New Data Shows Just How Unequal Wealth Has Become in the U.S. Since the 80s - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Habsburg;28317061]That doesn't make it capitalist.[/QUOTE] That's exactly my fucking point, way to critically read. I was attacking the method of spreading art in the Renaissance not attempting to use the Renaissance to defend capitalism.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317055]Not if the state funds, promotes, and spreads the art because then they would only support the art they approve of.[/QUOTE] Unless the state you know. Has freedom of speech laws.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28317065]Or all art if the state isn't oppressive. This is not an intrinsic value of communism, stop using the USSR as a reference.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't it just be more effective to allow artists to market their own work in their own individual way through a capitalist economy? [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=imasillypiggy;28317086]Unless the state you know. Has freedom of speech laws.[/QUOTE] What the state funds has absolutely fucking nothing to do with freedom of speech laws.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317063]The libraries buy those computers from companies who market their computers through capitalism and buy their books from authors who were able to produce work because of capitalism. Should I continue?[/QUOTE] Just because they were able to get the computers of off something that used capitalism doesnt mean they could only get it in a capitalist system. your arguments are getting worse.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317098]Wouldn't it just be more effective to allow artists to market their own work in their own individual way through a capitalist economy? [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] What the state funds has absolutely fucking nothing to do with freedom of speech laws.[/QUOTE] Possibly not, artists tend to be poor and many of them die without getting their work widely spread or recognized.

[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;28317111]Just because they were able to get the computers of off something that used capitalism doesnt mean they could only get it in a capitalist system. your arguments are getting worse.[/QUOTE] Not fucking really? The personal computer owes a great deal if not everything to capitalism.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317098]What the state funds has absolutely fucking nothing to do with freedom of speech laws.[/QUOTE] If the state either funds a library or funds people getting personal computers people are going to be able to upload art. [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Strider*;28317121]Not fucking really? The personal computer owes a great deal if not everything to capitalism.[/QUOTE] Remember there is a difference between something that happened in a capitalist state and something that can only happen in a capitalist state. your acting like only capitalists invent stuff.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28317118]Possibly not, artists tend to be poor and many of them die without getting their work widely spread or recognized.[/QUOTE] That happens regardless of the economic system. However only a capitalist economy has the means, the methods, and the resources to spread the work of every artist who tries and succeeds.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317143]That happens regardless of the economic system. However only a capitalist economy has the means, the methods, and the resources to spread the work of every artist who tries and succeeds.[/QUOTE] Didn't we disprove that with the deviant art thing?

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317143]That happens regardless of the economic system. However only a capitalist economy has the means, the methods, and the resources to spread the work of every artist who tries and succeeds.[/QUOTE] You can try and succeed in promoting yourself to the state too. e: And not every artist has the ability to try, and many who try don't succeed.

Is this really all you guys have? I don't even think one good point has been raised from the lot of you. Just a bunch of shaky ungrounded arguments that for the most part have no substance or relevance. [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=imasillypiggy;28317153]Didn't we disprove that with the deviant art thing?[/QUOTE] Deviantart exists through capitalism.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28316823]You have no argument against the statement, you're incapability to argue against me is astounding.[/QUOTE] uhm. you said something as a complete fucking hypothetical, can't back it up, and YOU are calling him stupid? Yeah, I laugh.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28317155]You can try and succeed in promoting yourself to the state too. e: And not every artist has the ability to try, and many who try don't succeed.[/QUOTE] So you think the state should determine which art is worthy of funding and production?

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317166]Is this really all you guys have? I don't even think one good point has been raised from the lot of you. [B]Just a bunch of shaky ungrounded arguments that for the most part have no substance or relevance.[/B] [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] Deviantart exists through capitalism.[/QUOTE] :fuckyou: This is really all that has to be said. [QUOTE=Strider*;28317180]So you think the state should determine which art is worthy of funding and production?[/QUOTE] So you think money and position in life should determine which art is worthy of succeeding?

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317166]Is this really all you guys have? I don't even think one good point has been raised from the lot of you. Just a bunch of shaky ungrounded arguments that for the most part have no substance or relevance.[/QUOTE] Are you talking to yourself or something because we disproved all your arguments. But it seems ryand is to far up there for you to realize that.

Also, Strider, I like how you think that the only alternative to Capitalism is Communism/Fascism. What about free association via partial or total anarchy?

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317098]Wouldn't it just be more effective to allow artists to market their own work in their own individual way through a capitalist economy? [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] What the state funds has absolutely fucking nothing to do with freedom of speech laws.[/QUOTE] Not all artists give a fuck about spreading their art. And it's not that hard to imagine, that you may be right. But no one is debating that. No one has once said, a capitalist system doesn't support art, but people have been debating you on the fact that you seem to think that pure capitalism is the ultimate form of everything, is what's fucking laughable.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28317174]uhm. you said something as a complete fucking hypothetical, can't back it up, and YOU are calling him stupid? Yeah, I laugh.[/QUOTE] I can call you a great deal worse. You should try using logic sometime.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317166]Deviantart exists through capitalism.[/QUOTE] Ok I really dont want to go through this whole thing again. what are you a fish forgetting what we just talked about?

[QUOTE=Pockets;28317185]Also, Strider, I like how you think that the only alternative to Capitalism is Communism/Fascism. What about free association via partial or total anarchy?[/QUOTE] I acknowledge the existence of mixed economies.

[QUOTE=Pockets;28317185]Also, Strider, I like how you think that the only alternative to Capitalism is Communism/Fascism. What about free association via partial or total anarchy?[/QUOTE] No, there is only things that are "the absence of capitalism". nothing is good if it lacks that. Because, seriously, a social democracy or anything similar, doesn't have a free market. [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Strider*;28317205]I acknowledge the existence of mixed economies.[/QUOTE] but you argue in black and white and absolutes. That's not reality. That's not what's going on.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28317196]Not all artists give a fuck about spreading their art. And it's not that hard to imagine, that you may be right. But no one is debating that. No one has once said, a capitalist system doesn't support art, but people have been debating you on the fact that you seem to think that pure capitalism is the ultimate form of everything, is what's fucking laughable.[/QUOTE] I'm not even arguing for pure capitalism right now, I'm arguing for capitalism regardless of the form.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317197]I can call you a great deal worse. You should try using logic sometime.[/QUOTE] When did calling names become logical?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;28317206]No, there is only things that are "the absence of capitalism". nothing is good if it lacks that. Because, seriously, a social democracy or anything similar, doesn't have a free market. [/QUOTE] I never said that, stop putting words in my mouth bro. [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=imasillypiggy;28317217]When did calling names become logical?[/QUOTE] It's not and I never said it was. He seems to often be emotionally affected by what I post however.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317225]I never said that, stop putting words in my mouth bro.[/QUOTE] You said many times that you want a ryand like system and junk like that. But if you are talking about the current argument you are trying to say art is only good in capitalism which is simply not true.

Judging from the raging private messages he sends me and the "humor" he uses to cloud his anger.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317180]So you think the state should determine which art is worthy of funding and production?[/QUOTE] So you think money and position in life should determine which art is worthy of succeeding?

[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;28317245]You said many times that you want a ryand like system and junk like that.[/QUOTE] Who's ryand? [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Xen Tricks;28317256]So you think money and position in life should determine which art is worthy of succeeding?[/QUOTE] No I think that ALL art should be given the chance to succeed commercially. What people like naturally will succeed.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317260]Who's ryand? [editline]27th February 2011[/editline] No I think that ALL art should be given the chance to succeed commercially. What people like naturally will succeed.[/QUOTE] Not true, often what is heavily promoted by galleries and agencies and other such succeed more than other artists, regardless of talent or if people like the other more, mainly because they're not aware of it due to the artist not having the funds to promote his work and get it in the public eye.

[QUOTE=Strider*;28317260] What people like naturally will succeed.[/QUOTE] This would also be true without capitalism except there wouldn't be any advertisement and junk like that to interfere with it. If you really wanted the best piece of art to succeed then you would want everyone piece to have an even playing field.