(October 2, 2010 at 1:17 pm)Existentialist Wrote: That's a funny analysis of communism. Where did you get that from - the Capitalist Guide to Anti-Communist Propaganda?

It's funny because it's true.

(October 2, 2010 at 1:15 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(October 2, 2010 at 9:45 am)Existentialist Wrote: That I'm looking for? How do you work that out?

Because you said so? You used the "well, they weren't true communists" argument.

Oh, right. And is that a paraphrase or a misquote? I really need to know, if I'm being told what I think.

---

(October 2, 2010 at 1:25 pm)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote: It's funny because it's true.

Ahhh... the truth. Why didn't you say?

There was also never a true capitalistic or a true democracy(maybe ancient athens?) country for that matter...

Quote:(maybe ancient athens?

If you don't count the women and the slaves.......

(October 2, 2010 at 1:27 pm)Existentialist Wrote: Oh, right. And is that a paraphrase or a misquote? I really need to know, if I'm being told what I think.

(October 2, 2010 at 1:27 pm)Existentialist Wrote: Ahhh... the truth. Why didn't you say?

Oh. Wow. Sarcasm. How original.

(October 2, 2010 at 4:27 pm)Ashendant Wrote: There was also never a true capitalistic or a true democracy(maybe ancient athens?) country for that matter...

Capitalism is in pretty much every country now. I don't know what people mean by "true" or "pure" capitalism anyway. Capitalism is an intelligently-manipulated, flexible, simultaneously oppressive and liberating concept anyway. The insistence on describing the impossibility of its "purity"or "trueness" seems to be aimed at liberal self-congratulation, and it seems to be almost every single atheist on this website takes the same line. The message is, yes capitalism is potentially oppressive but we liberals have designed mechanisms to make it as benign as possible to the largest possible number of people. That's part of the creed. When I say capitalism is a religion, I don't just mean it's like a religion. It actually is one. It shouldn't be surprising to us, it is the one true, universal religion that all other religions subordinate themselves to. The other religions bequeathed their belief systems to the world in the form of capitalism long before they entered their extended death throes which are now well advanced. Not long from now, atheists who have been successfully distracted will be able to say Look, the religions have died! while completely failing to spot the one big, all-pervasive, universal religion to which they are all fully subscribed, replete with all the trappings of the old religions: patriarchy, sin, guilt, blasphemy, belief and rationalistic enlightenment dogma to name but a few.

(October 2, 2010 at 5:10 pm)Existentialist Wrote: Capitalism is in pretty much every country now. I don't know what people mean by "true" or "pure" capitalism anyway. Capitalism is an intelligently-manipulated, flexible, simultaneously oppressive and liberating concept anyway. The insistence on describing the impossibility of its "purity"or "trueness" seems to be aimed at liberal self-congratulation, and it seems to be almost every single atheist on this website takes the same line. The message is, yes capitalism is potentially oppressive but we liberals have designed mechanisms to make it as benign as possible to the largest possible number of people. That's part of the creed. When I say capitalism is a religion, I don't just mean it's like a religion. It actually is one. It shouldn't be surprising to us, it is the one true, universal religion that all other religions subordinate themselves to. The other religions bequeathed their belief systems to the world in the form of capitalism long before they entered their extended death throes which are now well advanced. Not long from now, atheists who have been successfully distracted will be able to say Look, the religions have died! while completely failing to spot the one big, all-pervasive, universal religion to which they are all fully subscribed, replete with all the trappings of the old religions: patriarchy, sin, guilt, blasphemy, belief and rationalistic enlightenment dogma to name but a few.

You do know what religion is, right? It goes something like this:

Wikipedia: Religion Wrote:Religion is the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or a set of beliefs concerning the origin and purpose of the universe. It is commonly regarded as consisting of a person’s relation to God or to gods or spirits. Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories associated with their deity or deities, that are intended to give meaning to life. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature.

The word religion is sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system, but it is more than private belief and has a public aspect. Most religions have organised behaviors, congregations for prayer, priestly hierarchies, holy places and scriptures.

If necessary, I can provide other definitions from dictionary.com whatever I can google, but the above quote describes what religion actually is.
Since capitalism is an economic system with absolutely does not fit any description of a religion, then it cannot be defined as such and therefore your analogy is false. Aside from beliefs over certain aspects of a capitalist system - the system itself is well defined and requires no belief as to its operation whatsoever - being an entirely human construction.
While Capitalism seems to be the vessel for some wierdly religious beliefs (I call it Reagonism) it is, in itself, most certainly not the thing you said.

What people, such as I, notably mean by 'pure' or 'true' capitalism is essentially lassaz-faire capitalism - that is that businesses and the economic market operate with no government controls or regulation. This essentially makes it the opposite of the ideal of communism, in which the entire economy is a centrally planned economy or total government control.
Both of these things are ideals carried out by people but neither have ever been implimented successfully - and for good reason.

All but the most staunchly anti-government libertarians still recognize that at least some government control over the economy is necessary for the reason that Capitalism can fail when one business monopolizes a market. It's the problem the entire planet has right now with the entire world's oil industry. This is why most developed nations set the mark somewhere between all and no government and choose the setting that their constituants are most comfortable with.

(October 2, 2010 at 6:22 pm)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote: You do know what religion is, right?

I know exactly what religion is. Capitalism fits the definition perfectly. Read my posts through properly. You say yourself "Religion is the belief in and worship of a god". Capital has all the characterics of a god, capitalism has all the characteristics of a religion. Of course you want to do the denial thing - keep the debate nice and small, nice and controlled, limited to the pointless backwater of attacking abrahamic organisations and belief systems which are dying out anyway. Capitalism - the dominant religion - doesn't need them any more.

Funnily enough when you talked about capitalism failing when dominated by one business monopolising the system I thought you were going to say Banking. To give the oil industry as an example is completely off the wall. Either way, I know what people are trying to say when they talk about "pure capitalism" - yes its the intellectual concept of unregulated laissez-faire markets. My point is, that is a bad definition of "pure capitalism". Capitalism co-opts the State into its strategy. That's why the State has been blackmailed into bailing out the banks. The bail-out is part of the system. We're living pure capitalism as we speak. My point was that the liberals need to conceptualise pure capitalism as unregulated laissez-faire market forces, so they can congratulate themselves when they have to step in with state regulation to mitigate the most damaging aspects of the system. But what I'm saying is, they've been duped. They are acting completely within the bounds of capitalism at its most cynical, most brutal and most self-sustaining. The liberals have been hypnotised into this position in the same way that a religious believer has been hypnotised by his clergy. That's why you, Ace, DeistPaladin and no doubt plenty of others keep coming out with this liberal stuff about needing to control pure capitalism. But people can only be hypnotised if they want to be. You judge your interests to be on the side of preserving the system, assuaging your consciences with the reassurance that the state is wisely regulating the worst excesses of capitalism. It's an act of faith on your part, but being bad faith it causes emotional tension which needs an outlet. The lesser religions therefore become your target instead. But scapegoating others is also a strategy of the great religion, capitalism. Which ever way you turn, you can't get away from its all-pervasive doctrines, propaganda and mechanisms of social control. That's all I meant.

(October 2, 2010 at 7:17 am)Existentialist Wrote:

(October 2, 2010 at 6:59 am)padraic Wrote: ALL ideologies are flawed and temporary,the Utopian ones are the most seriously flawed.
I don't mind the Australian version of controlled democracy, as I'm very comfy thank you. Would not live in America unless I was rich enough not to have to pay tax.

The Australian version of controlled democracy is an ideology.

Indeed. However, I did not and do not claim it's perfect. I only claim it suits me because I benefit from it. I'm also fairly confident I'll be dead before it collapses under its own weight.

I suspect most people thought a slave based society was just dandy, unless of course they happened to be a slaves.

(October 2, 2010 at 5:03 pm)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote: Oh. Wow. Sarcasm. How original.

Who said we have to be original?