The Capitalism Debate!!!! - Page 6

"Cturtle was referring to Capitalism not democracy. If you carefully read over your post you will realize that you're mixing the two."
Goddamnit I havent. We forced CAPITALISM, a reactionary dictatorship on South Korea. The US propped up its weaknesses and ignored its human rights abuses. South Korea is today a rich democracy because America FORCED it to make the painful step of being a CAPITALIST DICTATORSHIP.

The difference with Vietnam was tactics, IE it was a guerrila war in jungle, as opposed to a traditional war like Korea. An occupying power can win a traditional war, only rarely a guerrila war. Had the Vietnamese used standard tactics, I assure you the USA would have won, and that (just like Korea and Taiwan) there would have been 20 or 30 years of dictatorship then blissful rich democracy.

I nowhere mentioned democracy (which has never cured anything IMO).

awakening - That is true. I am arguing that capitalist free trade willl eventually create a middle class and eventually create democracy. It worked for the French, Americans, British, South Koreans and Taiwanese.

I am also arguing that a different economic system (socialist for example) would entail less economic growth, would eventually damage the middle class and encourage extremism (the sort we saw after the Great Depression).

Thus democracy is different from capitalism. But a long lasting democracy can only exist with capitalism.

Cturtle - Democracy begins coming into a permanent form in the 19th century. Educated middle classes in Europe and America started battling the conservative aristocracy. WW2 showed that 'laissez faire' capitalism was flawed (it had created the Great Depression and thus the destruction of middle class and the creation of Fascism). It showed that government financial intervention (as opposed to SOCIAL intervention) was necessary to a healthy economy and a healthy democracy. The Cold War confirmed this.

quote:

---

The US propped up its weaknesses and ignored its human rights abuses. South Korea is today a rich democracy because America FORCED it to make the painful step of being a CAPITALIST DICTATORSHIP.

---

As I stated in one of the Iraq threads, if they are going to get a democracy then why shouldn't we recieve the same? Are you sure they are not still under a capitalistic dictatorship to some extent?
200 years ago people could shit in an outhouse. Today with millions of people it doesn't work well.
The accumulation of waste has started to catch up with us, we can no longer ignore our future needs for the sake of economic prosperity today. Our dependency on oil is only becoming greater untill we do something to overcome that dependency, like spending those billions spent on warfare on alternate energy rather than the newest stealth aircraft or building ten more shuttles or keeping corperations in business of governing the people.

That is a different issue altogether. You are right to an extent. A company may not do anything that will harm 3rd Parties. Mind you that so far, things are fine. And I think there are far more serious things to worry about then a pseudo-dammaged environment.

Frankly, I'm more worried about Iran, North Korea, african and middle eastern poverty (and thereby political instability), human rights abuse, the rise of China, the AIDS crisis in the Africa. A healthy economy will help us deal with these far more serious issues.

quote:

---

And I think there are far more serious things to worry about then a pseudo-dammaged environment.

---

Let's see I stand next to the largest river in Fla. On one side is the river on the other is a swimming pool. The pool is filled with children, the river has a few boats (no swimmiers).

quote:

---

What is wrong with this picture?

---

A guy comes in to the dock but has forgotten to plug the drain hole, the boat sinks. He ask for help but none dare the waters for fear of contamination?

quote:

---

What is wrong with this picture?

---

A healthy economy will help us deal with these far more serious issues. How?
We haven't done a good job of it yet? Will doing the same old thing over & over again change the results?

quote:

---

Today, they are rich democracies (?) because America FORCED it to make the painful step of being a CAPITALIST DICTATORSHIP. What is wrong with this picture?

---

As you are a capitalist or at least representing them => Let's consider the nation as factory? You are a boss in this plant working in a central office space, an employee comes to the office to complain about the coldness of the factory. So what do you do?
Tell the employees to work harder, to be more productive as the increase of their energy will cause them to be warmer?
The owners come in, shivering he tells you to turn on the heat. So you go over & turn up the thermostat on the space heater? Well the office warms up but floor of the factory isn't going improve much, it is not going to help those people but those in the office will benefit from it.
Why because heating the office doesn't provide heat to the various areas in the factory. You need a disturbution system, raising the heat within the office only has a trickle down effect.
The employees gather round the office demanding more heat so you open the doors of the office to increase the exchange (flow) of heat into the floor area & raise the setting of thermostat? A temperary solution at best.
You need to make some real positive changes to provide a safe, hospitable environment to produce a viable productive factory. The workers moving around to fight of the cold doesn't get the job done.

I really hate your long fictional oversimplifications.

Global warming is a natural occurance. Before man had any strong influence on his environment, there was the Ice Age, it got warmer without man's influence.

Thus, temperature change is a normal cyclical thing.

This is all totally irrelevant though. The topic is not "environment or jobs" its "capitalism debate". Socialists have historically have polluted just as much as capitalists, so I don't think this is part of the topic (Soviet Union and China are top polluters).

quote:

---

Global warming is a natural occurance.

---

I believe science thinks possibably meteor struck the earth, causing violent distribution of particle matter (dust) that blocked the energy of the sun which caused the ice age . . . no, no that isn't quite correct, is it? Immaterial anyway because the present rise in ambient temperature is supported by the increase of hydrocarbon molecules from industry and internal combusion engines?

quote:

---

Socialists have historically have polluted just as much as capitalists, so I don't think this is part of the topic

---

Does the present world situation result from capitalistic vs communistic confrontation to rule the world, rather than adopting a live & let live attitude? How can we seek to deal with those problems you previously mentioned, if we are at each other back to slice each others throats? Yes, I know it is all those religious zealots, who have caused these things to come to pass, right?
We are just making the world [safe for] democracy (capitalism)?

quote:

---

but I wonder if there could be a capitalistic society without democracy.

---

I think if we're not careful we will find out. Corporations are becoming richer than governments, and when money is allowed to buy power, what happens to our free will? Does our vote really matter. But he or she who owns the most shares rule.

quote:

---

Goddamnit I havent.

---

I guess if your that adamit about it, maybe I did missunderstand you.

quote:

---

The difference with Vietnam was tactics,

---

I've spoken to several Vietnam Vets who had been courtmarshalled because they refused to keep their safety on. Many comaplained that their weapons wouldn't fire. Hamburger hill and many other battle fields were won, surrendered and refought only to be given up again, until finally we gave up all together. Ask a Vietnam Vet why he was there, he explains that we could have won. Want to see him get really angry, ask him why we didn't. I cant prove that the latter part of Vietnam was fought so that weapons contractors could become rich, I can only tell you that they did, and we could have won and we didn't. Every battle we ever won, we surrundered it to only to retake it again.

" Every battle we ever won, we surrundered it to only to retake it again."
'Military Intelligence' is a paradox no? I think simple human incompitence can explain much of the fuckups.

" Does our vote really matter. But he or she who owns the most shares rule. "
Absolutely. Money should have no influence on an election campaign. That is the ideal.

"Immaterial anyway because the present rise in ambient temperature is supported by the increase of hydrocarbon molecules from industry and internal combusion engines?"

Greenhouse gazes are a contributing factor. The extent of which is unclear. Honeslty I don't care, with a healthy economy we have money, medicine, guns and bombs. These are important tools to deal with a Rising China, North Korea and Iran. I am far more worried about Seoul or New York going up in a mushroom cloud.

quote:

---

The difference with Vietnam was tactics,

---

http://www.captaincynic.com/thread.php3/thrdid=14897-u-frmid=1

And I don't mean OUR tactics. Vietnamization wasn't a strategy so much as a fancy word for 'retreat'.

The difference was enemy tactics, in Nam they used guerrila war, in Korea they used conventional war. That is the difference between the two. There is no moral difference, in both cases we attempted to force capitalism on an agricultural people.

No one has given me any moral reason for why Korea succeeded and Vietnam failed.

The majority of the people there were just plain tired of death's prevalence in their daily lives.
They were tired of the killing.

So are we allowed to force capitalism on another nation if we do it through a war with a quick victory?

oh that one's easy, No. wait...yes... no, definately NO. imagine forcing communism on a capitalist society, it wouldnt go so well... nothing should be forced on to people, but then again we wouldnt get anything done.... oi just reading this thread gives me migranes.

Apathy
Just got back from voting, I noted the volunteers with their signs so I walked over to a couple of them. I asked one question of them, give me one good reason to vote for their candidate?

quote:

---

nothing should be forced on to people, but then again we wouldnt get anything done....

---

Walking into the the voting precinct, I note the lines and the signs above them. Democrats in these 2 lines, Non-Partisan in this line & Republican in these 2 lines, so I go to the democrat for my ballot.
As I do this I say in a loud voice that all may hear "It wasn't untill I registered here as a democrat did I know that the independent could vote in these primaries. I had registered as an independent in several counties of this state but this is the first (county) time I had registered as a democrat that I recieved information & came to know that independents ballot existed in these proceedings!"

quote:

---

oi just reading this {thread} ballot gives me migranes.

---

I take my place in one of those little cubicals & open the cover, first thing I note is " Boy they could use some better lighting as I look toward the ceiling for the source, a recessed fixture." Looking over the ballot, supervisors of elections, judges and local ordinances. Hmm . . . most of these people I know nothing about and the judges? Well, the less I have to do with those people the better I like it. Should I vote by how their names sound or better yet I whip out the old crystal ball & ask spirit to help me to vote for the candidate who will bring forth the greater good for all.
May sound apathetic but who knows what the future will bring?