capitalism = natural selection

[Kuya]

no I understand clearly, you're trying to use the word capitalism in place of natural selection. natural selection will always exist, because the more clever / stronger / faster etc will find a way to succeed.

capitalism is just a system designed by man to regulate trade. what you're trying to do is design a context and label, you have fun with that brosef but you're not convincing anyone to come to the land of make-believe with you

What do you call what i just explained? Greed? Sociopathy? Those are just ugly labels used by those who don't want to face reality. You can call it whatever you want, really, but i shall call it for what it really is. Capitalism.

Is capitalism greed and sociopathy? So what if it is? The point is to succeed by accumulating wealth and thriving, the feelings of others only matter in so far as you need to fool them so they don't get in your way. Nobody wants to lose, which is why you have to make them think they're not losing. Capitalists, those who are on the top of the social foodchain, have succeeded at this. That's the real progress of modernity.

[TheShadyMan]

You are able to do that. Bill Gates doesn't have a magical invulnerability shield.

[Kuya]

Not the same in a few ways. If it was the same i would go kill bill gates because he is weak. And as you stated above there is not cheating so we should be able to do that.

If you can find a way to kill him and take all his money without losing it, you have succeded at capitalism. However, if you cannot take bill gates' money, but rather, he is taking yours, then you are losing.

[TheShadyMan]

DON'T YOU FUCKING IGNORE ME KUYA

[TheShadyMan]

THE PEOPLE WILL BE HEARD

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

What do you call what i just explained? Greed? Sociopathy? Those are just ugly labels used by those who don't want to face reality. You can call it whatever you want, really, but i shall call it for what it really is. Capitalism.

Is capitalism greed and sociopathy? So what if it is? The point is to succeed by accumulating wealth and thriving, the feelings of others only matter in so far as you need to fool them so they don't get in your way. Nobody wants to lose, which is why you have to make them think they're not losing. Capitalists, those who are on the top of the social foodchain, have succeeded at this. That's the real progress of modernity.

Your OP says capitalism is as natural as natural selection, then in another post you go on to use the accumulation of wealth and power in other systems as capitalist. you're trying to redefine an established word and idea, not flying pal

cap·i·tal·ism [kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.


so you're saying it's natural to desire to participate in an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.


lol, you're reaching man good luck with that

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

You know capitalism gets a lot of shit from unrealistic hippies about how it's so inmoral but when you think about it, capitalism is about as natural as natural selection. It promotes the success of those who can innovate and change and capitale on oportunities. It raises our greatest individuals to the top.

typical kuya thread, say something like this in OP. people explain it is a system and you can't truly capitalize outside of the rules of the man made system ( i.e. killing, stealing - like when a male lion kills another male lion and steals the pride of females and kills the cubs, thus capitalizing on its natural success and survival ) and kuya then decides to try and steer the debate in another direction

ohu

[TheShadyMan]

Did you just chastise him for trying to 'redefine a word and an idea' and then use a dictionary definition? Isn't the point of a dictionary to redefine a word or an idea? You think x means y? lol, idiot, this book says x means z, you dumbass.
Jesus Christ, you might as well replace dictionary with bible and just start sucking cock.

Words only definition is the one given to it by the recipient of them. Most times, our definition of words is defined on what the more or less social consensus of the word is. That doesn't mean that's what a word means, it just means that is what everyone decided that vocal utterance signifies. There is no goddamn 'meaning' it's just imaginary tags put onto imaginary ideas.

[Shiroikage]

I said the most correct thing in this entire thread.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Did you just chastise him for trying to 'redefine a word and an idea' and then use a dictionary definition? Isn't the point of a dictionary to redefine a word or an idea? You think x means y? lol, idiot, this book says x means z, you dumbass.
Jesus Christ, you might as well replace dictionary with bible and just start sucking cock.

Words only definition is the one given to it by the recipient of them. Most times, our definition of words is defined on what the more or less social consensus of the word is. That doesn't mean that's what a word means, it just means that is what everyone decided that vocal utterance signifies. There is no goddamn 'meaning' it's just imaginary tags put onto imaginary ideas.

what a fucking idiot. so if I start pointing at cars and call them clouds I'm right because it's all abstract? could you be any more retarded, really?

[TheShadyMan]

Is it lonely up there in your ivory tower, Shiro?

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

may as well just retitle this thread to "Let's Make Shit Up Ya'll It's Fun!"

[Shiroikage]

Is it lonely up there in your ivory tower, Shiro?

Are ivory towers ever lonely?

[TheShadyMan]

what a fucking idiot. so if I start pointing at cars and call them clouds I'm right because it's all abstract? could you be any more retarded, really?

Right is another imaginary idea you fucktard. Right is only right because everyone says its right. Blue could be right for all I'm concerned. Can you pick up right? Can you go to the store and buy a couple pounds of right? No, you can't, because it doesn't fucking exist. IT IS MADE UP.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

and also, numbnuts, the point of a dictionary is to list the understood definitions of a word or idea. what gasoline drinking parent of yours taught you that dictionaries are an egalitarian edited article such as wikipedia?

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Right is another imaginary idea you fucktard. Right is only right because everyone says its right. Blue could be right for all I'm concerned. Can you pick up right? Can you go to the store and buy a couple pounds of right? No, you can't, because it doesn't fucking exist. IT IS MADE UP.

so if it's all made up then you're wrong. got it. thanks!

[TheShadyMan]

No, I'm wrong, you dumbass.

[Mizango]

America! Fuck yeah!

[Kuya]

Let's start with people being poor and 'success stories' of people getting out of poverty. Not intending to put words in your mouth on this one, but these sort of stories are usually referred to 'as beating the odds', yes? Beating the odds does not mean that there are no odds; odds, by definition mean that only a certain percentage results in one outcome, and the rest do not. Just because a few can pull themselves up by their bootstraps does not mean that the rest can’t, or are too lazy, they just lost the probability game. I mean, you don't get to choose your parents (i.e. genetic material), so you have no power over what your natural talent for intelligence is (I won't even get into trying to define 'intelligence' because that'd be opening a whole other can of goddamn worms), so there's an address for the Nature theorists. You also don't get to choose where you were born, or the home you're raised in. So your cultural view points, and to an extent, your morals and values are out of your hands too (I am fully aware that once people 'get out into the world' many can readily change their beliefs, but that's only if the tinted glasses you're looking at the world through allows you to do so. If you're raised in hardcore racist environments, it'll get plugged in so goddamn deep in your head you'll refuse to believe anything else. See also; religion) so hidey-ho, there's nurture addressed. So when it comes down to it, saying x is like nature is basically saying the dice got rolled, and you had no power over what the outcome was, but goddamn, you've got to play with what you're dealt. I think you'd readily agree with that, and if not, we can debate the point in further posts.

Now, it is my belief (this, again, is totally up for debate) that the difference between man and animal is the ability to manipulate nature. And I don't goddamn mean being able to make tools out of a goddamn stick and a rock, I know monkeys and birds do it, but let's be fair, that's adapting to an environment, not changing it. Humans create their own ecosystems and habitats, look at any fucking urban center in the world. It's one thing for some ants to dig a colony in the ground; it's completely different for humans to take metals from the ground, purify them, and then mold and shape them into gigantic urban sprawls. It almost seems to me that the point of being human is fighting nature. It's cold outside, you don't like that. What does an animal do? It finds a hole and cuddles up in it. What does a human do? It will procure what it needs from its environment (be it clothing, or burning fuel, or building material for an insulated building) and go on with what they were doing. Day after day, humans are finding more and more ways nature works and using them for their own ends. They aren't adapting to their environment, they're learning all of the rules of the environment, and putting them to use to create their own environment that better suits their wants and needs. It's one thing to say 'I'm hungry' and go and kill something and eat it. It's another thing to say 'I'm hungry' and setting up a system of husbandry, where you raise animals, slaughter and eat them. That's not adaptation, that's change.

So with this point made, I have to ask; why shouldn't we be fighting 'human nature' (whatever the hell that's suppose to mean)? The ability to rationalize and abstractly contemplate ideas like this is exactly what being human is. It just bewilders me when people compare capitalism to nature and say that we shouldn't fight it, because that's how things are supposed to be (supposed to be? What the fuck? That's almost admitting an intelligent design theory and just... lol). They say we shouldn't fight nature, but that's exactly what we've been doing every step of the way since fire and the wheel. If you didn't want to 'fight nature' you'd still be out in the goddamn woods throwing rocks at birds.

Very compelling points. It is true that "winning" at capitalism might not even happen due to the intellectual strenght of an individual, but by mere chance, but fairness does not exist in nature and neither does it exist in capitalism. Fairness is merely an empathetic construct created by humans, because humans are also naturally empathetic. But their desire for things and social capital conflicts with their empathy, so they must construct silly concepts that hide what they really do. Because they desire that satisfaction (the accumulation) but they do not want to feel bad about this. Psychopaths are those do lack this limitation, but are smart enough to pretend they have it. Indeed, a psychopath is the most efficient creature within capitalism

I absolutely agree that just because something is natural (capitalism) it doesn't mean it's right (of course, in capitalism, right or wrong is irrelevant), but capitalism is a reality. Now, if you're trying to say that it's a reality one must change, then that's a fair point. It would not surprise me that, as there are psychopaths, there are humans who are much more strongly driven by empathy, and thus the world that exists is not to their liking. That is indeed the beauty of humanity, the ability to concuct these abstract machinations in their heads, useful for success, but also useful for self-delusion.

Unfortunately, the scoreboard is quite clear, those who desire a truly empathetic reality are not winning, but capitalism, the success of individual desire over collective soladirity, is at the top. Those who are realistic, pick the winning team.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

No, I'm wrong, you dumbass.

I was really hoping for a more confrontational rebuttal because I had this whole duck eating an alligator argument planned.