Spain's Communist Village Is Making The Rest Of The World Look Bad - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;43125960]Thats still an absolutely minuscule amount of people. On that scale I'm sure you could even get Fascism to work wonderfully.[/QUOTE] you probably could get national socialism to work on that scale till they wipe out half the population [editline]9th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Lachz0r;43128058]yeah this is how i feel, i don't really give a shit about 'your money' or private ownership or anything like that, we have the means to ensure every person on earth can live happily and we don't. capitalism encourages greed and selfishness. and that is wrong to me[/QUOTE] capitalism and morals are two different things.... if a person is kind, and honest, and generous, they will not be a greedy selfish asshole no matter how much money they get, the problem is most of the "new" wealth is very greedy and doesn't really give much back espeacially in places like china and the middle east

[QUOTE=Sableye;43128202]you probably could get national socialism to work on that scale till they wipe out half the population [editline]9th December 2013[/editline] capitalism and morals are two different things.... if a person is kind, and honest, and generous, they will not be a greedy selfish asshole no matter how much money they get, the problem is most of the "new" wealth is very greedy and doesn't really give much back espeacially in places like china and the middle east[/QUOTE] people are generally products of their upbringing and their environment, so when your environment and upbringing is based around the idea that the most important things is making money, gaining material possessions and pretty much GETTIN AHEAD then you'll find most people are going to be greedy and selfish regardless of how much money they get

The government of Andalusia gives them 3Mill every year, and they waste 4Mill, most part of it in personnel (guess who's composed by) who go to work one day of the week, or they don't even go. They support terrorist groups and the guy who's in charge (Sanchez Gordillo) isn't very smart, he supports 100% a social-democrat party in the Andalusian Parliament, besides he's Communist/Marxist. They also give houses to the people that cost 15€/m each one, I think they were between 30-40 sqm. The thing is, they expropriate rural soil, from other people and they build houses there with Junta of Andalusia's money (actually it's money from the EU, Spanish Government and Regional Government). Of course people's happy, they don't care about it right now since they have a house for 15€/m and a slave-like job. But they'll have to pay the debt one of these days.

can those of you that for some reason keep insisting that there are countries that are both socialist and capitalist please stop. simply because you are wrong. sorry for upsetting a lot of you. those who do this are referring to capitalist countries operating with welfare states, known as social democracies. you suddenly think these countries are half socialist or something because the government does something with your taxes? what you are talking about is merely fiscal policy designed to keep your capitalist economy running, so no, it is not socialist. socialism does not want to keep capitalism alive. its goal is to replace it. a country cannot be socialist if it is capitalist, and vice versa. an apple cannot be an orange, or half an orange, or a quarter orange. we will deal with them as absolutes because that is what they are. if you come to me and start arguing that a square is half a circle then i will call you an idiot because that's exactly what you are

[QUOTE=Gentonic;43128545]They support terrorist groups and the guy who's in charge (Sanchez Gordillo) isn't very smart, he supports 100% a social-democrat party in the Andalusian Parliament, besides he's Communist/Marxist.[/QUOTE] What terrorist groups? Are you going to tell me the supermarket raid was a terrorist act or something? Because that's barely considered terrorism. Are you sure that's not fascist propaganda you've been looking at?

[QUOTE=Jorori;43129386]What terrorist groups? Are you going to tell me the [B]supermarket raid was a terrorist act [/B]or something? Because that's barely considered terrorism. Are you sure that's not fascist propaganda you've been looking at?[/QUOTE] Technically they could of bankrupted a store in that area, and be responsible for even more pain and suffering. So yeah, terrorism.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43129487]Technically they could of bankrupted a store in that area, and be responsible for even more pain and suffering. So yeah, terrorism.[/QUOTE] boo hoo

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43129518]boo hoo[/QUOTE] A bunch of kids who finally get a job could now be unemployed because a group which essentially bitches and complains about unemployment, decided to rob the store they worked for. ~irony~

This is kind of unrelated, but I have a question for yawmwen. Do you think that people were happier/better off before civilization?

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43129543]A bunch of kids who finally get a job could now be unemployed because a group which essentially bitches and complains about unemployment, decided to rob the store they worked for. ~irony~[/QUOTE] "i might not be able to buy another yacht, better call this terrorism and bring up unemployed kids or somethin" [QUOTE=Explosions;43129560]This is kind of unrelated, but I have a question for yawmwen. Do you think that people were happier/better off before civilization?[/QUOTE] idk i didn't live back then. i would say that in some ways we might have been better off "uncivilized" than we were for most of human history under civilization. idk how we compare now.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43129580]idk i didn't live back then. i would say that in some ways we might have been better off "uncivilized" than we were for most of human history under civilization. idk how we compare now.[/QUOTE] Do you have any specifics you could mention? I only ask because you mentioned something similar about pre-agricultural societies in another thread a while ago.

So a bunch of kids working at a local store get their jobs dropped because the store is forced to close doors thanks to the loss of merchandise and cash. How does a bunch of kids working in a store relate to yachts..?

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43129659]So a bunch of kids working at a local store get their jobs dropped because the store is forced to close doors thanks to the loss of merchandise and cash. How does a bunch of kids working in a store relate to yachts..?[/QUOTE] because the people who run the supermarkets are rich as fuck

[QUOTE=Explosions;43129629]Do you have any specifics you could mention? I only ask because you mentioned something similar about pre-agricultural societies in another thread a while ago.[/QUOTE] our diet was better off before we invented agriculture. there is some evidence that the average person got to take part in more creative or artistic pursuits during those times too. those aren't really applicable in the "first world" modern age though since we have much better dietary standards and we have a lot more free time thanks to industrialization. however, different problems crop up including alienation from labor which wouldn't have been a problem pre-agriculture. [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43129659]So a bunch of kids working at a local store get their jobs dropped because the store is forced to close doors thanks to the loss of merchandise and cash. How does a bunch of kids working in a store relate to yachts..?[/QUOTE] did this happen?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43129686]including alienation from labor which wouldn't have been a problem pre-agriculture. [/QUOTE] No, you'd be too busy desperately trying to forage 24/7 to not die of starvation. Or you'd be freezing in a cave. Or dying in agony of appendicitis. You seem to have a very, very weirdly positive view of society before specialization of labor allowed us to move beyond cavemen.

[QUOTE=catbarf;43129732]No, you'd be too busy desperately trying to forage 24/7 to not die of starvation. Or you'd be freezing in a cave. Or dying in agony of appendicitis. You seem to have a very, very weirdly positive view of society before specialization of labor allowed us to move beyond cavemen.[/QUOTE] so why not take the good stuff of industrialization like medicine and food surplus and use it to benefit us instead of subjugate us? [editline]10th December 2013[/editline] and i don't have an incredibly positive view of pre-agriculture. i just think it can inform our lives now more than most people think.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43129754]so why not take the good stuff of industrialization like medicine and food surplus and use it to benefit us instead of subjugate us?[/QUOTE] Because the inventions of industrialization wouldn't have been possible without the "alienation from labor"

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;43129773]Because the inventions of industrialization wouldn't have been possible without the "alienation from labor"[/QUOTE] ok and so if it wasn't possible then why can't it be possible now?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43129754]so why not take the good stuff of industrialization like medicine and food surplus and use it to benefit us instead of subjugate us?[/QUOTE] What is that even supposed to mean? You live in the 21st century, where medicine can heal all sorts of diseases that would kill your 11th-century counterpart, and you can live a life other than that of a peasant farmer. 'use it to benefit us instead of subjugate us' is pure rhetoric. It's a meaningless phrase based on nothing but conjuring up emotion.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43128324]people are generally products of their upbringing and their environment, so when your environment and upbringing is based around the idea that the most important things is making money, gaining material possessions and pretty much GETTIN AHEAD then you'll find most people are going to be greedy and selfish regardless of how much money they get[/QUOTE] not true, many many millionares and billionares reach a point in their life where they decide to give back, vanderbelt, ford, rockafeller, gates, the list goes on, they gave back tens of millions in their own projects. nobody could argue that gates wasn't an asshole when he was making his money in fact he fired people for just asking questions after he gave orders,and rockafeller was probably the most cut-throat buisness man ever, but a large amount of millionares have gone back and done tons of philanthropic work

[QUOTE=catbarf;43129821]What is that even supposed to mean? You live in the 21st century, where medicine can heal all sorts of diseases that would kill your 11th-century counterpart, and you can live a life other than that of a peasant farmer. 'use it to benefit us instead of subjugate us' is pure rhetoric. It's a meaningless phrase based on nothing but conjuring up emotion.[/QUOTE] but it subjugates us now. we have little control over our work except on a superficial level. we have little influence in politics. we still kill each other over oil and racism. those things should change. [editline]10th December 2013[/editline] and what's wrong with "conjuring up emotion"?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43129836]but it subjugates us now. we have little control over our work except on a superficial level. we have little influence in politics. we still kill each other over oil and racism. those things should change.[/QUOTE] i'd much rather be subjugated than dying of disease or starvation tbh at least i get facepunch and netflix here!!

[QUOTE=Juniez;43129851]i'd much rather be subjugated than dying of disease or starvation tbh[/QUOTE] let's have neither.

[QUOTE=Juniez;43129851]i'd much rather be subjugated than dying of disease or starvation tbh at least i get facepunch and netflix here!![/QUOTE] why does it always have to be one or the other?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;43129836]but it subjugates us now. we have little control over our work except on a superficial level. we have little influence in politics. we still kill each other over oil and racism. those things should change.[/QUOTE] Oh okay so the invention of medicine and food surplus reduced our influence in politics. As opposed to basically everywhere up until the 18th century, when autocratic monarchies gave us real say in government. You want to run that by me again? This isn't even an argument. You just keep bringing up these random soundbites of rhetoric that have no real substance.

[QUOTE=Sableye;43129828]not true, many many millionares and billionares reach a point in their life where they decide to give back, vanderbelt, ford, rockafeller, gates, the list goes on, they gave back tens of millions in their own projects. nobody could argue that gates wasn't an asshole when he was making his money in fact he fired people for just asking questions after he gave orders,and rockafeller was probably the most cut-throat buisness man ever, but a large amount of millionares have gone back and done tons of philanthropic work[/QUOTE] so basically after they've ensured that they are and will live luxuriously for the rest of their lives they decide to throw money at problems. i think thats just a justification of the amount of greed people need to get to that point. and it's not like billionaires and millionaires make up the majority of the population, what about all the people that don't become billionaires and millionaires who are still shoe-horned into living greed-filled lives lusting after money and luxuries because that's what capitalism tells us is worthwhile? [editline]10th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=catbarf;43129883]Oh okay so the invention of medicine and food surplus reduced our influence in politics. As opposed to basically everywhere up until the 18th century, when autocratic monarchies gave us real say in government. You want to run that by me again? This isn't even an argument. You just keep bringing up these random soundbites of rhetoric that have no real substance.[/QUOTE] what exactly is YOUR argument? 'oh you're against the bad things in our society??? then you must be against all the good things too!'

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43129872]why does it always have to be one or the other?[/QUOTE] because afaik the division of labor and management contributed heavily to the efficiency that brought people out of that 'dying of disease or starvation' stage

[QUOTE=catbarf;43129883]Oh okay so the invention of medicine and food surplus reduced our influence in politics. As opposed to basically everywhere up until the 18th century, when autocratic monarchies gave us real say in government. You want to run that by me again? This isn't even an argument. You just keep bringing up these random soundbites of rhetoric that have no real substance.[/QUOTE] no the invention of food surplus didn't subjugate us. however, capitalist class relations subjugate us today.

[QUOTE=Juniez;43129914]because afaik the division of labor and management contributed heavily to the efficiency that brought people out of that 'dying of disease or starvation' stage[/QUOTE] alright, and why does it have to stay that way?

[QUOTE=Juniez;43129914]because afaik the division of labor and management contributed heavily to the efficiency that brought people out of that 'dying of disease or starvation' stage[/QUOTE] then let us choose it and manage it on our own instead of having it forced by the bourgeoisie.