Libertarian asks. I answer.

In an attempt to keep aynrandlover’s “Communism, Economics, and Planet Earth” thread in GQ and off the route to the Pit via GD, I have decided to take Libertarian’s “general questions” and answer them here. Why? I dunno. I guess the sarcastic answers are less of an effort than having to waste valuable office goof-off time in coming up with analytical answers. Which I would do if I felt they deserved such answers.

Just to set the tone.

Beet juice, borscht, and rice kasha. Oh wait, borscht is beet juice. Doesn’t matter, three items on the menu look better than two. Much more choice.

Sugar-free beet juice.

Yes. We’ll televise it weekly, with special daily broadcasts on Passover and Hanukkah, and call it Humiliate the Cosmpolite Conspiracy.

Of course. But only as long as His Holiness’ flesh holds out.

They’ll be on the TV show I mentioned earlier. Alternative lifestyles are a bourgeois corruption of proletarian mentality.

Whatever we can make out of the handful of recycled clothing scraps we have on hand. But those tuxedos we expropriated from Bill Gates in the name of the people are off-limits. We need those for state dinners celebrating the fulfillment of last year’s production norms.

Maoism is a Trotskyist deviation and possession of anything symbolic thereof will be punishable by ten years’ deprivation of freedom followed by sixteen years hard labor tailoring the handful of scraps we issue for the annual fashion dictates.

Of course. They will be converted into tailor shops for those imprisoned for possession of Maoist artifacts.

You ever see the commercial with the hot babushka saying “Is next - beach wear! Very nice”?

Separate bathroom and kitchen, five bedrooms (one for each family), with small fold-out beds and large wall-to-wall bookcases to hold the complete works of Lenin, Marx, and Engels.

You will both be in violation of the five-year energy consumption norms. Report immediately to Tailor Shop Branch #6573 and start sewing.

Americans think a good education is reciting pi to the 100,000th place from memory. Islam holds the ability to recite large sections of the Qur’an as a high academic standard. We do it one better. Anyone able to recite Lenin’s What is to be Done? and the Communist Manifesto in their entirety both forwards and backwards will be guaranteed a lifetime membership in the Party.

If you violate the energy consumption norms like you threatened to earlier, your son will learn agriculture very quickly at any one of the numerous grain collectives we will construct in Iowa.

Socialism values the family and strongly supports the bond that forms when parents educate their children. If you denounce your wife when you’re caught violating the energy consumption norms we can arrange to have you and your son at the same collective in Iowa.

Under socialism the proletariat won’t get sick. If you do, it’s because you’re still susceptible to bourgeous influences and we’ll have to heal your mind before we can let the body heal itself.

We’ll get you a referral for your eyes once you’re certified for release from the curative re-education facilities.

The best health insurance under socialism is a Party membership card. For those kidney patients unable to obtain one, we recommend a sharp reduction in beet juice intake so as to ease the burden of kidney function.

The problem of who will benefit from socialist society and who will need to work in order to build it has long troubled the socialist thinkers of the world. How to separate out those whose intellectual abilities are more suited to constructing socialism than to enjoying its fruits? Lenin said on more than one occasion “To correctly solve the problem, one must seek out and grasp the weakest link.”

We have already begun our work.

Ugh, that left a distinct bad taste in my mouth.
(good job)

A genuine question, I am marginally puzzled.

Yup, it’s always fun when people go off like that, as I recently discovered…

Is this a transcript from Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?

Ah, nothing I love more than a good slugfest between economics majors. :smiley:

Link, for other fans of the genre…

Collounsbury - no, this is a little steam-letting. 'S why it’s here in the Pit.

ah yes.

Well, it looks more like an exchange between a marxist and economics trained folks.

Okay, Olentzero, sign me up. You and your nose picking bureaucrats who live a thousand miles from me know what’s better for me and my family than we do, that’s for sure. Needs are needs. People who live in the South Bronx need exactly the same things as people who live in rural Wyoming.

I like the brilliant observation made by that Democrat senator who said that a poor man could buy a muffler with a tax cut while a rich man could buy a Lexus. After all, muffler manufacturing creates a lot more jobs than automobile manufacturing does. I also like the steadfast way Republican senators stick to their principles and dismantle federal agencies, like the Department of Education, while slashing pork filled transportation bills including for their own districts.

But what I really like is the fact that leftists can’t keep their hands out of my pockets and rightests can’t keep their hands off my zipper. I feel so loved I can’t stand it. Maybe we should become socialist with a sado-masochist as our dictator, so we can all have some needs shoved up our collective asses.

“Oh mommy, I ain’t no commie,” but I think I’d prefer to live a hundred years in Olentzero’s hypothetical Communist utopia, than one year in a Libertaria where the only way to possess any rights at all is to own real estate.

Don’t know where you got that from, RT, except maybe a careless skim of something I might have said. Real estate is not the only property there is. You are born with property, and therefore rights.

Have fun with your hundred years under Stalin, Hitler, and Mao.

And how do Stalin, Hitler and Mao fit into Olentzero’s communist utopia?

pan

I feel compelled to note that there is a large swath of territory between Olentzero’s position and Libertarian’s (presumed from what I have seen here) position. I feel comfortable accepting free markets as more efficient than command economies --the emperical evidence is overwhelming-- while at the same time rejecting a libertarian approach to political economy.

I’m honored to have started a GQ thread that completely bypassed GD and came straight to the Pit!

I am very confused, however: is someone here really a socialist? Olentzero’s comments seem completely sarcastic, but perhaps sarcastic in a way like, “This is what you [libertarians] think of us?”

So, before I can flame any of you commie gestapo KGB bastards, I need to know…which of you is a commie gestapo KGB bastard? :smiley:

It should come as no suprise that I don’t think lib’s comments were out of line, only that they were not appropriate to the forum. But it is difficult to not make an economic question have a non-debatable answer. I was hesitant to put it in GQ, but I really wanted less moralizing and as much as is considered fact over hypothesis.

kabbes
I think the implication is that socialism breeds the power-hungry since material gain is bred out of us. Maybe. Or perhaps that some of the the biggest promoters of the socialist way of thought have been some real bastards. Much could be directed at lazzie faire capitalism too, I’m sure.

Seems like you’re counterposing here, Collounsbury. So you’re saying if I’ve read works on Marxist economics, by and about Marx, but I don’t have a degree to back it up, I have no idea what I’m talking about?

I seem to remember a discussion we had on languages a while back. Have you a linguistics degree?

Libertarian: The bureaucrats have decided you don’t need a comb because the WHOOSH parted your hair quite nicely. Are you so used to masking your snide sarcasm with a veneer of seriousness (“I’m not debating, I’m asking questions”) that anytime anyone else is sarcastic at you, you take them seriously? Get your head out of Andre Marrou’s ass.

kabbes: They don’t, but that would be lost on anyone who’d rather provoke than listen and discuss.
cough Collounsbury cough Libertarian cough

This is the Pit, assclown. Take the evaluation of ideas to GD where they belong. You evaluate people here.

:rolleyes: Where in God’s everlovin’ name have you been?!

Wow, olentzero, I don’t think C should be taking a beating here, though I do remember the Esperanto debate.

Ahh, so it was sarcasm, eh? I knew no one took socialism seriously!! :smiley: :smiley: [sub]Oh shit…[/sub]

Basically, I read it as saying that Marxism is a theory that can be evaluated in the larger field of economics, and that you are not trained in that field, while others are. Just as I would listed to a trained scientist in evaluating the theory of evolution, rather than someone whose expertise is only in evolution or creationism.

And therefore, what?

aynrandlover Perhaps not, if he can explain what he meant by his comment.

Don’t make me bring a coupla pipe-bangin’ Bolsheviks over to get dialectic on your ass.

I think, knowing Lib, that he was taking the conclusions Hayek drew in The Road to Serfdom for granted. Most specifically, chapter 10 “Why the Worst Get on Top”. The book, which I’ve read myself and enjoyed, attempts to show that the theoretical concept of socialism can only lead to similar results as have been experienced in countries that have claimed to attempt it. Whether or not you agree with these conclusions is, I suppose, up to you, but he certainly does cover many points very well.

If you agree with Hayek, and Lib, then communism leads directly to having leaders such as Mao, Stalin, Kim Il Jong, Castro, Hitler (much is made of the socialist roots of fascism), etc. I would imagine that Olentzero would disagree, but it’s the Pit, so it’s not exactly like everyone is going to calmly try to find common ground to start from before making their arguments.