Comments by "King Orange" (@kingorange7739) on "Socialism is just better, scientifically" video.
-
@itcouldbelupus2842 "and if you don't have anyone to form a commune with?" - Find people.
"Capitalism is coercive, you can't opt." - How so?
"I basically live in a commune and we still very much have to participate in Capitalism in order to live, it isn't voluntary." - Having the option to say no does not make one immune to the self inflicted consequences of saying no. It would literally be no different in a coop style business. It is a job after all, not a charity. I work so I can eat, not so someone else I don't know eats.
"When your choice is participate or die, that isn't voluntary." - Which is what socialism quite literally inflicted. No your choices are to participate, find another source of income, or die. And even death is based on the need to survive, not based on someone threatening to murder you like socialism did.
"The main reason I live in a small community is because it's the only way we can survive under late stage capitalism," - Define that.
"half of my house has been homeless one time or another." - What do you mean?
"Capitalism isn't voluntary." - Yes it is, no one is threatening to murder or harm you by not doing it.
"Capitalism isn't freedom." - It is, however freedom does not equal doing everything you want without consequence.
"Capitalism is tyranny." - Your definition of tyranny is someone refusing to do handouts.
"If you are poor you sell your freedom in order to afford to live." - And under socialism, you sell your freedom in order to not be shot or sent to a labor camp.
"It's never been voluntary." - Again your definition of voluntary is to have handouts.
"Capitalism is only freedom to the rich," - Few members of my family are rich, yet here we are. Also mentioned above.
"the same way the Lord's were free under Feudalism." - Except they were not even free bud, considering they had to answer to the King at the time lol.
"The serfs, not so much." - Don't recall them choosing their job or ability to get paid.
"You're a fool if you believe otherwise." - I must be a fool then, lol. No, the problem with your entire assessment is you think the freedom to make choices should also make you immune to the self inflicted consequences of your choices. Basic fact in life, you don't work, you don't eat. Even down to ancient tribalism. Socialists who try to wrestle this concept are doing nothing more than deluding themselves, or they are lying and the reality is their ultimatums will be just as bad if not worse.
3
-
3
-
1
-
1
-
@gliiitched "yet what if the state was controlled by private interests," - You mean a government elite? Something that happened in socialist nations as well?
"as it is in the case of modern bourgeois democracy? The U.S. government, which is a puppet to capitalist interests," - Depends on the area.
"has a draft, which forces you to fight if the bourgeoisie wants you to." - Which ironically has almost never actually been used, kinda making your argument void.
"Starvation is so rare in the U.S. and the imperial core because a famine is bad for labor markets, and it will definitely turn people's suspicions toward capitalism." - It's a shame socialist nations don't have similar reservations.
"It is not in the bourgeoisie's interests to starve the very same people who make them rich." - It is basic common sense, not to let them starve. So let me get your logic straight, capitalism is bad because it does not want people to starve because that would not benefit business owners. It is bad because it provides mutual gain?
"Saying it's ignorant to say it's bad to let people starve is a can of worms that I don't even want to get into, just please, read what you' said." - I do. The fact does not change. Someone who has the opportunity to work for money to buy food and living and chooses not to, should not be surprised when their personal starvation follows.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1