- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If you could choose one current "intellectual"
Posted on 2/17/14 at 6:10 pm to Sleeping Tiger
Posted on 2/17/14 at 6:10 pm to Sleeping Tiger
but how apple rose to prominence compared to its competitors and how the paper industry allegedly shut out the hemp industry were accomplished through different mediums. the paper industry coordinated with government in order to shut out paper. apple did not use government to ban its competitors to gain market share. the situations are not comparable.
consumers cannot drive a market effectively if their choices are (1) legal or (2) illegal. of course the legal option will win in the market (even with black markets serving illegal choices).
there is not a single economic system. the USA is pretty capitalist, but there is plenty of crony capitalism mixed around. this is not a binary choice (because we don't have a truly free market). there are examples of both crony capitalism success stories (paper over hemp) and more free market success stories (apple)
the problem isn't with capitalism. capitalism is amazing. government interference with capitalism is a problem
consumers cannot drive a market effectively if their choices are (1) legal or (2) illegal. of course the legal option will win in the market (even with black markets serving illegal choices).
there is not a single economic system. the USA is pretty capitalist, but there is plenty of crony capitalism mixed around. this is not a binary choice (because we don't have a truly free market). there are examples of both crony capitalism success stories (paper over hemp) and more free market success stories (apple)
the problem isn't with capitalism. capitalism is amazing. government interference with capitalism is a problem
1
Posted on 2/17/14 at 6:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
but how apple rose to prominence compared to its competitors and how the paper industry allegedly shut out the hemp industry were accomplished through different mediums.
The way Apple rose to prominence and the banning of hemp were absolutely accomplished through different mediums.
But there were significant differences that explain why Apple was allowed to rise, while hemp was made illegal.
Big business knew it could coexist and benefit from Apples advancements. While big business knew hemp had the potential to disrupt nearly every existing industry, from oil to food.
quote:
the problem isn't with capitalism. capitalism is amazing. government interference with capitalism is a problem
This is a thread of it's own. If you believe in the existence of a government that won't interfere with capitalism you're as much of a utopia dreamer as the garden of eden, peace and love commune types.
Since Marx definitely believed in abolishing the political state, which is the root of government interference, you might enjoy his thoughts more than you might want to admit.
Posted on 2/17/14 at 6:40 pm to Sleeping Tiger
how was Apple allowed to overcome the current "big business" of the mid-00s (i'm talking ipod/iphone era Apple, when it was a Phoenix of the tech industry and went from basically 2% of the computer market to #1 company on earth)
there was plenty of "big industry" around to kill Apple and use government to kill it further. you're comparing non-competing industries with competing industries. so while non-competing industries could use Apple's advancements, competing industries (especially powerful ones) are the major concern
there was plenty of "big industry" around to kill Apple and use government to kill it further. you're comparing non-competing industries with competing industries. so while non-competing industries could use Apple's advancements, competing industries (especially powerful ones) are the major concern
Posted on 2/17/14 at 6:43 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
more government than libertarianism, obviously
In order to proceed with this, we will have to get precise with the terms we use. You'll have to define what you mean by libertarianism. Chomsky thinks that the typical American connotation is perverted.
Here's what we know - Chomsky does not view people as sheep that need to be herded:
quote:
His ideological position revolves around "nourishing the libertarian and creative character of the human being",[143] and he has described his beliefs as "fairly traditional anarchist ones, with origins in the Enlightenment and classical liberalism."[144] He has praised libertarian socialism,[145] and has described himself as an anarcho-syndicalist.
In the link that I provided earlier, he stated that the burden of proof is on the authority, and it should be challenged. In that way, he is strongly aligned with Anarchism.
What he was criticizing in is an American form of libertarianism. He is advocating the ideas Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson.
You said that Chomsky rejects limiting the power of government. You will have to provide evidence for that statement. We already have evidence in this thread to the contrary.
Posted on 2/17/14 at 6:46 pm to inadaze
i already described it as
why does he feel the US style/definition of libertarianism is a bad system?
American libertarianism is for limited government
quote:
libertarianism (of the USA)
quote:
You said that Chomsky rejects limiting the power of government. You will have to provide evidence for that statement.
why does he feel the US style/definition of libertarianism is a bad system?
American libertarianism is for limited government
Posted on 2/17/14 at 6:56 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
why does he feel the US style/definition of libertarianism is a bad system?
American libertarianism is for limited government
You are providing absolutely no evidence for your assertions. For your assertions to carry any weight, you'll have to provide evidence.
Honestly, libertarianism in the USA means different things to different people.
Posted on 2/17/14 at 7:06 pm to inadaze
quote:
You are providing absolutely no evidence for your assertions.
i will when you answer the questions. i've already provided the quotes and definitions he is using
quote:
Honestly, libertarianism in the USA means different things to different people.
it means limited government, both in my definition and chomsky's
Posted on 2/17/14 at 7:12 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Well what’s called libertarian in the United States, which is a special U. S. phenomenon, it doesn’t really exist anywhere else — a little bit in England — permits a very high level of authority and domination but in the hands of private power: so private power should be unleashed to do whatever it likes. The assumption is that by some kind of magic, concentrated private power will lead to a more free and just society…that kind of libertarianism, in my view, in the current world, is just a call for some of the worst kinds of tyranny, namely unaccountable private tyranny.
quote:
One way, incidentally, is through use of the state, to the extent that it is democratically controlled. I mean in the long run, anarchists would like to see the state eliminated. But it exists, alongside of private power, and the state is, at least to a certain extent, under public influence and control — could be much more so. And it provides devices to constrain the much more dangerous forces of private power. Rules for safety and health in the workplace for example. Or insuring that people have decent health care, let’s say. Many other things like that. They’re not going to come about through private power. Quite the contrary. But they can come about through the use of the state system under limited democratic control … to carry forward reformist measures.
LINK
Posted on 2/17/14 at 7:21 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i will when you answer the questions. i've already provided the quotes and definitions he is using
I can't speak for Chomsky on the specific reasons why he doesn't like libertarianism in the United States. I've got some ideas, but I'd rather be certain. I will look into it and try to find specific reasons. Maybe not tonight, as I've got some stuff to do, but I've been meaning to read more about his ideas anyways.
quote:
it means limited government, both in my definition and chomsky's
Well, then it seems there is nothing to disagree about, yet you have asserted that he rejects limited government, and that he views people as sheep that need to be herded.
Posted on 2/17/14 at 7:27 pm to inadaze
go and read the quotes i just posted. they're from a transcript of a talk he gave (it's on youtube). it's difficult to find the full transcript.
he states in clear language that he feels government > limited government
he states in clear language that he feels government > limited government
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News