Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

19 Minutes Of H8

smitty_one_each (243267) writes | about a year and a half ago

User Journal 15

Murdoch on socialism.

Murdoch on socialism.

cancel ×

15 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Murdoch Lectures on Morality (0)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about a year and a half ago | (#43448599)

Satan Defines Devotion

Re:Murdoch Lectures on Morality (1)

pudge (3605) | about a year and a half ago | (#43448665)

Trolls Argue Ad Hominem

And Marx Rebuts (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about a year and a half ago | (#43449141)

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

Bill Dog (726542) | about a year and a half ago | (#43449923)

Well I stopped reading after seeing "social justice" and the defending of welfare states. But I'm glad I got to the part about how workers should share in the profits of the company but not in the losses. If crony capitalism is "privatize profits but socialize losses", then is this "socialize profits but privatize losses" then crony communism?

Of course that's a rhetorical question. Leftism is *supposed to be* about unfairness. Just as I don't see income inequity as a bad thing, Leftists wouldn't see what the cardinal said there as a bad thing. I guess a take-away here is that it's realized by thinkers on both sides that there will always be unfairness, but that the Left seeks to replace "bad" unfairness with "good" unfairness.

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43452341)

Maybe you would prefer to replace the welfare state with Welfare Inc., with whips and chains and Dick Cheney in black leather underwear. Power has always been a very effective aphrodisiac. I can understand why people would hoard that.

Just as I don't see income inequity as a bad thing...

Well duh! Without poverty, who will empty your bedpan in the morning? Everybody, including the poor themselves, knows you have to starve people to motivate them. That's why every revolution is doomed to ultimate failure.

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

Bill Dog (726542) | about a year and a half ago | (#43458571)

Passing the Turing test is only difficult because all the attempts so far have been at imitating a generic sort of human being. Far easier to simply sidestep the whole problem of trying to emulate that much dimensionality and just shoot for mimicking the typical hysterical Leftist. All that's needed is a base file of the 20 or so party-line messages, and then a grammar re-arranger. Run the program with the IP address of Slashdot and voila.

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43458709)

:-) Dig... I'll see what I can whip up...

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#43457869)

TFA:

In fact, that radical capitalist ideology has become the social model.

I suppose if you think one big, honkin' corporation called 'the government' is a great idea, then fine.
Your attention is called to the wreckage about you.

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about a year and a half ago | (#43462695)

What's the difference between one big honkin' corporation called the government and one big honkin' corporation called the stock market? None, they're the same beast with a different face.

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#43468897)

Okay, over-centralization is a big loser.
However, a proper, smaller, capitalistic crash would have let the market disperse and fix itself.
Instead, you're pretty much guaranteeing a World War III to clear these books.
Because #Progress.

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43485237)

Okay, over-centralization is a big loser.

That would include ownership of 'property' and imply that limits are necessary, no?

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year and a half ago | (#43487129)

No, individual liberty and attendant natural, screw-you-Rousseau rights to privacy and property are the antithesis of over-centralization.
The Constitutional right of due process for takings applies here.

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43487259)

No? I really don't know how to argue with such nonsense, and shall leave you with your double standards then, but thanks for clarifying.

Re:And Marx Rebuts (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about a year ago | (#43499661)

That's a fine accusation, but what does it mean? How can you show me applying any 'double standard'?
Seriously. I am sincerely interested in being consistent, and would welcome constructive criticism.

Murdoch & the IPA (1)

tqft (619476) | about a year and a half ago | (#43450767)

Have a look at the IPA.

I haven't watched it and don't plan to.

Surprisingly enough Murdoch's spiel may not have been the worst at the celebratory dinner from various reports.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>