Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Capitalism

2

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry you've lost me now, what red books? Are you on about Plato?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Dont worry about it Krazed..Just my little marxist rant there. Just my attempt at sarcasm...Ignore me.

    It holds true though. If these people are being so horrifically oppressed then why are the only people that complain, well off English students? I dont see the people in those 3rd world factories complaining about the huge amounts of cash they are getting.

    If these people wanted to get out from under their corrupt govt which allows the capitalist companies into their country then they would have done something about it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I've been following this thresd with intrest and i have to say i'm with baldog, i would cancel third world debt, but they'd get no more loans, they just waste them on arms and palaces.

    I also have a question, how did the third world end up so ? we all started out roughly as equal, going way back, so how come we have a rich society and they don't ????



    drugs may be the road to nowhere, but at least there the scenic route
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Look at it like this-you say about the huge amounts of cash they get, would you want to go over to a third world country and live there and work in a factory for some big company? If not, why not? You make it sound so nice as if the people there choose to live like that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by ebenEzer bad:

    I also have a question, how did the third world end up so ? we all started out roughly as equal, going way back, so how come we have a rich society and they don't ????


    Because the West, from all the wars already had long standing armed forces, many of whom were veterans. That enabled us to take them over so easily.
    We took them over because we industrialised about 100 years before they did, we needed resources, they had resources so we took resources. They couldn't stop us, if they tried we killed them.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere:

    we industrialised about 100 years before they did

    why ?



    drugs may be the road to nowhere, but at least there the scenic route
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Krazed,

    I dont want to go and live in another 3rd world country, ours is bad enough <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif"&gt;

    Just joking.....

    I wouldnt wanna go and live in a 3rd world country because my family is here, my job is here etc.

    If I were in the market for another job then id be perfectly happy to take a job in a 3rd world country if the pay I got meant I could live the same life I live here...In some of these countries you could live as well as we do here on a fraction of the money. Fine with me.

    Have you ever even been to these countries Krazed? Or have you just read this kind of stuff on various socialist websites? It may well seem like oppression to you and it would be oppression if someone was paid the same in this country. BUT when someone has no money and no chance of getting a job then they are damned glad to see these evil capitalist firms.

    According to anti-capitalists it would be better if these companies withdrew from 3rd world countries...Ok well that puts hundreds of thousands out of work and because they are such poor countries theres no more jobs. They starve to death or turn to crime and violence.

    Thats so much better

    [This message has been edited by Balddog (edited 28-11-2001).]
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Been working for a few hours solid now (I know you care <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">)

    BD, I would imagine that what they get isn't the equivilant of huge amounts of money, more likely the equivilant of the minimum wage, or maybe the £4.20 an hour that I get for my supermarket job.

    I, as an anti-capitalist, don't necersarily think that these companies should pull out of third world countries, I think that they should treat their workers better, and stop capitalising (heh) on other countries shite employment laws.

    And you say you would happily work in a sweat shop for the equivilant of whatever money you earn now? I would imagine that that is fairly rare. In this country we get some sort of flexibility of working hours (well, I do, but I'm part time <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/tongue.gif">), if not a much shorter day. We work in better conditions, and there are laws in place to make sure that, for example, 12 year olds aren't doing the manual labour.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well seeing as neither of us actually know how much these people are paid I dont think either of us can prove the other wrong <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif"&gt;

    I didnt say sweatshop, I said factory. I also said if i could live my life as I do now. IE living conditions and working conditions.

    I work part time atm but in my last job I didnt get any flexibility whatsoever. It was 8:30-5:30 or youre fired.

    You say we work in better conditions but our entire country works in better conditions. You cannot compare the living or working conditions of a 3rd world country to the UK. Standards differ as well as pay...People who live in mud huts or shanty towns would likely see the worst western factory as an up to date luxury workplace. We in the west may see their working conditions as very dodgy but the people who are actually working those conditions might disagree. These people almost certainly had a much harder life before these companies turned up.

    Its all proportional.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't think big companies should withdraw from underdeveloped countries, but I don't think they should take advantage of the people that live there by exploiting them. Can you please stop putting words into my mouth. You basically didn't answer my question about living in another country, of course you don't want to live there because of the quality of life there.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Krazed,

    You keep saying that these big companies are exploiting them but you dont explain yourself. How are these people being exploited? Its a handy buzzword but if you cant explain it then its not a very good argument.

    I didnt put words in your mouth. I said that "anti-capitalists" wanted the withdrawl of these companies. Its a common trend.

    Erm I did answer your question. I would be fine working in a 3rd world country if the wages were proportional to the living conditions which they are.

    They get paid shit by our standards but they get paid masses by the standards of their country.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by ebenEzer bad:
    why ?



    Who knows? It is probably a question that historians and social scientists will be debating for a long time to come. It could be for many reasons, maybe it was the desire for wealth or power that we seemed to have. Maybe it was our geography? Who knows.
    Whatever it was, it gave us a huge advantage over the nations in the East.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    this is gonna sound racist, but it isn't intended to be. Why is it the developed world is in the main whites, and the 3rd world blacks/asians ? Is this the link to the above question ? it seems the most obvious distintion, between the developed and developing world

    drugs may be the road to nowhere, but at least there the scenic route
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Oh man, all hells gonna break loose now <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif"&gt;

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by ebenEzer bad:
    this is gonna sound racist, but it isn't intended to be. Why is it the developed world is in the main whites, and the 3rd world blacks/asians ? Is this the link to the above question ? it seems the most obvious distintion, between the developed and developing world



    Nazis among us would say that it was to do with whites being superior, that is not the case. It has been proven that the only differences between races is skin colour.

    Nobody knows why we were and still are more advanced. The eastern nations have suffered a lot from wars. The European crusades were probably the first, as we managed to destroy most of their civilisations as we sought our revenge. After that I guess we never let them recover, subscequent invasion on colonisation has meant that they were never able to industrialise without us coming and putting a cannon ball up their arses.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere,

    I would argue that its the complete opposite. The reason that the western European nations advanced further and more quickly other areas of the world was because of the wars we had here.

    Technology and industry advances quickest during times of war. Europe has been in a state of almost constant war for 1500 years. We were inventing new and improved ways of killing each other for hundreds of years and we got damn good at it.

    The less developed nations were less developed because they were relatively peaceful...Take the Americas for example. When the Spanish got there they were fighting naked guys with spears while they had guns..They wiped out civilisations with 500 very basic firearms. Up until the Euros got there, the native Americans were a relatively peaceful bunch and were never oppressed by others.

    Our violent ways are the sole reason we advanced faster than other parts of the world. I guess we have something to thank France for after all <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif"&gt;

    I can see youve had a very liberal, lefty history teacher in your past <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif"&gt;

    [This message has been edited by Balddog (edited 29-11-2001).]
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So you are saying that white/westerners are inherently more violent than others? That's really interesting. We learnt that in Texas, lawyers used the "fact" that black people are known to be more violent, to get them sent down and executed. I think if anyone knew the reason and answer for the worlds problems, then we would be halfway to solving them. :-)
    How do I get faces?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Krazed,

    Im not sure..I dont think that we are any more violent than any other group of people. People are pretty blood thirsty the world over.

    I think its more to do with the fact that there were so many countries in a small landmass fighting each other for the land and resources.

    Maybe its our natural desire to achieve. Many nations in history were happy to sit back and keep hold of the land they already had. Most nations in Europe wanted to expand their territory and increase their wealth and power.

    That thing about Texas. When did you learn that? They certainly wouldnt dare do such a thing now.

    To get the smiley faces. When you post a reply click on the bit to the right of the main text box that says 'Smilies Legend'. It will show you the diff faces and how to put them into your posts.

    [This message has been edited by Balddog (edited 29-11-2001).]
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Learnt it in philosophy last week. I don't think it happens any more but it wasn't that long ago either. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/wink.gif"&gt;
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Baldog, that is one reason, which I sorely negelcted. I didn't have a leftie teacher at all, I did geography so I only just know the details, not the reasons.
    But do you believe that the countries within the other continents weren't fighting against each other?
    Take Russia for example, they fought many bloody wars like us, but they didn't industrialise until just before the 20th century. Same with the Japanese and the Chinese. A lot of these nations were fighting many wars between themselves. War is one reason, but it isn't the only reason.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    hehe just sounded a little that way with your talk of the wests destruction of civilisations <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif"&gt;

    Youre right, almost every nation on earth has fought wars before. However, Europe is in a unique position. There has been more war here than anywhere else on earth. Russia I would say is in Europe, or at least the important bits of Russia is in Europe. They fought off attacks from us Europeans but they werent really ever in danger of total destruction. Napoleon and Hitler being the exceptions.

    The UK, where the industrial revolution really started has been under threat of invasion and almost constant war since the romans buggered off in 500.

    The thing about the Japanese and Chinese is that they only fought amongst themselves. IE tribal stuff. China was sealed off from the rest of the world as war Japan. Their technological advances stagnented cos they never fought anyone new.

    Youre probably right tho..There were im sure other reasons. I had thought it was about resources but Africa is one of the naturally rich places on earth and they were still spear chuckers when we got there, again with our guns.

    Its all very complicated
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog:
    I had thought it was about resources but Africa is one of the naturally rich places on earth and they were still spear chuckers when we got there, again with our guns.

    Its all very complicated

    Still is full of spear chuckers.

    But it is ironic to know that all the great empires and civilisations origianally started out in the med and Asia. Italy, Egypt, China, Greece e.t.c. From going to the most pwerful nations on Earth to the scummiest in the space of 2000 years takes some beating.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Good point..

    Ive wondered if civilisations run in cycles. Asia, Africa etc may be further ahead in their cycle than us. Theres always a fall after a civilisation becomes great, maybe its coming to the time for western civilisation to fall.

    The old civilisations werent as advanced as what we have now but they were just as great in other ways. I wonder how long it will be before the US/UK/Euro civilisation falls and we live in squalor.

    Interesting.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog:
    Good point..

    Ive wondered if civilisations run in cycles. Asia, Africa etc may be further ahead in their cycle than us. Theres always a fall after a civilisation becomes great, maybe its coming to the time for western civilisation to fall.

    The old civilisations werent as advanced as what we have now but they were just as great in other ways. I wonder how long it will be before the US/UK/Euro civilisation falls and we live in squalor.

    Interesting.

    Who knows, but I doubt we will relinquish our control that easily. It would take a nuclear war to ruin us, and even then it wouldn't be the end of civilisation.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think the total and utter collapse of Europes economy would get us half the way there and then the resulting war would be the end of us.

    I give it 20 years..tops
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Baldog are you suggesting 20 years from now, when we are 40ish, we will be part of the third world ?????????? hardly, if it was to happen it would take hundreds of years, the sheer size of the financial gap between us and the third world is probably beyond that situation anyway. Even if in the unlikely event terrorism etc does destroy our society, it would still be no worse than places such as africa and hence there will be no third world distinction, and besides very shortly the oil is gionna run out, and alot of the middle easts gdp will be decreased severly ! not to mention what the original thread is about, capitalism. The amount of wealth in the world remains constant, it just moves around - and i doubt very much we will allow our wealth to go anywhere nuclear bombs or not. Perhaps they'll wipe the u.k out - the result ? a richer europe / us .

    drugs may be the road to nowhere, but at least there the scenic route
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Eb,

    No, 20 years until Europe is in another major war with itself and the economies have collapsed...They will all be linked by then anyway.

    Terrorism is no threat to our civilisation. We are the threat to our civilisation.

    Our wealth wont go anywhere? Thats funny because as soon as we join the Euro, our entire gold reserve that backs up our currency will be shipped over the channel to some bank vault deep under brussels. So much for holding onto our wealth.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    true, but if our wealth moves into europe, then it is at the end of the day available to us if we need it, as you rightly point out a european state civil war is our greatest threat, but in comparison to the third world where they there always fighting, the proportioned costs to each mean the gap would be come no closer. Civilisations may move in cycles but surely we will never owe as much to the third world as they do to us now ? The wealth as i said does move around which it will, but passing it around the west ensures the third world doesn't get a piece of it, whether it be uk to europe or usa to australia, it doesn't matter, it still belong to the west.

    drugs may be the road to nowhere, but at least there the scenic route
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Im not saying that when the west collapses that the 3rd world will somehow become the 1st world. We will be in an awful state but we might be better off than the current 3rd world.

    There are an awful lot of countries that are in neither the 1st or 3rd world. Well off countries that are half and half.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    surely that would be no more than a bad recession ? and there are very very few countries which aren't classified developed or developing and very few of them are developed, its an exclusive club that is difficult to join and even harder to leave, inbetween countries are very few in number

    drugs may be the road to nowhere, but at least there the scenic route
Sign In or Register to comment.