( OFF TOPIC) Protester attacked at Greys Monument Camp
- Thread starter holystone
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
Well it's simply not true that I am vitriolic; you're just being hurtful now.
I hope you're joking. ''Smash the government and corporations and replace it with massive taxes, restrictions on freedoms, huge restrictions on businesses and the state ownership of everything! We can even have this guy
You must log in or register to see images
as our leader'' 
Seriously though you do realise that replacing one thing (be it government or corporations) simply leaves a void to be taken over by another thing with a hold over people?
By the way, there is an Occupy protest in Belfast. It's on the 30th.
Dream Boat, well said. I think the best option for replacing the compulsory state would be a series of voluntary governments which people would join themselves rather than being conscripted into from birth. As well as the choice not to be affiliated to a government of course. But judging by the amount of people who happily vote and support state institutions like the NHS, there's a lot of people who like being governed. Fair enough.
No one is advocating the introduction of totalitarian socialism, my god your like the paranoid American middle classes of the 60's "them damn kids are communists". The current system is certainly not socially sustainable
Jacky, their main focus has now swung to "eat the rich" and "support Robin Hood tax". Both of those concepts by their nature are socialist, unfair and tyrannical. Fair enough if individual rich men have violently exploited others - they should be punished, but they make no consideration for the hard-working, self-made billionaires who deserve all their wealth and reserve the right to do with it what they want (including passing it on to their kids and associates rather than having it stolen by 'benevolent' governments at gunpoint).
Leeds-18:1550041 said:
Does that include the right to embezzel it and hide it in multiple off shore havens to avoid tax?
To be honest my last post was a bit tongue in cheek
I don't actually think you want to throw us in gulags. My point was, fair enough you may get all of what you want (very very unlikely) but the thing is as soon as you get rid of one thing with a hold another steps into it's place so it's kind of pointless protesting when you could actually make things worse. For example if you were to get rid of Murdoch's media empire another person with another agenda would take up the mantle of 'controlling' the media and therefore all you have done is replace one bad thing with another.
The main angst is that we are being governed by the baby boomer population who seem to be making decisions, as usual, that best benefits them. Little consideration is being made for the new working generation who will never experience the same standard of living as we pay off the debt their lavish standard of living was based on. In a nutshell our futures have been mortaged by the previous generation and the debts are being called in.
Leeds-18:1550069 said:
Ok ....... strange. Ok does it include spending millions lobbying for legislation to reduce minimum wage for instance so their firms may become more cost efficient and profitable and increase their wealth to the further deteiment of the standard of living of the already impoverished working classes
Yes, because minimum wage is an artificial construct which is violently enforced by the government.
It's the rich man's business which he owns - he can do what he likes with it. The government don't own them. They therefore have no right to tell him what wage he should be paying the workers who choose to be a part of that business. But if he pays his consenting workers wages deemed unacceptable by Mr Politician and continues to do so, the government will assault the owner of said business by dragging him into one of their prisons.
Now I'm not saying that people should earn less money, I'm simply arguing for the basic principles of ownership to be applied fairly and consistently by governments. If that happened, I believe that the freed and empowered people of the world - whether poor or not - would in fact get much richer. After all, it's governments who are forcing the world to live off banknotes at the moment as a means of survival. I apologize if all this is a bit abstract and philosophical, but this is basically why I disagree with protests calling for more taxation, more state intervention and less freedom for all people.
Some Newcastle and Leeds fans are having a Tea Party
I don't see anyone changing their views here, I've seen the effects of the free market philosophy in the US and it ain't pretty, we saw the problems when Communism is the order of the day.
That's the trouble with extremes of political philosopy... real lives are damaged and real people suffer more than they need to.
I don't see anyone changing their views here, I've seen the effects of the free market philosophy in the US and it ain't pretty, we saw the problems when Communism is the order of the day.
That's the trouble with extremes of political philosopy... real lives are damaged and real people suffer more than they need to.
Your a capitalist's dream! What you are advocating only has one outcome, the gap in class difference becoming a virtually impossible to cross gulf. Massive poverty, even in developed countries. This would only ever result in violent resistance
Some Newcastle and Leeds fans are having a Tea Party
I don't see anyone changing their views here, I've seen the effects of the free market philosophy in the US and it ain't pretty, we saw the problems when Communism is the order of the day.
That's the trouble with extremes of political philosopy... real lives are damaged and real people suffer more than they need to.
And I take it that this free market was so free that everyone spent and relied on government-issued notes and paid state taxes? I don't count the US as ever having been a free market except perhaps for in the Wild West days. Not that I'm saying that's any sort of precedent for how 21st century voluntary government would look.
What I'm advocating is people being able to choose how they live. If they're poor, they can join a voluntary communist government along with all the other improverished you're so sure would exist. Or they could join a union/guild/workers' co-operative. Or they could trade without using banknotes. Who would they violently resist? There'd be no-one physically repressing them like the compulsory governments of today do on a systematic basis.
I'm fine with capitalism in the true sense of the word, but your perception of it is the government-tainted one.
Some Newcastle and Leeds fans are having a Tea Party
I don't see anyone changing their views here, I've seen the effects of the free market philosophy in the US and it ain't pretty, we saw the problems when Communism is the order of the day.
That's the trouble with extremes of political philosopy... real lives are damaged and real people suffer more than they need to.
No time for the Tea party. Social conservatives and therefore arseholes of the highest order, i'm 100% against them.
- Status