Is it possible to possess socialist principles while executing economics like an anarchist?
Laughing Man:They are simply diabolical.
you can tell i woke up in a bad mood today.
TelfordUS:Can it be agreed upon that anarcho-capitalism promotes personal gain? Then can it be concluded that anarcho-capitalism promotes individualist principles?
TelfordUS:Then can it be concluded that individualist ambitions squander humanity, as helping others cuts into personal profits?
TelfordUS:Can it be agreed upon that socialism promotes societal gain?
the invisible hand coordinates peoples disparate plans, even people who don't care for each other, in order to help themselves, must add value to the lives of others, in order to reap the benefits of the capitalist economy.
societal gain, is the gain of individuals in the 'society', it is not something apart from this. socialism undermines society simply because it undermines individuals.
TelfordUS:Then can it be concluded that societal principles lead to compulsory action for every citizen, therefore killing liberty?
free market ideology is truly a societal principle, the socialist principle does however lead to what you say therefore killing liberty.
Just because Socialists write about society and have Social in the first half of their BrandName, does not mean that they have a superior claim to the concept of society and related concepts. society is the collection of people involved in the market process. the collection of people who do not participate in the division of labour, are either isolated individuals, miserably self sufficient, i.e. not a society, or a set of people at war over resources.
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
nirgrahamUK:you can tell i woke up in a bad mood today.
This is for you my agitated friend
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
I'd like a reference to a socialist saying anything positive about humanity.
TelfordUS: Can it be agreed upon that anarcho-capitalism promotes personal gain? Then can it be concluded that anarcho-capitalism promotes individualist principles? Then can it be concluded that individualist ambitions squander humanity, as helping others cuts into personal profits?
Can it be agreed upon that anarcho-capitalism promotes personal gain? Then can it be concluded that anarcho-capitalism promotes individualist principles? Then can it be concluded that individualist ambitions squander humanity, as helping others cuts into personal profits?
Sometimes, for an individual to gain the most, it is necessary to work with others. And, when a person makes a trade with another person, both people do it because they are profiting. In these senses, capitalism promotes the very principles you are ascribing to socialist philosophy.
Can it be agreed upon that socialism promotes societal gain?
No, because they have to come at the expense of certain individuals. You can preach that socialism promotes the "commune", but you have to come to the realization that what this really means is that some people will be benefited, while others pay for it. It's all a façade.
TelfordUS: Socialist principles: humanity, fraternity, etc. Non-individualistic ambition
Socialist principles: humanity, fraternity, etc. Non-individualistic ambition
Marko:Socialism has few ideals of its own. Most of its claimed ideals have been lifted from liberalism.
Murray Rothbard explains why this is in his first article of Left and Right.
Laughing Man: TelfordUS:Then can it be concluded that individualist ambitions squander humanity, as helping others cuts into personal profits? Not at all. Profits are not simply monetary numbers. TelfordUS:Then can it be concluded that societal principles lead to compulsory action for every citizen, therefore killing liberty? People can engage in voluntary socialism.
Not at all. Profits are not simply monetary numbers.
People can engage in voluntary socialism.
But if you choose to engage, then you have the choice to engage or not. That's liberty, not compulsory. As soon as actions become compulsory, free choice becomes squandered.
TelfordUS:But if you choose to engage, then you have the choice to engage or not. That's liberty, not compulsory. As soon as actions become compulsory, free choice becomes squandered.
Yea but people can choose to go into a socialist system. It's rather bizarre but possible.
nirgrahamUK: TelfordUS:Then can it be concluded that individualist ambitions squander humanity, as helping others cuts into personal profits?no. if individuals place helping others high on their value scales, they receive profits when they expend their means to achieve this just as when they have luxury condo's on their value scales and they profit from expending less valued means to achieve that end.
But what if helping others is not valuable to you? It's easy to ignore the needs of society when is much easier looking out for yourself. It wouldn't make economic sense to help others without that profit.
Laughing Man: TelfordUS:But if you choose to engage, then you have the choice to engage or not. That's liberty, not compulsory. As soon as actions become compulsory, free choice becomes squandered. Yea but people can choose to go into a socialist system. It's rather bizarre but possible.
Would that be considered anarcho-socialism? Then I guess it's possible.
TelfordUS: nirgrahamUK: TelfordUS:Then can it be concluded that individualist ambitions squander humanity, as helping others cuts into personal profits?no. if individuals place helping others high on their value scales, they receive profits when they expend their means to achieve this just as when they have luxury condo's on their value scales and they profit from expending less valued means to achieve that end. But what if helping others is not valuable to you? It's easy to ignore the needs of society when is much easier looking out for yourself. It wouldn't make economic sense to help others without that profit.
It seems like you may have misunderstood what Nir was trying to say. If I may...
When someone expends a means (say time or money etc..) in order to achieve a desired end (in this case helping someone else) it follows that they valued the means less than the ends. Therefore, by exchanging something they valued less for something they valued more, they made a "profit."
Your reply seemed to ask but what if there was no monetary gain? It looks like you are confusing profit with monetary gain.
If I misunderstood, please ignore...
MatthewF: It seems like you may have misunderstood what Nir was trying to say. If I may... When someone expends a means (say time or money etc..) in order to achieve a desired end (in this case helping someone else) it follows that they valued the means less than the ends. Therefore, by exchanging something they valued less for something they valued more, they made a "profit." Your reply seemed to ask but what if there was no monetary gain? It looks like you are confusing profit with monetary gain. If I misunderstood, please ignore...
Well yes, I'm aware of the equation: Revenue - Cost = Profit, and that this equation does not only cover monetary wealth. In this case, the effort used to help someone is the cost, and the satisfaction that's felt afterward is the profit. (I apologize if thats not completely correct but I think I got the gist of it)
But I'm saying that some people may not wish to recieve this satisfaction as "profit". In a capitalist point of view, it would not make sense to make the effort (cost) to help someone if you do not feel satisfied (profit) afterward. In a dog-eat-dog environment, it would be nearly impossible to desire such satisfaction.
TelfordUS:In a dog-eat-dog environment, it would be nearly impossible to desire such satisfaction.
I might disagree. In an environment where many people were in need and few were willing to help, wouldn't the marginal utility of any amount of help offered be valued higher both by the giver and the reciever? If so this would seem to only encourage more help to be given the more that people are in need.
TelfordUS:But what if helping others is not valuable to you?