Marxism And The New Age Progressive Movements

[michael94]

It’s a store of value, unlike fiat currency which is inevitably debased by the issuing authority.

But how much more useful of a store of value is it than fiat? You can't print Gold, but Gold cant farm the land, come up with society altering inventions, provides services, produce healthy children etc. Those are the things that Money is supposed to attempt to represent, and if you peg your Nation's value of everything to Gold you make your very bloodlines completely beholden to this metal which isn't even essential.

Would a country be better off if it had 1 million tons of Gold but half of it's population was unable to work. Or a similar country that had 1 ounce of Gold but with a perfectly healthy and productive population?

 

[Marvel]

But how much more useful of a store of value is it than fiat? You can't print Gold, but Gold cant farm the land, come up with society altering inventions, provides services, produce healthy children etc. Those are the things that Money is supposed to attempt to represent, and if you peg your Nation's value of everything to Gold you make your very bloodlines completely beholden to this metal which isn't even essential.

Would a country be better off if it had 1 million tons of Gold but half of it's population was unable to work. Or a similar country that had 1 ounce of Gold but with a perfectly healthy and productive population?

The problem is the amount of control the centralised authorities have over the wealth in society. If they can debase the currency they’re stealing from and impoverishing the society. A free society needs a substantial middle class. Since the central banks and government have been debasing western currencies we’ve seen a decline in the general distribution of prosperity and power.

 

[kyle]

The state is the only viable tool the people have to limit the power of corporations.

People telling you to believe in some kind of revolution (in favor of whatever system it may be) are deluded and play into the hands of the status quo.

History says the American system is an ingeniously resilient system in the very technical sense of its laws, wealth, military and so on, it's not going anywhere anytime soon and this assumption is at least as good as any.

The only logical solution is the more pedestrian option of fashioning yourself into an informed and virtuous person and engaging with the world with the strengths you have. That is, becoming an American "citizen." It means going out in the world and meeting other people and organizing and getting people elected. It means accepting the many flaws and corruption and doing the best regardless.

America is pretty ok. There are much, much worse places. The path into political action is multi faceted. All of us have it as an option. But there is a path and anyone telling that the system is irredeemable is telling you to be a quitter - or worse, devoting yourself to ancap/commie/whatever and into intellectual irrelevancy.

Over time the bad guys and good guys come and go, good ideas rise and fall, so do the bad. The corporations will always try to cling to their power for as long as they can with their clammy, cold hands but America goes on.

Look at what a guy like Aajonus Vanderplanitz could accomplish in California of all places. We need more people like him who are fighters and understand the system and lead people, not feed them doom and gloom.

@haidut I see the sense and the appeal in your theory about society, but good health won't stop you from having bad ideas and letting perceptions and worldviews manifest in unforeseen ways.

The biggest fallacy I see fixing the environment for more optimal health probably won't stop these uber healthy people from going on and wrecking the world again. Imagine an island of tropical fruit and cows - then there's a few days of cloud cover, metabolism drops and they start cutting down the fruit trees to make spears to throw at each other. A likely scenario.

Rather we live in a patchwork of bad and good ideas and environments at all times and that is the real basis from which we have to accept and develop ideas from.

 

[michael94]

The problem is the amount of control the centralised authorities have over the wealth in society. If they can debase the currency they’re stealing from and impoverishing the society. A free society needs a substantial middle class. Since the central banks and government have been debasing western currencies we’ve seen a decline in the general distribution of prosperity and power.

Central Banks can set interest rates and provides Reserves to Private Banks, but even then the FED is more reactionary than anything. The money we use at Starbucks or the Gas station isn't Central Bank Reserves, that's just what the Banks use to settle payments. What we see in our account statement is almost entirely a creation of the PRIVATE banking industry, i.e. just a promise to pay from the Bank. It wasn't minted in the Treasury with the blessing of Mnuchin or created with the Fed's printing press. Cash and coins are less than 5% of the entire money supply, and even then only the coins are solely a Government creation. So who is to blame for the debasing of our currency, the Government or Private interests? It's both, but the Government is in the best position to cut out the parasites with some simple law changes. Whereas if you leave everything up to the Private Banks you are just hoping that market forces will eliminate collusion and corruption. I think Private Industry should be given lots of freedom, but controlling the entire money supply as it very nearly does now? Emphatically No.

Who benefited the most from the money supply expansion in the last 100 years? It is not a riddle, Private Banks did because they were the ones leading the expansion ( always with interest owed to them in the form of loans ). This is not a conspiracy but just how our Money Supply and Banking System are structured.

Split-Circuit Reserve Banking — sovereign money

 

[Marvel]

Central Banks can set interest rates and provides Reserves to Private Banks, but even then the FED is more reactionary than anything. The money we use at Starbucks or the Gas station isn't Central Bank Reserves, that's just what the Banks use to settle payments. What we see in our account statement is almost entirely a creation of the PRIVATE banking industry, i.e. just a promise to pay from the Bank. It wasn't minted in the Treasury with the blessing of Mnuchin or created with the Fed's printing press. Cash and coins are less than 5% of the entire money supply, and even then only the coins are solely a Government creation. So who is to blame for the debasing of our currency, the Government or Private interests? It's both, but the Government is in the best position to cut out the parasites with some simple law changes. Whereas if you leave everything up to the Private Banks you are just hoping that market forces will eliminate collusion and corruption. I think Private Industry should be given lots of freedom, but controlling the entire money supply as it very nearly does now? Emphatically No.

Who benefited the most from the money supply expansion in the last 100 years? It is not a riddle, Private Banks did because they were the ones leading the expansion ( always with interest owed to them in the form of loans ). This is not a conspiracy but just how our Money Supply and Banking System are structured.

Split-Circuit Reserve Banking — sovereign money

The government with the central banks do all the QE and stimulus that debases the currency. The government then is able to waste that money on whatever nonsense projects they like. A lot of it ends up pushing up stock prices and then disappearing into hedge funds. It’s a total sham.

Sure I’m relying on market forces, but if banks had the risk of becoming insolvent they might actually act responsibly.

 

[michael94]

Sure I’m relying on market forces, but if banks had the risk of becoming insolvent they might actually act responsibly.

You could do that with a simple law change ending fractional lending, then Banks could be allowed to fail with no problems. Right now if a Bank becomes insolvent, all of their customers who have deposits with that Bank would be completely screwed

 

[Marvel]

You could do that with a simple law change ending fractional lending, then Banks could be allowed to fail with no problems. Right now if a Bank becomes insolvent, all of their customers who have deposits with that Bank would be completely screwed

Sure, but the private banks aren’t the main problem.

 

[postman]

The absence of authoritarianism is just authority by capital. If China freed its internet, it would just become authoritarianism by American capital (and its trendy brainwashed masses). Russian/Chinese authoritarianism is just authority by a different (IE: non-western) force.

Which is good, because western authorities are more moneyed than Russian/Chinese ones by multiple orders of magnitude. So in that sense, these non-western authoritarianism is anti-authoritarian, at least until western authorities give up more power/money to their populace.

Next level mental gymnastics

 

[michael94]

Sure, but the private banks aren’t the main problem.

What do you see as the main problem?

 

[MatheusPN]

Next level mental gymnastics

It was a brilliant performance by Lvysaur

@Marvel A representative democracy, as you desire, is very corrupt prone and authoritarian system if you can't dissent and opt out. You want another elite. Unless they are totally transparent its a awful democracy.
@kyle anarchists have a similar action, direct action, generally thought social projects and protests. So your text related to it, doesn't make sense.

America is pretty ok. There are much, much worse places. The path into political action is multi faceted. All of us have it as an option. But there is a path and anyone telling that the system is irredeemable is telling you to be a quitter - or worse, devoting yourself to ancap/commie/whatever and into intellectual irrelevancy.

America is extremely good at annihilating, destroying countries/ societies and then profiting from it.


To who who want to read the photos, the order is Are we good enough, then the first image, then the last.

 

[lvysaur]

Next level mental gymnastics

High value rebuttal, very thorough
The central points of my argument were extensively debunked. I concede defeat.

I find it funny that on a forum that is centrally dedicated to debunking nefarious health memes that have found mass-acceptance among the general populace, that people can be so vehemently opposed to the exact same thing happening in simply another sphere of life.

 

[kyle]

@MatheusPN anarchists are aligned with the oligarchs on social issues and now they want to now disrupt the very functioning of elections and law and order - the only things the people have to protect thenselces against corporations.

And no, they are not doing anything I wrote - the basic first principles they accept make that impossible for an array of reasons.

America is extremely good at annihilating, destroying countries/ societies and then profiting from it.

The foreign policy since WWII is actually somewhat of an abberation, and theres a lot of evidence imperialism, at least overt military action, is coming to an end.

 

[MatheusPN]

High value rebuttal, very thorough
The central points of my argument were extensively debunked. I concede defeat.

I find it funny that on a forum that is centrally dedicated to debunking nefarious health memes that have found mass-acceptance among the general populace, that people can be so vehemently opposed to the exact same thing happening in simply another sphere of life.

To be clear, if I made fun of someone it was only of @postman.
I really like your posts in those regards, very well made and different.

@MatheusPN anarchists are aligned with the oligarchs on social issues and now they want to now disrupt the very functioning of elections and law and order - the only things the people have to protect thenselces against corporations.

And no, they are not doing anything I wrote - the basic first principles they accept make that impossible for an array of reasons.



The foreign policy since WWII is actually somewhat of an abberation, and theres a lot of evidence imperialism, at least overt military action, is coming to an end.

Apparently you, like most right-wingers and liberals, ppl who love hierarchies and segregation, you think likewise that now anarchists is a class who have in common the alignment with the oligarchs, how so? Take a look at the real significative anarchist's actions, they are happening now

As I said what anarchists do is direct action like social projects, like helping people build houses for free, cooperating.

They won't use Military imperialism if and while: propaganda and Capital supremacy which result in slavery, like NAFTA to some caused, is more profitable and tranquil.

 

[kyle]

As I said what anarchists do is direct action like social projects, like helping people build houses for free, cooperating.

This is just semantics. Right wingers also do that stuff, right? What of it?

Theres a large gulf between anarchist politcal tactics and so on, and being a good citizen.

They won't use Military imperialism if, propaganda and Capital supremacy wich causes slavery, like NAFTA to some were, is more profitable and tranquil.

I agree.

What anarchists generally do with regards to every problem is assume government in the abstract needs to be destroyed.

And why such ideas gain traction, at least in election year, is it is stupid enough to get large amounts of people to go about smashing up things instead of seeing how things work.

 

[MatheusPN]

This is just semantics. Right wingers also do that stuff, right? What of it?

Of course they can do and it wasn't just semantics. Was a example of direct action.

What anarchists generally do with regards to every problem is assume government in the abstract needs to be destroyed.

And why such ideas gain traction, at least in election year, is it is stupid enough to get large amounts of people to go about smashing up things instead of seeing how things work.

Anarchists don't want the destruction of the idea of a government. But I am sure they would like to have and switch to an anti-authoritarian government.
Which ideas gain traction, that directs people to smash up things instead of seeing how things work? What things are smashed and by who?

 

[lvysaur]

To be clear, if I made fun of someone it was only of @postman.
I really like your posts in those regards, very well made and different.

Thanks and no problem, I misunderstood you as sarcasm. I edited the post to remove your section.

 

[kyle]

Anarchists don't want the destruction of the idea of a government. But I am sure they would like to have and switch to an anti-authoritarian government.

Uh huh...

 

[MatheusPN]

Uh huh...

You clearly misunderstand what anarchism is, (propaganda, as most ridiculous beliefs about communism) because you think that anarchism wants the destruction of any and every government.

Thanks and no problem, I misunderstood you as sarcasm. I edited the post to remove your section.

Thanks man

 

[Marvel]

What do you see as the main problem?

The existence of central banking.

 

[Regina]

Has an 'Anti-Science' Sentiment Overtaken the United States?

Of course, Pfizer's new campaign is Science Will Win.

(forced martial junk science and mind-control).