User talk:An American Nihilist/Archive2

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search


communism failed; a pointless rant[edit]

because 1) nationalism 2) people like stuff and status 3) this is very important, working conditions improved 4) the middle class never vanished into the elite and the proles; and therefor, theres something to distract the proles from revolting, namely, a social group within reach saying "no no; stop that, just work hard and you can be with us, and set up your children and grandchildren to have a better life"

that, in my reasoning, is why communism never took off. it got superceded by the times, then ruined by a lot of power hungry fucks. --il'Dictator Mikal 05:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable enough, given that I don't know anything about history or civics.
I think that communism could maybe -- maybe -- work after generations and generations of slow socialistic progression towards the ultimate ideal, but even then that's a pretty big stretch, and it'd most likely get messed up along the way. Nihilist 06:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Communism in theory is a very awesome idea for the most part, the problem is, it can't happen because smothering certain human desires isn't going to happen in the timeframe you would need it to happen in for it to ever work out --il'Dictator Mikal 06:05, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
How about, "Karl Marx had been studying German idealism a little too much and had his head lodged where the sun don't shine"? Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 06:10, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
I disagree to an extent. Revolutionary Communism, as an ideology, failed because because most western nations adopted a welfare state, abandoned laissez faire. Revolts happen if people go hungry. If they are fed and given healthcare they are complacent. Secondly, communism is really the only moral end of human history possible. The value of human labor, how most people make their living, probably last maybe 50 years. At that point I'm more willing to choose communism over feudalism.JohnSnow (talk) 06:20, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
"communism is really the only moral end of human history possible." As a Historian, your words make me laugh so much sir. History is not going to end any time soon, and it won't be because of some variant utopian socialist theory. --il'Dictator Mikal 06:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Because capitalism can continue when the value of human labor is null? JohnSnow (talk) 06:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
History is not going to end any time soon, and it won't be because of some variant utopian socialist theory. --il'Dictator Mikal 06:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Repeating a statement doesn't make it true. This isn't some utopia socialist theory. When you take a reduction position, the increases in technological advancement have to reduce the value of labor given the inherent competition in capitalism. Short of a Butlerian Jihad, communism is the only moral way to distribute the means of production. JohnSnow (talk) 06:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Communism is the only moral way to distribute the means of production. As you say, "Repeating a statement doesn't make it true." Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 06:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Do you have any other way to do so when the value of human work has come to and end? JohnSnow (talk) 06:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Mu. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 06:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
you trying to make a point? im still laughing about you saying communism will be the end of human history. --il'Dictator Mikal 06:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
So you're going to be a biased asshole? Why even post if you're going to make insipid comments?JohnSnow (talk) 06:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
How am i being biased? You made a stupid statement, im laughing at it. History is FILLED with apocalypse predictions and ideas to be the final state of man in some utopia. they ALL failed. --il'Dictator Mikal 06:43, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Goodpost.gif End of history, pure communism, Resurrection Day, Second Coming, frashokereti — different words, same dreck. Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX 06:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
I never said it was bound to happen. I said it would be the most just way for it to happen. Do you disagree that advancements in technology (automation and artificial intelligence) will one day displace human labor?
I dont think marx was making a theory for AI and modern technology. he lived in a world where things were like the mid and late 1800's, and his theory is designed around a world like the mid to late 1800's. --il'Dictator Mikal 06:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm kind of missing the point. Not being ready in the past does not preclude it from being right in the future. I can see from your post that you do not disagree with my view that eventually all human will be worth the same (nothing). You laughed at the idea of communism being the most just end of history. What is the most just end when all human worth is the same? JohnSnow (talk) 07:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
-Shrugs- --il'Dictator Mikal 07:05, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

you do sci-fi[edit]

you tell me what any of this means: "First. Violent or Peaceful? War?

a losing front on all sides, with no hope in sight.

Why? The storymaker knows, but the storymaker doesn't quite understand however. Near or far; for what purpose? Resources? Land? Experiment? To be deciphered.

Human or Different? Radical or similar? Worshiped as God, worshiped as demons, joyous in its worship.

all together, suffer. "

i found it on my computer and am not to sure what I was trying to get at.--il'Dictator Mikal 07:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

You seem to be trying to say it doesn't matter the reason for two different civilizations to contact, and that humans will either demonize or idealize the other -- in the end it doesn't matter, because it all leads to suffering.
By the way, I'm trying to develop a pseudo-intro for lo colors.
Some called it a miracle of modern science.

In truth, it was a much more mundane milestone than the media let on, the technology having been available and in use for years; although to be fair, it was the first of this scale, it was the first to gain this widespread attention, and it was the most affordable – and damn if it wasn’t impressive.

Thousands of the poor and middle-class now stood atop a cylindrical plateau, a perfectly-symmetrical monolith high enough to rival the tallest skyscrapers. Elevators zipped up and down, carrying people streaming in from the extended dock.
I'm trying to get description down. Nihilist 07:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

why CNN is crap[edit]

about 25 in--il'Dictator Mikal 07:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Rob[edit]

There’s a discussion about cooping Rob. Proxima Centauri (talk) 08:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

where[edit]

the hell have you been? I'm running out of people from my gen that i can relate to--Mikal Harass Follow 19:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC).

I took a break from RationalWiki.
What's up with you? Nihilist 00:29, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm in an inactive period for RW, doing school things. --Mikal Harass Follow 04:41, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Valid Discussions[edit]

I think most, not all, but most topics, are open to discussion, I personally think he shouldn't have opened it because he has the worst way of going about putting his views across. --Mikal 05:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Maybe ey didn't open the discussion in the most eloquent or sensitive way, but i don't think there's anything wrong with what ey said.
Yes, i'm using Spivak pronouns. (talk to a) Nihilist 06:22, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Would be far much effort to use other pronouns. --Mikal 04:52, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Substing the world[edit]

I'm pretty sure the pibot thing won't work now. Peter mqzp 02:46, 22 February 2013 (UTC)