io9 
Enter your username and password.
San Francisco, 7:16 PM
Fri Nov 27
19 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/10/08
I sure hope this means we'll be getting more "Was Jesus Really an Alien" posts next just for good measure. Or we could always have a Farscape Flame War again? Those are always fun.
11/10/08
I love io9. It's my most visited site, and I don't read all the articles, but that doesn't mean I won't stop visiting it. Don't like it, don't read it. Simple as that.
11/10/08
LOL
11/10/08
RADCAP!!!! OMG!!!1!!
11/10/08
Actually communicating "pleasure"(weird word to use) does help. It tells them what people want to read about and they respond by posting more articles in that interest.
11/10/08
11/10/08
11/10/08
11/10/08
Well tell that to the many people who have had their homes foreclosed by the hand of capitalism. What do you suppose we do to fix the people that fall through capitalism's cracks? Do we help them, which would be socialist, or do we forget about them?
11/10/08
Do you two follow each other all day long?
11/10/08
11/10/08
Fuck. You found me out. Now I have to go over to Jezebel and tell them that Rachel Maddow is a communist.
And after that...Kotaku, where I will tell them that FF7 is the crappiest game of all time.
It's all coming together...
11/10/08
(BTW, Maddow is teh HOT... coming from a straight doode who knows he's got NO CHANCE)
11/10/08
Coming from a straight girl...I loves the Maddow.
11/10/08
11/10/08
Sure, I'll tell them.
Or is it your claim that they should be able to keep the thing they traded for, even though they don't give the other person what they agreed to give him in exchange?
Let's see how you like it if you work for your boss and then he says "Sorry, I can't pay you what I promised. But hey, thanks for the work!" Suddenly you would become the biggest 'capitalist' in the world, shouting "Thief!"
Funny how some people have problems consistently applying principles.
not being able to pay what they agreed to pay in trade for a house - and so the house is taken away.
11/10/08
Well actually, the people in question were promised that they could refinance their homes after they were encouraged to buy them. You might try doing research on the subject rather than taking a few philosophy courses and (poorly) applying them to real life.
Also, you have YET to say what the government can do to fix the problem.
11/10/08
11/10/08
You rule. (So does Annalee)
11/09/08
sure, talk about politics here. thats alright with me. i hear about politics everywhere else as it is, but this way i can hear what my fellow sci-fi nerds think.
11/09/08
I'd choose "socialism" over the elimination of gay rights and the freedom to choose, any day. And yeah, I actually think it's intriguing to see what my fellow nerds have to say about the world.
11/09/08
Certainly shows the false alternative of that "choice".
11/10/08
Hmm, if we got socialism, then how come my boss has a better car than I do?
Srsly, I think I missed the socialism boat.
And there's no "supposed" elimination of gay rights. It just happened. Check no adoptions for non married adults in Arkansas and Prop 8 in CA. Gay people do not have the same rights as heteros in CA, they are second class citizens.
And, I'm curious. Since you think any socialistic ideas are the devil incarnate, how do you suppose we fix our current financial problems? I'm a liberal, and I hate the bailout, but I don't have an alternative.
It's great to criticize, but do you have a solution?
11/09/08
11/09/08
But you DO have to watch out for Obama *conscripting* kids into government service. He's been saying that explicitly throughout his campaign.
11/09/08
Source please?
11/09/08
Isn't that interesting.
11/09/08
11/10/08
The failed attempt at refutation via the logical fallacy 'resort to ridicule' does nothing to change the fact that it is conscription - slavery - and YOU APPROVE of it.
Well congratulations! You are supporting exactly that evil which both the civil war and the civil rights movement fought so hard to stamp out.
"Change" indeed.
11/10/08
Once again, Source please? Quote maybe? If it's so obvious, give me a quote.
11/10/08
People ridicule you mostly because you're funny to read and generally make little sense. For the record.
And as far as slavery or conscription goes, can I have an example?
11/10/08
As to public school, you must be joking. Public schools haven't even included a civics course since the 70's. Do you also object to the teaching of economics in public schools, because it presents Global Capitalism as the only system worthy of discussion? Do you object to math classes for their rigorous dedication to Pythagorean geometry and the Newtonian Calculus? How exactly do public schools brainwash anyone when most of the children there don't even listen? Indeed, considering the Union's dismal performance in international knowledge competitions, perhaps we could stand to have a slightly more rigorous environment in our public schools.
11/10/08
(And I am sure there will be howls (not necessarily from you AngryL) of 'if there was no government provided knowledge, only the rich would have knowledge'. That argument is as asinine as the claim that 'if there were no government provided shoes (or houses, or clothes, or anything else), then only the rich would have shoes.')
11/10/08
No, shoes are objects, Education is an investment of time and energy but professional individuals. Do you really believe that there should be no government schools? Because this country would definety not be improved by uch an act. Do you believe otherwise? Do you have a solution to the problem of government run schools?
Once again. No solution, no facts.
Keep it coming radcap, people are only laughing at you. Probably me too for egging you on, but hey, I am an egger.
11/09/08
I don't need IO9 to discuss socialism, capatialism, or whateverism. There are enough websites for people that enjoy self-flagellation and the copout that all science fiction is political is a little too pretentious.
I read IO9 for enjoyment and entertainment. I don't expect fiction to reflect reality and I do not expect the outcomes of fiction to demonstrate the truth or viability or any philosophy, religion or science. I expect fiction to be entertaining and that's it. So cut the politics. The new politics of division are only enjoyed by the sadomasochist and they aren't enough of them to support the advertisers that pay for IO9 and it's employees.
11/09/08
11/10/08
11/10/08
11/10/08
MMMM. Feel that love and tolerance! No hate here. No divisiveness. Just hope and unity!
LOL
11/10/08
God forbid we shame people that do not back up claims with facts!
Everyone's opinion is clearly equal. Even uneducated ones.
11/10/08
11/10/08
The problem is the hypocrisy. 'I hate anyone who doesn't tolerate my ideas!' That is as 'divisive' as one can get, yet that is what you and your "ilk" keep doing. You do Orwell proud.
"In fact wouldn't you be happier living on a little island alone?" No. I would be happier living in a nation where the majority weren't gun happy thugs. My problem isn't people. Its the thuggery many of them can't (or more accurately REFUSE) to rise above that is the problem.
11/10/08
Gun happy thugs? Aren't you always getting on people for not seeing your way? I hate guns, but you might wanna try practicing what you preach.
11/09/08
11/09/08
11/09/08
I would love to see the Bible covered here, as science fiction. As an atheist who grew up in an evangelical household, it fascinates me to no end.
11/09/08
11/10/08
11/09/08
It's stupid to think in a presidential election (especially this one that would have made history either way) that writers won't voice their opinion and be blind to it. No one is making you come here, no one is making you click on every single thread. Go elsewhere or better yet start your own apolitical or right leaning SciFi blog if it bothers you so much.
I think the site goes out of its way not to lay down the hammer, listen to its readers and give ample room to voice disagreement and that's a classy move imo.
11/09/08
Yeah, right on. I'm sick of people acting like io9 owes them something. So you think this site has a liberal bias and it sucks? Don't come here. It's the same reason why I don't troll the Fox News forum. They put this stuff up for entertainment purposes. And newsflash, "entertainment" INCLUDES politics.
11/09/08
Yeah - just like you should hope for a day when calling yourself a Nazi in the United States isn't like calling yourself a fan of child molestation, too.
Because, hey - they are all just systems which enslave and murder human beings. There is nothing wrong with that - certainly not compared to child molestation! So grow up, you provincial hicks, and get over your irrational, divisive fears of dictatorial political systems! You ignorant proles are standing in the way of legitimizing these things once again! You intellectual cavemen are what prevent us from reaching twinkling lights of subjugation. Until you learn to be good little drones, you force those starry aspirations to remain nothing but fiction.
Damn you!
11/09/08
11/09/08
11/09/08
11/09/08
11/09/08
11/09/08
Gotta love such blatant hypocrisy - especially when it is used as a weapon for the promotion of subjugation and against liberty.
True colors certainly do shine through in such cases, don't they? ;)
11/09/08
You're confused. Certainly Marxism-Leninism and Stalinism as practiced in the former Soviet Union, for example, involved slavery and murder, but European Social Democracy does not. Indeed it has a very reasonable claim to being relatively humane. You might also reflect upon the fact that our own country has it's own excesses to live down.
11/09/08
11/09/08
Put simply, a particular slave owner might not murder his slaves at a given point in time. But the *principle* of slavery certainly sanctions such action, if he so chooses. The exact same is true of socialism (no matter which variant one might be referencing). A particular socialist nation might not murder its citizens at a given point in time. But the *principle* of socialism certainly sanctions such action, if its practitioners so chose.
The reason it is true in both instances (slavery and socialism) is because both treat human beings as chattel - as property - to be disposed of by others.
Put simply, like slavery, socialism has EARNED its status as a "dirty word".
Just imagine if Annalee or someone else walked up to an african-american and dared say: "Calling oneself a proponent of slavery in the US is, to a lot of people, like calling yourself a fan of child molestation. I do hope that at some point in the future, we can talk about having slavery and being slave owners again without all this nasty rage". She would be lucky if rage was the ONLY thing directed her way. And as that response would not be at all surprising OR unjustified, neither is the outrage at her current comments.
11/09/08
If you look up mass generalizations and faulty logic you'll see a big honkin' picture of "radcap" listed.
That is all.
11/09/08
Too bad the blatant attempt at intellectual dishonesty via evasion was identified. In other words, the attempt didn't work. As I have shown, socialism, like slavery, has EARNED its status as a "dirty word". If evlsushi believes *either* is proper, he is free to *try* to rebut the argument presented. Or he can continue to demonstrate his irrationality and provide engage in more ad homs.
So which will it be? A rational argument - or an irrational personal attack? We all wait with baited breath.
11/10/08
11/10/08
11/10/08
11/10/08
11/10/08
11/10/08
"Was FDR a socialist too?"
Yes.
"Did the New Deal bring about slavery..."
Yes.
"...and murder?" Indirectly, yes. But this question is evidence that bitsy didn't even bother reading my post. This is like asking "Did a particular slave owner murder his slaves? No? Then slavery doesn't sanction the murder of slaves." LOL
"why is now any different?"
It's worse now actually. Because on top of FDR's socialism, we have LBJ's fascism, Kennedy's socialism, Nixon's fascism, Clinton's socialism, and both Bush's socialism.
"Palin is more socialist than Obama is." No. They are indeed BOTH socialists. But Obama is the more consistent one - and proceeds from more consistent Marxist principles (ie "from each according to his abilities; to each according to his needs" - which is a direct principle of slavery).
"When people attack socialism I don't see red or blue, I just see stupid."
And back to the ad homs.
--
So - to recap bitsy's post:
Arbitrary assertion (ie claim with no argument provided as support)
Personal attack.
Personal attack
Personal attack
Arbitrary assertion
Questions against opposing view - and arbitrary assertions as supposed answers.
Personal attack
Arbitrary assertion.
Arbitrary assertion -and- personal attack
Personal attack
Personal attack
It really is amazing how many words a person can write and yet never ONCE engage in rational argumentation.
Emotionalists of the world, UNITE!
You have nothing to lose but the rationality you have already abandoned!
11/10/08
11/10/08
Your problem is that you are mistaking fascism for socialism, when they are two distinct ideas. For reference, fascism is the idea that the government is more important than the individual. Socialism is the idea that the government owns businesses. In practice, socialist countries usually only control things related to infrastructure.
The idea that the government treats individuals like commodities is not unique to socialism. To a business, you are a consumer. To an employer, you are a worker. To a politician or a marketer, you are part of a demographic. It is quite easy and common to reduce a person to a unit. At its worst, a socialist country is capable of everything you said. But then again, that can be true of other government systems.
The intent of socialism is that the government can and should help its people as necessary, rather than leaving them to fend for themselves. Universal health care, for instance, is used in Europe because they believe that health care is a right, not a privilege only for those that can afford it. It also serves to improve efficiency where capitalism has proven wasteful. Imagine if every company wanted to build and control their own personal power lines, sewers, roads, etc.
Yes, socialism can be twisted as a way to give the government too much power. But that is about the same as saying Zimbabwe or Iraq under Saddam are representative of democracy.
Capitalism and socialism each have their advantages and disadvantages. While I have my beliefs, neither is right or wrong. However, the idea that murder is necessarily acceptable in a socialist system is so completely wrong that it took me several minutes to figure out where exactly to begin.
11/10/08
It's not personal, you just use a lot of generalizations and no exact circumstances to back them up. Pretty simple actually. If anything, I'm sure people would appreciate you give actual examples of your thoughts rather than make a blanketed statement.
I've made no statement about socialism either way, mostly because you keep repeating the same ol' comments about it being a dirty word without saying why.
11/10/08
And the principle that the collective may dispose of the individual as it sees fit, rather than as that individual sees fit is slavery. Capitalism does not adhere to that principle. Only socialism does.
"capitalism holds the same capacity." The principle of capitalism is not that each individual is the property of the collective, to be disposed of as it sees fit. The principle of capitalism is that each individual is sovereign and thus may only be disposed of *by* that individual.
So slavery is the principle of socialism. Capitalism stands in opposition to that principle.
"humans are viewed only as commodity" I am terribly sorry that you do not like voluntary exchange of ideas or services between individuals to the mutual agreed benefit of those individuals. However, nothing in that is either slavery or a sanction of murder, as you claim.
"5% of us have almost all the wealth while 95% of us squabble over the little that remains" Uneven distribution of wealth via voluntary trade is a sanction of slavery and murder? Wow. Your definition of those terms must simply be "I don't 'like' X condition, therefore it must be slavery. Because my emotional state is the standard of these things!"
"Look what privatization did to health care in this country." Bwahahahahahahahahahah! After banking, the health care system is one of the most heavily socialized industries in the nation. To claim they are even CLOSE to private - that individuals are free to interact voluntarily without government initiation of force between them - is simply laughable.
But I do love the arguments you try to provide. They are the EXACT same one's used by the South to justify the continuation of slavery. 'OMG - if we didn't have slavery, then no one would have textiles and conditions would deteriorate to a point of mass starvation and death! Freedom? We can't PERMIT people to be free! Freedom just produces disaster! It CAN'T produce prosperity. Prosperity can ONLY be produced at the point of a gun and under a master's lash!"
The arguments weren't rational then - and they aren't rational now.
"Help me understand how where we are now is better than bringing some socialist ideas into the mix..."BRINGING them into the mix? As if they aren't ALREADY there??? WOW!
Since this seems to be news to you, allow me to let you in on a little fact: the US does NOT have a capitalist system. We have what is called a mixed system. It is primarily fascist in its form ('private' ownership with govt control), with socialism and welfare statism thrown into that mix.
If you believe we have even CLOSE to a system of capitalism, that simply shows how woefully misunderstood the concept of capitalism is here.
"I saw you attacking community service elsewhere in this thread. How is community service bad?" If you don't know why pointing a gun at a CHILD'S head and forcing him to serve others is bad, you are truly lost. You are truly beyond comprehending any of this.
"It sounds to me like you want to count your money all alone in a dark corner and not be expected to contribute to the rest of society in any way." While that is an absurd straw man, suppose it were true - that I wanted to sit all alone in a dark corner. By what right do you claim to force me to do anything else? By what right do you claim to force me to 'contribute' - to act, do, say, or think, anything I do not want to do?
Only a man who thinks I am his property, to dispose of as he sees fit, would FEEL that he may compel me to do any of these things.
That is the mentality of a slave master. "You WILL "contribute" to the Plantation! You will NOT go off and do whatever you want! I OWN you. You are MY property and you will do what *I* want you to do. How DARE you even think you should do anything else. You try and I will use the whip on you - and with righteous pleasure too!!!"
"Where does this fear of opposing ideas come from? Oh! Were you molested by Karl Marx? Show me on the doll where the big, bad socialist touched you!"
And then you resort right back to form - right back to the personal attacks. You don't like the idea of slavery? I must therefore resort to logical fallacies to defend against your arguments. Because the appeal to emotions is superior to the appeal to reason! A slave has no use of reason. A slave simply must accept the whim of his master!
11/10/08
"why is now any different?"
It's worse now actually. Because on top of FDR's socialism, we have LBJ's fascism, Kennedy's socialism, Nixon's fascism, Clinton's socialism, and both Bush's socialism.
Those are some bold statements. Examples please?
11/10/08
"Look what privatization did to health care in this country." Bwahahahahahahahahahah! After banking, the health care system is one of the most heavily socialized industries in the nation. To claim they are even CLOSE to private - that individuals are free to interact voluntarily without government initiation of force between them - is simply laughable."
That must be why our banking system is so strong now. Oh wait.
"I saw you attacking community service elsewhere in this thread. How is community service bad?" If you don't know why pointing a gun at a CHILD'S head and forcing him to serve others is bad, you are truly lost. You are truly beyond comprehending any of this.
When does this happen? Source please?
"Where does this fear of opposing ideas come from? Oh! Were you molested by Karl Marx? Show me on the doll where the big, bad socialist touched you!"
And then you resort right back to form - right back to the personal attacks. You don't like the idea of slavery? I must therefore resort to logical fallacies to defend against your arguments. Because the appeal to emotions is superior to the appeal to reason! A slave has no use of reason. A slave simply must accept the whim of his master! "
I just think it was a joke.
11/10/08
"I'm sure people would appreciate you give actual examples of your thoughts rather than make a blanketed statement." I have identified that socialism is slavery (and sanctions murder). And I have identified the principles of socialism which support this claim. If you believe I am wrong - that the principles are not those of socialism, or that they do not support my claim, then you need to make these claims and provide support for them. Until you do so, ALL you are doing is engaging in personal attacks via arbitrary assertion.
11/10/08
Um, so you DON'T have an example.
Ok, just checking.
11/10/08
"I support the efforts of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution between a man and a woman, just as we did in my home state of Arizona. I do not believe judges should be making these decisions."
From this gathered that Mccain does not feel same sex partnerships should be legally recognized. I think not recognizing that is a form of bigotry. So, I believe Mccain is a bigot.
See? Now you go.
11/10/08
"For reference, fascism is the idea that the government is more important than the individual. Socialism is the idea that the government owns businesses." While I dispute these definitions, they still make my case. On what basis does a socialist system declare that it must own businesses - ie must own the productive effort and dictate the productive lives of the individual? Only on the basis that it may dispose of the individual as property. That the individual is chattel, to be used by it.
That is the exact principle you identify as fascism.
"The idea that the government treats individuals like commodities is not unique to socialism." NOT true. A capitalist government does NOT treat individuals as commodities. It does not buy and sell them. It leaves each individual FREE. Each individual may interact or refrain from interacting with other individuals as he sees fit. The government is not his master under capitalism. He is is own master.
"a socialist country is capable of everything you said."At its BEST, a socialist system is still a system of slavery.
"that can be true of other government systems." No. If a capitalist government tries to engage in either slavery or murder, it is VIOLATING its principles. When a socialist government engages in slavery or murder, it is acting in ACCORD with its principles. For the capitalist principle is that the individual is sovereign. The socialist principle is that the individual is subject - to something else that is sovereign.
"The intent of socialism is that the government can and should help its people as necessary, rather than leaving them to fend for themselves." The justifications provided for enslaving individuals are varied - and ultimately meaningless. WHY one wants to subjugate another human being - to violate his right to his life, his liberty, his property, and his pursuit of happiness - do nothing to change the fact that the individual is NOT the property of another.
"health care is a right" Health care is the effort provided by other human beings. The claim that health care is a right is the claim that the lives and efforts of other human beings is a right - that slavery is a right.
There is no such thing as the right to enslave. That is a contradiction in terms.
"It also serves to improve efficiency where capitalism has proven wasteful. Imagine if every company wanted to build and control their own personal power lines, sewers, roads, etc." The idea that competition - the debate between who thinks they can do something better than someone else - is 'inefficient' - and that the decrees of a dictator declaring how something must be done regardless of disagreement - is 'efficient' - is the acceptance of the slave principle - and a rejection of both individual freedom and individual rationality. You disagree with the collective? Too bad. The collective must be served and cannot waste ITS recourses on ALLOWING you to do what YOU think is right. On what YOU think is best. On what YOU want. You are not sovereign. So what YOU want is immaterial. To divert time, energy, and resources into YOU pursuing YOUR life and YOUR happiness would be WASTEFUL.
Sorry - the justification of individual sovereignty - of individual rights - of a person's right to his life - is NOT that it serves the ends of others.
"Yes, socialism can be twisted..." Socialism IS twisted in its very nature. The fundamental principle it proceeds from is that the individual is properly SUBJUGATED to something else. When that principle is accepted, then one may do ANYTHING to the individual.
"...neither [socialism or capitalism] is right or wrong."
Then neither murder or self defense is right or wrong. Neither rape or sex is right or wrong. Neither theft nor production is right or wrong. Because the principle which distinguishes each of these things from each other is the same principle which distinguishes socialism from capitalism.
The murderer believes he has the right to dispose of another man's life. The rapist believe he has the right to dispose of another person's body. The thief believes he has the right to dispose of another person's effort. And the socialist believes he has the right to do any of these things.
Such individuals are all essentially the SAME because they accept the same fundamental principle - that other human beings are theirs to dispose of as they see fit.
11/10/08
Do you believe that a true capitalist society would work in today's world? I so, how would you solve the problems that arise by that (see financial crisis)?
11/10/08
Here is a systemic problem that I have seen all throughout your arguments. You have stated that individuals are treated as commodities under socialism, and have drawn your conclusions from that. Here's the thing though; you have never established that socialism is akin to slavery in the first place. You can't make a logical argument from an assumption; it just doesn't work. You need actual evidence, and citing a few fascist countries that had a few things in common with socialism doesn't count. As I said before, it's akin to arguing against democracy and citing Zimbabwe or Iraq under Hussein as an example (voting against the people in power means getting beaten or killed, so it's a democracy in name only).
"On what basis does a socialist system declare that it must own businesses - ie must own the productive effort and dictate the productive lives of the individual? Only on the basis that it may dispose of the individual as property. That the individual is chattel, to be used by it."
You're asking a loaded question, and answering it yourself based off your own assumptions. Perhaps they decided to own a business because it would be unprofitable for a business, and thus would only be done at incredibly high prices? Or perhaps there is too much potential for a greedy monopoly? Or perhaps any number of reasonable answers that has nothing to do with controlling the populace?
" "The idea that the government treats individuals like commodities is not unique to socialism." NOT true. A capitalist government does NOT treat individuals as commodities. It does not buy and sell them. It leaves each individual FREE. Each individual may interact or refrain from interacting with other individuals as he sees fit. The government is not his master under capitalism. He is is own master."
Umm, what? do you think that socialist governments force people to work? That's completely wrong. The only difference between a government run business and a regular business is that the money comes largely from taxes rather than sales, and that the government acts as CEO.
" "that can be true of other government systems." No. If a capitalist government tries to engage in either slavery or murder, it is VIOLATING its principles. When a socialist government engages in slavery or murder, it is acting in ACCORD with its principles. For the capitalist principle is that the individual is sovereign. The socialist principle is that the individual is subject - to something else that is sovereign.
Murder is against capitalism, but slavery in a sense is not. Capitalism says that one group tries sell a service for a price, and another tries to buy a service for price. Enslaving people and selling them sounds capitalistic to me, if you treat the slave in question as a commodity and not a buyer or seller. In fact, capitalistic countries engaged in it. You're thinking of libertarianism, which is closely related to democracy. In fact, there's even such a thing as libertarian socialism!
"health care is a right" Health care is the effort provided by other human beings. The claim that health care is a right is the claim that the lives and efforts of other human beings is a right - that slavery is a right."
Of course it takes effort. You know what's a good motivator to put forth effort? Money. And that's exactly how they get doctors in socialist countries too. The only difference is that where doctors would normally get reimbursed by the patient's insurer, they get it from the government instead. When I made the comment that it's a right, I meant that society believes it's a thing to which all people should be entitled, even if it takes effort. It takes effort to see that people are able to act on their rights to life, liberty, and happiness too. You know how that gets done? People pay taxes, and some of that goes to the police.
" "It also serves to improve efficiency where capitalism has proven wasteful. Imagine if every company wanted to build and control their own personal power lines, sewers, roads, etc." The idea that competition - the debate between who thinks they can do something better than someone else - is 'inefficient' - and that the decrees of a dictator declaring how something must be done regardless of disagreement - is 'efficient' ..."
Notice that all of my examples were matter of infrastructure. In those cases, yes, competition is bad because companies often have a bad record when it comes to cooperating with their competitors. They wouldn't want to share the power lines, or make their networks work together. You'd either end up with five lines going to a house, or a bunch of local monopolies that kept prices artificially high.
I'm not going to bother arguing with the rest of it, since it's all the same thing I have already mentioned. You keep talking about capitalism vs. socialism, but what you're describing is libertarianism vs. fascism. Capitalism and socialism are economic policies. The difference between these two is what kind of part the government has in the economy.
11/10/08
Oh Tiber, stop bringing logic 'round here. It brings nothing but the horrible radcap to shout "Socialism is slavery, therfore Monekys fly out of my butt!" logic.
11/09/08
11/09/08
I replied to her announcement of this with a simple, "Awesome."
11/09/08
11/09/08
We're living in one of the most pivotal and interesting parts of modern history and some people would like to just put their head in the sand and pretend like nothing's happening.
Don't expect io9 to be like that.
11/09/08
And Io9's occasional political posts were usually flavored with parody, and if I recall correctly, always tied in with SF as well. I have no complaints.
11/09/08
11/04/08