How do you raise a child to be a Good Communist?

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by joncha
Didn't you know? Fez is a socialist. Of the national variety.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
There can be a belief that humanity is chosen by the evolutionary process, since it is the only species to be given the gift of logic and reasoning and that makes humans special. It doesn't require a God.

How can evolution chose anything? If anything, evolution teaches us to be modest and respectful of other sentient creatures, in remembering that we could as well be the inferior specy.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Gives the name Pop - eye a whole new meaning.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
How can evolution chose anything?

It's obviously personifcation to illustrate a point, a literary device. Don't get hung up on semantics if you can help it.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Have you ever heard of the American Institutionalists School of economic thought? Thornston Veblen was a famous guy there.

Can't say as I am familiar with them. Sounds intrigueing.

You did understand my main point was the deisre for the win feeding the self esteem moreso than the desire to see others lose. That is a darker yet secondary thrill.

[chequita guevara]

If you study economics at all, you'll run across Veblen and his Theory of the Leisure Class.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


Can't say as I am familiar with them. Sounds intrigueing.

You did understand my main point was the deisre for the win feeding the self esteem moreso than the desire to see others lose. That is a darker yet secondary thrill.

I disagree that it's a thrill at all, but I wonder about some of you right wing folks.

Anyway, since we agree that the significant human goal is economic benefit for the self, the only thing left to do is create a system that will motivate people to work in an effective and efficient way and assuming that they will do so if it benefits them economically. I see no reason why we can't do that and have economic and political equality. If you do then you can make your argument in light of your new understanding about human nature.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Thanks on the Veblen refrence, I'll have to pick it up for a read whilst on the road.

[Kidicious]

You raised an interesting point though Ogie. You could also assume that people are primarily concerned with equality as opposed to individual economic benefit, however I think that whether or not you prefer inequality to equality depends on how much economic benefit the individual will get from any particular system with inequality. Poor people in a system with inequality will be more inclined to prefer equality, and rich people in a system with inequality will be more inclined to prefer inequality. However, in a system with equality I'm certain that the vast majority of people will prefer equality, because when you seperate equality from economics it is in itself desirable where inequality is not.

[Imran Siddiqui]

If you study economics at all, you'll run across Veblen and his Theory of the Leisure Class.

Sometimes .

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[qIf you study economics at all, you'll run across Veblen and his Theory of the Leisure Class.[/q]

Sometimes .

Well if you study economics, not just orthodoxy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well if you study ideology, I guess you run into it .

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Well if you study ideology, I guess you run into it .

Aren't you suppose to study ideology? How do you know which one is best if you don't?

[Imran Siddiqui]

In economics? Not so much. You study more numbers (or should). Ideology is better put in the political science department.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
In economics? Not so much. You study more numbers (or should). Ideology is better put in the political science department.

Numbers are manipulated. Economics is for manipulating them in your favor and debunking other economists manipulations, all in favor of your ideology.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Oh, so cynical .

Economics is to read through any manipulation of numbers and see what they actually mean.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Oh, so cynical .

Economics is to read through any manipulation of numbers and see what they actually mean.

And the way to do that is to look at economic issues from all points of view, and not just one.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And the way to do that is to look at economic issues from all points of view, and not just one.

Ideological books don't qualify . More econometrics is required.

[Berzerker]

I give Berzerker a 9/10 for that troll judging by the immediate reaction to it.

chegitz -

This and all the rest of your post are BS.

Humans aren't solitary creatures that wandered around until someone had the brilliant idea to gather a group. In fact, if we weren't social creatures from the begining, ideas wouldn't be a possibility, since idea require language, and language requires social groups.

What does that have to do with the fact people join communities out of self-interest, not communal "sharing"? I never said people were solitary, although some are, I said they make a trade-off based on their self-interest.

Since before we were human, we have been living in social groups. Look at all our primate relatives. They all exist in social groups. It is the way of our species. It is programmed into our genetic code. We are social creatures. We go crazy in isolation and we die without the aid of other humans (including past aid, aka, teaching).

That's why this is "natural". Are you suggesting our hardwiring is not conducive to self-interest? Seems to me that's proof that self-interest - "capitalism" - is a result of evolution.

Kid -

Che is right. BS. You haven't made any real distintion between being envious and wanting to benefit yourself. And do you know why? Because there isn't any.

Che didn't even address that part of my post, so how could he be right? I just made the distinction, the capitalist who wants to benefit, i.e., own a nice house, doesn't see the rich person as someone to be looked down upon. Envy - the communist - resents that someone has that nice house and does look down upon them.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

And the way to do that is to look at economic issues from all points of view, and not just one.

Ideological books don't qualify . More econometrics is required.

A lot of people get caught up in the math. Economics doesn't always work out perfectly in math, because of the nonscience nature of it. Much of it must be discovered dialectically, and economists have to know when the math doesn't help. All this is determined unfortunately by ones ideological bias, and more conservative people usually come to the wrong conclusions because they were more concerned with the math that the reasonability of the problem and solution.

[Oncle Boris]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
It's obviously personifcation to illustrate a point, a literary device. Don't get hung up on semantics if you can help it.

It's just an illustration that 'being chosen by evolution' is not any more plausible than 'being chosen by God'.

[PeteH]

Personally I do not believe humans are chosen for anything special, anymore than any other animal, rock, tree, whatever. Each has its place in the world, and has a web of relationships connecting to the rest of the community. I think on the 'human timeline', civilization will be a blip which will become part of the mythology of the future bands of humans. In non-civilized cultures generally speaking, the idea of communication between species is not a metaphor, but the way things are. Messages are there from the rivers and trees and animals as surely as from other humans, but you can't hear them if you arent willing to listen. If you look at trees and see 'board-feet' you will never hear what they have to say. Similarly, if you look at a baby and see civilized human in training, you will teach that behaviour.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by JohnT


Gian, this is Agathon we're talking about. He makes his living off of dead, out-moded systems of thought, so it stands to reason that he's a Communist... and an angry one at that. So, why bother?

Yeah, whatever. You'd be a C- student at best. Why don't you stick to delivering phone books or whatever you do and leave serious matters to serious people.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Che didn't even address that part of my post, so how could he be right? I just made the distinction, the capitalist who wants to benefit, i.e., own a nice house, doesn't see the rich person as someone to be looked down upon. Envy - the communist - resents that someone has that nice house and does look down upon them.

Now you made a better distinction.

Some people on the left do get a superior attitude, but that's really not what communism is about. Rich people should be judged by their individual actions, not by what economic group they belong to, and I'm not against making money in a capitalist system. I'm strictly against capitalism as a system, not against capitalists as individuals. I do joke around, and through the term Pigdog around, but I don't mean it. I should use winkies more often.

[Kidicious]

Boris 2,

Your sigs are pretty funny.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Suns go nova all the time.

But this is a one of a kind event.

How do you know? How do you know there isn't intelligent life on other planets? Moreover, even there ISN'T intelligent life on other planets, the exception is that intelligence evolved at all, not the course that society took.

If it is a natual stage why are we the only species to have gone through it? Because it's an anomaly - an unusual occorance, a break from the rule.

Again, the ONLY "anomaly" (I dispute that even this is an anomaly, but that's beside the point) is the evolution of intelligence and the ability to use tools.

Unless you believe humans are seperate from all other life and have some sort of pre-determined 'evolutionary' destiny. In which case, I really don't think you're an athiest.

Everything has a sort of "evolutionary" destiny, in that there are certain evolutionary trends. For example, it could be predicted that single-celled organisms will eventually evolve into multicellular ones. Similarly, given intelligent beings, you can predict how their societies will evolve.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
What's wrong with it is that it leads to one-dimensional human beings, rather than being fully-developed multi-faceted individuals.

No it doesn't. Only those who have that mindset perform those actions. Capitalism doesn't actually enforce that mindset on people.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris


How can evolution chose anything? If anything, evolution teaches us to be modest and respectful of other sentient creatures, in remembering that we could as well be the inferior specy.

Evolution says nothing of the sort. Evolution assigns no moral weights whatsoever - it's like physics.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by PeteH
Personally I do not believe humans are chosen for anything special, anymore than any other animal, rock, tree, whatever. Each has its place in the world, and has a web of relationships connecting to the rest of the community. I think on the 'human timeline', civilization will be a blip which will become part of the mythology of the future bands of humans. In non-civilized cultures generally speaking, the idea of communication between species is not a metaphor, but the way things are. Messages are there from the rivers and trees and animals as surely as from other humans, but you can't hear them if you arent willing to listen. If you look at trees and see 'board-feet' you will never hear what they have to say. Similarly, if you look at a baby and see civilized human in training, you will teach that behaviour.

I don't think humans are special, but I also don't think we have a special place in the world I attach no moral weight to other species - we might as well f*ck with them as long as it's in our self-interest.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Agathon


Yeah, whatever. You'd be a C- student at best. Why don't you stick to delivering phone books or whatever you do and leave serious matters to serious people.

hurts, doesn't it Aggie