay
20:00 / 03.09.05
Haus,

Thanks for your concern.

I have a diversified portfolio that includes gold bullion.

I'm not counting on any of it to be worth anything.

Including the gold. FDR confiscated gold last time around.

What's your investment strategy? I love to learn from professionals.
 
 
MJ-12
20:02 / 03.09.05
What's your investment strategy? I love to learn from professionals.

Ammo.
 
 
jbsay
20:03 / 03.09.05
Haus,

I'll humour your condescension.

The quickest cure for SOCIALISM would be to return to an honest monetary and banking system

1) back up all money by a commodity (gold, silver, oil, whatever you want) to the tune of 100%
2) require all banks to hold 100% reserves. anything less is fraudulent. no fractional reserves. eliminate central banks
3) never allow the goverment to print money or take on debt. all government finances must be paid for out of taxes.


bonus suggestion: never, ever, set a price floor or a price ceiling for any good.

After that, the rest is details.

Thanks for your genuine curiosity
 
 
jbsay
20:04 / 03.09.05
MJ

shoot your ammo. I invest and give economic consulting advice for a living. what do you do again?
 
 
MJ-12
20:10 / 03.09.05
I leech off of your taxes.
 
 
jbsay
20:14 / 03.09.05
I leech off of your taxes.

Ammo.

Get a real job.

p.s. at least you have a sense of humour. kudos.
 
 
Jackie Susann
20:26 / 03.09.05
Hey could a mod do me a favour and add this third contradictory comment to my last post:

Economics studies human action.

Allocating resources is a subdivision of the general category of human action.
 
 
jbsay
20:28 / 03.09.05
Dread

Do I need to draw you a venn diagram?

Are you autistic?
 
 
jbsay
20:32 / 03.09.05
Dread,

Can I ask you a serious question. Why, as someone who has literally zero knowledge of economic thought outside of Marx, do you feel entiteled to speak on the subject? Do you feel simiilarly entitled to speak to building a bridge even though you are ignorant of mathematics and engineering?

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance."
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:47 / 03.09.05
jbsay: Quick question. How exactly do you feel that screaming, spitting your dummy and rotting threads that might otherwise at least contain some interesting discussion in any way advances any cause other than the cause of people thinking you're not very bright?

Seriously. If this trolling carries on, I think we're going to have to delete your ID just so that other people can talk in peace without ten sequential posts of badly-spelled abuse from you every couple of hours.
 
 
jbsay
20:56 / 03.09.05
Haus,

This board is not my property. Feel free to delete my ID.

I do not feel that I'm trolling. I can reference everything I've posted here. And I have multiple advanced degrees on the subject. I note that you never threaten anyone else on this board when they attack me.

For the record, I think that's a pathetic threat, and entirely in character for you.

But, again, it's your property.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:19 / 03.09.05
Actually it isn't my property, jbsays. It's a communal property.

If, jbsays, and this is quite a big if, you can behave like a grown-up in just one of these arguments - no calling people who disagree with them autistic, no creepy telling women about how they'll be raped, no personal attacks - then you might have a hope of convincing people that you are worth listening to. You are consistently unable to do this. You claim to be able to support every claim you make, but in fact when backed into a corner you post the same links to the same two or three von Mises fansites. I am prepared to bet that you have succeeded not once on convincing anybody else - on Barbelith or indeed in any other forum - of the rightness of your apparently inescapably correct economic vision, because your rhetorical resources are so threadbare.

Now, as I have told you before, if you feel that you are so much more able and informed than your interlocutors, provie it by adding something of worth. Otherwise, you're a single-issue troll, and you will continue to be treated with precisely the respect your temper tantrums deserve. No claims of "advanced degrees" will alter that. Now, stop forcing me to waste my time on you, have a glass of refreshing milk and start with the adult talk. You'll find that others, if they can be bothered to engage with you, will do likewise, just as you dragged this conversation down to the personal level you are now complaining about.
 
 
jbsay
21:27 / 03.09.05
First of all, I'll call total bullshit on the rape comment

I used a reductio ad absurdum argument for nina--which, as a debating technique was valid. Anyone who is even passing familiar with libertarianism knows that rape is a BIG no-no. As is property theft, murder, or aggression.

I simply took her point of view to its logical extreme to disprove it. This is a common debating technique.

Anyone who knows me (or libertarian philosophy) knows that a) I don't condone rape and b) i would shoot anyone on the spot who I saw raping a woman (or man).

Don't you dare fucking tell me I made creepy "rape" comments.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:32 / 03.09.05
You started discussing the rape of the woman you were arguing with. You call that a valid debating point, I call it creepy. Having sexy violent fantasies about saving women from rapists with your mighty boomstick doesn't make a lot of difference to that.

Creepy rape comments. You can accept that or not as you wish, but you may want to take how it looked into account for future interactions, especially with real-life ladies.
 
 
jbsay
21:34 / 03.09.05
You don't need to believe my economic vision. It will unfold before your eyes. Watch debt + fiat currency combine to yield an interesting economic mixture.


I could care less whether you agree with me or not. I'm happy to debate you.

Censoring or blackmisting me is an entirely different matter.
 
 
Jackie Susann
21:35 / 03.09.05
Do Venn diagrams really help the autistic?

You should go into business with this idea! You could make a mint.
 
 
jbsay
21:36 / 03.09.05
No, i did NOT discuss rape

She implied that my house is not my property. And that she could enter my house and take it over, including the contents. And that none of my possesions were mine (I'll assume she meant my body as well)

I said that's great, as long as we're thinking like that, I'm glad you agree that your body is not your property either.

That is a valid debating technique.

Libertarianism is based on 2 simple tenets
1) every individual is sovereign and owns him/herself
2) every individual owns the rights to his/her fruits of labor (including house and contents)
 
 
jbsay
21:39 / 03.09.05
My point is simply this:

she could not understand how people could claim property rights, since it belogns to the community


i extended this idea to her personage. she didnt like it. any more than i like the idea that she could steal my house and property.

end of story. you can call it creepy.

i call theft creepy. why did you not interject when she threatened my property and person?

a little hypocritical
 
 
Lurid Archive
21:44 / 03.09.05
This thread has now been rotted possibly beyond redemption, which is an enormous shame. I'd prefer it if further discussion about jbsay's conduct were conducted in the Policy.

Back to Marxism.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:46 / 03.09.05
You started speculating about the sexual molestation of the woman who had dared to disagree with you. Creepy.

Moving this back briefly to private property, it does raise an interesting question. What if the woman was being raped on somebody else's private property? And that person had specified that anybody foolish enough to enter his private property was going to get raped? At that point what claim does any other private individual have to the right to shoot that property owner on his own property? Are we suggesting certain sovereign rights that surpass the entitlement of private ownership? And would we not need some sort of police force to enforce those sovereign rights, and a judicial system to determine whether that police force limited itself to the enforcement of transcendent rights? In the thread on the police action against a rave that was taken place on private property, jbsay describes this as a symptom of the Communist society - his words, not mine - under which the USA labours. If a properly non-Communist, non-Marxist society did not allow police (or by extension private individuals) to enter private property to stop a rave, how about a rave where people were, in the opinion of the police in danger of being raped?
 
 
jbsay
21:51 / 03.09.05
At that point what claim does any other private individual have to the right to shoot that property owner on his own property?
if the rape is against her consent (isnt that the defintiion of rape), and as such an assault on her sovereignty, that would be a violation of her private property. I’m happy to open fire under this circumstance

Are we suggesting certain sovereign rights that surpass the entitlement of private ownership?
sovereign rights are included in private ownership


And would we not need some sort of police force to enforce those sovereign rights, and a judicial system to determine whether that police force limited itself to the enforcement of transcendent rights?
entirely possible. Public or private?

In the thread on the police action against a rave that was taken place on private property, jbsay describes this as a symptom of the Communist society - his words, not mine - under which the USA labours.
point?

If a properly non-Communist, non-Marxist society did not allow police (or by extension private individuals) to enter private property to stop a rave, how about a rave where people were, in the opinion of the police in danger of being raped?
what police? Are they private police hired by the private property owner?
 
 
jbsay
21:55 / 03.09.05
Haus,

If someone steals your wallet on their property, is that ok under private property?

No. The wallet is your property.


Neither is rape on someone else's property

Nice try
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:06 / 03.09.05
The wallet is your property, yes. But whose property is the rape victim's? Nobody's property except their own. Therefore, nobody else needs to protect their property here.

So, your analogy is flawed. A correct analogy would be that somebody else had _their_ wallet taken from them by the owner of the property they were standing on. The owner had previously stated that, as the owner of that property, they would treat every incursion as trespass, and would punish every trespass by removing the trespasser's wallet. You are on your own private property next door with a rifle. Are you entitled to open fire to prevent the removal of a stranger's wallet on another person's property? If so, what is the transcendent quality that allows you to control what your neighbour is allowed to do on his own property when your own ownership rights are unthreatened?
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
22:07 / 03.09.05
(Mod hat: This is just getting ugly now. Precedent notwithstanding, could we please drop the rape-as-a-debating-point thing? I'm sorely tempted to move for some of this to be deleted.)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:36 / 03.09.05
Ah - so the individual has the right to intercede whenever anybody's property rights are being violated. Or, more precisely, whenever they believe that anybody's property rights are being violated.

Now, that presents a bit of a problem of its own. Your neighbour has made it clear that he does not want you to walk onto his property. You respect that, naturally. However, from your rocker you see what you believe to be your neighbour taking somebody's wallet from them without their permission. At what point are you certain enough of the rightness of that belief to take the shot, if you are too far away to request further particulars? If there is a compelling expectation on all private individuals to uphold the property rights of all other private individuals, what conditions attach to the exercise of that duty? So, for example, if the Utah police had a reasonable suspicion that private property was being disrespected at that rave, through theft or (shudder) collectivisation, would they at that point have been morally compelled to violate the owner of the property's right to exclude whomerver he wished from his property in order to prevent this?
 
 
Lurid Archive
23:05 / 03.09.05
I'm moving for the last few posts up to Mordant's be deleted in the vain hope that the thread return to topic.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
23:10 / 03.09.05
Lurid - you appear to have moved to delete the posts discussing the distinctions of private and public ownership, which are as close to discussing Marx as we've been for a while around here. I don't understand that strategy.
 
 
Lurid Archive
23:21 / 03.09.05
It seems more like bickering to me, Haus, using certain arguments as a pretext. I agree that we've been adrift for some time here, but I thought I'd try to stop this at this point. Think of your ideal discussion of Marx - this isn't it. Other mods can, as always, disagree.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
23:34 / 03.09.05
I'd suggest deleting certainly all of page 4 and probably about half of page 3, in that case.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
10:48 / 04.09.05
(Slightly off-topic;

For what it's worth (and as an old woman of 70, I don't know if I'm speaking for anyone else here,) I'm fairly sure this thread's just fine as it is. Whether or not any given discussion seems a bit distasteful on a personal level has, surely, got nothing at all to do with a valid set of reasons why it ought to be shut down? Why not just let the thing run its course? No one's said anything all that bad and really, if it hurts your eyes that much, no one's exactly holding a gun to your head, so, y'know, there are other things in life, etc.

Not trying to start a fight here, at all, but a delete request over the head of what's being discussed at the moment seems a bit ridiculous, IMVVHO.
 
 
sdv (non-human)
18:55 / 04.09.05
One of the things that proves the importance of Marx as both a political philosopher and social theorist --- is precisely the disaster that this thread has become.

The responses that Marxism generates, including the strange bourgious ideological spin that always appears whenever the line of thought that Marx instantiated surfaces, usually intended to refuse the thought that the Marxist critique is a necessary part of any reasonable critique of capital...
 
 
Tom Paine's Bones
13:19 / 05.09.05
I'm well aware that everyone thinks that the US is capitalism incarnate. I'm saying that this is wrong.

If, as you accept, everyone uses a term to mean something other than you mean by it, doesn't that very fact mean that yours is unlikely to be the correct usage?

Out of interest, how are you going to decide who owns which property in your anarcho-capitalist utopia? Go with what was owned beforehand under your despised socialist (sorry, SOCIALIST)goverment?
 
  

Page: 123(4)5

 
  
Add Your Reply