Socialism Or Capitalism?

[Hugo]

Angelus,

I can see you've put a lot of work into this, but I'm going to have to shoot you down, and I hope you will take it as constructive criticism. Taken from the website:

Of all the contributions made to humanity science has by far been the most effective at improving humanity.

Which, of course, is not true or even valid. Science is a tool, and while it has been the case that science has been used to do good, it has also been used to do great evil. To say that science has been the most effective improver of humanity is like saying that hammers are the most effective builders of houses, which is, of course, nonsense. People build houses. Hammers build nothing.

Furthermore, you ignore religion as a driver of improvement of humanity, forgetting that religious movements ended slavery and segregation, founded the first hospitals, ran the first charities and so forth.

The proposition of Geniocracy is then a political system who’s hierarchy revolved around intelligence.

This won't work. Intelligence is independent of morality, and Hitler, Mao and others of their ilk were all arguably geniuses or at the very least, extremely intelligent.

So that Earth becomes a world of happiness, liberty and self-development for all its inhabitants, without prejudice to race, religion, gender, sexuality, culture or level of intelligence.

Unfortunately, your very political philosophy makes this impossible by dint of the fact that you have stated that you will be prejudiced by level of intelligence.

Now, I haven't read through the rest of your documents, which I shall try to take the time to do, but it seems to me that this is basically an exercise in secular humanism which is in complete denial of any aspect or concept of morality or ethics. Not to mention the self-contradictions.

Keep working on it.

This is partly because the Rich are able to own passive income generators that allow them to accumulate wealth without personal effort into it and this benefit is inherited by their children.

Passive income generators are an important incentive because they reward hard work with the possibility of freedom from work. People can achieve this because they worked hard, or because their parents did, which brings me on to your second point, inheritance. Obviously, one of the reasons people try to do well in life is to provide a better existence for their children and it is not fair to deny them this. It is entirely right that a man should be able to become wealthy in order to bequeath that wealth to his children so that they will be spared hard work. If your parents did not achieve that for you, that's unfortunate, but if your parents did not have blue eyes, you might find that unfortunate too, but what is done is done. Furthermore, you do have the chance to work hard and bequeath to your own children in turn.

[Vercingetorix]

They have no liability whatsoever towards the common man.

Honestly, why should they? The "common man" does nothing for them except buy their products. All they must do is make the "common man" buy the products.

How many rich people donate to charity, and even if they do, what proportion of their income is it?

Why should they? See above.

And are you saying that planned 5 yr economies are more likely to fail than unplanned ones?

Hey, that's one of the DUMBEST things I have ever read. You obviously have no knowledge of the history of the USSR and their 5 year plans.

And let me if it would have been better if he was in a socialist state and the government would have confiscated half of his profits and redistributed them amongst the poor.

You mean if the government had STOLEN half of his profits. He earns them fairly...I don't see why he must have them wrested from his hands as you advocate.

[Angelus22]

Those are all very excellent criticisms, since however that is going on a tangent to this thread I have taken the liberty of copying your post and placing it on the Geniocracy Forum, which is probably a better place to discuss the particular aspects of the manifesto.

I have formed a response to your criticisms and I am pleased that you have thought about it.

Angelus

http://www.geniocracy.net follow the forum link

[Crusader]

Obviously socialism. The capitalist democracy in the US has only proved that the middle class and the downtrodden get screwed over every time. Socialism is much better. Democracy in the US can't even comit any kind of Universal Health Care. In socialism, true equality is achived.

[righturnonred]

Democracy in the US can't even comit any kind of Universal Health Care.

There is no need for universal health care in the United States. It is a liberal myth that there are great numbers of people in this country who can't afford adequate health care. The largest single segment of the uninsured are young adults, who typically have no need for health care. Virtually all seniors have a health care plan and roughly 80% of them have some sort of prescription drug package. Contrary to liberal misrepresentions, no one who needs health care goes without it in this country. My girl friend, who is an RN, testifies that hospitals will absorb the costs associated with individuals who cannot afford to pay. Its called compassion, and there is a hell of lot more of here than there is in socialist Europe.

If you'd rather work 20-30 hour work weeks, spend lazy afternoons lounging at the cafe, live in relative squalor, have the government confiscate 70% of your income in taxes, and provide you with mediocre health care, then thats your prerogative. Just don't thrust that pathetic existence onto me.

And another thing. If there are such egregious inequalities in the United States, than why do people from all corners of globe risk their livelyhoods trying to get here? I'll tell you why, because no other place on earth offers the kind of freedom and opportunity that we have here in America.

The only thing I want from the government is another round of tax cuts.

[Crusader]

Well, I don't know too much about yopu, but I'm still in school. If you like Bush cutting Education by 1.7 billion so you can get a nice 400 dollar check in the mail (Which FYI, 1 in 4 people did not qualify for) thats your buisness, but I myself would like to go to collage.

The 'American Dream' that the conservitives thought of is simply a lie. There dangling a carrot in front of our face so we think we could someday "make it big." In reality, none of us will be rich so get used to the idea. UIt's a lie thought up by corporate CEO's so the working class will work harder for no extra money. You'll never be rich so get used to the idea.

Finally, there are vast inequilities in America. There is an 8.6% unemployment rate. There are more people living below the established poverty line than ever before under the Bush administration. There is no compassionate in your converitism when you get a 400 dollar tax cut and a homeless man gets nothing.

[Hugo]

I myself would like to go to collage.

Great. We can cram even more colleges with dimwitted students who can't even string a coherent sentence together, at taxpayer's expense.

In my judgement, most college and university students currently studying have no right to be there. They just don't have the brains. Now, of course, we have a glut of IT people and lawyers, none of them terribly intelligent, while car mechanics and plumbers take home six-figure salaries.

We need to raise the educational bar again. Reserve university and college for those who truly have the intelligence to be there, and for those who don't, go learn a trade skill and do something useful. The last thing Canada needs is more idiots with Liberal Arts degrees.

[daniel]

Great. We can cram even more colleges with dimwitted students who can't even string a coherent sentence together, at taxpayer's expense.

Why are you so cruel? The fellow has a plan for higher education and that should be encouraged. Unlike other kids who have no plan, they end up wasting their youth and adult hood.

At least you have identified an area he is weak: English grammar. Do we attribute that to the internet where most people rarely check their grammar and spelling before posting? Or is it a legitimate weakness in which he should practise improving?

Are your comments about reserving university only for Canada or are they global? There's a certain President who certainly fits the criticism you describe.

[Hugo]

I think it's crueler to give kids false impressions of themselves and then send them into an academic environment where they are unable to compete. It's crueler still (to all graduates) to then lower the bar for graduation to the point that degrees are essentially worthless.

My comments on English grammar were not meant for Crusader. Compared to what I've seen, he is a positive erudite. I wish him luck in his studies and his life, however, I also wish that people his age have a realistic idea of their capabilities and choose their educational and career paths accordingly.

My point is that universities are no longer faculties of learning, they are becoming faculties of stupidity where people who'd have struggled to pass an 8th-grade exam a few decades ago are now indulged with high marks in meaningless courses such as "Women's Studies" or "Liberal Arts."

And what is "wasting youth and adulthood"? You may think that not to attend university is a waste, but I say it's far less of a waste to attend a trade school or serve an apprenticeship and then to start out earning $35-45k (with the potential to earn six figures) as a car mechanic, a pipe fitter, or an electrician, rather than to get a Liberal Arts degree and then wind up managing a McDonald's franchise (for life) after discovering that no decent employer is interested in a Liberal Arts graduate.

[daniel]

Your universe is only in black-and-white, eh? No, sorry, black-and-black.

I guess the Mona Lisa was a waste of seven years.

[Hugo]

That's all you have to say in response? What a disappointment.

[Lost in Manitoba]

more idiots with Liberal Arts degrees.

Am I mistaken, or didn't you say you were a History major? Listening to you criticize someone like that, I've got to question how successfull you are. The amount of posts, as well as their length, at all hours of the day makes me wonder if a) you're unemployed or have no life or c) you're wasting your employers time by surfing the net while at work. Probably an unfair assumption to make, but if it's ok for one person to do it then hey.....

[Hugo]

d) none of the above, and yes, you are mistaken. That's all I will tell you in public, so you might as well forget any further needling. Now, do you have a point?

[righturnonred]

Am I mistaken, or didn't you say you were a History major? Listening to you criticize someone like that, I've got to question how successfull you are. The amount of posts, as well as their length, at all hours of the day makes me wonder if a) you're unemployed or  have no life or c) you're wasting your employers time by surfing the net while at work. Probably an unfair assumption to make, but if it's ok for one person to do it then hey.....

Ah, here we are again. Observing another lovely example of what liberals do best: trying to destroy those personally with whom they don't agree. Your frustrated attempts to lash out in response to reasoned arguments is quite distasteful.

[daniel]

Observing another lovely example of what liberals do best: trying to destroy those personally with whom they don't agree.

Then it's evident that you haven't been reading Craig, or Hugo, or Morgan. They must be disappointed their etiquette hasn't rubbed off on you.

[Lost in Manitoba]

You know, a personal attack is a personal attack, no matter who's making it. And, yes, it is distasteful.

[Hugo]

If you feel I, or anyone else, has made a personal attack, report it to Greg. Otherwise, either contribute to the discussion, or stop wasting bandwidth.

[righturnonred]

Then it's evident that you haven't been reading Craig, or Hugo, or Morgan. They must be disappointed their etiquette hasn't rubbed off on you.

I have yet to read a personal attack levied by any of these fellows. To use the term liberal or lie-beral, or Dumbo-crud or any other colorful pejorative does not constitute a personal attack, as those terms apply to groups. However, to imply that an individual is unsuccessful or unemployed, or has no life, or defrauds their employer is a personal attack.

If you can't tell the difference than at least try to bite your tounge.

I guess the Mona Lisa was a waste of seven years.

I was unaware it took that long to create, but if thats the case, I'd say yes, it was a considerable waste of time. After all, the late Bob Ross was capable of creating a superior painting in just a half an hour.

[Black Dog]

Reserve university and college for those who truly have the intelligence to be there, and for those who don't, go learn a trade skill and do something useful

The conversation above (vis a vis the practicality of "liberal arts" degrees) is really a microcosm of the larger debate of capitalism versus alternative economic system. As we can see by this debate, liberal arts degrees are "useless" because they don't contribute to the machine of the capitalist system (notwithstanding the fact that even philosophy grads have jobs, pay taxes etc.), a system wherein the sum total of human accomplishment is defined by the cycle of working and spending, effectively turning us all into ants in a hill. Doctirnaire capitalists place no value on knowledge for knowledge's sake. Broad horizons matter not a wit unless cold cash is involved.

What a drab, grey world to inhabit.

[righturnonred]

Doctirnaire capitalists place no value on knowledge for knowledge's sake. Broad horizons matter not a wit unless cold cash is involved.

With the exception of some sort of personal sense of enlightenment, unfortunately this statement is essentailly correct. A college education represents a tremendous investment for the average person. For most people, it is a neccessity to earn a return on that investment, otherwise that person has invested considerable time and resources to achieve nothing more than peice of mind. It seems to me that this exercise is not very economical, under any system. But then again, we live in a free society in America and if that is what you choose to do, it is your decision to make. Conversely, I seriously doubt that the ruling communist leadership would provide every man, woman, and child a college education and not expect a return on their investment.

a system wherein the sum total of human accomplishment is defined by the cycle of working and spending, effectively turning us all into ants in a hill.

What alternative system do you suggest that doesn't involve working and spending?

What a drab, grey world to inhabit.

Maybe so, but I can certainly imagine a much more drab existence.

[Hugo]

As we can see by this debate, liberal arts degrees are "useless" because they don't contribute to the machine of the capitalist system (notwithstanding the fact that even philosophy grads have jobs, pay taxes etc.)

It used to be that any university degree was worth something. If universities were truly reserved for the academic elite, the fact is that even a Liberal Arts graduate would be guaranteed an income and good work because his degree guarantees a high level of literacy, numeracy, initiative and motivation - qualities an employer is looking for.

Now, I appreciate your point that degrees are often not valued unless they provide a means to a job. However, this modus was always so. Even Rembrandt had serious financial problems and left vast debts, and the great philosophers and thinkers of history were all men of independent means. The fact is that human existence depends upon work far more than upon thought. Not to say that art and philosophy have no value, however, how much resources and money is society going to divert to these pursuits? Bearing in mind that a lot of talented artists do actually achieve widespread recognition and wealth from the very capitalist system that you suppose stifles them?

The basic fact is that it's more important to eat than to read good poetry.

working and spending, effectively turning us all into ants in a hill

This is the only mode of human existence yet discovered. All societies at all technological levels require people to work. Unfortunately, people in socialist and communist societies tend to work even harder (longer work days, worse conditions, less vacation, less pay) than people in capitalist societies, and people in more primitive modes of existence must work even harder (farmers in developing countries have very long work days and do a lot of hard physical labour).

The truth is that the best relief from the 'rat race' is, ironically, in free-market capitalism.

[Black Dog]

This is the only mode of human existence yet discovered. All societies at all technological levels require people to work. Unfortunately, people in socialist and communist societies tend to work even harder (longer work days, worse conditions, less vacation, less pay) than people in capitalist societies, and people in more primitive modes of existence must work even harder (farmers in developing countries have very long work days and do a lot of hard physical labour).

The truth is that the best relief from the 'rat race' is, ironically, in free-market capitalism.

Then explain why, despite the miracle panacea of capitalism and technological advancement, people in North America work harder, longer and for less than ever before (and certainly far less than their European counterparts). Not to mention the maladies that seem to thrive in consumer capitalist societies such as ours: depression and other psychological problems, obeisity, stress, debt, self-medication and so forth. these are natural byproducts of a system predicated wholly on the pursuit of individual status and material wealth.

[Hugo]

Blackdog,

Your claims are as outrageous as they are ridiculous. If you're going to claim that "people in North America work harder, longer and for less than ever before" I want to see some evidence of that.

Post figures (with sources) for average work week length, real income, disposable income, availability of consumer goods, cyclical/seasonal unemployment, average private debt and assets, and prevalence of hard manual labour and demonstrate that these are worse now than at any point in history.