Capitalism vs Socialism (Page 2)

LiptonCambell: Derp! I forgot this was a 'Debate Club' thread- my apologies!

It absolutely is the ultimate manifestation of mankind- and greed and destruction describe mankind excellently! We must be willing to reach a higher standard, where all people can live peacefully and equally. Suggesting capitalism is an acceptable system of government is accepting waste, greed, and destruction as acceptable moral standards- and such a society is nothing if not self-destructive. The rich have a stranglehold on the vast majority of individuals- all I ask for is equality.

Outbackjack: Capitalism is nothing more than natural selection.The inefficient corporations that create waste are weeded out and the more efficient ones merely replace them.This is not waste.Corporations are usually owned by shareholders and superannuation funds so the wealth is more spread out.Shareholders can attend the annual meetings to ensure that the rich do not have a stranglehold.

Koyx: I could argue for Socialism... maybe...

LiptonCambell: There's alot of good ideas in there... just in practice....

jguerra92: Lets go with a quote from Ayn Rand, "The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit."

Socialism, Communism or any other form of collectivism is a system of institutionalized violence. Where one group takes from another group, by means of force, and redistributes wealth. Violating NAP, and the rule of property. Collectivism claims greatest good for the greatest number, by that standard they claim that it is acceptable to sacrifice any individual for the benefit of the majority. But there is a false dichotomy that the collectivists dont see. the group and the individual cannot be separated for the group for a group is nothing but a number of individuals. All rational action is in the first place individual action. Only the individual thinks. Only the individual reasons. Only the individual acts. There is no such thing as a group.

What does Socialism strive for? Equality? what is equality? In means or material? If material, how do you achieve that? The only way, is by force. By violating another individuals rights.
Communism seeks EQUALITY and LAW. But communism, mistaking uniformity for law, and levelism for equality, becomes tyrannical and unjust.

jguerra92: This may be good in theory, but it doesn’t work in practice.” What is a theory? It is a set of abstract principles purporting to be either a correct description of reality or a set of guidelines for man’s actions. Correspondence to reality is the standard of value by which one estimates a theory. If a theory is inapplicable to reality, by what standard can it be estimated as “good”? If one were to accept that notion, it would mean: a. that the activity of man’s mind is unrelated to reality; b. that the purpose of thinking is neither to acquire knowledge nor to guide man’s actions. (The purpose of that catch phrase is to invalidate man’s conceptual faculty.)

jguerra92: The system i follow, consists of 3 principles, Life, Liberty, Property. To Take a Life is Murder, to take Liberty is enslavement, to take property is theft. Much can be derived from these 3 principles. For example, taxation. Taxation is a form of theft, it is the coercive taking of an another individuals property. Many people say that "oh we need taxation though, to run schools and build roads. Who will build the roads???" I see it as a simple question of morality. Is force bad? yes. Then taxation is bad because it is force. If taxation without consent is not robbery then any band of robbers can declare a government and all their robberies will be legalized. What is the difference between a group of your friends voting and declaring they have the right to steal from you and a group of senators voting and declaring they have the right to steal from you?

LiptonCambell: Lol a mistake a made earlier, and I think you're making now, is believing this is a legitmate topic....this is a "debate club" topic....meaning that the opinions expressed on here are the opposite of what you honestly feel....

So do you honestly support the works of Rand? If you do, you're supposed to argue against them....

jguerra92: so I am supposed to oppose what i actually believe in this room?

LiptonCambell: I feel your pain brother- I love Rand too- but this is an effort to see through the eyes of another person- help you understand the logic behind their thoughts and the mistakes in your own.....you don't have to believe it, but it IS a thought exercise....