News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Greetings

Started by Hoxha Cat, January 02, 2022, 08:54:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Hoxha Cat

Quote from: drunkenshoe on January 26, 2022, 03:01:06 PM
Yes, it is theistic. It suggests humans have learned to be greedy in some artificial way. ?

Yeah it is nauseating. Men do not like it either. Human culture = Mad Max Fury Road in a nutshell. And then look at socialists. We are doomed.
Look at ignorant bootlickers to the Capitalist ruling class and the bourgeoisie, individuals who are brainwashed by them and foolishly sell their labour to them for a meager wage whilst the Capitalists make billions, that is what dooms humanity and the planet as a whole especially as Capitalism leads to immens overproduction and Under-Consumption and pollution as a result.

Hoxha Cat

Quote from: drunkenshoe on January 26, 2022, 03:01:06 PM
Yes, it is theistic. It suggests humans have learned to be greedy in some artificial way. ?

Yeah it is nauseating. Men do not like it either. Human culture = Mad Max Fury Road in a nutshell. And then look at socialists. We are doomed.
I'm not a Socialist, I'm a Communist because my end goal isn't Socialism but the eventual achievement of Communism and a Communist-Society and world through Socialism as a temporary transitory stage.

Shiranu

Quote from: drunkenshoe on January 26, 2022, 02:51:15 PM
That sounds like an exaggerated romanticized notion, imho. People in small groups can learn to act according to the benefit of the family, and be greedy, ambitious... Especially when survival is in question which was often. They are not stupid. That's why human culture invented politics and social roles, key roles, side roles...etc.

Do you have a link or some source?



https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201105/how-hunter-gatherers-maintained-their-egalitarian-ways

"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Shiranu

Quote from: ProletarianBanner on January 26, 2022, 02:48:25 PM
I wasn't saying, implying, nor attempting to imply that it was taught as if by some nonsensical deity, it was rather something that developed, this doesn't mean it's natural.

So it developed unnaturally?
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

Hoxha Cat

Quote from: Shiranu on January 26, 2022, 03:23:19 PM
So it developed unnaturally?
I'm saying it's not human nature... As in it's not inherent, it's not instinct or anything of the sort.

Mike Cl

Quote from: Shiranu on January 26, 2022, 03:22:57 PM

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201105/how-hunter-gatherers-maintained-their-egalitarian-ways

This article---https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy--dovetails with the one above.

Apparently what we call a 'family unit' helped end the egalitarian ways of the hunter/gatherers and helped usher in the era of patriarchy that we are in now.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Mike Cl

Quote from: Mike Cl on January 26, 2022, 12:17:46 PM
You keep saying that.  Can you give any examples?  I don't think that that is accurate.  I don't think hunter-gatherer societies were egalitarian.
I guess I'll have to walk that back.  Apparently most, if not all, hunter-gatherer groups were egalitarian.  Learning is fun. :)
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Mike Cl

Quote from: ProletarianBanner on January 26, 2022, 12:47:25 PM
as Engels worded it and a gift economy "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" as Marx had said.

My problem with this saying, is that I think it is impossible to determine.  Who or what defines what my 'needs' are.  Many would say that my computer would not fill a 'need'.  But I think it does.  So, who determines what my needs are???  And who decides what my 'abilities' are?  What if I was good at building widgits, yet hated doing the work.  Yet my society has a great use for them--would I be told to keep making them?  If so, who would be telling me this.  I don't think a 'gift' society is workable.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Blackleaf

Quote from: ProletarianBanner on January 26, 2022, 02:44:33 PM
Listen screw you, why would you think I wouldn't be here?!

Because you talk about only one thing. You don't contribute to any threads other than this one, the one you made to complain about this forum being "stupid," and any other threads you could use as a platform for pro-Communist talking points. How long can this go on before you get bored and move on?
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville--

Hydra009


drunkenshoe

#70
Quote from: ProletarianBanner on January 26, 2022, 04:42:43 PM
I'm saying it's not human nature... As in it's not inherent, it's not instinct or anything of the sort.

You know those people who say 'organic' and 'energy' 50 times a day? What they think 'organic' is like what you think 'natural' is. Do you follow that? Human nature is what humans develop under any circumstances. If they can develop and do that, it is in their nature. If you think humans have some set of defined 'natural' traits with boxes to check, you either do not understand evolution or have some distorted, idealistic vision of humans which of the latter by the way is very common among in socialists.

Calling an adult, 'communist' is absurd. It is like calling a child 'Jedi' because he thinks it's awesome! It's either socialist or Jedi. Pick one.
"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

drunkenshoe

#71
Quote from: Shiranu on January 26, 2022, 03:22:57 PM

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201105/how-hunter-gatherers-maintained-their-egalitarian-ways

Thanks. Yeah, I remember something like this. I'm reluctant about this. First, because there is something I recognise here. We live this situation with early modern Europe all the time guys, hunter gatherers? You kidding? It sounds a bit positively anachronistic to me. Also a few things poke my eye.  In the first place, why do we assume that what is egalitarian for us is also the same to people who lived in survival mod tens of thousands years ago, under completely different circumstances?

See, egalitarianism is very important to us and we have arrived here in a very long time with a very hard process. Awareness of the past, present and future. And that things can be changed for people for today and tomorrow for the better because people can do this. Most importantly what happens when there is no egalitarian structure or even a fight, push about this. But just around the second corner back with a few hundred years, people can't even imagine this even though they are drowning in shit. We know that people living in the Middle Ages basically thought that the past was the same as the present they live, and expected the future to be so. It's not wrong to say that until the French Revolution, people didn't know that the future was something that could be shaped by them. This process is actually a terrible shock, a painful crisis which we call enlightenment. E: the age part seemed too much while reading.

People living with cycles of nature, do not need an awareness like that. (Well, we can envy them.) See, there is a description of the expectation of how a person should be or behave - a common trait of old world human history- and this is actually the other way around saying there is rigidity and why not, it's about survival. We often confuse what is important for people living in some time in the past and what is important for us. Being egalitarian doesn't mean anything to people roughly back from 300 years ago -actually much less- which makes the egalitarian. The awareness makes it real. Social equality is a result of abstract thought in theory and ironically the hypermodern minds are the last to grasp that I feel.

Long story short, may be there is a need of another concept for what's meant as 'egalitarian' here. (Ironically, generally I'm strictly against creating new concepts.) Because it's copy pasting our understanding of that -and maybe also a bit of our longing- to the beautiful, symmetric simple and real natural life we fantasize. I mean just thinking about it is therapeutic, can you deny that? Otherwise, it is just death from anything in a week.

"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

Hoxha Cat

#72
Quote from: drunkenshoe on January 27, 2022, 12:49:03 AM
You know those people who say 'organic' and 'energy' 50 times a day? What they think 'organic' is like what you think 'natural' is. Do you follow that? Human nature is what humans develop under any circumstances. If they can develop and do that, it is in their nature. If you think humans have some set of defined 'natural' traits with boxes to check, you either do not understand evolution or have some distorted, idealistic vision of humans which of the latter by the way is very common among in socialists.

Calling an adult, 'communist' is absurd. It is like calling a child 'Jedi' because he thinks it's awesome! It's either socialist or Jedi. Pick one.
Listen bud, just because I do something doesn't mean it's common among leftists, I could argue such nonsense along with the use of logical fallacies is very common with supporters of Capitalism.

I am not a Socialist because I advocate for Communism, yes Socialism is used as a temporary transitory stage to achieve it, but it's not the end goal.

A lack of understanding of evolution is quite common with conservatives and the supporters of Capitalism.

Cassia

Marxist professors do pretty well under capitalism as they send out their converts bursting with student loans and degrees that qualify them to work the Wendy's takeout window. They just know they deserve a better position; I am sure

Hoxha Cat

Quote from: Cassia on January 27, 2022, 10:47:49 AM
Marxist professors do pretty well under capitalism as they send out their converts bursting with student loans and degrees that qualify them to work the Wendy's takeout window. They just know they deserve a better position; I am sure
So what if THEY do well under Capitalism, sure people in first-world nations, the individuals who aren't homeless or in poverty that is, have better qualities of life, but look at the people in third-world nations that are exploited by the first-world Imperialist superpowers and how they live in slums, starve, and don't have access to drinking water.