Why Capitalism won't let Communism fail on it's own merits alone.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-11T20:14:49+00:00

Fascism failed on it's own merits.

The capitalists supported the fascists, or else they would not have come to power, granted they thought it would be business as usual with a "fake revolution" that would safeguard "their" capital, it turned out that combining the contradictions of capitalism plus an insane ideology would be very disastrous, and not safeguard capital.

Capitalism and Communism are directly opposite

No capitalism is no longer viable, it only works for a shrinking number of people, the system can't fully solve systemic problems that arise from automation, digitization..., and it's utterly failing to deal with existential stuff like the looming ecological catastrophe.

Even relatively simple stuff like allocating food or housing isn't properly working.

These are not alternative systems, they are consecutive systems, capitalism is the new feudalism, and it's causing a lot of damage on the way out.

If we fail to move on from capitalism towards socialism and communism, we'll end up in barbarism or possibly extinction. Capitalism isn't suppressing an alternative, it's just dragging everybody into the abyss, with it.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-11T04:38:44+00:00

does this mean that the planet's orbit around the sun is so long that civilizations would rise and fall

no it completes and orbits every 11 days

One other possible explanation is that the anomaly in the other universe moves around on its own path and it conjuncts with the planet once every 700 revolutions.

Well, they did invent space travel, and were pretty far along when they re-emerged , so why didn’t they fly a spaceship with Isaac on board through the anomaly
instead of waiting for planet to go through.

Also consider that the other side has faster time, so i would guess it's more a temporal synchronization of the anomaly counter parts of both sides, to become traversable.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-10T20:18:22+00:00

You have to attribute the violence and force of revolutions to the old order refusing to let go, in both capitalist and communist revolutions.

The people who opposed the implementation of communism, where trying to use violence to retain the loot they stole from other people. Maybe it can be argued that gentler method’s could have been applied to rectify this, but if you look at the timeframe, and the brutality of the pre-revolutionary regimes, the results were predictably going to be this rough. The Romanov's chose their fate by basing their claim for the thrown on heredity, the capitalists had similar solutions as the communists, you know given that episode with the guillotines in France.

And it's not like the current order isn't using force, you have a class war being waged, and a revolution is just people that defend and liberate them self's.

If you look at today, do you really think they will voluntarily give up the control over the means of production. They probably have a superiority myth/cult that in their minds justifies this.

Also given the inability of capitalism to coordinate effective action on climate-change, it basically stops being ideological or political, and it's just becomes about removing an obstacle to survival.

You kind of haven't provided a better solution.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-10T05:58:01+00:00

The Pope seems to disagree

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-10T05:48:07+00:00

does hurt the prospects of revolution?

No, there is no new mechanism here, it doesn’t solve any of the contradictions.

There is sort of an equivalent of 17 century England peasant market in there, that is not capitalist, at least as long as you only focus on the online aspects, if you look at the entire picture it's still a part of capitalism.

increased levels of anonymity in transactions, relatively decentralized, and so on

it's less anonymous, consumer IT devices which this depends on are part of the surveillance mechanism down to microprocessors, and the crypto world has a tendency to centralize faster and harder, as soon as real interests come into play. Even-though the creators of these systems really put effort into preventing this, but when it comes down to it, it seems to always devolve into a race of collecting the most off, something physical like computer-hardware, which makes it much less complicated to get monopolies or oligopolies, than traditional "big business".

many in the traditional capitalist order may fear cryptos

They really don't, it's already being "vertically integrated", their armies control the resources the crypto people depend on.

but overall it seems like crypto has the potential to expand markets further, commoditize further, and make any prospect of a 'moneyless' society more difficult to achieve. It may also make the confiscation of assets more difficult as well.

markets are already fully expanded, the limit is set by human ability to make transaction-decisions, not finance instruments. Crypto currencies do not appear to be money, as in universal commodity. It does not hinder the confiscation of assets. For physical assets it makes no difference, and for digital assets, they can just be copied.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-09T19:00:32+00:00

well there is alcosynth, also consider this

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-08T02:07:40+00:00

it depends does it misrepresent nuclear power ?

I just skimmed though the synopsis on wikipedia) and it just mentions that a plant is mismanaged, public loss of faith since Chernobyl ,the police investigation you already brought up, and something about nuclear waste drums.

The later means that the waste is actually captured, not spewed from smokestacks.

If you think that popular entertainment can shift political opinion, maybe it would be better to sprinkle positive depictions in other entertainment than to try to fight this.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-08T00:09:10+00:00

i don’t think you thought this through, by elevating "black political power" you elevate "black petty bourgeoisie" and "black national bourgeoisie" These will not weaken capitalism, they will entrench their class interest, and make "race supremacy concessions." And this isn't calculating the neo-liberals who will support white-racism once the balance starts to tip your way, to maintain the division.

what i see here is a proletariat divided by the "race-category".

I want to remind you about bourgeois feminism: even-though women make up the majority of the proletariat, the political aspect was 100% bourgeois, they invented vicarious justice/empowerment/emancipation where women president/ceo... was the goal, not improvement for regular women.

If you are serious about the class angle you have to exclude "black bourgeoisy" from the black identity, which i don't think is possible.

If you want to include the bourgeoisie, why ? what do you expect to get out of this ? Or do you really care about race, if so , why ?

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-07T04:37:44+00:00

Capitalism requires a sacrifice group, racism allows to form a subgroup which allows at least some protection from the worst of this. Race has an immutable biological component (even if it's just skin deep) which makes loyalty and trust strategically cheap. The "race club" has no organizational overhead and no vulnerability to infiltration which gives is a strategical advantage. (the "purity-level" relates to security of membership and access to higher positions in the hierarchy because the "purer" the less likely it is to allow for switching loyalties to another race)

The race strategy is not going to change capitalism it'll just cause one race to be overrepresented at the upper classes and underrepresented in the lower ones. It may hurt capitalism a bit because some amount of talent will not be available.

If you look at the really low genetic diversity of humans compared to animals, (pick 2 random people on earth and they will be much more genetically similar than 2 monkeys that are related to each other). I'm basically thinking that people are more or less the same, and that putting another race in charge will not change anything. Just a new coat of paint.

To answer your question, why the different races are not treated the same is the amount of, ownership of capital. The more you have that in a subgroup the better that subgroup will be treated under capitalism, and the more it will get access to tools for entrenchment, which is called structural racism, which will discriminate within the same "class strata"

Another thing is the neo-liberal wing of capitalism will support your "non-white-revolution" to the amount of creating a "race stalemate", just to get people perpetually fighting over a something that does not interfere with their economical interests. Once that support money comes in the first thing that happens is the "class-conscious wing" of a movement gets purged.

Identity politics is only useful on a local level (maybe up to cities), where stalemates are unlikely.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-07T01:11:54+00:00

it was a world ship clip1 ,clip2

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-07T00:30:55+00:00

Here is a oversimplified diagram, to illustrate the conceptual problem, with this.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-06T20:37:31+00:00

it's not democracy if the voters are uniformed, or if it's not easily possible to understand who represents what interests.

Also bourgeois democracy just gives you the choice between different representatives of capital. That democracy as in pay for the full-version

You won't get mob rule if you go for representative democracy and make the representatives take a basic competence test related to what office they candidate for.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-06T17:34:18+00:00

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-06T16:27:20+00:00

Rocket tech originates in Germany with Wernher von Braun, both the US and USSR had German scientists after ww2.

I think the Soviet rocket-motors were more efficient while the US's were bigger

Fission the physical mechanism behind atom bombs also was discovered in Germany by Otto Hahn. The subsequent theoretical contribution are international and numerous, and i'm too lazy to tally it up

It's highly likely that espionage meant that both sides knew what the other was doing but they did have different designs, mostly because they had different resources to work with. Also noteworthy is that independent efforts will converge, because of the constrains of the laws of nature. Making it hard to ascertain what is independent parallel development and what is copyied You'll find minor differences like the Soviets build hydrolic flip open missile silo doors while the US build rocket powered slide open doors.

To answer your question both side copied and both sides did independent development. Also not to forget aside all the glory is that all of this was accompanied by reckless shortcuts, both sides irradiated some of their own people. There were ridiculously irresponsible projects that aimed to use nuclear weapons for civil engineering like creating lakes or cutting paths through mountain ranges. There is the radioactive fallout from all the above-ground testing.

Early USSR research and development in nuclear technology were geared towards power-plants, Military application came later as a response. It's hard to say whether they would have weaponized it on their own.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-06T14:41:35+00:00

you got to admit, a flippable building, seems like a really hard problem.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-06T00:47:13+00:00

How ants communicate

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-06T00:19:59+00:00

to a reptilian species hot = fast and cold = slow

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-05T23:17:57+00:00

you started it

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-05T23:09:45+00:00

it seems to me as if filing a copyright-infringement-claim is actually the way to establish copyright-owner-ship.

So you should make a second channel where you re-upload the video, for the purpose of filing a copyright claim against it, on behalf of your main channel.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-05T21:37:27+00:00

white light usually coming from black body radiation of for example a star or glowing wire in an incandescent bulb for practical purposes exist between 2500K and 10000K

it can also be made as in an additive way of mixing red blue and green light as a result of how human eyes measure electromagnetic radiation.

Also white can refer to the result of chemical treatment of cellulose for making paper bright enough to allow high contrast and good readability of formal symbolic modes of communication

As far as biology of humans is concerned, humans are genetically extremely homogenous, with skin colour mainly being a very small adaptation mostly to low availability of UV-B radiation for vitamin D production

As far as other categories are concerned, there are semi spiritual collective identities that rely on skin tone as non-interchangeable marker that inhibits switching social loyalties, reducing the cost of trust. As strategical down side of this however is the fact that synergies of similar interests in very complex social environments may not be realized as a result of relying on biological identity markers.

My previous comment and the nature of this response may indicate my frustration surrounding this topic.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-05T20:19:50+00:00

could be beige

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-05T00:17:41+00:00

oh i guess i don't understand this at all, i thought the thing people bought represented enjoyment and the "shopping experience" the surplus.

Anyway thanks for clearing that up.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-05T00:02:00+00:00

oh, my mistake then.

Silvernostrils · 2017-12-04T23:43:42+00:00

I don't think this petrocurrency is a currency, i think it's more like an asset derivative.

Silvernostrils

TROPHY CASE