355
A capitalism truth pill people still need to swallow (europe.pub)
submitted 2 weeks ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
96 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 1 week ago (25 children)

"You don't have a good example because I know a handful of people (who children or not born when the USSR dissolved)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 1 week ago (24 children)

    Very glib. My point remains though - if this stuff were popular, it would be used more. So why don't we have it in the US? How do you propose to get around that?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (22 children)

    Your point does not stand at all, you shared an anecdote. There is no empirical data supporting your claim, in actuality the majority of the people who lived during the time of the Soviet Union say they miss it and life was better in the USSR.

    Gonna steal @yogthos@lemmygrad.ml comment:

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 1 week ago (21 children)

    You didn't address any of my questions. If this stuff is so popular, why isn't it used more? How do you propose to overcome the objections of the vast majority of Americans and Europeans, including the rich and powerful?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (20 children)

    Finish your argument before you start a new one sweetie. You made a claim that you could not back up, the available empirical data opposes your claim, and yet you declare your point still stands. It does not.
    In a proper civil dialogue we conclude disagreements before moving on to the next wall you've thrown shit at to see what sticks. So if you want to ask questions and get them answered, then you gotta show yourself to be acting in good faith as well. This requires behaving like a normal person and not some little weasely booger who cannot admit fault or themself answer any questions - In your case you gotta either admit you were wrong, provide reasonable critique for why the data is not applicable (this of course requires you read the texts you have been given, something I doubt you will ever do, you types rarely even make it past the headline and even then it is typically only a brief skim, feverishly hunting for some sentence you can misinterpret) or provide sufficient empirical data that can help create a working hypothesis alongside the other data.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 1 week ago (19 children)

    Ok great some people affected liked it. You win and have a huge penis.

    That does not mean it is popular here and I still don't see a way forward for it.

    Until we all see that, we will generally bounce between unregulated capitalism and (what I favor) which is well regulated capitalism with worker and environmental protections.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago

    we will generally bounce between unregulated capitalism and (what I favor) which is well regulated capitalism with worker and environmental protections.

    If only that were true. Unfortunately the next stop on your train is fascism not better regulation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (17 children)

    ok you win

    There is nothing to win, we are having a discussion and you are behaving like an angry toddler, and I am asking that you behave normal in order for this conversation to be gainful. If you are not interested in dialogue, why engage in it? Just don't respond instead of wasting everyones time.

    That does not mean it is popular here

    Factually untrue, as the data shows. Furthermore if you think "I win" then that does mean it is popular there. Why do you lie?

    Until we all see that, we will generally bounce between unregulated capitalism and (what I favor) which is well regulated capitalism with worker and environmental protections.

    Completely vibes-based statement with nothing supporting it. Read Reform or Revolution.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (12 children)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (11 children)

    What do you feel this link provides?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    Evidence of the impracticality of what you propose.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    So far the only thing I have proposed is that you are wrong about your point still standing and I have supplied additional evidence to supply this. You keep trying to argue against something else because you have a weak and prideful mind, too fragile to handle being wrong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (8 children)

    So still answer for "how will this make a political impact in the US?" But lots of ad hominem attacks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    God damn, Reddit shitlibs really do think that "ad-hominem" is just a magic incantation to win debates they were otherwise eating shit in

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Ironically your comment here is also an ad hominem attack. For the 9th time, does anyone have a practical plan for getting these political plans implemented? Please do not answer with anything but that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (2 children)

    I have actually made 0 ad hominem so far. You are confusing "insults" with "attacking the argument through the character". Of course you wouldn't know that, halfwit that you are.

    The rebuttal has been presented, you have failed to engage with it, you are the one halting discussion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Ok still no plans though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 days ago

    Well I would love to move on to another discussion and point out the many faulty assumptions and assertions you have made there, but to do that we have to do what I have described many times already. You seem to struggle with reason and civil discussion, consider looking inwards to deal with you having a hard time with simple challenges to your beliefs and a pattern of changing the topic instead of engaging with the text at hand, when that text refutes your pointless vibes-based anecdotal evidence.

    You are making a claim but you have no proof for it. What hasn't worked "here" whereever that is? If you are talking about socialism in the east block it very clearly did work. It was massively popular, improved the living conditions for the population and only fell after decades of capitalist subversion and even then it had to be done through a military coup. And, as the evidence available shows, it is missed today.
    Elsewhere it is still massively succesful to this very day.
    So I dont understand your question, it seems to be based on a completely fallacious understanding of the world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    That does not mean it is popular here

    Factually untrue, as the data shows.

    Then why don't we have this as our current form of government? How to you propose to get everyone to buy in to this in the US? If you can't reduce it to practice, this is just impractical Internet bullshit talk.

    I assert that that's all this will ever be. We have zero chance of this being implemented here.

    We do however have a chance of getting back to regulated capitalism. All we need is a new TR.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Then why don’t we have this as our current form of government? How to you propose to get everyone to buy in to this in the US? If you can’t reduce it to practice, this is just impractical Internet bullshit talk.

    Finish your argument before you start a new one sweetie.

    For us to be able to go deeper into discussion we need to first agree on the facts that form the basis of the discussion, which we do not at the moment. You have to either accept that your point was wrong and integrate that acceptance into your line of argument or argue for your point being correct - This is done by either supplying sufficient empirical data that helps create some synthesis with the rest of the data or you go through the given data and explain why it is faulty or insufficient as a basis for a rebuttal.

    As the rest of the comment you are responding to explains, you have still yet to do this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Finish your argument before you start a new one sweetie.

    This is condescending and intended to distract from the main point by being inflammatory You keep dodging because you don't have an answer.

    You have to either accept that your point was wrong and integrate that acceptance into your line of argument or argue for your point being correct - This is done by either supplying sufficient empirical data that helps create some synthesis with the rest of the data or you go through the given data and explain why it is faulty or insufficient as a basis for a rebuttal.

    As the rest of the comment you are responding to explains, you have still yet to do this.

    Nah. It can't be popular enough to work here. If it could, you would have said how. You're just diverting from that fact because you don't actually have an answer.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

    Lmk when you want to actually make progress on anything regarding this topic and not just nitpick tediously. The main point is that there's no way to get those political systems to fly here because people don't want them currently.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    this is condescending

    Correct, you are behaving poorly so I am treating you in kind

    Distracting from the main point

    The only one distracting from anything is you. You are the one who seeks discussion and then flees at challenge, I am holding you to it.

    You are now attempting to give yourself a plausible exit where you can save face, which is very funny since the only audience is you and me, yet your ego can still not handle it. Sadly the exit-strategy you've sought is ill-fitting, since both you and I are aware that you are the one who has been avoiding discussion, instead seeking to change the subject at every turn. It is no surprise that you would do something like this, you seem to be a fucking idiot.
    I still hold out hope you will be able to do the bare minimum, but I cannot be disappointed by you anymore.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent