You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
1

[–] deathcomesilent 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The term "capitalism" has been so bastardized via politics in the last 50 years, that they abandoned that actual meaning and started using "true capitalism" to describe the former.

According to macroeconomics, regulation of trade is always anti-capitalist. No way around it. However, people are so brainwashed that when someone says "anti-capitalist" they hear "bad." Economic theory does not have a moral compass, good and bad are bullshit concepts (when applied outside the self) to enforce guilt and promote compliance.

AND FINALLY: the word "politic" is a bullshit misnomer that never quite means anything. Everything anyone cares about is technically politics. If you say "I don't like politics" you're basically saying "i don't like things that involve planning and tactful no-nonsense dealing." It's all political double speak put there to keep people arguing semantics while the world burns.

3
-2

[–] flyawayhigh 3 points -2 points (+1|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Since the libertarians around here are absolutely intolerant of the free speech of anyone who would post basic factual or reasoning errors, and since the libertarians defy their own "personal responsibility" dogma by actively violating the voluntary convention of not using the downVoat button as a disagree button, utterly discrediting this bankrupt ideology, no point in mincing words. Here goes. :)

The term "capitalism" has been so bastardized via politics in the last 50 years

True.

that they abandoned that actual meaning and started using "true capitalism" to describe the former.

True, but the new connotation is unworkable. Capitalism, to have unique meaning, and to properly contrast "socialism," is simply the means of production, investment and transportation in the hands of non-governmental parties. All other meanings are ambiguous and subject to manipulation.

According to macroeconomics, regulation of trade is always anti-capitalist.

Exactly and utterly false. The first chapter explains the prerequisites of macroeconomic analysis. Try reading it.

No way around it.

Punctuating the false claim. Nice.

However, people are so brainwashed that when someone says "anti-capitalist" they hear "bad."

Not sure how this fits into the comment.

Economic theory does not have a moral compass, good and bad are bullshit concepts (when applied outside the self) to enforce guilt and promote compliance.

The purpose of economics, in chapter one again, is certainly an application of morality. But, the technical applications of the science, once you get past that purpose could be described as amoral.

good and bad are bullshit concepts (when applied outside the self) to enforce guilt and promote compliance.

Whether to choose one economic model or another is determined by a very low-level and basic understanding of good and bad -- once it has been determined that the economic model would objectively produce the desired effects.

AND FINALLY: the word "politic" is a bullshit misnomer that never quite means anything. Everything anyone cares about is technically politics.

Well, sure. And if you agree with this, to be consistent, you should also agree with my analysis of the prior comment.

But words have multiple meanings. In context, the word politics is usually referred to as involving issues of governance. When Exxon and the Koch brothers get together to pay vast sums to create science-like papers denying global warming, this is definitely political. Obviously, they do it to change the governance environment and to maximize profits (which hopefully will refine my initial disagreement with the prior comment).

If you say "I don't like politics" you're basically saying "i don't like things that involve planning and tactful no-nonsense dealing." It's all political double speak put there to keep people arguing semantics while the world burns.

Context and semantics matter. Use of the term 'semantics' itself is a semantic tool often for the purpose of draining out specific meanings from discussions and reverting to simpler sloganeering. (I am not saying your comment did this, but that's usually what happens when people bring up 'semantics.')

Thanks for being the bold one to reply. As you can see, I had some agreements and disagreements. This might actually become a conversation -- something that happens less and less here at Voat.

0
0

[–] BoiseNTheHood ago 

Since the libertarians around here are absolutely intolerant of the free speech of anyone who would post basic factual or reasoning errors

How is your free speech being denied? Nobody has ever stopped you from flooding this sub with Soros-funded propaganda and disingenuous arguments.

and since the libertarians defy their own "personal responsibility" dogma by actively violating the voluntary convention of not using the downVoat button as a disagree button, utterly discrediting this bankrupt ideology

The Cult of Bernie is the most obvious and blatant downvote brigade on this site. By your logic, your own ideology is now bankrupt and discredited (as if it wasn't discredited already by the USSR, Venezuela, Cuba, et al., but that's beside the point).