02-06-2003 16:23									#1
	First Communist Interfactional (Cominfac) Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Glorious comrades, allow me to introduce myself. I am Gnool, self apointed People's Commisar of the Collective Happiness of the Human Hive. As you probably know, we at the Hive are committed to seeing Marx's centuries old vision of a glorious proletariat paradise become a reality. While we at the Hive are dedicated to this admirable goal, we know that some of you from other factions share this glorious dream, but weren't fortunate enough to come down in the Hive's pod.

The goal of the First Communist Interfactional (Cominfac) is to reach out to fellow communists, socialists, and other assorted left-wingers out there among the fungus, and to engage in thoughtful discussion and debate on all things left.I invite all of you now to join in this glorious discussion of left-wingedness, put forward your ideas, criticise others etc. Let the glorious fun begin!

	02-06-2003 17:10									#2
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Its...........

.........The Return of the Revenge of the Son of the Everlasting CCCP!

For starters I'd like to propose that one is less free in a Free Market, than in a Planned economy

-Jam

	02-06-2003 21:42									#3
	Get a bigger avatar today!

* Cedayon scrambles out to get to the bomb shelter before Archaic arrives*

	03-06-2003 00:10									#4
	Inflate your Upload Space

I think the whole of the UoP or PUT (whatever you wish to call it) is in hiding. They seem to be keeping very much to remselves at the moment

However if he feels like it, I'll take Jamski on

How does having the ability to choose what you wish to buy make you less free? What part of free market (not a corporate run society, but one where the market is actually 'free') makes it less free? How does not having competition, and having (usually) only 1 product of each type to choose, make you more free? And most importantly, what is your Planned economy like? Is everyone given jobs (as per Marxist theory) but not allowed to choose or change jobs? Is there a choice of products to choose from?

If you cannot choose your occupation, you cannot choose what you are doing for most of your waking hours, a considerable constraint on your freedom. If you cannot choose what you buy, then you have reduced choice with the products you consume, another constraint on freedom.

So tell me Jam, how are you less free in a Free Market than in a Planned economy?

	03-06-2003 00:42									#5
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Archaic, GT and I had a debate way back on that. A debate about socialization and internalization of capitalist values, and about determinism. Do you want me to dig it up?

	03-06-2003 01:14									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

@ Drogue : I'm glad you used all those wink smilies. Yes - it was a deliberate troll to start some debate As I argued (at great and boring length) in the old CCCP thread that it was a logical imposiblility to be "more free" or "less free" - one is either free, or one is not - my proposal that "one is less free in a Free Market, than in a Planned economy" is obviously rubbish.

However - on the same grounds one can argue that it is not possible for either Planned or FM to be more or less free than one another. This demonstrates the inaccuracy of the name "Free Market" - when what is meant is "Deregulated Market"

@ Maniac : Please don't - I still dream about that thread.... there was a really funny post (from you or Ced?) where Archaic argued with a YEC, represented as smilies.... if you care to search those thoses lighter gems out.... would be much appreciated by the people who missed the "fun" last time.

-Jam

	03-06-2003 01:49									#7
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Jamski This demonstrates the inaccuracy of the name "Free Market" - when what is meant is "Deregulated Market"

Nothing could be further from the truth. "Free" in free market means no legal entry (and exot) barriers, nothing else. Free markets can be resulated, unregulated, firecly competitive or monopolies, but as long as there's no legal barrier to entry, they're theoretically free.

If you gonna take swipes at the only system in human history to bring properity to the masses, capitalism, please don't do it like an OT teenage commiebopper.

	03-06-2003 02:16									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

*whispers to Moomin*

This is just a bit of fun, mate

-Jam

	03-06-2003 02:20									#9
	Tired of ads?

Fun, you say?

Well see who'll be laughing after the powers that be get anonymous pointers to this outrageous spamming!

Oh, wait. This is a DG. Sorry. Carry right on!

	03-06-2003 02:44									#10
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Well, this is really just a normal OT thread hidden in the safe home of the ACDG womb.

-Jam

	03-06-2003 03:16									#11
	Suffering from ads?

quote: there was a really funny post (from you or Ced?) where Archaic argued with a YEC, represented as smilies.... if you care to search those thoses lighter gems out.... would be much appreciated by the people who missed the "fun" last time.

I found it in The Everlasting CCCP ! thread:

--------
*imagines an Archaic v. YEC encounter*

YEC:
...
Archaic: ... ...
...
YEC: ... ...
...
Archaic: ... ...
...
YEC: ...
...
Archaic:
...
Both:
...
(further degeneration).

*shudders*

That must have been ugly
----------

If new ACDG members would like to read some of those... "fun" discussions, I suggest you rearrange your forum to show threads sorted by number of replies in descending order, from the beginning. As those discussions were all quite lengthy, all the debate threads will be on page one and two. And after you've read all the discussions, you'll understand why a multiple team game was better than one big common ACDG.

quote: prosperity to the masses = capitalism

Great joke!!!


Maniac

	03-06-2003 03:17									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: If you gonna take swipes at the only system in human history to bring properity to the masses, capitalism, please don't do it like an OT teenage commiebopper.

Firstly, I assume you mean prosperity. Secondly, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Let us look at the glorious US for an example; a place where the top 1% of the population controls more wealth than the bottom 95%. This is also the nation that brings you for profit heath care, lacklustre education services, and, generally, a poor quality of life for the majority of people. If one uses the UN Human Development Index one sees that nations which have adopted a balanced fiscal policy, maintained a conservative monetary policy, and followed more along the lines of socialism in determining government regulation, ownership, and taxation, tend to do the best in terms of overall development. Now, not to toot my own horn, but take Canada for example. This year we ranked 3rd in the world on that index (down from 1 where was had been sitting for a good number of years). We experience low inflation, the highest GDP growth in the G-8, a massive trade surplus, and, while the US is sinking in a 500 billion dollar deficit, we are projected to gain a multibillion dollar federal surplus this year (no thanks to evil protectionist measures being taken by the US). But yes, a deregulated market is by no means the best system. A system which has capitalist elements to it but leans to the left has been shown to yield more consistent and wide spread results.

- Rokossovky

	03-06-2003 03:28									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Maniac That's the one I was thinking of

They don't make threads like that anymore

-Jam

	03-06-2003 03:48									#14
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: a place where the top 1% of the population controls more wealth than the bottom 95%

It isn't that extreme. Still, according to this thread the top 1% own 34% of the wealth, and the lowest 95% 44.7% of the wealth. And if you look at the entire world population, which you should since there is a constant trend towards globalization, the wealth discrepancy is even greater.
In any case, I would say it is capitalism with socialist accents (socialism/social-democracy in other words) that brought prosperity to the masses. Not simply "capitalism" on itself. Everyone knowing something about the conditions during the industrial revolution should know that. I don't know how things went elsewhere, but in Europe it took decades of struggle by the masses to gain all the rights and prosperity we have now.

	03-06-2003 03:50									#15
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Regardless, as you pointed out the gap is wide and unnacceptable.

	03-06-2003 04:35									#16
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Drogue I think the whole of the UoP or PUT (whatever you wish to call it) is in hiding. They seem to be keeping very much to remselves at the moment

yes, that's what The Gorilla wants you to think

	03-06-2003 05:33									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I generally refuse to get caught up in 'capitalism v socialism ' debates because there is seemingly enough evidence and counter evidence for each side to keep attacking the other, without having to consider a third possibility and because to do so,that would be loss of face.

Yet to my view there are other ways to describe the patterns of human behaviour and power in the world.

To reduce world politics and political dynamic to simple capitalist v socialist diatribe is an injustice to the diversity of human political thinking.

Yes the thread, referred to was funny at the time, but also a severe turn off for those not doing politics/ political theory. If I remember participation in the DG dropped sharply.

I also remember that quite innocent threads on non controversial items suddenly became embroiled in Cap/Soc debates.

So yeah, if you want to have a debate, do it somewhere off centre and keep to your own discussion threads, without hijacking. (I suppose that was what Gnool was attempting here).

Remember the masters of hijacking are the pirates, so don't get us started.

	03-06-2003 06:34									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Attachment: prop.jpg
This has been downloaded 73 time(s).

	03-06-2003 06:54									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Jamski @ Drogue : I'm glad you used all those wink smilies. Yes - it was a deliberate troll to start some debate As I argued (at great and boring length) in the old CCCP thread that it was a logical imposiblility to be "more free" or "less free" - one is either free, or one is not - my proposal that "one is less free in a Free Market, than in a Planned economy" is obviously rubbish.

Actually, as I recall, you did concede that it was possible to be "closer to freedom" or "further from freedom"; you only objected to the phrase "more free" on semantic grounds, and the only reason I preferred to use that phrase was that it's the commonly used one; it makes no difference to the actual meaning.

Oh, and I still don't think that freedom is actually indivisible, if for no other reason than because if one does accept it as such, then one is not free under any circumstances and hence, logicially speaking, there's no difference between the freest democracy and the most vicious dictatorship.

	03-06-2003 09:32									#20
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Laissez-faire markets are bull. Most of the men "at the top" are only in it to make a buck and to h*** with the rest of the world. One just has to take a long look at all the corporate executives in America today to see the type of greed that free-market economy's fester (sorry to beat a dead horse, but it's the most prevalent example).

Laissez-faire= Planned=

	03-06-2003 09:36									#21
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Frankychan Laissez-faire markets are bull. Most of the men "at the top" are only in it to make a buck and to h*** with the rest of the world. One just has to take a long look at all the corporate executives in America today to see the type of greed that free-market economy's fester (sorry to beat a dead horse, but it's the most prevalent example). Laissez-faire= Planned=

Maybe you ought to go take a look at the Brezhenevs in the USSR and the kind of sh*t they got up to before attacking free markets for the same thing. It would be interesting to compare the figures for how much communist apparatchiks have stolen in Planned economies vs. how much corrupt CEOs have stolen in capitalist ones...

	03-06-2003 09:56									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I'm not saying that Planned is without faults, because I know it is. Regardless, I think Planned economics can be a better system IF the people in charge of running it have an altruistic nature. All this ulterior motive stuff just isn't worth it, IMHO.

But when you have some body whose see's how much money they can make through illicit means, no matter what type of system they fall under, you're going to have corruption of some sort. I'm still a supporter of planned (or for the less radical, semi-Planned) economies.

(good discussion btw )

	03-06-2003 09:57									#23
	Got spare money?

Planned economics isn't so good if you're the guy in the factory job that would be unnecessary if you used modern technology and didn't insist on 100% employment.

	03-06-2003 10:07									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Frankychan I'm not saying that Planned is without faults, because I know it is. Regardless, I think Planned economics can be a better system IF the people in charge of running it have an altruistic nature. All this ulterior motive stuff just isn't worth it, IMHO.

Well, even without going into the utter idiocy of constructing a system which will only work if the people at the top are nice and stay that way... Planned remains an inferior system because there's no effective means for demand and supply to interact. If everything is monopolized (and that's what happens under Planned), then the guys at the top produce X number of product Y, but they have no real way of knowing if they produced to much or too little, or how much they should have produced. Moreover, there's no real reason for them to do so except a sense of duty, and like I said, it's plain idiocy to create a system which will work only if the people at the top make the effort to keep it running, more so if they've got no particular reason to.

quote: But when you have some body whose see's how much money they can make through illicit means, no matter what type of system they fall under, you're going to have corruption of some sort. I'm still a supporter of planned (or for the less radical, semi-Planned) economies. (good discussion btw )

Well, naturally corruption is going to occur no matter what system you're using, but a Planned economy lends itself to corruption with extraordinary efficiency, as it effectively centralizes all the economic decision-making into watever body does the planning, and leaves the bureaucrats with no real incentive to actually do do their jobs efficiently (except the threat of being sacked by your bosses, but they don't have any more reason to do their jobs well than their subordinates do).

	03-06-2003 13:51									#25
	Inflate your Upload Space

"absolute power corrupts absolutely" - a small amount of people with a lot of money is bad. This applies for both free market economies (where the few at the top of a corporation have lots of money, and money is power, therefore they have lots of power and are dangerous) and Soviet-style planned economies (where an elite few are in charge of the entire economy, and when you throw a police state in to boot you get far too much power in the hands of far too many). The "true" idea of socialism sees socialism as "economic democracy", where "the people" control the economy, either directly or through a representative system. We at the Hive strive for true socialism, and that's what makes us so glorious.

	03-06-2003 15:34									#26
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Jamski However - on the same grounds one can argue that it is not possible for either Planned or FM to be more or less free than one another. This demonstrates the inaccuracy of the name "Free Market" - when what is meant is "Deregulated Market"

Exactly. Free Market does not state explicitly that the people are free, it states that the market ios free. There may be no mroe or less free, but the market itself is free under FM, and not under Planned, where it is controlled. Not saying one is better than the other (I think we all know which one that is ) but a Free Market means that the market is Free, and Planned means that the market is controlled, or Planned. If you remove the regulations of the people, then the people becpme free. If you remove the regulations of the market, then the market becomes free. Thus a deregulated market is a free market

All hail the market GooglieGod



Whoes YEC?

	03-06-2003 15:36									#27
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Whoes YEC?

A YEC is a Young Earth Creationist - one of those people who think that Genesis is literally correct and that any contrary evidence must have been planted by God to confuse us (or by the devil, or invented by scientists who want to destroy Christianity).

	03-06-2003 15:39									#28
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Gnool The "true" idea of socialism sees socialism as "economic democracy", where "the people" control the economy, either directly

And that my friends, is also a 'true' free market. Where the people control the market directly. However FM tends towards corporatism, and Socialism tends towards autocratic communism

Unless of course, you join the CyCon, where the uber-rational and ultra-intelligent brains of ours bypass all those human foibles and means we get a true economic democracy. Whether running FM or Planned, we reach the paradigm

	03-06-2003 17:44									#29
	Put an end to popups!

I would equate free market economics with economic anarchism than democracy. Democracy means that any decisions are made with the approval of the majority of the people. By economic democracy I mean something like "ok we've got a GDP of $123 billion, how should we spend it" and getting everyone to decide how they want it spent, rather than having the government spend their share, microsoft spending their share, the small business down the road spending their share etc.

To put it simply - Capitalism = money being controlled on an individual level. Socialism = money being controlled on a "collective" level.

	03-06-2003 18:07									#30
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Actually, as I recall, you did concede that it was possible to be "closer to freedom" or "further from freedom"; you only objected to the phrase "more free" on semantic grounds, and the only reason I preferred to use that phrase was that it's the commonly used one; it makes no difference to the actual meaning.

Let's run round the argument again for the "benefit" of new readers....

GeneralTacticus - Makes a comparison that something is "more free"
Jamski - Objects that it is not possible to be "more free"
GT - Yes it is.
Jam - No its not, one is either free, or one is not.
GT - If I was in prison, and then released, I would be "more free than before"
Archaic - OWNED!!!!!!!!
Jam - I disagree. Freedom is a binary function, one is either free, or one is not free. One should say "closer to freedom" or "further from freedom"
GT - OK, maybe you're right, but this is just a semantic argument.
Jam - Yes, but semantics are important.
GT - I was using the common expression, "more free" to mean "closer to freedom" - that's the sense in which everyone uses it. Everyone say's that the glass is either half full or half empty.
Jam - But I say that the glass is either full or it is empty or it is closer or further from one of these states.
GT - But that's just you being pedantic and semantic.
Jam - True, but these things are important to me, to make sure we are actually discussing the same thing, and that we mean the same things by our words
GT - Whatever, it has the same meaning whatever words you use. OK, let's actually get on with this disussion.... whatever it was about
Jam - Well, actually it doesn't, but......but let's get on shall we.

That was about it, in short, if I recall correctly. GT?

-Jam