4 ms·

Nice abuse of Popper’s phrase. Of course you have just hoisted yourself on your own petard: it’s hard to dispute that American capitalism cannot tolerate compe

Nice abuse of Popper’s phrase. Of course you have just hoisted yourself on your own petard: it’s hard to dispute that American capitalism cannot tolerate competing ideologies, evidenced by (e.g.) The Vietnam War and Korean War. But now I am just repeating my original comment. You also have another glaring problem to address: it is very easy and simple to tolerate the kind of socialism/communism where an independent nation state wants to use it’s own national resources instead of opening it up to foreign private interests. No one is harmed by that.[1] I guess the CIA just had a very eccentric interpretation of Popper. [1] Unless you want to get real Red Scare and concoct some crazy theory about how those small nation states are really puppets of the Soviet Union who will use those resources to eventually nuke the Free World… and therefore War is Peace, Paradox of Tolerance and all that.

CamperBob2 5y ago
Comparisons to capitalism as an abstract ideology notwithstanding, you do have to use violence to keep people from voluntarily buying from and selling to each other. There is a reason why the Communist Party of the USA is a thing and the Capitalist Party of the PRC is not. They are willing to use violence within their own borders to suppress competing ideologies in the absence of tangible criminal offenses, while we generally are not. And then there's the simple question of whether more people die trying to sneak into your country or out of it. Moral relativists run into serious trouble with that one.
- avgcorrection 5y ago
  You have to use violence in order to stop people from nationalising their own resources instead of opening themselves up to foreign corporate penetration. The US federal state had to use violence to suppress the socialist Black Panthers. I could go on like this all day. You have no legs to stand on when your claim is that capitalism is just voluntarism.
  - CamperBob2 5y ago
    I could go on like this all day. Looks that way. I think we're talking past each other, peace out.

CamperBob2 5y ago

Comparisons to capitalism as an abstract ideology notwithstanding, you do have to use violence to keep people from voluntarily buying from and selling to each other. There is a reason why the Communist Party of the USA is a thing and the Capitalist Party of the PRC is not. They are willing to use violence within their own borders to suppress competing ideologies in the absence of tangible criminal offenses, while we generally are not. And then there's the simple question of whether more people die trying to sneak into your country or out of it. Moral relativists run into serious trouble with that one.

avgcorrection 5y ago
You have to use violence in order to stop people from nationalising their own resources instead of opening themselves up to foreign corporate penetration. The US federal state had to use violence to suppress the socialist Black Panthers. I could go on like this all day. You have no legs to stand on when your claim is that capitalism is just voluntarism.
- CamperBob2 5y ago
  I could go on like this all day. Looks that way. I think we're talking past each other, peace out.