Why are people forced to participate in Capitalism? (abuse, broadcast, pay)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i didn't know that was anarcho-communism but i'm not hiding the fact that i do indeed agree that, ultimately, no one owns anything.
that's because you can either take what you own from the earth or, to provide energy for yourself, take it from another species by force. so in that respect the energy you use to produce anything is not yours. it ultimately comes from the sun which i assume you're not claiming ownership of?
i didn't know that was anarcho-communism but i'm not hiding the fact that i do indeed agree that, ultimately, no one owns anything.
that's because you can either take what you own from the earth or, to provide energy for yourself, take it from another species by force. so in that respect the energy you use to produce anything is not yours. it ultimately comes from the sun which i assume you're not claiming ownership of?
but that's another discussion.
Then why are you using the protecting environment thing to get your point across?
If you got your anarcho-communist society you'd still be polluting. Even cavemen polluted.
and btw, how is industrialization, not wrecking the environment, on the one hand, and, simultaneously, imposing laws that require participation in the monetary system to "protect the environment" from lower tech living models?
Some say I'm free to pursue this living model but it seems the modern world is imposing restrictions from two directions at once.
Industrialization is not bad, initiating force on others would be.
you're right, I dont' own the clothes on my back or the computer I'm typing on get real
no, why don't you explain to me how you did the work to buy those things without using force to get them?
you're going to say you worked for them but you had to kill another species to appropriate their energy so you could do the work in order to get paid so you could buy that stuff. are you claiming the species was a willing participant in the transaction?
so really, how do you own anything? it's just a transference of energy.
Again, read my first post, you are not talking about capitalism. (the allocation of capital by private as opposed to government means)
We own the fruits of our labor and creation, natural resources we owe society for their use.
So I don't have any issue with you as long as you agree that, no matter which option is chosen, neither side has a right to wreck and poison the environment.
So I don't have any issue with you as long as you agree that, no matter which option is chosen, neither side has a right to wreck and poison the environment.
and btw, how is industrialization, not wrecking the environment, on the one hand, and, simultaneously, imposing laws that require participation in the monetary system to "protect the environment" from lower tech living models? Industrialization gave many a better standard of living, paved the way for medical cures, cleaner drinking water, better clothes and as you know the filters in America are amazing compared to the dirt elsewhere. Ted Kaczynski living is OK for you, not my thing. You are welcome to go for it.
Some say I'm free to pursue this living model but it seems the modern world is imposing restrictions from two directions at once. No they are not, you can go to places in the world where there are almost no people or are no people, just a matter of whether or not you have the big ones to follow up on what you pontificate about.
Get er' done!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.