[ SECRET POST #2936 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2936 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 066 secrets from Secret Submission Post #420.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - text secret ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: World peace

[(Anonymous)]

Dude. One-time thing or not, it's still communism, and it wouldn't work. Everything looks good in theory, but once you add real, flawed people to the mix, even the best-intentioned systems break down. Because there will always be those who can and will game the system, those who lose out to those that do, and no amount of education can correct for psychopaths who are unable to be anything but corrupt.

This is an amazingly bad critique of communism, given that it's a critique of the inability to build structures that function over the long term period. I see no prima facie reason why either capitalism or a mixed economy would be better equipped to deal with the problem of psychopaths. And in fact I think there's a good amount of evidence that laissez-faire capitalism is actually quite bad at dealing with it.

Re: World peace

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

"I see no prima facie reason why either capitalism or a mixed economy would be better equipped to deal with the problem of psychopaths. And in fact I think there's a good amount of evidence that laissez-faire capitalism is actually quite bad at dealing with it."

Did you read what I said at the end? I definitely don't favour laissez-faire capitalism at all, that's why I think two imperfect systems balance each other out when neither has absolute authority. (Maybe pertinent to mention I am a citizen of a Commonwealth country, so I am biased towards the Westminster system because in my opinion, it mostly works well.) Albeit, the two systems balance each other imperfectly, but there is no true perfect system of mass governance that doesn't have some issues.

Re: World peace

[(Anonymous)]

I did, and I still stand by the argument that there's no reason to assume that a particular system deals with this problem in a better or worse way. You have to go to specifics.

The point re: laissez faire capitalism was more about reinforcing the point that these issues are not at all unique to capitalism, let alone to socialism more broadly.