become a lesbian, stop populating the planet
What do you actually think would happen if we "destroyed" capitalism? Would we rely on state agencies? Would we end up with a communist nirvana?
I don't view it as paradise, I believe it would be a lot of work. The goal of overthrowing capitalist state is to replace it with a marxian socialist one, through that and central planning, you'd allocate resources to help combat whatever problems are being faced. The end goal of communism however, is to achieve a stateless, moneyless society. I am entirely fine with that, but I am also entirely fine with just having a socialist state that never withers away.
In what sense do you mean "State agencies"?
I'm saying mostly, capitalism is an unsustainable, unstable economic system that will collapse one way or the other, and it's mechanism has become parasitic to humanity and our survival.
This video is my core issue with Capitalism.Beyond Capitalism being bad how does starting a global conflict that leads to more energy consumption needs, mass death, and the overall waste of resources solve enviromental issues?
Well, it seems like it's inevitable in regards to the path of economic collapse we are on. I don't like it, no matter what outcome, there's going to be hell, and a need to rebuild, I'd rather have that event happen sooner than later.
I can't see a peaceful solution that will simply have the bourgeoisie hand over their power, and dismantle Capitalism.
If Capitalism is a main contributor, and is the one that got us this deep, then I can't see how capitalism can solve it, because it's own nature is the cause of it.
The path humanity is on, will lead to global conflict, mass death, and consumption of energy, and waste of resources. It's really the path we're already on when you look at China and the US, and any other big player. We're already progressing down said road.
It's going to be bloody, it's going to be hell.
In my eyes, I'd like to have a force of comrades, whose sole focus is to expand knowledge, and expand physical strength. Admittedly, I have failed in learning, and you taught me that. I found this quote by Lenin, and I realize my foolish mistakes. I do have some regrets from dropping out of my college, I was rash. However, I will re-enter college via military. I just hope I can find a good one. I still will seek to expand my ability to learn on my own and achieve self-sufficiency though. 
By expanding our knowledge, by expanding our physical strength, and becoming the best polymaths we can be, it would certainly help in rebuilding the shambles of Humanity. We must be as prepared and ready as possible.
gone
last edit on
11/4/2019 8:13:33 PM
become a lesbian, stop populating the planet
Overpopulation is a myth. Malthusian theory doesn't apply to Humans.
gone
I cannot see this problem being solved under a capitalist economic system, that I'd argue got us this deep in the mess to begin with. AOC is just apart of the System, and Greta is just a poster child for green capitalism. It doesn't solve the problem, it's just a band aid.
i agree, i've been a life long capitalist and am starting to think that this is one situation where government needs to step in and just spend the money. defer defense spending and build nuclear plants right now. a global effort to put coal and natural gas out of business. the goal would be to make all countries similar to France. energy independent and not relying on oil and gas, oui oui.
just think how that would change the middle east dynamics, no one would give a shit if they start killing themselves.
for the sake of argument lets say climate change is bullshit, ooops we build some bad ass modern power plants and everyone is energy independent, we are no longer using our atmosphere as a garbage dump, and we put coal and natural gas out of business. the down side here is small as the workers can move to the nuclear field.
just seems time we move out of the cave man days when "fire and burning" was our only source for survival.
there are also carbon capture technologies for existing coal plants, i just like the nuclear idea
I cannot see this problem being solved under a capitalist economic system, that I'd argue got us this deep in the mess to begin with. AOC is just apart of the System, and Greta is just a poster child for green capitalism. It doesn't solve the problem, it's just a band aid.
i agree, i've been a life long capitalist and am starting to think that this is one situation where government needs to step in and just spend the money. defer defense spending and build nuclear plants right now. a global effort to put coal and natural gas out of business. the goal would be to make all countries similar to France. energy independent and not relying on oil and gas, oui oui.
just think how that would change the middle east dynamics, no one would give a shit if they start killing themselves.
for the sake of argument lets say climate change is bullshit, ooops we build some bad ass modern power plants and everyone is energy independent, we are no longer using our atmosphere as a garbage dump, and we put coal and natural gas out of business. the down side here is small as the workers can move to the nuclear field.
just seems time we move out of the cave man days when "fire and burning" was our only source for survival.
there are also carbon capture technologies for existing coal plants, i just like the nuclear idea
My problem though, I view our government as on some level, a servant to the bourgeoisie, there's just different viewpoints within the bourgeois class. You have conservatives that just want trickle down, and no social programs, then you got liberals that do want to provide welfare services. However, both do seek to expand profit.
I don't view it as some weird cult conspiracy, I'm just saying in our society, money holds power, or more important, those who hold the means of production, wield true power, and so while the government might introduce regulation, that's only to appease the workers, and bring back stability. This would be in favor of the bourgeoisie, as to not create problems. I mean, whether or not you bring in regulation, companies will expand their businesses, it's just the rate at which they do it, and how severe factors on those variables of, "What concessions do we give to the working people?"
gone
Ideologies everywhere but no solutions.
D E S T R O Y A L L H U M A N S
Some people aren't born to be blessed with tragedy in their blood.
I cannot see this problem being solved under a capitalist economic system, that I'd argue got us this deep in the mess to begin with. AOC is just apart of the System, and Greta is just a poster child for green capitalism. It doesn't solve the problem, it's just a band aid.
i agree, i've been a life long capitalist and am starting to think that this is one situation where government needs to step in and just spend the money. defer defense spending and build nuclear plants right now. a global effort to put coal and natural gas out of business. the goal would be to make all countries similar to France. energy independent and not relying on oil and gas, oui oui.
just think how that would change the middle east dynamics, no one would give a shit if they start killing themselves.
for the sake of argument lets say climate change is bullshit, ooops we build some bad ass modern power plants and everyone is energy independent, we are no longer using our atmosphere as a garbage dump, and we put coal and natural gas out of business. the down side here is small as the workers can move to the nuclear field.
just seems time we move out of the cave man days when "fire and burning" was our only source for survival.
there are also carbon capture technologies for existing coal plants, i just like the nuclear idea
My problem though, I view our government as on some level, a servant to the bourgeoisie, there's just different viewpoints within the bourgeois class. You have conservatives that just want trickle down, and no social programs, then you got liberals that do want to provide welfare services. However, both do seek to expand profit.
I don't view it as some weird cult conspiracy, I'm just saying in our society, money holds power, or more important, those who hold the means of production, wield true power, and so while the government might introduce regulation, that's only to appease the workers, and bring back stability. This would be in favor of the bourgeoisie, as to not create problems. I mean, whether or not you bring in regulation, companies will expand their businesses, it's just the rate at which they do it, and how severe factors on those variables of, "What concessions do we give to the working people?"
"My problem though, I view our government as on some level, a servant to the bourgeoisie"
i agree. the government should work for the people. the problem comes about when the people are actually stupid and dont know what is best for them. i know this is dangerous radical speak. but a just and kind dictatorship in this situation may just save the earth. or at least postpone the disasters.
democracy is great until you are in the minority, then you are fucked.
BIlly said:"My problem though, I view our government as on some level, a servant to the bourgeoisie"
i agree. the government should work for the people. the problem comes about when the people are actually stupid and dont know what is best for them. i know this is dangerous radical speak. but a just and kind dictatorship in this situation may just save the earth. or at least postpone the disasters.
democracy is great until you are in the minority, then you are fucked.
Well, I consider the ignorance of the people to be a product of the poor education, and propaganda which I see as intentional, as our government and system I consider corrupt.
I personally don't see our government in it's current form as going to save us. I believe a revolution would though.
However, in any way, what I see happening is things going to shit, and there being a broken fractured humanity that will need unification and help. This is why I firmly believe that those of similar ideological background to me should seek to learn and prepare in all capacities, to become polymaths and strong revolutionaries and know how to use weapons and fight.
The sooner this hell happens, and the sooner the conflict ends, the more time we have towards not necessarily stopping global warming, as I view that as natural, and maybe not even reducing, but adapting to the new challenges and the new world we will face. I believe we have already passed the point of reversing some negatives effects coming our way.
I do believe democracy can work. My ideal system though, and you could reject this as democratic (semantics), because this is where I will definitively disagree with a lot. I view the soviet system under that of Lenin and Stalin as the most democratic and prosperous for the people period under the Soviet Union.
As so not to completely derail the topic though, this is a video I'd recommend.
The point and focus should be that, preparation for a new age of Humanity should be the sole focus, and to an extent I view things as going to become apocalyptic, not because of some scripture, or "great replacement" but because of problems that we have set up for ourselves, and we could've fixed but didn't, because of where the importance of our society was placed, and what goals were deemed more important.
I don't see it as the end for humanity, I don't view humanity as inherently evil, or wrong. I just view us as misguided, and we very much have the chance to rebuild and be set on a brighter path.
gone
What do you actually think would happen if we "destroyed" capitalism? Would we rely on state agencies? Would we end up with a communist nirvana?
I don't view it as paradise, I believe it would be a lot of work. The goal of overthrowing capitalist state is to replace it with a marxian socialist one, through that and central planning, you'd allocate resources to help combat whatever problems are being faced. The end goal of communism however, is to achieve a stateless, moneyless society. I am entirely fine with that, but I am also entirely fine with just having a socialist state that never withers away.
In what sense do you mean "State agencies"?
I'm saying mostly, capitalism is an unsustainable, unstable economic system that will collapse one way or the other, and it's mechanism has become parasitic to humanity and our survival.
This video is my core issue with Capitalism.Beyond Capitalism being bad how does starting a global conflict that leads to more energy consumption needs, mass death, and the overall waste of resources solve enviromental issues?
Well, it seems like it's inevitable in regards to the path of economic collapse we are on. I don't like it, no matter what outcome, there's going to be hell, and a need to rebuild, I'd rather have that event happen sooner than later.
Are we on our way to complete economic collapse?
I watched your video and read the sources, once again the sources with any worth do not support the claim in the video.
First I want to say this was an interesting read so I'm glad I read it.
Having said that, it by no means supports the notion that we our about to experience a traumatic economic collapse. It instead merely relates a time-series to profit rates. The reason why Basu and Manolakos wish to do this is to test the rough ideas Marx presents in Kapital III. They are not confirming Marx, they are not even using his actual hypothesis. They are instead merely using his notions as a guide to test a formulation they've come up with. Fundamentally, this is just experimental modeling.
As far as a modeling methodology goes, it's actually pretty interesting as they use the Box-Jenkins approach which has actually been gaining traction the past few years but still requires a lot of work. But even more interesting is that they state the nonstationarity of the profit rate series. This is very interesting but it also brings up theoretical concerns pertaining estimating the standard deviation - nonstationarity is a nonstandard distribution hence dealing with error and verifying the model becomes much more difficult. They attempt to compensate for this but they run into more issues pertaining to rates of convergence. As a result, their model under their own admission needs work but proves promising and at the least is a helpful thought experiment.
There is a very big issue, though:
Basu & Manolakos said:The variables have been measured as follows. The intensity of exploitation is computed by an application of the Hodrick Prescott filter to the productivity of labour
^This is very concerning because Hodrick Prescot filter is proven to be unreliable. It was at one point used quite a bit but has been shown time and time again to completely annihilate the validity of results. The reason for this is that it poorly deals with noise in the data and creates false predictions. This is mostly driven by the fact that it's a dynamic algorithm and as such constructs false relations.
This basically annihilates any trust I have of the results, the paper is merely to experimental and uses poorly performing and outdated modeling techniques. I do appreciate it as a thought process though.
I can't see a peaceful solution that will simply have the bourgeoisie hand over their power, and dismantle Capitalism.
True.
If Capitalism is a main contributor, and is the one that got us this deep, then I can't see how capitalism can solve it, because it's own nature is the cause of it.
Okay.
How would Marxism solve this though, especially given your variant is very scientific.
How much energy do you think is utilized in scientific experimentation? How much energy is necessary to settle the solar system? How much energy is necessary to feed populations and increase standards of living? Where does that energy come from?
The path humanity is on, will lead to global conflict, mass death, and consumption of energy, and waste of resources. It's really the path we're already on when you look at China and the US, and any other big player. We're already progressing down said road.
How will Marxism make this all worth it and not prove to contribute to the problem?
It's going to be bloody, it's going to be hell.
Sounds like it
In my eyes, I'd like to have a force of comrades, whose sole focus is to expand knowledge, and expand physical strength. Admittedly, I have failed in learning, and you taught me that. I found this quote by Lenin, and I realize my foolish mistakes. I do have some regrets from dropping out of my college, I was rash. However, I will re-enter college via military. I just hope I can find a good one. I still will seek to expand my ability to learn on my own and achieve self-sufficiency though.By expanding our knowledge, by expanding our physical strength, and becoming the best polymaths we can be, it would certainly help in rebuilding the shambles of Humanity. We must be as prepared and ready as possible.
This will take hard work and an amount of dedication rarely seen, I hope you're up for it.
last edit on
11/4/2019 9:38:34 PM
If you havent done your research why are you talking?
Global warming is not something influencable, just like the ice age was not. Saying that we can stop it just allows us to feel in control of our doom.
"
Hothouse Earth
Take the Cretaceous Period, which lasted from 145 to 66 million years ago. It was the final period of the dinosaur era, the time of Triceratops and Tyrannosaurus rex.
It was also roasting hot. There was at least four times as much carbon dioxide in the air then as there is now, and the results were dramatic. There were no large continental ice sheets, even at the poles. According to a review published in 2016, the Arctic Ocean may have been as warm as modern tropical oceans, between 15 and 20 °C. Closer to the equator, there is evidence that air temperatures regularly reached 50 °C, with peaks as high as 62 °C."
I believe earths temperature is cyclical just as we have 4 seasons.
yes, historical warm periods are shown in the ice sheet core record. in fact, there is discussion going on as to why CO2 lags the warming in time. that is different than what is going on today. they think its due to the warm oceans absorbing the CO2. fucking mystery
it appears that humans are influencing and causing an increase in the warming. pumping CO2 into the atmosphere is accelerating the change into a hothouse earth.
maybe this is alarmist or maybe this is fact. the computer models over in Alice's thread are showing some good correlations with real data. fuck that model from the 70's was looking pretty good.
making an error to the conservative side of the argument, that is, humans are causing the warming lets do something about it, is the lesser of the two possible outcome evils. It just cost a little money.