Philosophy Now Forum

Coming off a bout of food poisoning...still not up to snuff...between hugging the toilet and hugging a pillow, I had time to think about threads like this one

"The case for Socialism": this morning, Mika Brzezinski asked, what's wrong with Socialism? For myself, the answer is simple...when I hear 'socialism', I hear 'being directed'...that is 'socialism', for me, is synonymous with 'being directed'.

I have a large problem with being directed (by socialists, by capitalists, by any one).

I get that a great many folks are happy to let others (elected or appointed, covertly and overtly) decide the foundations and parameters of their living, but I'm not one of those folks. I'm congenitally unable to think in terms of 'we' or 'the people' or 'the many'. I'm unable to trust the collective will.

I don't play well with others.

So, at least for me, the case 'against' socialism (or capitalism or any other formal ordering method) isn't economic or philosophic or ideologic , but visceral, a gut response.

"Can you give an example of something she has said that brings her to your mind?"

This...

There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own. Nobody. You built a factory out there - good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory... Now look. You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea - God bless! Keep a hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

...strikes me as the kind of communitarian thinking that leads to...

Every citizen will be a public man, sustained by, supported by, and occupied at the public expense.

Never mind that the factory owner paid for the roads, paid for the education of the workers, and paid for the police and fire fighters just like every one else (by way of taxes)...never mind that he or she invested his or her time and resources into establishing the factory...never mind that he or she bears the brunt of things if the factory fails...to Warren, and folks like Warren, taxes and primary investment and responsibility isn't enough...Keep a hunk of it (and) pay forward (the rest to) the next kid who comes along.

This, communitarianism, comes from a leading, seated, democrat senator, and was echoed by the current president, also a democrat.

*shrug*

.



You sound very intelligent.

The two most successful and loved government program that have ever been created in my country are Medicaid and Social Security.

Both based in deep Democratic Socialism.







.............................................................







.

"The two most successful and loved government program that have ever been created in my country are Medicaid and Social Security. Both based in deep Democratic Socialism."

I know, Bill...every one knows, Bill.

That's one of the reasons I just posted 'I get that a great many folks are happy to let others (elected or appointed, covertly and overtly) decide the foundations and parameters of their living'.

As I say (perhaps in this thread somewhere): I'm a dinosaur, aberrant, deviant...you and yours done won, Bill...me and mine: we're dead meat.

Your utopia is just around the corner...wait for it...wait for it...

henry quirk wrote:"The two most successful and loved government program that have ever been created in my country are Medicaid and Social Security. Both based in deep Democratic Socialism."

I know, Bill...every one knows, Bill.

That's one of the reasons I just posted 'I get that a great many folks are happy to let others (elected or appointed, covertly and overtly) decide the foundations and parameters of their living'.

As I say (perhaps in this thread somewhere): I'm a dinosaur, aberrant, deviant...you and yours done won, Bill...me and mine: we're dead meat.

Your utopia is just around the corner...wait for it...wait for it...

Doesn't matter what the system or nation is, Henry. The foundations and parameters of your living were decided for you by the time of your birth. I'm not certain what point you're trying to make to Bill.

"The foundations and parameters of your living were decided for you by the time of your birth."

You really believe this? As an adult, there's nuthin' of 'you' in your living? All of your living is determined by others?

henry quirk wrote:"The foundations and parameters of your living were decided for you by the time of your birth."

You really believe this? As an adult, there's nuthin' of 'you' in your living? All of your living is determined by others?

Right back at you. Do you really believe you are that much more, outside of what you were molded into?

.





Holy shit. You guys are actually talking about deep philosophical concepts in the context of your own metaphorical lives - ON a philosophy site...how'd that happen?





.

I do.

Why?

Cuz I'm not a passive consumer of what's in front of me, but an active apprehender of that which is not in front of me.

I was an ill-fitting piece as a kid and am even more so as an adult. Never took, do not take, what was and is modeled (overtly and covertly) as gospel. I don't take kindly to direction, or instruction.

So -- yeah -- I really believe I am that much more.

You, I take it, believe yourself to be that much less.

Mebbe, for you, that's the case.

As I say: a great many folks are happy to let others (elected or appointed, covertly and overtly) decide the foundations and parameters of their living.

I'm not one of those folks

.




Could you tell me about your life? Present & past?


Then I'll butt-out.

I appreciate the fact that you two are actually having the basis of a very good philosophical conversation.


I appreciate that it happened within my thread.




.

Each system works for someone. All systems have their victims. Such is true of the life-system itself, of which political and economic systems are a subset. As long as there are finite resources, there will be someone who doesn't get their resource necessities met.

That's life guys. Suck it up.

Dalek Prime wrote: As long as there are finite resources, there will be someone who doesn't get their resource necessities met.

That's life guys. Suck it up.

This isn't entirely true. It's a balance between supply and demand. The population has exploded recently in large part because of increased production, particularly of food. So many more people could be fed if we cut back on waste and banned gorcery stores and other food suppliers from throwing out perfectly good food and stopped subsidizing the shit out of corn, and especially if we grew less livestock (the amount of feed required to make equivalent calories of meat is insane, along with the amount of methane they create in the digestive process, on top of the amount of forrests that are cleared for grazing land). We could easily support 9+ billion people on this planet. With genetically engineering to make crops more robust we could support even more.

BigWhit wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote: As long as there are finite resources, there will be someone who doesn't get their resource necessities met.

That's life guys. Suck it up.

This isn't entirely true. It's a balance between supply and demand. The population has exploded recently in large part because of increased production, particularly of food. So many more people could be fed if we cut back on waste and banned gorcery stores and other food suppliers from throwing out perfectly good food and stopped subsidizing the shit out of corn, and especially if we grew less livestock (the amount of feed required to make equivalent calories of meat is insane, along with the amount of methane they create in the digestive process, on top of the amount of forrests that are cleared for grazing land). We could easily support 9+ billion people on this planet. With genetically engineering to make crops more robust we could support even more.

Well, let's get on it, then. Problem solved.

Actually if we grew all our food in the oceans instead of on land this planet could accommodate a human population of 100 billion or more and still be entirely biologically sustainable. By no means am I advocating such a population increase but merely make the point that the ecological havoc which we are wreaking on our planet is not a problem of resource availability at all. It's simply a question of resource management and such questions fall comfortably within the domain of human knowledge to resolve. The tricky bit is mobilising the political will to make it happen.

Obvious Leo wrote:Actually if we grew all our food in the oceans instead of on land this planet could accommodate a human population of 100 billion or more and still be entirely biologically sustainable. By no means am I advocating such a population increase but merely make the point that the ecological havoc which we are wreaking on our planet is not a problem of resource availability at all. It's simply a question of resource management and such questions fall comfortably within the domain of human knowledge to resolve.
I know all too well that those in government give their friends back door deals on public funds. This is why I'd rather the government have only the power and funds necessary to operate effectively, and for that power to be concentrated at the lowest levels so the people can best good them accountable.

It's a problem of resource creation and management. The resources must be created, and then managed in a sustainable way, but this requires a society which is knowledgable, interested, and motivated to act to bring about those ends. Globalization may make that harder, but it may make it easier.

The tricky bit is mobilising the political will to make it happen.

Ha! That is the very, very, tricky bit.