- 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: Rolling Stone: Marx Was Right
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:30 pm to Sleeping Tiger
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:30 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
Think about the fact that under capitalism we brought slaves from Africa to do our work, think that didn't contribute to the rise of this country?
No, it didn't. That's why economies grew in Europe and the US when slavery was abolished. Slave labor did not build this country, it held innovation back exponentially.
0
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:31 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
Think about the fact that under capitalism we brought slaves from Africa to do our work, think that didn't contribute to the rise of this country?
Slavery an institution that has always existed is the fault of capitalism.
If slavery contributed to the rise of the country then why was the south so much poorer than the rest of the nation? Did the industrial revolution happen during slavery ? of coarse not.
quote:
Think about a corporation like Dole or United Fruit Co who have exploited other countries for their natural resources while bringing in major profits to the US economy. Think that doesn't contribute to our wealth?
They gave them job opportunities where none existed before. Pick fruit or sell your body on the street. I guess that's capitalism's fault to.
If it were up to marxist they'd have no choice but to do the latter.
quote:
Last time I checked the US was 17 trillion in debt, some cities look like 3rd world countries, the gap between rich and poor has grown to unbelievable levels, small business is being overtaken by multinationals, all media is owned by a few corporations who propagate those interests 24/7.
Your beef is with corporatism not capitalism.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:33 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
The Cultural Left has been trying to rehabilitate Marx my entire life.
Yes it's like a bad never ending version of Weekend at Bernies.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:34 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
Think about a corporation like Dole or United Fruit Co who have exploited other countries for their natural resources while bringing in major profits to the US economy. Think that doesn't contribute to our wealth?
I don't care. I have long been a proponent of child labor in the 3rd world. That's how they can eat. I try to find clothing made in Malaysia and buy it.
It's cheap. It's good enough for me. It helps save a starving child. I consider myself a humanitarian for seeking out sweat shop goods.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:37 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
The Cultural Left has been trying to rehabilitate Marx my entire life.
The left has been trying to explain his work for what it is, not try to rehabilitate his work.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:39 pm to Zach
quote:
I don't care. I have long been a proponent of child labor in the 3rd world. That's how they can eat. I try to find clothing made in Malaysia and buy it.
It's cheap. It's good enough for me. It helps save a starving child. I consider myself a humanitarian for seeking out sweat shop goods.
It's fine that you want to think that way, but I hope you own the fact that it's an incomplete and insane view.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:41 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
The left has been trying to explain his work for what it is, not try to rehabilitate his work.
And the left has a fantastic track record of trying to implement his philosophy in practices as well!
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:41 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
It's fine that you want to think that way, but I hope you own the fact that it's an incomplete and insane view.
Why?
And be careful because I'm 10 arguments ahead of your logic and I'm gonna make you look very stupid.
Now, go ahead and answer the question.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:43 pm to KissmyAxe
quote:
Slavery an institution that has always existed is the fault of capitalism
Not at all. A point was made that under capitalism the US became the worlds greatest power in just 250 years. Bringing to light the fact that slavery played a role in this countries rise is not blaming capitalism for slavery.
quote:
They gave them job opportunities where none existed before. Pick fruit or sell your body on the street. I guess that's capitalism's fault to.
If it were up to marxist they'd have no choice but to do the latter.
This is as tremendously inaccurate as what you said about blaming slavery on capitalism.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:48 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
. Bringing to light the fact that slavery played a role in this countries rise is not blaming capitalism for slavery.
But it didn't play a role. Not in the sense that you are trying to argue for anyways. Slavery hindered this nations growth. That's why the south was poor during slavery and that's why the industrial revolution didn't happen until slavery was abolished.
quote:
This is as tremendously inaccurate as what you said about blaming slavery on capitalism.
ok...........examples? proof? reasoning? any argument to prove your position at all?
Posted on 2/1/14 at 2:48 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
A point was made that under capitalism the US became the worlds greatest power in just 250 years. Bringing to light the fact that slavery played a role in this countries rise is not blaming capitalism for slavery.
Wrong. The US was not the worlds greatest power until slavery was abolished. We were pikers compared to the British who had already abolished slavery and become globally dominant.
If the British wanted to destroy us in the 1800s they could have. But to what end.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:05 pm to KissmyAxe
quote:
But it didn't play a role. Not in the sense that you are trying to argue for anyways. Slavery hindered this nations growth. That's why the south was poor during slavery and that's why the industrial revolution didn't happen until slavery was abolished.
Slavery did play a role in this countries rise, to say otherwise is blasphemy. The US was able to capitalize on natural resources that would have been impossible to capitalize on without free labor. No machines could do what the slaves did, and paying that many workers wouldn't have been economical. The majority of the south was poor, but that's how capitalism works, just as the majority of the world is poor today while great wealth is also present. Slavery is not why the US became the power it did, but ignoring any role it played in the rise is foolish.
quote:
ok...........examples? proof? reasoning? any argument to prove your position at all?
You're saying that because of the way capitalism exploited a region like S America it gave them the opportunity to earn a wage and eat instead of selling their bodies in the streets. I honestly don't even know what to say to that. It's sort of like saying that I helped a homeless man by kicking him in the gut, stealing his clothes, then tossing him a dime. Your position is incomplete, it's not really accounting for why their conditions were bad in the first place. Marx in some ways believed something like capitalism was necessary to bridge feudalism and colonialism to socialism, ughh this is difficult to articulate.
This post was edited on 2/1/14 at 3:08 pm
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:12 pm to Zach
quote:
Wrong. The US was not the worlds greatest power until slavery was abolished. We were pikers compared to the British who had already abolished slavery and become globally dominant.
Great. But that doesn't negate the fact that slavery played a role in the rise. It doesn't matter that we weren't the most powerful at the time of slavery.
I could start lifting heavy today, but I won't be the strongest man alive. But, two years from now I will be the strongest man alive, to say that those first days of lifting didn't play a role in my ability to become the strongest would be to deny the truth.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:15 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
Slavery did play a role in this countries rise, to say otherwise is blasphemy. The US was able to capitalize on natural resources that would have been impossible to capitalize on without free labor.
Then, by your logic the South should have won the war.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:16 pm to Zach
quote:
Then, by your logic the South should have won the war.
Not really
It's easy to use slavery as a crutch and it can inhibit further advancement. That doesn't mean it wasn't beneficial to the south at some point in time however.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:18 pm to Zach
quote:
Then, by your logic the South should have won the war.
Not at all. How does anything I say reflect that?
And, sort of off topic, but the South would have won the war if conditions were fair. If the South could have done things like print 400 million greenbacks, interest free, like the north did things may have been different.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:41 pm to Powerman
quote:
It's easy to use slavery as a crutch and it can inhibit further advancement. That doesn't mean it wasn't beneficial to the south at some point in time however.
Your two sentences contradict each other.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:43 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
Then, by your logic the South should have won the war. Not at all. How does anything I say reflect that?
The South had resources due to slavery. The North did not. So, the South should have won if slavery was an advantage. It was not an advantage at all.
You need to read some Thomas Sowell on this issue.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:49 pm to Zach
How is he contradicting himself?
Many things, if not all things, have negative and positive aspects to their nature. Slavery can inhibit progress by limiting the need to advance technology, but that doesn't mean it can't be an economic positive for its benefactors.
Many things, if not all things, have negative and positive aspects to their nature. Slavery can inhibit progress by limiting the need to advance technology, but that doesn't mean it can't be an economic positive for its benefactors.
Posted on 2/1/14 at 3:53 pm to Zach
quote:
The South had resources due to slavery. The North did not. So, the South should have won if slavery was an advantage. It was not an advantage at all.
You greatly mutated this dialogue.
The point on slavery has nothing at all to do with it being an advantage or disadvantage during the civil war.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News