An Open Invitation to Karl

Karl,

I’d like to have a real conversation with you so we can explore the differences in our ideas.  Now, I understand that the nature of this forum makes this difficult, so here’s a proposal.  I will start with an observation and a series of questions for you.  You think about them and answer me in the comments section.  Feel free to add your own observations and questions.  I will then paste your reply into the main body of this post and reply in kind.  We’ll continue this way for as long as we can keep things civil.  There’s just one request I must insist upon: that, when you are asked a question, you give an actual reply.  I will give you an affirmative answer to your questions, but only if you will do so in return.  I do not want you trying to deflect the issue by asking me a question instead.  Do we have an agreement?  I hope so, as I would love the opportunity to hear you defend your position (no, seriously, I want to hear your reasoning).

Since you have already chosen Karl as your name, let me chose one for myself.  I’ll use “Thomas.”

THOMAS:

Karl,

You tell me there is no such thing as a Natural Right.  Supposing I accept this assertion for the sake of argument, could you tell me by what reasoning you attack the Capitalist?  If there are no Natural Rights, then how can the Capitalist steal anything from the worker?  Stealing would denote a right to something, but you have said there are no rights.  Therefore, there can be no theft.  Likewise, how can you claim the Capitalist is guilty of coercion?  If there are no Natural Rights, then the worker has no right to his labor or even himself, therefore, there can be no moral value placed on the Capitalist’s actions.  If he is coercing the worker, then the worker must be the weaker.  In this sense, it would seem that the Capitalist is actually the more “evolved” between himself and the worker, and thus, the more preferred.  Furthermore, if there are no rights, the Capitalist’s accumulation of wealth should be viewed as a virtue: a measure of his “evolution” above the worker.  So I’ll ask you again: if there is no such thing as Natural Rights, how do you justify your attack against the Capitalist?

KARL:

Karl

I’m not available all hours of the day.

The attack on the capitalist stems not from natural rights, but from the idea that one day the majority of human beings the working class, will get grinded in between the millstones of unemployment and low wages and decide that the bourgeoisie are not necesarry and in doing so, will become class conscious and engage in class struggle. This stems from what Marx theorized, was the way the world worked. So far the workers have yet to become class conscious and revolt, but it is still a beautiful ideal. They say capitalist fairy tales begin with the words “once upon a time,” and Marxist fairy tales begin with “onde day there will be a worker’s revolution.”

Marx said it is a, take if you can world, and right now the capitalist are taking, He theorized the workers would get fed up and start fighting back. There is no right and wrong aspect about. His theories say the bourgeoisie will try to justify their taking, and the worker’s would be wrong to actually heed the words of bourgeoisie philosophers, because the bourgeoisie philosophers would use their words to justify their actions.

Marxism isn’t about right and wrong, it is about competing interest, and class struggle.

The attack on the capitalist comes from the fact that I’m working class, I have seen the deplorable conditions of the working class and I have seen the amazing wealth and power of the bourgeoisie. As a member of the working class I seek for my class to hold more power in society, I see the bourgeosie as ineffective parasite holding the working class down. In essence working class interest are at odds with bourgeoisie interest.

THOMAS:

OK, so you deny any question of right and wrong in the current situation.  You say it is merely a matter of power and the struggle for more.  I’ll accept that — for the sake of argument.

Now, answer me this.  Why not just fight to become a Capitalist?  You have just pointed out that the Capitalist is the one winning this struggle so far.  This is an admission that the working class has not shown an ability to fight back.  So it would seem that you are taking an irrational position: that of “hoping” for what has never been when you have a clear path to what you want that you, yourself, admit works.  Therefore, the rational conclusion is for one to become a Capitalist and not sit around hoping for what has never been.

Next, you claim that the workers will unite as a class, but this is impossible.  It is impossible because it rests upon a fictitious premise: that the working class is a single entity.  In reality, there is no such thing as “the working class.”  Even within the group of employees there are different “classes” that serve to prevent the collectivist movement for which you are “hoping.”  The white collar worker will work against the blue collar union man, who will work against the wage laborer.  Actual events have already demonstrated this to be true.  But more to the point, the collective is a fiction designed to allow men such as Marx to write about how to control it.  While, in reality, what Marx thinks of as a class is nothing more than a collection of individuals, and the only way to get a large group of individuals is to organize them.  When it comes to production, you call that organizer a Capitalist and you hate him.  But when it comes to trying to force your reality on the natural order of this world, he is called a dictator and you love and praise him.  However, the result is always the same: your beloved “working class” remains oppressed.  The only thing that changes is the person doing the oppressing.

Which brings us to my original accusation against your ideology: that you are merely looking for a justification for your greed.  You want to take what others have earned (stolen in your view) and you want people to tell you that you were right to do so.  And that is an indication of the Natural Law you refuse to acknowledge — because it shows you do have a conscience, and your conscience is telling you that you are wrong, but you refuse to acknowledge this inner law in favor of your own greedy and lust for power.  If it were not the case, you — as a worker — would simply say “Oh, well, this is just the way things are.”  But you don’t — because you feel you have suffered some sort of wrong, and that takes us right back to the morality issue.

KARL:

Karl

Many people want a sense of purpose in life. I would like to work for my fellow man, rather than work for individual wealth. I see how the “free-market” allocates more resources on electronic gizmos and 72 inch HDTVs rather than far more pressing issues.

I want my work to have purpose, the “free-market” provides purposeless work and does not even compensate that well for it.

If I became a capitalist, my life would still be purposeless, rich and powerful, but without purpose.

Working class unity, MIGHT not be possible, the Leninist solution to this is a vanguard worker’s party to lead/force the workers into unity. I don’t know the answer to, or even the possibility of working class unity.

The capitalist organizes labor for the benefit of private profits. This is at odds with the interest of the working class. Profits do not equal what society needs or requires.

you say
If it were not the case, you — as a worker — would simply say “Oh, well, this is just the way things are.”

Why would anyone ever utter such a thing, when there is a possibility of improving the situation?
The bourgeoise will accuse the other side of being greedy, and the other side will accuse the bourgeosie of being greedy. This is how class politics work. I reject any claims that I am greedy because I don’t respect private property claims. In Real life I do, because I’ll get arrested, but in theory private property is a shackle holding back the working class. Back in my libertarian days, i could not advocate socialism because I respected private property, but now, I see it as detrimental to the working class.

THOMAS:

Karl,

You are making value judgments again, and inherent in value judgments is the notion of what is right vs. what is wrong: otherwise known as morality.   So, once again, you are really just trying to justify your definition of morality and, in the sense that you are willing to use force to enforce it, you are trying to be god (little g).

As for working for others: who is to say the Capitalist is not working for others?  If the owner of a company provides a service that makes the lives of his fellow man easier or more enjoyable and he grows wealthy from it, where is the harm in that?  By your own words, you should see NOTHING wrong with that – yet you just assume that wherever someone has more than you, there must be oppression.  I think the word you really want is “envy.”

Now, as to your question about the worker’s class “might” not be possible: can you show me one time in history when it has ever existed?  NO!  So unicorns “might” not be possible, but if I desire them to exist, I can tape horns on horses until they start growing them.  And as to the vanguard: you reveal your greed and envy by supporting the use of force (i.e. the same oppression you fight against when you see the Capitalist doing it) to better your lot in life, yet all you do is swap one master for another.  I think that leaves you just as “purposeless” as when you started.

Finally, you suggest that you can improve your situation?  How?  For you, the answer always seems to be measured against material gain, but purpose is not a material thing.  Doesn’t a monk have purpose?  Yet he swears a vow of poverty.  But you say you do not respect private property claims.  OK, then why worry about trying to improve your lot in life?  Since you cannot claim property, if you gain it, I can come take it for my needs – thus, leaving you back where you started.  And if there is no private property, how will you improve your lot in the first place as no one will work when they get no reward, thus there will be nothing to share.

Karl, my friend, we’ve had three round of this now and every time I have used your reasoning to turn your own words against you.  I can do this all day long – no matter what you come up with.  The secret is, if you understood the issues, you could do the same to me.  This is because logic and reason are useless when it comes to establishing matters of right and wrong.  The truth is, you are envious and greedy, but we all are – to a point.  However, you have allowed it to turn your reason against you.  Rather than looking for ways to improve your lot in life by serving your fellow man, you waste your time and energy trying to justify what is nothing more than theft, and that will never succeed because it can’t – it violates natural law.  So why don’t you try what has been shown to work throughout human history and work within that law?

34 thoughts on “An Open Invitation to Karl

  1. “Karl, I’d like to have a real conversation with you so we can explore the differences in our ideas.”

    Yeah, good luck with that. lol

  2. Karl,

    Please respond to Joe immediately. We have huge sums of money bet on whether or not you will use your natural right to defend your ideology. Remember your dear leader Obama is counting on you to defend the cause. Failure to do so usually results in an extra hole in the cranium.

  3. Y’all Don’t get it …. Karl has already told us ….he’s Waiting for the “Workers” to just come and SIEZE control of the RNL site…….because it it already rightfully THEIRS….

    Joe is just the Unjust occupier of the Peole’s RNL ………….. And I’m not being facecious !!!!

      • Yes and thanks…..7.62×51 = 308 ( but necess 308 Win)…..better to have a “platform” dedicated to 7.62×51 than 308….as 308 will go through….but not necess the reverse……and Civilian 308 supply could become an issue…….Right ?

        I put up another question regarding 5.56 / .223 after it……..figured that was a similar situation.

        • I put up another question regarding 5.56 / .223 after it……..figured that was a similar situation.

          As we used to say in Turkey,
          Same,same

        • Don,

          FN FNAR and FN SCAR 17s is the way, 7.62 or .308 no problem. As far as supply you need a Dillon 1050 and a boat load of components. Problem solved any shortages let me know. Enough on hand until the military supplies become ours. Remember Band of Brothers. I am short a good bolt action 7.62 but it is on the want list. Most likely an FN A1A SPR.

          • Thanks I’ll look that up. I was able to secure a Daniel Defence since the beginning of Feb……As I said I am a novice and my main interest in acquiring is for Defence and excercising our (my) 2nd amendment rights….

            All Youse guys know a helluvalot more than me … I am just making sure I can keep my end of the bargain up ….when and if it’s necessary. I must admit through discussions here, on other sites, at NUMEROUS Gun shops, and with folks I’ve encountered through Gun-Broker.com, and at the Range……the people who are Gun-owners are a Friendly, unassuming, knowledgable and quite approachable bunch….whether I’m talking to someone from SC, Ohio, Texas NY or whereever…..Very good bunch of folks consistanly…..Just felt I needed to say that.

            • Don, as a “group”, firearms enthusiasts are friendlier, unassuming, helpful, and more polite than any other “group”. Be it golf, tennis, bowling, etc.

      • You could just put a regular Sesame Street Tape on …. they’ve been trained by this media anyway …. they’d prolly just stand there mesmorized……then just subsitute their little “sayings from chairman Mao” books….with one that says…”Pay on the Way Out” and you’re all set. Collect their $20 and say thanks Gaspadeen….thanks Komrade as they leave….

        Jus’Sayin.

  4. Joe,
    I think karl just came here to drop a T—, in the punchbowl.
    The replies from all of you made him realize he forgot to unbuckle his pants first!

  5. I’m not available all hours of the day.

    The attack on the capitalist stems not from natural rights, but from the idea that one day the majority of human beings the working class, will get grinded in between the millstones of unemployment and low wages and decide that the bourgeoisie are not necesarry and in doing so, will become class conscious and engage in class struggle. This stems from what Marx theorized, was the way the world worked. So far the workers have yet to become class conscious and revolt, but it is still a beautiful ideal. They say capitalist fairy tales begin with the words “once upon a time,” and Marxist fairy tales begin with “onde day there will be a worker’s revolution.”

    Marx said it is a, take if you can world, and right now the capitalist are taking, He theorized the workers would get fed up and start fighting back. There is no right and wrong aspect about. His theories say the bourgeoisie will try to justify their taking, and the worker’s would be wrong to actually heed the words of bourgeoisie philosophers, because the bourgeoisie philosophers would use their words to justify their actions.

    Marxism isn’t about right and wrong, it is about competing interest, and class struggle.

    The attack on the capitalist comes from the fact that I’m working class, I have seen the deplorable conditions of the working class and I have seen the amazing wealth and power of the bourgeoisie. As a member of the working class I seek for my class to hold more power in society, I see the bourgeosie as ineffective parasite holding the working class down. In essence working class interest are at odds with bourgeoisie interest.

  6. Many people want a sense of purpose in life. I would like to work for my fellow man, rather than work for individual wealth. I see how the “free-market” allocates more resources on electronic gizmos and 72 inch HDTVs rather than far more pressing issues.

    I want my work to have purpose, the “free-market” provides purposeless work and does not even compensate that well for it.

    If I became a capitalist, my life would still be purposeless, rich and powerful, but without purpose.

    Working class unity, MIGHT not be possible, the Leninist solution to this is a vanguard worker’s party to lead/force the workers into unity. I don’t know the answer to, or even the possibility of working class unity.

    The capitalist organizes labor for the benefit of private profits. This is at odds with the interest of the working class. Profits do not equal what society needs or requires.

    you say
    If it were not the case, you — as a worker — would simply say “Oh, well, this is just the way things are.”

    Why would anyone ever utter such a thing, when there is a possibility of improving the situation?
    The bourgeoise will accuse the other side of being greedy, and the other side will accuse the bourgeosie of being greedy. This is how class politics work. I reject any claims that I am greedy because I don’t respect private property claims. In Real life I do, because I’ll get arrested, but in theory private property is a shackle holding back the working class. Back in my libertarian days, i could not advocate socialism because I respected private property, but now, I see it as detrimental to the working class.

    • Karl – Working for the betterment of your fellow man is indeed a noble goal and one that is obtainable by joining the Peace Corps. This could very well be the satisfaction you seek. The Peace Corps is government funded and union represented (by the AFSCME). I understand the pay is not all that good though, so if you have children that you want to put through college, a house payment (or rent) or a car payment, this job might not be for you. If you have financial obligations that force you to work, volunteer to serve meals at your nearest homeless shelter.

      As far as “Oh, well, this is just the way things are.”, that’s not quite accurate. While many workers might accept, reluctantly or with satisfaction, that they will always work for someone else, hopefully they all realize that IF THEY WANTED TO, they would be able to go out and start their own businesses, and there is the difference. In the US, we have the right (or opportunity if you will) to make this choice for ourselves. In a Marxist or Communist society, you do not have that choice. In a capitalist society, you trade work, labor, or skills for a fair wage. Yes, the business owner makes money, but then he has all the investment and liabilities, right?

  7. So – we’ve gone from natural rights to Marxism. I know it’s an old (and somewhat tired) cliche, but have you ever gotten hired by one of your coworkers, or by a poor man? I suspect (you mention you’re a member of the working class) that a capitalist provides your job, which in turn allows you to pay your bills and support your family. On the other hand you could be a government worker and your Utopia is having the government own all businesses and provide for the workers in that capacity. I’m truly interested in how you feel about that. I’ve seen workers rise up in revolt against their employers (strikes) to the point the business owners had to shut down. The working class is the loser in that scenario because they no longer can support their families, while the business owner, if he has been vigilant, has money and resources to continue and possibly start a new business.

    • FC,

      Could you contact me off line? I have a piece I’d like you to write for us. Email in the contact info in far right margin: just scroll down until you find it. Thanks :-)

  8. I thought this was an interesting story. Goes with the Marxist mentality of Karl.

    Free House

    I was in my neighborhood restaurant this morning and was seated behind a group of jubilant individuals celebrating the coming implementation of the health care bill. I could not finish my breakfast. This is what ensued:

    They were a diverse group of several races and both sexes. I heard the young man exclaim, “Isn’t Obama like Jesus Christ? I mean, after all, he is healing the sick.“ The young woman enthusiastically proclaimed, “Yeah, and he does it for free. I cannot believe anyone would think that a free market would work for health care.“ Another said, “The stupid Republicans want us all to starve to death so they can inherit all of the power. Obama should be made a Saint for what he did for those of us less fortunate.“ At this, I had more than enough. I arose from my seat, mustering all the restraint I could find, and approached their table. “Please excuse me; may I impose upon you for one moment?“ They smiled and welcomed me to the conversation. I stood at the end of their table, smiled as best I could and began an experiment.

    “I would like to give one of you my house. It will cost you no money and I will pay all of the expenses and taxes for as long as you live there. Anyone interested?” They looked at each other in astonishment. “Why would you do something like that?“ asked a young man, “There isn’t anything for free in this world.“ They began to laugh at me, as they did not realize this man had just made my point. “I am serious, I will give you my house for free, no money whatsoever. Anyone interested?“ In unison, a resounding Yeah filled the room.

    “Since there are too many of you, I will have to make a choice as to who receives this money-free bargain.“ I noticed an elderly couple was paying attention to the spectacle unfolding before their eyes, the old man shaking his head in apparent disgust. “I tell you what; I will give it to the one of you most willing to obey my rules.“ Again, they looked at one another, an expression of bewilderment on their faces. The perky young woman asked, “What are the rules?“ I smiled and said, “I don’t know. I have not yet defined them. However, it is a free home that I offer you.“ They giggled amongst themselves, the youngest of which said, “What an old coot. He must be crazy to give away his home. Go take your meds, old man.“ I smiled and leaned into the table a bit further. “I am serious, this is a legitimate offer.“ They gaped at me for a moment.

    “I’ll take it, you old fool. Where are the keys?” boasted the youngest among them. ”Then I presume you accept ALL of my terms then?” I asked. The elderly couple seemed amused and entertained as they watched from the privacy of their table. ”Oh yeah! Where do I sign up?” I took a napkin and wrote, I give this man my home, without the burden of financial obligation, so long as he accepts and abides by the terms that I shall set forth upon consummation of this transaction. I signed it and handed it to the young man who eagerly scratched out his signature. ”Where are the keys to my new house?” he asked in a mocking tone of voice. All eyes were upon us as I stepped back from the table, pulling the keys from pocket and dangling them before the excited new homeowner.

    ”Now that we have entered into this binding contract, witnessed by all of your friends, I have decided upon the conditions you are obligated to adhere from this point forward. You may only live in the house for one hour a day. You will not use anything inside of the home. You will obey me without question or resistance. I expect complete loyalty and admiration for this gift I bestow upon you. You will accept my commands and wishes with enthusiasm, no matter the nature. Your morals and principles shall be as mine. You will vote as I do, think as I do and do it with blind faith. These are my terms. Here are your keys.” I reached the keys forward and the young man looked at me dumbfounded.

    ”Are you out of your mind? Who would ever agree to those ridiculous terms?” The young man appeared irritated. ”You did when you signed this contract before reading it, understanding it and with the full knowledge that I would provide my conditions only after you committed to the agreement.” The elderly man chuckled as his wife tried to restrain him. I was looking at a now silenced and bewildered group of people. ”You can shove that stupid deal up you’re a** old man, I want no part of it,” exclaimed the now infuriated young man. “You have committed to the contract, as witnessed by all of your friends; you cannot get out of the deal unless I agree to it. I do not intend to let you free now that I have you ensnared. I am the power you agreed to. I am the one you blindly and without thought chose to enslave yourself to. In short, I am your Master.“ At this, the table of celebrating individuals became a unified group against the unfairness of the deal.
    After a few moments of unrepeatable comments and slurs, I revealed my true intent. “What I did to you is what this administration and congress did to you with the health care legislation. I easily suckered you in and then revealed the real cost of the bargain. Your folly was in the belief that you can have something you did not earn; that you are entitled to, and that which you did not earn; that you willingly allowed someone else to think for you. Your failure to research, study and inform yourself permitted reason to escape you. You have entered into a trap from which you cannot flee. Your only chance of freedom is if your new Master gives it to you. A freedom that is given can also be taken away; therefore, it is not freedom.“ With that, I tore up the napkin and placed it before the astonished young man. “This is the nature of your new health care legislation.“

    I turned away to leave these few in thought and contemplation and was surprised by applause. The elderly gentleman, who was clearly entertained, shook my hand enthusiastically and said, “Thank you sir, these kids don’t understand Liberty.“ He refused to allow me to pay my bill as he said, “You earned this one, it is an honor to pick up the tab.“ I shook his hand in thanks, leaving the restaurant somewhat humbled, and sensing a glimmer of hope for my beloved country.

    Remember, four boxes keep us free: the Soap Box, the Ballot Box, the Jury Box, and the Ammo Box!

  9. Disclaimer. All of Karl’s political thoughts are subject to approval by the worldwide proletariat.

    Socialism is the end of private property for everyone. Including me. I don’t care if I don’t gain property, I’m not expecting it.

    I’m not greedy, I just see capitalism as a system that does not work very well for my class.
    All I want is work to be decided by the workers. Private property impedes this.

    The problem with private property, markets and profits. Is that it is an unstable economic system that can be gamed by those who have control over the means of production. It is an economic system that does not work for the working class, yes the working class should be greedy, the bourgeoisie are greedy. Class conflict is a characteristic of capitalism, to end class conflict you must also end capitalism.

    You say
    “You are making value judgments again, and inherent in value judgments is the notion of what is right vs. what is wrong: otherwise known as morality. So, once again, you are really just trying to justify your definition of morality and, in the sense that you are willing to use force to enforce it, you are trying to be god (little g).”

    Aren’t you doing the same, except you claim your moral judgements come from, god, natural law and a divine morality. All these things are defined by men and by you.

    you made some wrong assumptions.

    1. I envy the riches of the bourgeoisie.
    I don’t envy their riches, I envy their power over the means of production.
    2. That I measure all things in material goods.
    Material things are important, but so are social relations, life satisfaction, workplace safety, feeling that you are part of a greater system.

  10. Karl,

    I’ve tried to write this reply several times to see it I could somehow explain where the far more erudite had failed.
    But I keep retuning to your view on property rights. I boils down to this.
    “It ain’t your, you didn’t earn it! You want it, GO AND EARN IT!
    No, the world isn’t fair! Get used to the fact and do what you can do to improve yourself, and you will be surprised at what you can accomplish. Provided someone doesn’t try and imprison you in a system where there is no free will, Where some Central committee will tell you what to do, and where/how to live. Decide for you what you need and don’t need.
    You know that is what your advocating. You don’t mind as long as the Romney’s of the world are made as miserable as you.
    We used to call that “Cutting one’s nose off to spite his face.” Today, it’s “Enlightenment”

    Once, we would tell our young men to read their Kipling. It is still good advice.

    “As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
    There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
    That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
    And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

    And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
    When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
    As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
    The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return! “

  11. I hardly drop responses, however I browsed a few of the remarks on An Open
    Invitation to Karl | The Rio Norte Line.
    I actually do have a couple of questions for you if it’s allright. Could it be simply me or do some of the comments appear like they are written by brain dead people? :-P And, if you are posting on other online sites, I would like to follow everything fresh you have to post. Would you make a list of every one of all your social networking pages like your linkedin profile, Facebook page or twitter feed?

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s