3 of 8
3
I am doing research for a critical thinking paper.
Posted: 25 April 2011 09:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

I suppose my atheism and my socialism are all a part of my non-conformist, anti-authoritarian outlook…

How do you get anti-authoritarian from socialism? The ideal may be one thing but in actual practice, the most authoritarian regimes with the most prolific executioners have been either socialist or at the very least paid lip service to the idea.

Just curious.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 10:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  338
Joined  2011-01-17
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 25 April 2011 09:14 AM

I suppose my atheism and my socialism are all a part of my non-conformist, anti-authoritarian outlook…

How do you get anti-authoritarian from socialism? The ideal may be one thing but in actual practice, the most authoritarian regimes with the most prolific executioners have been either socialist or at the very least paid lip service to the idea.

Just curious.


There are many types of socialism. I believe in workers co-operatives and the such. Egalitarian socialism works on a smaller scale, like kibbutzim, and co-operatives I have worked in. Definitely, what Marx envisioned was egalitarian. I actually don’t think any political system would/does work on a large nation size scale (like the size of Canada or the US).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_socialism

And I have to say that it amuses/horrifies me that people don’t see how authoritarian Capitalist systems are, especially with the size of your prison system. Cruel dictatorship actually has to be more of a part of Capitalism than Socialism.


C

 Signature 

“You can tell me that it’s gospel but I know that it’s only church.”

Tom Waits

“I take a simple view of life. It is keep your eyes open and get on with it.”

Laurence Sterne

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 12:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4298
Joined  2010-08-15
Bees Mom - 25 April 2011 10:00 AM

There are many types of socialism.

Yea, like families!  tongue wink

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 02:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

There are now two definitions of socialism.  The earlier one was quasi-communism.  It described a society well on the way to final communism.  Over the last forty years conservatives have accused any government program that helped people in genaral as socialistic.  This was done so often and across a wide set of venues that a new definition evolved.  To the extent that any government offers programs that help all their citizens in need, it is called socialistic. 

These two divergent definitions make discussions using the term confusing unless the participants state clearly which they are using.

For example, our government, local to national, would be considered socialistic based on its services to its citizens, a few of which are: Military, Police, Fire Services, Local Roads, use, & maint., Highways, use, & maint., Street Signs & Traffic Control, Street Lights, Schools,  Elementary, High Schools, Universities, Postal Service, Libraries, Judicial Court System,  Patent Protection, Food Safety, Flight Safety, Penal System, Communication Control, Property Laws, Personal Laws,  Record Keeping, Public Parks, Health Care, Garbage Collection, Sewer System, Drainage System, Vocational Training, Utility Supply and Control, Minimum Wages, Worker Safety, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Humanitarian Assistance, Financial Regulations, Professional Licensing, Vehicle & Driver Licensing, Environmental Protection, Child Protection, Voting Regulation.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 02:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  338
Joined  2011-01-17
Occam. - 25 April 2011 02:29 PM

There are now two definitions of socialism.  The earlier one was quasi-communism.  It described a society well on the way to final communism.  Over the last forty years conservatives have accused any government program that helped people in genaral as socialistic.  This was done so often and across a wide set of venues that a new definition evolved.  To the extent that any government offers programs that help all their citizens in need, it is called socialistic. 

These two divergent definitions make discussions using the term confusing unless the participants state clearly which they are using.

For example, our government, local to national, would be considered socialistic based on its services to its citizens, a few of which are: Military, Police, Fire Services, Local Roads, use, & maint., Highways, use, & maint., Street Signs & Traffic Control, Street Lights, Schools,  Elementary, High Schools, Universities, Postal Service, Libraries, Judicial Court System,  Patent Protection, Food Safety, Flight Safety, Penal System, Communication Control, Property Laws, Personal Laws,  Record Keeping, Public Parks, Health Care, Garbage Collection, Sewer System, Drainage System, Vocational Training, Utility Supply and Control, Minimum Wages, Worker Safety, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Humanitarian Assistance, Financial Regulations, Professional Licensing, Vehicle & Driver Licensing, Environmental Protection, Child Protection, Voting Regulation.

Occam

Just a few, eh? wink

 Signature 

“You can tell me that it’s gospel but I know that it’s only church.”

Tom Waits

“I take a simple view of life. It is keep your eyes open and get on with it.”

Laurence Sterne

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 02:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  338
Joined  2011-01-17
citizenschallenge.pm - 25 April 2011 12:55 PM
Bees Mom - 25 April 2011 10:00 AM

There are many types of socialism.

Yea, like families!  tongue wink

Ideally. smile

 Signature 

“You can tell me that it’s gospel but I know that it’s only church.”

Tom Waits

“I take a simple view of life. It is keep your eyes open and get on with it.”

Laurence Sterne

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 10:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2681
Joined  2011-04-24
Mriana - 21 April 2011 09:50 AM
Alpheia - 21 April 2011 09:40 AM

You are all thoughtful, independent, inquisitive thinkers!
Alpheia

LOL  Now there is a stereotype you can put in your hat.  Many atheists are thoughtful, independent, inquisitive thinkers, thus the term Freethinker often applies to many.  I have yet to meet one who is not.

I have never met an atheist who is not a freethinker either,maybe it comes with the territory.I gotta admit though,Ive known a few religious believers who were somewhat freethinking.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 11:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2681
Joined  2011-04-24
Alpheia - 20 April 2011 05:37 PM

Hello, I am a student doing research for a philosophy paper on the views of Atheists/secularist on Capital Punishment. I need your help if you could spare 5 minutes to answer the following questions.

1 Do you support Capital punishment or not?

2 Why or why not?

Does your atheism help guide your thinking on capital punishment? If so, how?

Also, I am looking for papers written about secularist/ atheist view on capital punishment. I have searched on the internet but I am not finding any thing of substance. I cannot use blogs for my research. I am looking for journal articles or web sites; .org .edu.

Thank you very much for your help!

Best,

Alpheia

I feel capital punishment is good sometimes and bad others.Not against it totally,but I mostly think its not a good idea for the government to be able to kill you,and you know damn well the wrong people have been killed before on purpose and not.Atheism does influence it for me because obviously I believe the person will be gone forever,and there is no turning back from it once you do it,also there’s no supernatural beings that are going to judge the the one who died or the ones who killed them.If I was a lawyer or a judge involved with a C.P.case I might feel overwhelmed by the risk and not want anything to do with it;on the other hand if I was certain that the person was guilty and the crime was very bad I might not hesitate.That arizona shooter jared whatever his name,If it can be proved that he’s not insane and the shooting spree was planned out then no time should be wasted on his execution.Any way you look at it its hard.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 11:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  731
Joined  2007-06-20

1 Do you support Capital punishment or not? No, I do not support capital punishment.

2 Why or why not? Primarily, I simply have a negative emotional reaction to it.

Does your atheism help guide your thinking on capital punishment? If so, how? No.  Neither does my non-stampcollecting nor my alephrechaunism.

[ Edited: 25 April 2011 11:57 PM by the PC apeman ]
 Signature 

PC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 April 2011 11:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  731
Joined  2007-06-20

What “ethical frame work” do you use to consider your views on capital punishment?  I am a non-cognitivist when it comes to ethics.  I don’t know how to answer this question other than the emotivist’s ‘I find it repulsive.’

What are the ethical standards you use to decide on difficult issues such as this?  What is an ethical standard?

 Signature 

PC

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 April 2011 12:04 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

And I have to say that it amuses/horrifies me that people don’t see how authoritarian Capitalist systems are, especially with the size of your prison system.

Any system can be authoritarian or benign depending on who’s running the show. If anyone conflates either Capitalism or socialism in and of themselves with savagery, I’m afraid you’re putting the cart before the horse. If you want to understand why U.S. prisons are overcrowded, you need to look beyond that.

All that aside, the “Capitalist System” in the USA never sent tens of millions to frozen gulags never to be heard from again the way the Soviets did or to death camps the way the right wing version of socialist regimes like the Nazis did. In the end, it’s really not the system so much as what the people do with the system they have.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 April 2011 12:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  338
Joined  2011-01-17
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 26 April 2011 12:04 AM

And I have to say that it amuses/horrifies me that people don’t see how authoritarian Capitalist systems are, especially with the size of your prison system.

Any system can be authoritarian or benign depending on who’s running the show. If anyone conflates either Capitalism or socialism in and of themselves with savagery, I’m afraid you’re putting the cart before the horse. If you want to understand why U.S. prisons are overcrowded, you need to look beyond that.

All that aside, the “Capitalist System” in the USA never sent tens of millions to frozen gulags never to be heard from again the way the Soviets did or to death camps the way the right wing version of socialist regimes like the Nazis did. In the end, it’s really not the system so much as what the people do with the system they have.

I didn’t say they can’t, I am pointing out the blindness that many in North America have towards their own system.

And with one of the highest, and growing, prison populations in the world, I’d say your gulag system is pretty established. I am certain many thousands of black men either don’t make it home from prison, or come home so scarred as to be rendered practically disappeared. They are imprisoned at appalling rates, and their employment and other possibilities are virtually non existent. Not to mention the thousands who toil overseas for exported Capitalism, men women and children working in horrible conditions, losing life and health.

And I disagree. I think the precepts you start out with really shape the system.  Capitalism requires a system owners and workers, which has a starting point of inequality. I do think it can be handled better than it is in the states. Many other countries do it better.

You’ll have to explain what you mean by “look beyond that.”


It all depends on from what vantage point you are looking at the system.

C

 Signature 

“You can tell me that it’s gospel but I know that it’s only church.”

Tom Waits

“I take a simple view of life. It is keep your eyes open and get on with it.”

Laurence Sterne

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 April 2011 06:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2681
Joined  2011-04-24
Bees Mom - 26 April 2011 12:57 AM
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 26 April 2011 12:04 AM

And I have to say that it amuses/horrifies me that people don’t see how authoritarian Capitalist systems are, especially with the size of your prison system.

Any system can be authoritarian or benign depending on who’s running the show. If anyone conflates either Capitalism or socialism in and of themselves with savagery, I’m afraid you’re putting the cart before the horse. If you want to understand why U.S. prisons are overcrowded, you need to look beyond that.

All that aside, the “Capitalist System” in the USA never sent tens of millions to frozen gulags never to be heard from again the way the Soviets did or to death camps the way the right wing version of socialist regimes like the Nazis did. In the end, it’s really not the system so much as what the people do with the system they have.

I didn’t say they can’t, I am pointing out the blindness that many in North America have towards their own system.

And with one of the highest, and growing, prison populations in the world, I’d say your gulag system is pretty established. I am certain many thousands of black men either don’t make it home from prison, or come home so scarred as to be rendered practically disappeared. They are imprisoned at appalling rates, and their employment and other possibilities are virtually non existent. Not to mention the thousands who toil overseas for exported Capitalism, men women and children working in horrible conditions, losing life and health.

And I disagree. I think the precepts you start out with really shape the system.  Capitalism requires a system owners and workers, which has a starting point of inequality. I do think it can be handled better than it is in the states. Many other countries do it better.

You’ll have to explain what you mean by “look beyond that.”


It all depends on from what vantage point you are looking at the system.

C

Here in the U.S. Im not sure many people are blind to the system,it may be that people just dont care that much.The states does put way too many people in prison;Ive read more than anywhere else in the world.In the area I grew up in most people seemed to have had at least one family member put away at some point,and it was a pretty middle class area ohh Seems like it aint ending anytime soon;they ought to change some laws.When you say thousands of black men dont make it home do you mean that they are killed there?When you say they come back so scarred do you mean bodily or emotionally?

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 April 2011 09:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

And I disagree. I think the precepts you start out with really shape the system.  Capitalism requires a system owners and workers, which has a starting point of inequality. I do think it can be handled better than it is in the states. Many other countries do it better.

You’ll have to explain what you mean by “look beyond that.”

Every system is Capitalism. The only question is who it is that’s controlling the capital. The old defunct Soviet system had it controlled almost exclusively by the state and ultimately, it didn’t work. However, blaming the system itself for it’s failure looks too simplistic to me. A lot can be pointed towards the cronyism which existed there. The Russian version of the Good Old Boys network may have had a different lable, but it was still a Good Old Boys network where the party elite looked after their own, ultimately at the expense of the nation.

As to inequality, that strikes me as too simplistic, if only because people like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs have shown what can be done by a few people with a vision who start out in a garage or a backroom workshop. They’re not the only ones either. U.S. history is filled with such examples where people started out from the very bottom and clawed their way to the top.

As to looking beyond that, the trick is to get past the finger pointing and looking for a simple explaination to a complex problem. No system has a monopoly on high crime rates. Ultimately, the problems lie with the people and what they do with what they have.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 April 2011 10:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 26 April 2011 09:32 AM

Every system is Capitalism. The only question is who it is that’s controlling the capital. The old defunct Soviet system had it controlled almost exclusively by the state and ultimately, it didn’t work. However, blaming the system itself for it’s failure looks too simplistic to me. A lot can be pointed towards the cronyism which existed there. The Russian version of the Good Old Boys network may have had a different lable, but it was still a Good Old Boys network where the party elite looked after their own, ultimately at the expense of the nation.

Communism was not capitalism. If it was identical, as you say, to any other system, why did it fail? I’ll tell you why it failed, because the communists overestimated the human nature. Communism was like a game of soccer without the goalie nets, hence the inability to score and win (or lose). People got bored and unproductive.

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 8
3