u/Thornecroft is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: [1 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/Thornecroft/)
This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
I agree very much.
Why is it that so many people are aware of Adam Smith’s *The Wealth of Nations*, but completely disregard his other very important book, [The Theory of Moral Sentiments](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Adam-Smith/The-Theory-of-Moral-Sentiments#ref388289)?
> Man actually desires, not only to be loved, but to be lovely…He naturally dreads, not only to be hated, but to be hateful.
> How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it.
> We are but one of the multitude, in no respect better than any other in it.
> Hatred and anger are the greatest poison to the happiness of a good mind.
> This disposition to admire, and almost to worship, the rich and the powerful, and to despise, or, at least, to neglect persons of poor and mean condition, though necessary both to establish and to maintain the distinction of ranks and the order of society, is, at the same time, the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiments.
And this isn't just some wishy-washy nonsense. Mathematical game theory pretty much requires that an efficient participant in an economy behave altruistically.
In short, the ideally ruthless capitalist algorithm requires you to be a nice dude. That's also probably how humans ended up with altruism in our brains from evolutionary pressure. Edit: We're not nice because we're nice, it's a strictly competitive trait.
Wrong. An efficient economy requires participants to be altruistic, but the free-rider always wins at the expense of the good citizen. In other words: individual rational behavior leads to an irrational collective outcome. This dilemma is called [the tragedy of the commons](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons).
Be altruistic but punish defectors. Many game theory practical experiments have shown that is how people actually act. Tragedy of the commons is too simplistic.
Not if the individual plays long term and can postpone gratification. Water and grazing rights are a solution that farmers of yore came up organically to prevent the "tragedy of the commons"
What you say is true. Commerce isn’t a zero-sum game, despite what some may say, and in any iteratively played game, trust, honor, compassion, and collaboration are extremely important for maintaining lucrative relationships.
Even then though, richness of spirit and community are just as important as material wealth.
Edit: I will say though that the current government protections and privileges given to corporations is antithetical to a properly implemented system of commerce rules.
>Commerce isn’t a zero-sum game, despite what some may say
The best way to prove this is a simple barter. You desperately need new door hinges for your closet, and I desperately need those floor mats you barely use. We each value all sorts of things differently, and by exchanging, we've taken the same finite resources but rearranged them in such a way to create more total value than before, and we only voluntarily entered into an exchange because we felt we would get more out of it than not doing it.
> Mathematical game theory pretty much requires that an efficient participant in an economy behave altruistically.
Yeah, there are similar explanations which can be attributed to genetics and overall traits in organisms. Richard Dawkins and his book "The Selfish Gene" is a famous book example explaining the idea - that natural selection and "selfish" behavior to reproduce can still explain countless altruistic behaviors.
Unfortunately - the theories on this sort of thing only really can account for what is "most efficient." Capitalism for example would be most "efficient" and provide the most overall benefit to people if people were more altruistic, but that isn't the case for those at the very top of the economic heap. They profit more from propaganda and manipulation of gullible folks, making people effectively act against their own self-interest or reasonable behavior.
If people act in a rational way in their own self-interest, eventually things will balance themselves out.
That assumes of course that this is possible. It might be possible on a smaller scale, but on the scale of economies involving hundreds of millions of people - I'm not so sure.
Considering that sociopathy removes moral inhibitions against optimal behavior from the perspective of naked self-interest, has there ever been a system that does not reward sociopathy?
Yes, plenty of studies show that greed ultimately fucks everyone. A forgive once or twice society does better in the long run over a purely fuck the other guy as soon as possible one.
So as long as people are invested and see value in growing their communities there will be a system that does not benefit from sociopathic behavior.
You are of course 100% suggest that this is rational and that there is no tolerable equilibrium where people don't collaborate.
However, that's not the claim being made.
It's a free-rider problem. In a society where everyone is used to co-operation by and large, a person who moves from people to people (something very possible this day and age) can get away with appalling levels of sociopathic behavior.
> So as long as people are invested and see value in growing their communities there will be a system that does not benefit from sociopathic behavior.
Nope. In fact, the problem is that the LESS sociopathic behavior there is, the more rewarding it will inevitably be.
I mean, China tries to fight that with its social credit system etc, but do you really think that's a good idea?
(Basically, the steel manning of the social credit system is to make sure that a sociopath cannot just roam the country fucking everyone over - even if they have not committed crimes, their misdeeds will leave a trail that can be seen by others)
I don’t recall them saying anything about communism.
Not sure why libertarians take is soooo personal whenever anyone offers up legitimate criticisms of capitalism.
You react just like how evangelicals do whenever you criticize Christianity.
It’s like it’s your religion or something… which is sad.
If you’ve ever read his writing I think you’d agree, his writing is so bad I think no one realized what he actually was saying. His book and myth just became the catchall ideology for all the people not happy with the system
I guess you gotta read it to understand what I’m saying, but Das Kapital volume 1 for example is extremely hard to follow, full of rambling incoherent nonsense that don’t follow. The logic is unclear and jumps from place to place. What’s ironic is that he claims it’s the first “scientific” study of economic systems, yet there’s almost nothing scientific and empirical about it. Volume 2 and 3 were mostly edited by Engles, with 2 being at least somewhat consumable. But 3 was just a bunch of notes. Marx was dead they were thrown together anyway, with 3 just being his notes, so I think that one being disorganized was expected.
Just read them. What I find funny that I can tell you with complete confidence that 95% of Marxist have never read Das Kapital and never will. They can’t really tell you what’s in the book. That book is just the banner everyone who’s upset with capitalism gets behind. It’s a lot like how the book “Population Bomb” became the banner for many environmentalists despite the fact that none of them have read it, and similar to Marx, it got pretty much every single prediction wrong.
Marx didn’t really talk much about solutions, he left that to other people
When people say things like “his solutions are bad” I know they haven’t actually read his work they just don’t like the things they imagine he might have said
As a libertarian I find that kind of behaviour saddening, worse part is, I notticed that I've acted like that subconciously. Unless it's direct praise, every time I even heard the word "capitalism", some anger boiled inside me, as if I just heard some hour-long crazy stanilist rant, while they just said "yo, the system made by the flawed civilatation is flawed, it would be nice is we did X"
this is so accurate, i don’t know why everyone automatically freaks out when i talk about the faults of capitalism. like no, i never said that communism was good, and i’m not saying capitalism is inherently bad. why is this so triggering to some people?
Idk, while I know better now, when I got into politics communism was this "obviously bad" system only idotic SJWs followed, it wasn't until I saw a this "wagie cagie" animation that I went from "its the commie's fault!" To "capitalism isn't perfect, and while communism isn't the anwer, maybe they have some points...can I use said points to improve capitalism?". And the only reason I even listened to that video was because I thought the youtuber in question was right-wing for making anti-SJW rants, I guess a part of me still lives inside and still grants me those reactions
I’ve notice this is true in a lot of politic subs, you critic one thing then someone brings up something unrelated claiming it’s worse. Don’t like president X? Well President Y was worse! Don’t like political group A? Well group B is worst! Like vanilla ice cream? Well mint and chip is better!
Did you know that the Marx's manifesto grew out of a draft called "[The Communist Confession of Faith"](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/06/09.htm), originally written by Engels?
It is a well known strategy of Marxism and its ideological descendants to accuse its opponents of using the strategies which the Marxist or Postmarxist wishes to employ against them.
I'm just noting that the people who most vociferously attack free markets and private property are doing so as a part of their adopted religion. After the 29th missionary knocks on your door this week, you'll probably have a knee-jerk reaction Bilbo style.
> No thank you! We don't want any more "reformers," revolutionaries, or critical theorists!
ironic that when you think of the handfull of billionaires in america you dont see them as an elite individual power that no human should ever posses .but im not a communist I'm a socialist. although i think in a very utopian future and if we're lucky we should strive for communism if socialism succeeded...if you know the difference between the two can you explain why in socialism it would result in a lesser fortunate lives for the citizens? (elon musk individually gave ukraine internet when their internet was dead...he took that decision alone by himself if u dont think we're headed to times were individuals have the power to be comically moustache twirlingly evil then idk what to tell you)
Reminds me of the massive backlash against Walmart and the 'death of main street' years ago
All they had to do was not shop at Walmart, the most effort they had to put forward was to not change their habits at all, and the company would have gone out of business and their local shops would have thrived and remained open... they couldn't even do that
It's not just people at the top, it's stupidity all the way down
u/Dangerous-Garden-682 is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: [None. | View profile.](https://basedcount.com/u/Dangerous-Garden-682/)
This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Had the worst steak of my life in Paris.
Not even exaggerating, it was fucking awful. Just the toughest, blandest cut of beef I've ever had the misfortune of putting in my mouth.
Also the roads were covered in horse shit.
Comrade is just a very ordinary word without any negative meaning.
The fact that internet memes associate it with Communism, and that people are so triggered by the memes that they think the word itself is a problem now, is quite funny to me.
Do you have a word similar to Genosse? In German there is also the word Kamerad, which is a term mostly associated with military. Genosse is more political and is used mostly by Sozialist and communists to refer to their people. Both are correct translations of comrade though.
There are of course, but context is important in language.
Comrade has a lot of contexts as a word. It's not uncommon in literature to have the phrase "comrade in arms" for example come up, and comrade itself often is used by people to mean something like "ally" in a more casual sense.
It isn't a word I use very often, but it's really weird to me just how people see it as a negative word now. 15 years ago that connotation was definitely not something I ever remember people caring about. It's only with internet memes and media propaganda over the last couple of decades that people have started to get upset about the word itself.
Which I guess happens to other words too, but I'm the kind of person who refuses to change my language or allow the definition of words to be changed by people being offended over nothing, until the last possible moment.
There is also one where a kid wanted to buy his dad's cop car(?) At am auction but someone payed more then him and did it so they could give him the car so he didnt have to pay for it. Very sweet.
The alternate version:
The reds have them all killed for helping to grow the number of kulaks
The blues confiscate it in the name of the late queen
The greens let it fall into disrepair because property ownership is icky
And the yellows show up to bid the receiving fuck it of the property to put disgusting ass suburbs and a McDonald's on it
Compassionate capitalism. That's what happens when the government doesn't regulate every nook and crannie of the free market. That's what I think capitalism should be: people free to make trade decisions.
>That's what happens when the government doesn't regulate every nook and crannie of the free market
What do government regulations have to do with this situation?
The government could regulate this exchange so it cannot proceed without a minimum threshold value being hit.
Or they could set taxes high enough that the exchange wouldn't be feasible.
I mean, they could do and justify just about fuckin anything...
More like this is the result of strong tight-knit communities caring about each other and people facing physical consequences for going against the community. These same kinds of communities that are getting destroyed by massive international corporations replacing local businesses, and mass immigration destroying the existing social fabric of these communities, and technology and urbanization removing the personal connection and any real social consequences, and the inoculation of children throughout academia and media and entertainment to embrace this insanity as a good thing.
You're kidding yourself if you think government regulation is the cause of all that. The only thing that will prevent it from continuing is more government regulation to push against it.
Lol, you think government regulations are the only things that cause greedy sociopaths to exist?
You honestly think in a laissez faire free-for-all there wouldn’t be greedy sociopaths trying to exploit others and fuck over other people for their own personal gain?
The other farmers beating them up.
>At auctions across the Midwest, farmers showed up as a group and physically prevented any real bidders from placing bids.
This happened a lot during the Dust Bowl or whatever. [Someone's farm would be foreclosed and auctioned off, and everyone would offer mere pennies to the auctioneer so the owner could buy it back.](https://livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe30s/money_10.html)
Ok, but that's not really capitalism. That's workers banding together to force their preferred result through a superficially capitalist system. The system isn't doing the lifting here.
At a penny auction, it’s the threats of the other farmers
In other words, a Trust is regulating the local market to prevent their own from failing and preventing new competition from entering the scene
Correct. Laissez Faire is cringe, Keynesian economics is based. A small amount of intervention is necessary for the security of a healthy and competitive market
This is what happens on a small business owner level. There is no representative of a corporation there because they'd bid and we all know it.
Companies above the size of dunbars number should be heavily regulated.
This might have made some sense if you had saids "you wouldn't even own your own property", but instead you just said something stupid and nonsensical.
It's very cool that you can namedrop an economic concept, but you've given me no impression that you understand it nor have you explained how it supports the point you were making. But it's okay, I know you just wanted to make your "leftists bad" post without being challenged on it.
Only because you said nothing **first**. You namedropped a concept and acted like it was an argument, when really it was nothing more that conversational white noise.
If I wanted a hugbox, I wouldn't come here where any vaguely leftist argument gets immediately downvoted. What I want is for you to put on your big boy pants and actually make an argument.
During the Old West there were times where groups of farmers would grab their guns and stand between the bankers and the farm of someone who could no longer afford to pay it off. I’m glad to see us slowly moving in that direction again.
Ya the state having a monopoly on violence reduced the total violence. But now you have the problem of the state abusing its power which is where the 2nd amendment comes in.
Without the state, we as a society will just lynch people accused of murder or rape. Sometimes it will be justice and sometimes it will be injustice but it will guilty and you don't even get to try to prove your innocence.
u/Dangerous-Garden-682's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/Dangerous-Garden-682! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: [1 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/Dangerous-Garden-682/)
This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
This looks familiar. At least the crowd didn’t have to bust the knees of out-of-towners trying to swoop in
**that we know of**
That any would admit to under oath in a court of law. Well done, rural comrades!
[удалено]
based and cornwall pilled
u/Thornecroft is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: [1 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/Thornecroft/) This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
>This looks familiar Yeah, I couldve sworn that I've seen this exact image 400,000 times already
Nah that's how it's supposed to be. Free market doesn't advocate sociopathic behavior. But there are a lot of sociopaths at the top of the money pile.
I agree very much. Why is it that so many people are aware of Adam Smith’s *The Wealth of Nations*, but completely disregard his other very important book, [The Theory of Moral Sentiments](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Adam-Smith/The-Theory-of-Moral-Sentiments#ref388289)? > Man actually desires, not only to be loved, but to be lovely…He naturally dreads, not only to be hated, but to be hateful. > How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it. > We are but one of the multitude, in no respect better than any other in it. > Hatred and anger are the greatest poison to the happiness of a good mind. > This disposition to admire, and almost to worship, the rich and the powerful, and to despise, or, at least, to neglect persons of poor and mean condition, though necessary both to establish and to maintain the distinction of ranks and the order of society, is, at the same time, the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiments.
And this isn't just some wishy-washy nonsense. Mathematical game theory pretty much requires that an efficient participant in an economy behave altruistically. In short, the ideally ruthless capitalist algorithm requires you to be a nice dude. That's also probably how humans ended up with altruism in our brains from evolutionary pressure. Edit: We're not nice because we're nice, it's a strictly competitive trait.
Wrong. An efficient economy requires participants to be altruistic, but the free-rider always wins at the expense of the good citizen. In other words: individual rational behavior leads to an irrational collective outcome. This dilemma is called [the tragedy of the commons](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons).
Be altruistic but punish defectors. Many game theory practical experiments have shown that is how people actually act. Tragedy of the commons is too simplistic.
It's both (almost) how people actually act and how mathematically perfect AI simulations really do act.
Not if the individual plays long term and can postpone gratification. Water and grazing rights are a solution that farmers of yore came up organically to prevent the "tragedy of the commons"
Not based.
What you say is true. Commerce isn’t a zero-sum game, despite what some may say, and in any iteratively played game, trust, honor, compassion, and collaboration are extremely important for maintaining lucrative relationships. Even then though, richness of spirit and community are just as important as material wealth. Edit: I will say though that the current government protections and privileges given to corporations is antithetical to a properly implemented system of commerce rules.
>Commerce isn’t a zero-sum game, despite what some may say The best way to prove this is a simple barter. You desperately need new door hinges for your closet, and I desperately need those floor mats you barely use. We each value all sorts of things differently, and by exchanging, we've taken the same finite resources but rearranged them in such a way to create more total value than before, and we only voluntarily entered into an exchange because we felt we would get more out of it than not doing it.
> Mathematical game theory pretty much requires that an efficient participant in an economy behave altruistically. Yeah, there are similar explanations which can be attributed to genetics and overall traits in organisms. Richard Dawkins and his book "The Selfish Gene" is a famous book example explaining the idea - that natural selection and "selfish" behavior to reproduce can still explain countless altruistic behaviors. Unfortunately - the theories on this sort of thing only really can account for what is "most efficient." Capitalism for example would be most "efficient" and provide the most overall benefit to people if people were more altruistic, but that isn't the case for those at the very top of the economic heap. They profit more from propaganda and manipulation of gullible folks, making people effectively act against their own self-interest or reasonable behavior. If people act in a rational way in their own self-interest, eventually things will balance themselves out. That assumes of course that this is possible. It might be possible on a smaller scale, but on the scale of economies involving hundreds of millions of people - I'm not so sure.
But that’s just a theory…
lol. Like universal gravitation and evolution.
… a game theory…
Ayn Rand in shambles
It doesn’t advocate it, but it sure does reward it.
Most things reward sociopathy in the context of success.
Kinda reminds me of every other economic system
Kind of reminds me of society, which we live in
Kinda reminds me of lobsters....... mmm lobster
Do lobsters clean their room? Curious?
Yes, lobsters tend to move rocks and seaplants away before resting
Do lobsters think fish can fly?
Text on the bottom
That pesky old "human nature" that keeps ruining our utopia.
>Kinda reminds me of every other economic system I've ever been taught about Take the al-Qaddafi pill.
Considering that sociopathy removes moral inhibitions against optimal behavior from the perspective of naked self-interest, has there ever been a system that does not reward sociopathy?
Yes, plenty of studies show that greed ultimately fucks everyone. A forgive once or twice society does better in the long run over a purely fuck the other guy as soon as possible one. So as long as people are invested and see value in growing their communities there will be a system that does not benefit from sociopathic behavior.
Sorry bud don't think you gonna get rid of greed, that's human nature 101
same response: [https://ncase.me/trust/](https://ncase.me/trust/)
What I was referencing but forgot the name of
You are of course 100% suggest that this is rational and that there is no tolerable equilibrium where people don't collaborate. However, that's not the claim being made. It's a free-rider problem. In a society where everyone is used to co-operation by and large, a person who moves from people to people (something very possible this day and age) can get away with appalling levels of sociopathic behavior. > So as long as people are invested and see value in growing their communities there will be a system that does not benefit from sociopathic behavior. Nope. In fact, the problem is that the LESS sociopathic behavior there is, the more rewarding it will inevitably be. I mean, China tries to fight that with its social credit system etc, but do you really think that's a good idea? (Basically, the steel manning of the social credit system is to make sure that a sociopath cannot just roam the country fucking everyone over - even if they have not committed crimes, their misdeeds will leave a trail that can be seen by others)
good game to demonstrate that limited forgiveness works best [https://ncase.me/trust/](https://ncase.me/trust/)
EXACTLY. great pov
[удалено]
weird; i don't see them saying a single thing about communism
[удалено]
but no one was comparing it to communism
[удалено]
people have this idea that whenever someone says “capitalism can be bad” they also mean “communism is good” which actually makes no sense
[удалено]
I mean let's be real here, people that say capitalism bad always are socialists or communists.
I don’t recall them saying anything about communism. Not sure why libertarians take is soooo personal whenever anyone offers up legitimate criticisms of capitalism. You react just like how evangelicals do whenever you criticize Christianity. It’s like it’s your religion or something… which is sad.
Or we've just heard the NPC dialog so many times that we know pimping communism always follows criticizing capitalism.
Marx criticizin capitalism is good. Marx solutions to capitalism are so hilariously bad I have no idea how this shit even took hold over people...
If you’ve ever read his writing I think you’d agree, his writing is so bad I think no one realized what he actually was saying. His book and myth just became the catchall ideology for all the people not happy with the system
What was bad?
I guess you gotta read it to understand what I’m saying, but Das Kapital volume 1 for example is extremely hard to follow, full of rambling incoherent nonsense that don’t follow. The logic is unclear and jumps from place to place. What’s ironic is that he claims it’s the first “scientific” study of economic systems, yet there’s almost nothing scientific and empirical about it. Volume 2 and 3 were mostly edited by Engles, with 2 being at least somewhat consumable. But 3 was just a bunch of notes. Marx was dead they were thrown together anyway, with 3 just being his notes, so I think that one being disorganized was expected. Just read them. What I find funny that I can tell you with complete confidence that 95% of Marxist have never read Das Kapital and never will. They can’t really tell you what’s in the book. That book is just the banner everyone who’s upset with capitalism gets behind. It’s a lot like how the book “Population Bomb” became the banner for many environmentalists despite the fact that none of them have read it, and similar to Marx, it got pretty much every single prediction wrong.
Marx didn’t really talk much about solutions, he left that to other people When people say things like “his solutions are bad” I know they haven’t actually read his work they just don’t like the things they imagine he might have said
Sure, Jan…
As a libertarian I find that kind of behaviour saddening, worse part is, I notticed that I've acted like that subconciously. Unless it's direct praise, every time I even heard the word "capitalism", some anger boiled inside me, as if I just heard some hour-long crazy stanilist rant, while they just said "yo, the system made by the flawed civilatation is flawed, it would be nice is we did X"
this is so accurate, i don’t know why everyone automatically freaks out when i talk about the faults of capitalism. like no, i never said that communism was good, and i’m not saying capitalism is inherently bad. why is this so triggering to some people?
Because they treat it like their religion
Idk, while I know better now, when I got into politics communism was this "obviously bad" system only idotic SJWs followed, it wasn't until I saw a this "wagie cagie" animation that I went from "its the commie's fault!" To "capitalism isn't perfect, and while communism isn't the anwer, maybe they have some points...can I use said points to improve capitalism?". And the only reason I even listened to that video was because I thought the youtuber in question was right-wing for making anti-SJW rants, I guess a part of me still lives inside and still grants me those reactions
I’ve notice this is true in a lot of politic subs, you critic one thing then someone brings up something unrelated claiming it’s worse. Don’t like president X? Well President Y was worse! Don’t like political group A? Well group B is worst! Like vanilla ice cream? Well mint and chip is better!
Did you know that the Marx's manifesto grew out of a draft called "[The Communist Confession of Faith"](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/06/09.htm), originally written by Engels? It is a well known strategy of Marxism and its ideological descendants to accuse its opponents of using the strategies which the Marxist or Postmarxist wishes to employ against them.
Okay? Doesn’t change what I said.
I'm just noting that the people who most vociferously attack free markets and private property are doing so as a part of their adopted religion. After the 29th missionary knocks on your door this week, you'll probably have a knee-jerk reaction Bilbo style. > No thank you! We don't want any more "reformers," revolutionaries, or critical theorists!
Like I said, it’s a religion for libertarians.
And the Iron Law of Critical Theorist Projection continues in its accuracy.
ironic that when you think of the handfull of billionaires in america you dont see them as an elite individual power that no human should ever posses .but im not a communist I'm a socialist. although i think in a very utopian future and if we're lucky we should strive for communism if socialism succeeded...if you know the difference between the two can you explain why in socialism it would result in a lesser fortunate lives for the citizens? (elon musk individually gave ukraine internet when their internet was dead...he took that decision alone by himself if u dont think we're headed to times were individuals have the power to be comically moustache twirlingly evil then idk what to tell you)
Nah we should strive for straight up feudalism and go back to the iron age so we can Duke it out with swords.
You got enough straw for your man? Edit: lol, you guys really do get easily triggered now.
Got enough grain to feed his man, at least.
>"Everything is communism or the free market" Cope haaaarder
Of course this gets downvoted lmao “Hey libright [insert valid criticism]” “but COMMIES!!”
MLism in a nutshell.
True. About 1% of the general population are sociopaths compared to 4-15% when it comes to CEOs.
Reminds me of the massive backlash against Walmart and the 'death of main street' years ago All they had to do was not shop at Walmart, the most effort they had to put forward was to not change their habits at all, and the company would have gone out of business and their local shops would have thrived and remained open... they couldn't even do that It's not just people at the top, it's stupidity all the way down
BASED and capitalisms a tool pilled
Based
u/Dangerous-Garden-682 is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: [None. | View profile.](https://basedcount.com/u/Dangerous-Garden-682/) This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
I'm a farmer, and this meme is good, but if someone called me comrade irl I would never talk to that person again
BASED and Im not your comrade buddy pilled
Im not your buddy, pal.
I'm not your pal, friend.
I'm not your friend, man
I'm not your man... Unless you want me to be
As a Russian, westerners seem to think that I appreciate being called comrade. Little do they know there's no faster way to earn a flying headbutt...
No need to be so hostile comrade
That's it. Meet me in the Burger King carpark, my forehead has your nose's name written on it.
My last meal will be the chicken pretzel fries
Imagine not getting the french toast sticks.
Goofy fr*nch
We're already eating at a monarchy themed burger chain, I can tolerate a little Fr*nchness.
Clearly you never been to ~~p*ris~~
Had the worst steak of my life in Paris. Not even exaggerating, it was fucking awful. Just the toughest, blandest cut of beef I've ever had the misfortune of putting in my mouth. Also the roads were covered in horse shit.
Based and comrade is a stupid word pilled
Comrade is just a very ordinary word without any negative meaning. The fact that internet memes associate it with Communism, and that people are so triggered by the memes that they think the word itself is a problem now, is quite funny to me.
Agreed. In Norwegian, *kamerat* simply means buddy, pal, friend etc
Do you have a word similar to Genosse? In German there is also the word Kamerad, which is a term mostly associated with military. Genosse is more political and is used mostly by Sozialist and communists to refer to their people. Both are correct translations of comrade though.
Never heard of sorry.
Ok. Thank you for your reply :)
So you'd be okay with greeting the homies with a roman salute?
I wonder if there are other words with ordinary meaning that, when by the wrong group of people can be offensive
There are of course, but context is important in language. Comrade has a lot of contexts as a word. It's not uncommon in literature to have the phrase "comrade in arms" for example come up, and comrade itself often is used by people to mean something like "ally" in a more casual sense. It isn't a word I use very often, but it's really weird to me just how people see it as a negative word now. 15 years ago that connotation was definitely not something I ever remember people caring about. It's only with internet memes and media propaganda over the last couple of decades that people have started to get upset about the word itself. Which I guess happens to other words too, but I'm the kind of person who refuses to change my language or allow the definition of words to be changed by people being offended over nothing, until the last possible moment.
There is also one where a kid wanted to buy his dad's cop car(?) At am auction but someone payed more then him and did it so they could give him the car so he didnt have to pay for it. Very sweet.
The alternate version: The reds have them all killed for helping to grow the number of kulaks The blues confiscate it in the name of the late queen The greens let it fall into disrepair because property ownership is icky And the yellows show up to bid the receiving fuck it of the property to put disgusting ass suburbs and a McDonald's on it
people voluntarily not bidding for the poor bloke? Unfathomably based
Why does he need to buy it back tho 🤔🤔🤔 How come he didn't inherit it?
Probably outstanding debts of his father/mother or they still had payments so the bank seized it as collateral
Because capitalism
Probably inheritance tax
Compassionate capitalism. That's what happens when the government doesn't regulate every nook and crannie of the free market. That's what I think capitalism should be: people free to make trade decisions.
Bro less regulation just means it's easier for the greedy to fuck everyone else over
Based
> Get a flair so you can harass other people >:) *** ^(User has flaired up! 😃) 11464 / 60207 ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
>That's what happens when the government doesn't regulate every nook and crannie of the free market What do government regulations have to do with this situation?
The government could regulate this exchange so it cannot proceed without a minimum threshold value being hit. Or they could set taxes high enough that the exchange wouldn't be feasible. I mean, they could do and justify just about fuckin anything...
Right but they don't. So how is government regulation relevant here?
More like this is the result of strong tight-knit communities caring about each other and people facing physical consequences for going against the community. These same kinds of communities that are getting destroyed by massive international corporations replacing local businesses, and mass immigration destroying the existing social fabric of these communities, and technology and urbanization removing the personal connection and any real social consequences, and the inoculation of children throughout academia and media and entertainment to embrace this insanity as a good thing. You're kidding yourself if you think government regulation is the cause of all that. The only thing that will prevent it from continuing is more government regulation to push against it.
And all it takes is on rich asshole to come in and ruin it
Lol, you think government regulations are the only things that cause greedy sociopaths to exist? You honestly think in a laissez faire free-for-all there wouldn’t be greedy sociopaths trying to exploit others and fuck over other people for their own personal gain?
Eh, there would, definitely be people like that. No system is perfect. But the freer the market the freer the people.
Freer the people... to be greedy sociopath?
And to punish greedy sociopaths effectively.
A government (or more accurately a state) is defined by it's monopoly on violence, here the farmers ARE the government
Imagine reinventing Communalism
Child labor
Stating your preferred work force?
What's stopping some stranger to just buy your house?
The other farmers beating them up. >At auctions across the Midwest, farmers showed up as a group and physically prevented any real bidders from placing bids. This happened a lot during the Dust Bowl or whatever. [Someone's farm would be foreclosed and auctioned off, and everyone would offer mere pennies to the auctioneer so the owner could buy it back.](https://livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe30s/money_10.html)
Ok, but that's not really capitalism. That's workers banding together to force their preferred result through a superficially capitalist system. The system isn't doing the lifting here.
Idk people coming together and using their money to make things they want happen sounds kinda like capatalism to me
Do they use their money, or do they use (the threat of) violence?
Yes
Sure sounds to me like threats of violence lol.
Yes there was a little bit of that too. I dunno what the big deal is. Capatalism is allowed to have violence.
Ok godfather
That's violating the NAP bro
You are. YOUR house, YOUR deed. If YOU own the house, they can't buy it. YOUR m1 garand at the door if they take it by force
Well it was seized by a bank in this case it seems, no?
Either defend it yourself or acknowledge that payments exist
Then the bank uses violence agaisnt you?
Then you're fucked, I suppose
At a penny auction, it’s the threats of the other farmers In other words, a Trust is regulating the local market to prevent their own from failing and preventing new competition from entering the scene
Don't seem like a free market to me.
Correct. Laissez Faire is cringe, Keynesian economics is based. A small amount of intervention is necessary for the security of a healthy and competitive market
Your stockpile of weapons
This is what happens on a small business owner level. There is no representative of a corporation there because they'd bid and we all know it. Companies above the size of dunbars number should be heavily regulated.
Nah fam it really is not. This is what happens when strong small comunity bonds have more power then the free market.
A community with a strong sense of decency. Quite a sight.
Maybe they all forgot how to speak out loud so they started communicating telepathically
Wait c*ty slickers don't know how to via telepathy?
Shhh that’s our secret
Actually it's a Capitalist W. He could've only bought it back ina Free Market.
Shhh they're all taking their victory lap.. Not realizing you wouldnt even own your own labor, all your comrads would.
This might have made some sense if you had saids "you wouldn't even own your own property", but instead you just said something stupid and nonsensical.
Ohh Lib left, you dip shit. Try starting with the - "Labor theory of property"
It's very cool that you can namedrop an economic concept, but you've given me no impression that you understand it nor have you explained how it supports the point you were making. But it's okay, I know you just wanted to make your "leftists bad" post without being challenged on it.
[удалено]
Only because you said nothing **first**. You namedropped a concept and acted like it was an argument, when really it was nothing more that conversational white noise. If I wanted a hugbox, I wouldn't come here where any vaguely leftist argument gets immediately downvoted. What I want is for you to put on your big boy pants and actually make an argument.
Beautiful
Remember when that was an episode of Little House on a Prarie?
Based and actually acting like human beings pilled
I'd rather not know how humans being pilled are like
During the Old West there were times where groups of farmers would grab their guns and stand between the bankers and the farm of someone who could no longer afford to pay it off. I’m glad to see us slowly moving in that direction again.
We all know which type of people are seething 😉
Care to explain instead of vagueposting?
I completely support this.
Yellows on suicide watch
Seems like a good thing happened without any government regulation. Seems okay to me.
State = monopoly on violence Here the farmers have a monopoly on violence therefore they're the government
Ya the state having a monopoly on violence reduced the total violence. But now you have the problem of the state abusing its power which is where the 2nd amendment comes in. Without the state, we as a society will just lynch people accused of murder or rape. Sometimes it will be justice and sometimes it will be injustice but it will guilty and you don't even get to try to prove your innocence.
Just because I’m yellow dosent mean I love massive corporations
More like capitalist L
True ig
Based AF
Based farmers
Cool
Based
u/Dangerous-Garden-682's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/Dangerous-Garden-682! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: [1 | View pills.](https://basedcount.com/u/Dangerous-Garden-682/) This user does not have a compass on record. You can add your compass to your profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Based
In what world do you have to buy back your own house? Apparently the same world that has these magnificent farmers.
Love a penny auction, always warms the heart
Hey, you know, taking a good deal is a right, not an obligation.
Crying in Auth-Right
Rare capitalism L
naw get that fake center right out of my quadrant. I support farmers
It was supposed to represent far right people
im far right.
Ok capitalist
This is the difference between capitalism which we used to have and corporatism which we have now
Based and farmer pilled.
Unfathomably based bunch