Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 11, 2024, 3:20 pm
Thread Rating:
|
Atheist historical figure you should know.
|
 Quote:The materialistic philosophy of Baron d'Holbach had an influence in the historical materialism of Karl Marx That's all the shitstains have to hear!  (September 19, 2014 at 11:55 am)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:The materialistic philosophy of Baron d'Holbach had an influence in the historical materialism of Karl Marx Um who is talking about his economic views here. I was posting it because of his views on the natural world.  (September 19, 2014 at 11:58 am)Brian37 Wrote:(September 19, 2014 at 11:55 am)Minimalist Wrote: That's all the shitstains have to hear! Karl Marx wasn't just an economist..
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson (September 19, 2014 at 11:58 am)Brian37 Wrote:(September 19, 2014 at 11:55 am)Minimalist Wrote: That's all the shitstains have to hear! Do try to remember that you are talking about the FOX News crowd. All they have to hear is "atheist" and "Karl Marx" in the same sentence and they'll run their fucking mouths for a hour and half straight.... even if they aren't sure who Karl Marx is. (September 19, 2014 at 12:01 pm)Minimalist Wrote:(September 19, 2014 at 11:58 am)Brian37 Wrote: Um who is talking about his economic views here. I was posting it because of his views on the natural world. Especially if that means they can link it to Obama, which links him to muslims, and atheists, and communists.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Marx had SOME good ideas, but the problem I have with ALL economic views is that life is diverse and you cannot slap a blanket solution onto a complex species. He was simply the opposite of Ayn Rand's "fuck you I got mine" crap.
Economics is as simple as the more people who are stable the more stable that society is. Cutting vs spending is a matter of timing not a matter of a blanket solution. I am neither for "No rules" Libertarians and rethuglicans want. But I would never want to employ Che's revolution and become Cuba either.
No "ism" has all the answers. Even capitalism.
(September 19, 2014 at 12:26 pm)Minimalist Wrote: No "ism" has all the answers. Even capitalism. "Captialism" as others may have heard me say before, is NOT a form of government. There is not one government friend or foe that does not invest in the global market. The Saudi Royal Family owns oil companies and stock in banks and weapons. China's communist party keeps it's monopoly on party power by allowing western businesses to exist there so they can make money making cheep crap on slave wages. Gadaffi was a billionaire who owned stock in GE. What matters is preventing monopolies of power. Wealth becomes a plutocracy no matter if the system is open or closed. Quote:"Captialism" as others may have heard me say before, is NOT a form of government. I'm watching The Roosevelts on PBS right now and it amazing how little has changed since T.R. and F.D.R. Then, as now, a small cabal of rich motherfuckers is trying to manipulate the government for their own benefit. They had succeeded before Teddy came along and they are succeeding again. Until people wake up to what they are doing "capitalism" will remain a very effective...if criminal...form of 'government' even if it is nothing but a smokescreen for greed. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
