to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlBOANspYJg
#economics #politics #politicalphilosophy #philosophy #finance #politicalcompass #maneco64 #gold #fiat " #Socialism ". (he actually insisted the conservative party are socialist now... #wat )
I wonder why #youtube #censorship wouldnt let me post this comment:
@Maneco64, some questions:
When you say socialism, what do you mean?
Something like the Orwellian name-changer "National Socialism" (that was more totalitarian hegemony)?
Or something more like Bakunin's "we are convinced that socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality, and freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice"?
And what do you mean by your aversion to politics? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ame0j8jbMY4
And what do you mean by small government? A government of one, a monarch? This is an ambiguous term wide open for abuse of alternative interpretations.
"The only way to have socialism, is to take"...
o_O disturbing lack of imagination.
Have you read "The science of getting rich"?
We've vast abundance, and no need to have this fearful "take".
That top-down impositional, and rather scarcity-centric.
We can give, we can generate. No taking required. certainly not "the only way".
"The only way" is one of those phrases that alarm bells should go off, some arrogance, up on dunning-kruger's mount stupid with a dangerously little piece of information, and not realise it.
"there's more authoritarianism"
in this "only" way?
Please do look again to the political philosophies and writings of of anarcho-socialists and libertarian-socialists. No authoritarianism required at all.
Also, you seemed averse to the giving half of your equation that apparently presumed necessary "taking". Are you advocating to pull the rug from under those in receipt of welfare benefits, disability income, etc? Are you advocating I be left to perish and die? Or do you think Charity would take up the slack? I ask, because we already live under considerable authoritarianism, and rather hobbled amount of socialism. I'd rather we do the socialism without the authority. But you seem, in your intro, rather oblivious to the authoritarianism and relative absence of socialism, as if oblivious to the conservative party and liberal democrat party having committed a genocide of the disabled poor... is that socialism to your thinking? Is that what's throttling the country? Are you sure it's not intentional over-inflation and mis-deployment of inflation to create a greater wealth divide and greater devaluation, for a power grab like has been done in history?
"The individual is not as free to do as the individual wants"... as per our current system, heavy on authoritarianism, and light on socialism. If we had anarcho-socialism, then we would have resources availed to do as we each want. Are you sure you're not thinking of fascism or totalitarianism? Truly socialist ways would be boosting individual freedom to do as they want, to create that strong society, not harming society by depriving individuals of their autonomy and free thought. "Many eyes make all bugs shallow" as one expression from the Free Software movement assert. The value of the individual freedom is respected, necessary, essential, to freedom. And in this, socialist.
I wonder if your aversion to politics, by whatever you've narrowly interpreted the term to mean, is what has kept you from studying the possibilities further than whatever narrow conceptions keeps you averse and in prolific agnogenesis regarding political philosophy possibilities.
The politicalcompass website may be fascinating to you if you've never encountered it before (which at a guess, you've not, or at least have not delved deep enough into it to give it due credence, perhaps because of this narrow-conception based aversion).
And, it's a mite peculiar, and undermining of your credibility, to speak so averse to politics, professing to avoid it, and then proceed to do nothing but chirp (frankly, from novice-ignorance) about nothing but politics.
"Taxation is heavy", this may blow your mind, but, there are ways to do it without taxation at all.
Some of which, (which I think likely you'll object to, perhaps again, due to narrowed conceptions of the possibilities), is via fiat currency, which has more potential, more levers, to adapt it to needs. Or, in the case of a corrupted power clique, abuse.
But there's the key piece... If we had genuine democratic control over our currencies, it could be deployed to meet needs. Many a decentralised innovation, beyond the monopoly keepers of corrupted abusive forms of fiat, and beyond the likewise fairly centralised and ever consolidating keepers of gold (not to mention... who stole all the gold in the various historical gold heists... why would you want to give them (from inquisitions, to vast false-flag terror attacks to provoke problem-reaction-solution based losses of rights and moving more resources to the tools of jingoist hegemony and total global primacy) all that power???)
Have you been replaced by a deep fake A.I.?
I thought you were more in favour of (at least) liberty.
Albeit perhaps a little misguided to think gold the answer. Or has that always been your own corruption, trying to drive up demand for your own stockpile? Or more directly are complicit with those prior heist-archy groups?
"because, uhh, statists. That's what socialists are."
o_O like all socialists are the same???
Seemingly oblivious to the word "socialist"(/"socialism") being one of the most broadly applied political terms, so much so it almost loses any tangible meaning. Hence the call for adjectives, and even then with adjectives, duly wary, given the Orwellian historical abuses of its good name, for monstrous political philosophies of authoritarianism. ... And if you think socialism is all authoritarian, then I think you've not been paying attention, and only parroting the language and lies of the oppressor.
"They ("socialists") don't like sound money, because it limits the amount of spending they can do"
Well, since I've already pointed out the folly of your ignorantly broad-brush using the term as if a homogeneous group, I'll move on to treat that characterisation... How about instead, see an availing of resources. Someone needs something, to contribute, avail it... rather than say "you cannot have that because you do not have enough of our imaginary coins, or have not accrued enough precious metal"... what a foolish hobbling of human potential that would be.
Seems as socially/politically ignorant as Marx, to consider only economics. That's how we end up drifting to authoritarianism of various ilk. Whether it be Big Baron, Big Bully, or Big Brother. Seems all born of either ignorance of more than just money & economics & resources, or, abuses thereof.
There are ways to freedom, fair for each and all. These strawmen are counter-compelling, to those who've seen not all are as you've constructed to easily fell.
"Unfortunately, we've got socialism EVERYWHERE right now." BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. No. So outrageously absurd. So insane. We have far more corporatism, plutarchy, kleptarchy, oligarchy, kakistarchy, rule by bankers, attercoparchy, hegemony, ... so many political terms more fitting, which reveal, we do NOT have socialism. If we did, there'd be a lot less poverty caused by inequality, a lot less wealth hording and maximised wealth extraction transferring historical record amounts of wealth to the super rich. How many trillion was it recently was racketeered from people to the super rich, 5 trillion? 10 trillion? And how many more times total wealth was DESTROYED in so doing? ... These are not socialist characteristics. I wonder what reality tunnel you've fallen down through to have snagged such impossible notions. How far have the Orwellian newspeak name-changers contorted your conceptions of possibilities with their truncations and conflations of terms?
... This is going to get very long, if there's to be such density of exercise of Brandolini's law and Cunningham's law here consistent through the rest of this piece. I'm not even 3 minutes in, and already have written an essay load.
"And, um, even the conservative party has become socialist" For goodness sake man, get a grip. Those who committed genocide, those plutarchs, those corrupt nepotists, who do not even vote in their "leader" (and what use would there be for a "leader" in true anarchist democratic socialism?), but instead have a leader, a puppet leader, a hedge-fund banker billionaire, selected and imposed upon them... I'm sorry, where's the socialism in this?
Have you ever listened to any who identify as socialist? You seem to have a very peculiar grasp, and a tight grasp, of something you are insisting is socialism, yet is not at all what many consider socialism.
Look again to the political compass... look to their own analysis. Try apply your own analysis. See how well you can construe Conservative party actions as socialist, without an absurd moving the goalposts of what socialism is supposed to mean. I suspect you'll still see the Conservative party (along with Labour, and Lib Dem) in the authoritarian right. Then try find a self-identified socialist (or several) of whatever ilk, and see what result comes out for them from the political compass test... I strongly suspect, they will not be authoritarian right. They'll at least be on the left hand side of the graph, and more than likely, in the libertarian half too. Though maybe that's just my bias from the choir's I've sung in, getting the same echoed back to me. And I suspect the same may be happening to you, albeit, apparently, much less wittingly, given the certainty with which you've spouted what to me is absurd self-contradictory impossibilities, using terminology backwards, like a cliche example of Orwellianised newspeak.
Okay, I don't have time to keep being trolled by your (sorry to say) nonsense. I have health issues to attend to (thanks to our socialised health care system having been >40 years back-door hijacked by corporations and encumbered by administrative hierarchies). And the stress of discovering someone I respected now saying such dangerous newspeak nonsense, is not helping. And also... it has undermined everything you've said thus far. I find myself in very loud doubt about the merits of gold now that you've spouted these cliches and, frankly, redscare propaganda conflationary nonsense. I hope someone else can get some sense through to you, because this rot, not only harms the noosphere if believed, it harms you either way.
It's so mind boggling that you'd utter such obvious nonsense... It has me wonder if this is intentional nonsense, in frustration at censors denying you a voice to say what you really think, and this nonsense is all that gets through.
Seriously, go look, at least, to the political compass, so you can get a better notion of where things are, and what other possibilities there are.
I couldn't even get through 3 and a half minutes of that trolling.
maybe for the best. lol. :P
& #DigitsRants (a lightbulb plinked a noise like it didnt want me to include that hashtag). XD mercurryyyyyyyyy! n_n
