Race to 9001

[lordfarquaad]

<p>it’s called a #hashtag. #noswagjuicedrippin</p>

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

<p>This thread got weird.</p>

[toxic93]

<p>This thread got weird along time ago.</p>

[HarryJones]

<p>Isn’t #illegal?</p>

[FallenAngel9]

<p>This thread was always weird.</p>

[Hovito]

<h1>billymcthesociopathnerdfuturetedkaczynski</h1>

[mathsciencedude]

<p>

Socialism is an economic ideology, not a political one. For socialism to function properly, it must be joined with democracy. Socialism is opposed to capitalism; communism, as a democratic economy, is more compatible with true democracy than capitalism.

</p>

<p>Democracy is a clearly unsustainable form of government. Tyranny of the majority is what you proclaim. No further comment. </p>

<p>

Of course, if the system works for you, you are less likely to think it wrong.

You hope for a utopia, but that is not possible in this world. Lesser of two evils, my friend

[/quote]
</p>

<p>

Look up social justice. However, I do not need my Church to tell me whether or not to rise; my morality does that. The Church does not oppose my view. The words of Christ compliment a socialist/communist view.

</p>

<p>I don’t think that the poor shouldn’t be helped, but that your way of helping is vile and doomed to failure. How much money do you think Donald Trump should give away so that he isn’t wealthy and therefore evil?</p>

<p>

An organized, disciplined, and dedicated group beginning with protests, resistance, theft from the rich to feed the poor. Add people planning, people speaking, people inspiring, people resisting, and others will be drawn to it. Seeing the worst of the rich being stolen from for no purpose but to help the poor has a historical precedent of winning the poor over. Several countries are/will be on the brink of revolution; some aid and conversion from socialists can aid in their resistance and eventual government.</p>

<p>However, I am going to college to study history to discover how to go about this; obviously I don’t know it all now.

Robin Hood? Batman would be proud. Too bad you don’t have a superpower.</p>

<p>You might want to learn about tyranny of the majority as it happened in America.

Once a provisional government takes over to ensure democracy and communism are established, public projects must begin at once. Full labor mobilization to renovate cities, repair infrastructure, produce goods, grow crops, produce clean energy, advance science, and sustain society. When infrastructure is established and agriculture/production consolidated all over the world, united human effort would then be directed in one direction: the exploration and colonization of space. The expansion of the human race beyond the Earth is necessary for its survival. Of course, it would also serve to motivate humanity to a common end, give us a reason for continued production and economic motion, and provide for the eventual alleviation of the population problem.

</p>

<p>I see you assume that there is a population problem. No comment.</p>

<p>

All humanity must rule; after Revolution, there ought not be any involuntary poverty. The workers will rule the economy, all humanity will rule their destinies.

Did you learn this ideology from a teacher or from a book? I’m just curious</p>

<p>

See most of Africa, much of Asia, and parts of Latin America. They do not have the quality of life of Ancient Greece. Further, Ancient Greece had one of the highest qualities of life of its time. Even if economics wasn’t a zero-sum game, it would take too long to produce enough wealth for everyone to have enough while allowing the rich to remain rich. Look at the past ten thousand years. Still, millions starve, still the poor suffer, still, too many die.

Okay my pants were down for that one. </p>

<p>But for the economics, I’m saying that we have it in America already (at least partly). As times advance, quality of life steadily increases, so relatively speaking you will always see someone not having an ipod and therefore unjustly treated.</p>

<p>Again, have you ever volunteered at a homeless shelter? Most of those people choose it in the sense that they are addicts or mentally ill. On the other side, we provide shelter for those in need. Thanks to our form of government and the wealth that has been provided by capitalism, we can provide for those who need help.</p>

[mathsciencedude]

<p>^^Wow Billy, I think he likes you. :P</p>

[BillyMc]

<p>

Democracy is a clearly unsustainable form of government. Tyranny of the majority is what you proclaim. No further comment.

Government and economy based on human rights and equality is what I proclaim. Democracy, yes, but no majority can ever vote to oppress another group, impose classes, or take away rights.</p>

<p>

You hope for a utopia, but that is not possible in this world. Lesser of two evils, my friend

I hope for a better world. This world is not the lesser of two evils, though it may seem like that to the top 1%.</p>

<p>

I don’t think that the poor shouldn’t be helped, but that your way of helping is vile and doomed to failure. How much money do you think Donald Trump should give away so that he isn’t wealthy and therefore evil?

All wealth should be seized and distributed equally amongst all humanity. I don’t see how that is vile or doomed; you just have an interest in maintaining the status quo, so you will believe it impossible to change. If you want people to feel bad for the rich, choosing Trump was probably a bad idea.</p>

<p>

Robin Hood? Batman would be proud. Too bad you don’t have a superpower.</p>

<p>You might want to learn about tyranny of the majority as it happened in America.

No, not Robin Hood. Look at populist revolutions in the past.</p>

<p>“Tyranny of the majority” springs from not having a proper system of rights. A socialist workers’ republic and later a world communist state would have guaranteed human rights, liberties, and equality far above what is present in any country today. No vote could take away a man’s liberty, or his right to life, or his equality with all other men. Socialism is more about equality than anything else; how are you getting tyranny of the majority from this?</p>

<p>

I see you assume that there is a population problem. No comment.

There will be eventually, at humanity’s current rate of reproduction. We can provide for all humans today if we distribute wealth evenly; we should be able to do that for some time, but eventually, if we are not to limit the rights of reproduction, we need to expand. Do you really not think expansion into space a worthwhile pursuit, mathsciencedude?</p>

<p>Given that you only target that little bit, I’ll assume that you concede the rest of the point.</p>

<p>

Did you learn this ideology from a teacher or from a book? I’m just curious

Reading the works of philosophers and revolutionaries past; feeling the ills of poverty and seeing others far worse; knowing the injustices of history and today and wishing to correct them.</p>

<p>

Okay my pants were down for that one.</p>

<p>But for the economics, I’m saying that we have it in America already (at least partly). As times advance, quality of life steadily increases, so relatively speaking you will always see someone not having an ipod and therefore unjustly treated.

Over 50 million Americans experience hunger from poverty; that’s a little more than not having an ipod. But why are you focusing only on America? It’s among the richest parts of the world. Do you not care about the rest of the world? The poorest parts of the world grow poorer still while the US profits.</p>

<p>

Again, have you ever volunteered at a homeless shelter? Most of those people choose it in the sense that they are addicts or mentally ill. On the other side, we provide shelter for those in need. Thanks to our form of government and the wealth that has been provided by capitalism, we can provide for those who need help.

Yes. I’d rather not doom the mentally ill to homelessness; it’s hardly their choice. Homeless shelters are insufficient shelter and there is not enough shelter out there for the homeless. Have you ever been homeless? Poor? Starving? Capitalism is not providing for the poor; not remotely in the US, let alone the world.</p>

[HarryJones]

<p>

Robin Hood? Batman would be proud. Too bad you don’t have a superpower.

BillyMc -> Robin Hood -> Robin -> Batman -> Superpowers
Were you just playing wrod association or did I miss something?</p>

[mathsciencedude]

<p>Actually Billy, I have been homeless. In addition, my sister and her family are currently on welfare. I am not in the top 1%, so how could I be blinded by being there? </p>

<p>I don’t think space travel is a panacea, and I don’t think people should starve. What I disagree about with you specifically is your way of feeding people. The world is not fair, and men were not created equally. Now should we turn a blind eye to their suffering? No. The world needs moral change more than socialist change. You want to create a moral socialist society, do you not? If it is amoral, you get Stalin. You cannot quell the desire for self-benefit. The poor will seize control and make themselves equal to the rich? I laugh. Hardy-har-har.</p>

<p>@Harry, no you definitely missed something.</p>

[chicken1992]

<p>Ayn Rand said hi.</p>

<p>p.s. hardy-har-har? is that supposed to be a laugh because that sounds more like you choking on a piece of pretzel.</p>

[HarryJones]

<p>Chicken quotes (well, you know what I mean) Ayn Rand.
Ayn Rand hates communism.
mathsicdude (you never got an alternative name) is arguing against Billy’s proposed communist takeover.
Chicken is arguing with mathsic.
HarryJanes is lost.</p>

[mathsciencedude]

<p>Wait, math[sic]dude? </p>

<p>@Chicken, stop running around like you’ve had your head cut off.
Hardy-har-har is an often used ill-enthused laugh.</p>

<p>I wax poetic, mainly because this thread is frenetic.</p>

[HarryJones]

<p>

Wait, math[sic]dude?

Of course! Everyone knows that the correct spelling is ‘maths’.</p>

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

<p>Hopefully I’ll get my midterm back today</p>

[leafblade1354]

<p>…finals anyone? :eek:</p>

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

<p>No, I’m 4 weeks away from Finals.</p>

[Xenophanes]

<p>Billy, from a utilitarian perspective do you believe socialism is ideal? I’m only a capitalist because capitalism, from examining history, seems to be the ideology that has advanced us the most. Just look at the countries with the most economic freedom and look at the countries with the least. And the fact that the idea was popularised in the age of enlightenment, does say something. Although, it’s hard to tell whether it was successful because it became more free or whether it was successful because it was centrist (most of these supposed capitalist governments from the USA to Hong Kong aren’t really capitalist if we’re defining capitalism as free market system).</p>

[enfieldacademy]

<p>wow, this thread appears to have gotten fascinating. Yay, xenophane is posting. I will have to read this all later.</p>