Americans are mindless robots under capitalism

MASTERBAKER

DEMOTED MOD
BGOL Investor
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OUj-m6Gq_2Y?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OUj-m6Gq_2Y?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>
hmmm...
 
Her eyes are opening and she is removing the veil of state control.

No Bro. She's not removing the veil; she wants to hide behind it while us working S.O.B.'s provide for her:

She doesn't want a fucking car note :smh:
(but she wants to ride)

She doesn't want a fucking mortgage note :smh:
(but she wants to own)

She doesn't want to fucking pay rent :smh:
(but she wants a roof)

She doesn't want a fucking food bill :smh:
(but she wants to eat)

However, she said that she would be happy to move to Africa

(where she seems to believe riding, owning, renting, eating and

shit is fucking free, right :eek: :smh:);

and that she would be off to Africa, if only she had the money.

Well, sounds to me, she already has the solution in hand:
  • Stop paying the car note;
  • Stop paying the mortgage or rent;
  • Cut her ass back on food;
  • Save the cash; and

  • Move.

Freedom does not mean shit is free. It, like everything else, comes with a price.
 
No Bro. She's not removing the veil; she wants to hide behind it while us working S.O.B.'s provide for her:

Yeah, maybe. I don't know one way or the other.

It's just unusual, to me, to see a black woman talking like this.
 
She raises some good questions but unfortunately for us there is no viable alternative to the status quo.
 
To my understanding , she seems to mean that why the f do we have to ruin and waste our life away to live. (very fair question)

It is not about her not wanting to pay or go work but rather showing us that the whole system is a catch 22 and you wont be able to escape it.

Imagine somebody holding you at gunpoint (in that case at moneypoint :D) and telling you what to do, you will obey not because you are thrilled to do so but because you simply dont want to die.

why is education expensive that most of the student graduates cant even pay their loans?

learning should be free so as land and water.

she has some good valid points there.
Havent you noticed that the rest of the species on this planet arent paying for water and land and knowledge
 
:smh: Come on man! It's literally scary that anyone would find this woman's rant on capitalism worthy of being taken seriously. & the number of you all who seem to agree with her... Wow. The stuff this woman was saying regarding capitalism & "the system" was so nonsensical that it's not even worth addressing any of its parts separately.
 
No Bro. She's not removing the veil; she wants to hide behind it while us working S.O.B.'s provide for her:

She doesn't want a fucking car note :smh:
(but she wants to ride)

She doesn't want a fucking mortgage note :smh:
(but she wants to own)

She doesn't want to fucking pay rent :smh:
(but she wants a roof)

She doesn't want a fucking food bill :smh:
(but she wants to eat)

However, she said that she would be happy to move to Africa

(where she seems to believe riding, owning, renting, eating and

shit is fucking free, right :eek: :smh:);

and that she would be off to Africa, if only she had the money.

Well, sounds to me, she already has the solution in hand:
  • Stop paying the car note;
  • Stop paying the mortgage or rent;
  • Cut her ass back on food;
  • Save the cash; and

  • Move.

Freedom does not mean shit is free. It, like everything else, comes with a price.

:):)
 
What other animal pays for food, shelter, water and education.

Lol yooo!!! Are you serious man? This was the good question?! Are you comparing these things to what humans enjoy as food, shelter, water, & education??? :confused:

What do other animals eat?! Grass...other animals (after they've chased them down, while they hope not to be eaten by another animal themselves)... feces...

Other animal's shelter? What shelter?!

Yo man, I'm absolutely mind-boggled by you right now. Water? Education? Animals? :lol::lol::lol::smh::smh::smh:
 
Lol yooo!!! Are you serious man? This was the good question?! Are you comparing these things to what humans enjoy as food, shelter, water, & education??? :confused:

What do other animals eat?! Grass...other animals (after they've chased them down, while they hope not to be eaten by another animal themselves)... feces...

Other animal's shelter? What shelter?!

Yo man, I'm absolutely mind-boggled by you right now. Water? Education? Animals? :lol::lol::lol::smh::smh::smh:


Evidently you think we are suppose to pay for these things can you explain why. I don't think you will be mind boggled afterwards.
 
Evidently you think we are suppose to pay for these things can you explain why. I don't think you will be mind boggled afterwards.

I'm even more boggled now since you think there is a some sort of challenge in explaining why we pay for these things. I thought just pointing out what the "quality" of these things are in the animal world would be enough to show how ridiculous that question was but obviously not. So...

We aren't paying simply for the thing itself when we pay for these things, we're paying for the labor that was necessary to produce things in the form that we as human beings consume them today.

When we eat a chicken for example, we don't eat it the way a fox eats a chicken. There is labor involved in several points in the production process for us to eat those nicely prepared pieces of thighs, legs, breasts, wings whether we choose to consume them fried, baked, grilled, etc. Same thing with water. We're not going straight to some filthy lake & drinking straight out of the lake or dipping a bucket in there. There are people in other countries that do this; maybe you'd prefer to consume water of the same quality & obtain it the same way they do. It is free for them because there was no specialized labor involved in order for them to receive it the way we do & at the same quality in which we consume water.

Education? This is straight up sad that I should even have to compare the "education" of animals with education human beings receive, particularly in this country since that's where the woman in this video was speaking of. Again, we pay for the labor that is involved in all of the production process of the education. The teachers, the books, the schools, the classroom materials, etc. None of these things are free and they cannot be. There is a cost to everything whether you want to believe it or not.

I'm not sure how much further I have to go with this. You must be completely ignorant of the process of production as well as the division of labor. It's the division of labor into specializations where people are most productive and/or efficient that allows this country to be so wealthy and have such a high standard of living. This same thing, being that we possess intelligence greater than any other animal, is what allows us to enjoy all these things in an indescribably higher quality & with greater abundance than any other animal.

You need to take econ 101 or something. Honestly you shouldn't need to in order to answer that ridiculous question but apparently you do.
 
I'm even more boggled now since you think there is a some sort of challenge in explaining why we pay for these things. I thought just pointing out what the "quality" of these things are in the animal world would be enough to show how ridiculous that question was but obviously not. So...

We aren't paying simply for the thing itself when we pay for these things, we're paying for the labor that was necessary to produce things in the form that we as human beings consume them today.

When we eat a chicken for example, we don't eat it the way a fox eats a chicken. There is labor involved in several points in the production process for us to eat those nicely prepared pieces of thighs, legs, breasts, wings whether we choose to consume them fried, baked, grilled, etc. Same thing with water. We're not going straight to some filthy lake & drinking straight out of the lake or dipping a bucket in there. There are people in other countries that do this; maybe you'd prefer to consume water of the same quality & obtain it the same way they do. It is free for them because there was no specialized labor involved in order for them to receive it the way we do & at the same quality in which we consume water.

Education? This is straight up sad that I should even have to compare the "education" of animals with education human beings receive, particularly in this country since that's where the woman in this video was speaking of. Again, we pay for the labor that is involved in all of the production process of the education. The teachers, the books, the schools, the classroom materials, etc. None of these things are free and they cannot be. There is a cost to everything whether you want to believe it or not.

I'm not sure how much further I have to go with this. You must be completely ignorant of the process of production as well as the division of labor. It's the division of labor into specializations where people are most productive and/or efficient that allows this country to be so wealthy and have such a high standard of living. This same thing, being that we possess intelligence greater than any other animal, is what allows us to enjoy all these things in an indescribably higher quality & with greater abundance than any other animal.

You need to take econ 101 or something. Honestly you shouldn't need to in order to answer that ridiculous question but apparently you do.

An Introduction to the State Manifesto
 
I'm even more boggled now since you think there is a some sort of challenge in explaining why we pay for these things. I thought just pointing out what the "quality" of these things are in the animal world would be enough to show how ridiculous that question was but obviously not. So...

We aren't paying simply for the thing itself when we pay for these things, we're paying for the labor that was necessary to produce things in the form that we as human beings consume them today.

When we eat a chicken for example, we don't eat it the way a fox eats a chicken. There is labor involved in several points in the production process for us to eat those nicely prepared pieces of thighs, legs, breasts, wings whether we choose to consume them fried, baked, grilled, etc. Same thing with water. We're not going straight to some filthy lake & drinking straight out of the lake or dipping a bucket in there. There are people in other countries that do this; maybe you'd prefer to consume water of the same quality & obtain it the same way they do. It is free for them because there was no specialized labor involved in order for them to receive it the way we do & at the same quality in which we consume water.

Education? This is straight up sad that I should even have to compare the "education" of animals with education human beings receive, particularly in this country since that's where the woman in this video was speaking of. Again, we pay for the labor that is involved in all of the production process of the education. The teachers, the books, the schools, the classroom materials, etc. None of these things are free and they cannot be. There is a cost to everything whether you want to believe it or not.

I'm not sure how much further I have to go with this. You must be completely ignorant of the process of production as well as the division of labor. It's the division of labor into specializations where people are most productive and/or efficient that allows this country to be so wealthy and have such a high standard of living. This same thing, being that we possess intelligence greater than any other animal, is what allows us to enjoy all these things in an indescribably higher quality & with greater abundance than any other animal.

You need to take econ 101 or something. Honestly you shouldn't need to in order to answer that ridiculous question but apparently you do.


Capitalism is about 200 yrs old and it's on the verge of collapse surely you realize it's a bad idea whose time has come and gone.
 
Cruise is an anarchist. Expect that from him. Anything that sounds governmental, he's against, so he says. I spoke negatively of the great Kwame Kilpatrick once or twice and Cruise lept to his defense. I was baffled that the anarchist would argue so passionately in support of government, corrupt at that.

Maybe because Kwame is Black and Cruise perceived his demise to be at the hands of whitey. Maybe he's right. But the evidence showed corruption -- something one would think would be a prime reason for an anarchist to oppose government. go figure.
 
Cruise is an anarchist. Expect that from him. Anything that sounds governmental, he's against, so he says. I spoke negatively of the great Kwame Kilpatrick once or twice and Cruise lept to his defense. I was baffled that the anarchist would argue so passionately in support of government, corrupt at that.

Maybe because Kwame is Black and Cruise perceived his demise to be at the hands of whitey. Maybe he's right. But the evidence showed corruption -- something one would think would be a prime reason for an anarchist to oppose government. go figure.

Things is, I was not talking about the government or the state at all.
 
To the anarchist, you were.

Maybe he's a left-wing anarchist & is against all property rights. If that's the case, then that's the only link (& a weak one still) to make my statement one involving government. Sure wish Cruise would explain. If he can.

Nittie, feel free to actually say something of substance too.
 
Maybe he's a left-wing anarchist & is against all property rights. If that's the case, then that's the only link (& a weak one still) to make my statement one involving government. Sure wish Cruise would explain. If he can.

Nittie, feel free to actually say something of substance too.



Things is, I was not talking about the government or the state at all.

This doesn't sound like a State scripted brainwashing Manifesto to you. The logic is straight out of a govt controlled think tank, a nazi think tank at that. What gives a man or the govt the right to decided that water, food, shelter and especially education should cost. How did people survive before capitalism if thats the case.



Originally Posted by BrainChild09
I'm even more boggled now since you think there is a some sort of challenge in explaining why we pay for these things. I thought just pointing out what the "quality" of these things are in the animal world would be enough to show how ridiculous that question was but obviously not. So...

We aren't paying simply for the thing itself when we pay for these things, we're paying for the labor that was necessary to produce things in the form that we as human beings consume them today.

When we eat a chicken for example, we don't eat it the way a fox eats a chicken. There is labor involved in several points in the production process for us to eat those nicely prepared pieces of thighs, legs, breasts, wings whether we choose to consume them fried, baked, grilled, etc. Same thing with water. We're not going straight to some filthy lake & drinking straight out of the lake or dipping a bucket in there. There are people in other countries that do this; maybe you'd prefer to consume water of the same quality & obtain it the same way they do. It is free for them because there was no specialized labor involved in order for them to receive it the way we do & at the same quality in which we consume water.

Education? This is straight up sad that I should even have to compare the "education" of animals with education human beings receive, particularly in this country since that's where the woman in this video was speaking of. Again, we pay for the labor that is involved in all of the production process of the education. The teachers, the books, the schools, the classroom materials, etc. None of these things are free and they cannot be. There is a cost to everything whether you want to believe it or not.

I'm not sure how much further I have to go with this. You must be completely ignorant of the process of production as well as the division of labor. It's the division of labor into specializations where people are most productive and/or efficient that allows this country to be so wealthy and have such a high standard of living. This same thing, being that we possess intelligence greater than any other animal, is what allows us to enjoy all these things in an indescribably higher quality & with greater abundance than any other animal.

You need to take econ 101 or something. Honestly you shouldn't need to in order to answer that ridiculous question but apparently you do.
 
This doesn't sound like a State scripted brainwashing Manifesto to you. The logic is straight out of a govt controlled think tank, a nazi think tank at that. What gives a man or the govt the right to decided that water, food, shelter and especially education should cost. How did people survive before capitalism if thats the case.

You're still not giving any logic for why anything I've said is wrong. You're just making stupid assertions like the logic is straight out of a nazi think tank. How ridiculous are you going to get? Nazis? Otherwise known as the National Socialists German Workers' Party. :hmm:

No man or government decides that obtaining water, food, shelter, or education should costs. Even if there were no financial transaction involved there is still a cost in order to obtain them because their is labor involved, that is the cost. Or do you deny that there is any labor expended in order to obtain these things, especially in the form in which we consume them?

Next question for you. What is capitalism? I'd like you to be honest & reply to this question without looking up the answer or anything in which to help you respond. How would you, at the very moment you're first reading this, define capitalism? I'm pretty confident you don't even know what it is or how it works.

I'm really interested in you explaining your logic cause so far everything you've said has been completely absent of it.
 
You're still not giving any logic for why anything I've said is wrong. You're just making stupid assertions like the logic is straight out of a nazi think tank. How ridiculous are you going to get? Nazis? Otherwise known as the National Socialists German Workers' Party. :hmm:

No man or government decides that obtaining water, food, shelter, or education should costs. Even if there were no financial transaction involved there is still a cost in order to obtain them because their is labor involved, that is the cost. Or do you deny that there is any labor expended in order to obtain these things, especially in the form in which we consume them?

Next question for you. What is capitalism? I'd like you to be honest & reply to this question without looking up the answer or anything in which to help you respond. How would you, at the very moment you're first reading this, define capitalism? I'm pretty confident you don't even know what it is or how it works.

I'm really interested in you explaining your logic cause so far everything you've said has been completely absent of it.


For the sake of argument lets say capitalism is a system where goods and services are privately owned and sold for money. The problem is how do you determine who owns the goods and how much do they cost. Nature did not designate ownership of land, food, water or knowledge people did that. Now we have a system where 1% of the population owns all the resources and 1 in 5 Americans are living on food stamps, the distribution of resources is wider now than it was during slavery matter of fact there are more people in slavery today there was during the slave trade. This is the system you support and see as logical.
 
Cruise is an anarchist. Expect that from him. Anything that sounds governmental, he's against, so he says. I spoke negatively of the great Kwame Kilpatrick once or twice and Cruise lept to his defense. I was baffled that the anarchist would argue so passionately in support of government, corrupt at that.

Maybe because Kwame is Black and Cruise perceived his demise to be at the hands of whitey. Maybe he's right. But the evidence showed corruption -- something one would think would be a prime reason for an anarchist to oppose government. go figure.

I defend Kwame Kilpatrick because he did a lot of good and was a native Detroiter.

What contribution have you made to Detroit?

Who are you to put down another black man, in a city you are not from and know nothing about?

You are talking out the side of your neck to say Detroit politicians are corrupt. I don't see you talking greasy about Dave Bing, the current great white hope in Detroit.

Saying there is corruption in politics is like saying there is sex in the city.

The question is, "Why were whites pissing their pants to 'expose' Kwame's corruption but not their own?"

To me, Kwame gave Detroit the best chance at an anarchist society. It would have been glorious.

It makes me pissed just thinking about this.

You're still not giving any logic for why anything I've said is wrong. You're just making stupid assertions like the logic is straight out of a nazi think tank. How ridiculous are you going to get? Nazis? Otherwise known as the National Socialists German Workers' Party. :hmm:

I'm really interested in you explaining your logic cause so far everything you've said has been completely absent of it.

You seem determined to dismiss and disparage any approach that you don't like.

Why would anyone want to explain anything to you, if all you are going to do is make attacks without addressing the argument.

It's like your saying, "This is the way it is. If you don't like it... tough!"
 
Nittie (and Cruise & anyone else who would defend these quotes of his):

For the sake of argument lets say capitalism is a system where goods and services are privately owned and sold for money. The problem is how do you determine who owns the goods and how much do they cost.

Again, to understand all this just study a little Econ 101. That's basic economics if you didn't know.

Nature did not designate ownership of land, food, water or knowledge people did that.

Every system rests on some concept of property rights, there's no way to avoid this. Unless maybe what you support is a society where nothing is considered to be property whatsoever. Is that what you support? How would it work?

Now we have a system where 1% of the population owns all the resources and 1 in 5 Americans are living on food stamps, the distribution of resources is wider now than it was during slavery matter of fact there are more people in slavery today there was during the slave trade. This is the system you support and see as logical.

At this point you got extra dumb with it lol. I want to know what system you support. How does it work? How would people get food, water, shelter, and education for free? How would they get all the other things besides them as well?
 
You seem determined to dismiss and disparage any approach that you don't like.

Why would anyone want to explain anything to you, if all you are going to do is make attacks without addressing the argument.

It's like your saying, "This is the way it is. If you don't like it... tough!"

& still not one shred of substance supporting your stance or refuting mine or QueEx's for that matter.

Oh & I guess calling my statement an "Introduction to the State Manifesto" wasn't dismissive or disparaging. Lol you're a trip dude. I keep addressing the argument directly & with specifics. You on the other hand still have not addressed any of what I've said. Then you whine for being chided after you choose to assign a disparaging label to my argument without providing one word of why you drew that conclusion? Good shit.
 
Nittie (and Cruise & anyone else who would defend these quotes of his):



Again, to understand all this just study a little Econ 101. That's basic economics if you didn't know.



Every system rests on some concept of property rights, there's no way to avoid this. Unless maybe what you support is a society where nothing is considered to be property whatsoever. Is that what you support? How would it work?



At this point you got extra dumb with it lol. I want to know what system you support. How does it work? How would people get food, water, shelter, and education for free? How would they get all the other things besides them as well?


Lets wrap this convo up shall we. In order for this to make any sense to you we have to say fuck econ 101. We have to say I can think for myself and I don't give a damn what the state sponsored education system wants me to believe. If you can do that then the idea that capitalism is just a theory that evolved as a alternative to monarchy is not so hard to understand.
 
Lets wrap this convo up shall we. In order for this to make any sense to you we have to say fuck econ 101. We have to say I can think for myself and I don't give a damn what the state sponsored education system wants me to believe. If you can do that then the idea that capitalism is just a theory that evolved as a alternative to monarchy is not so hard to understand.

Wow. So you decide not to answer the question whatsoever. It would have been possible to prove that you think for yourself & know what you're talking about it if you had answered the question. But instead you want to end the entire conversation instead of explaining AT ALL how people would get these things like food, water, shelter, & education. :smh:

I mean why on earth would anyone change there thinking at all on anything if the person saying there's a better alternative can't provide a modicum of information about that alternative?
 
& still not one shred of substance supporting your stance or refuting mine or QueEx's for that matter.

Oh & I guess calling my statement an "Introduction to the State Manifesto" wasn't dismissive or disparaging. Lol you're a trip dude. I keep addressing the argument directly & with specifics. You on the other hand still have not addressed any of what I've said. Then you whine for being chided after you choose to assign a disparaging label to my argument without providing one word of why you drew that conclusion? Good shit.

Oh I get it.

You're better because you say so. That's original.

QueEx had it right, I tend toward anarchy. So, there is no argument there. Are you addressing his comments about Kwame Kilpatrick and Detroit? What is your expertise that makes you more qualified than me?

Besides, what's wrong with advocating the power of the State over the individual?

You seem to think you know what's best for everyone, so advocating for the State should be a compliment to you, shouldn't it?
 
Oh I get it.

You're better because you say so. That's original.

Huh? How old are you dude???

QueEx had it right, I tend toward anarchy. So, there is no argument there. Are you addressing his comments about Kwame Kilpatrick and Detroit? What is your expertise that makes you more qualified than me?

Why would I address Kwame Kilpatrick & Detroit? That's completely off point of this thread's subject. I just noted that not only had you not addressed or countered what I've said, but you also didn't do so with what he said.

Why do I have to be an expert to explain something? I articulated why these things are not free. I literally explained it. Perhaps you disagree but you still, STILL, have not explained why what I'm saying is incorrect. Nor have you described AT ALL, I mean not one little bit, an alternative system you would prefer.

Besides, what's wrong with advocating the power of the State over the individual?

You seem to think you know what's best for everyone, so advocating for the State should be a compliment to you, shouldn't it?

No it's not a compliment to me & you're still not providing ANY substance and keep making juvenile insults. Advocating for the power of the State over the individual is wrong because only individuals have natural rights, the individual is supreme & most valuable in society, and the only role the State should possibly have is defending the individual, taking action against the violation of their natural rights, and enforcing contracts so that people can thrive freely and society can prosper through voluntary associations & exchange. My views have much in common with the true anarchist. Yours however, well, I don't know because you still haven't explained them at all.
 
Back
Top