Celebrating National “Pick On An Idiot” Day

I can’t help it: I’m feeling especially ‘snarky’ today, but that’s no reason not to declare and celebrate “National Pick on an Idiot Day.”  So, if this offends you, at least I was honest enough to admit it and warn you beforehand.  Now, I’m calling dibs on our resident commie idiot, Karl.

Karl has told us there is no such thing as free will.  Everything we do is just a react to outside stimuli.  However, there can’t be any rhyme or reason to how we react to these outside stimuli because Karl has also told us that there is no such thing as natural law.  Well, no, not quite: Karl does allow for natural laws over inanimate objects such as the laws of gravity and motion.  He just doesn’t believe in any sort of natural law that governs human behavior.  I suppose this is why he says there is no such thing as morality, either.  After all, if there is no natural law, then we’re all just animals, and there is nothing wrong with the zebra eating the lion, so how could there be anything wrong with what humans do?

Now, I find this a rather odd set of beliefs for Karl to have, especially since his driving force in life is to “organize the proletariat” so they can seize control over the means of production and establish a more just or ‘fair’ distribution of goods.   I find Karl’s beliefs to be odd because, if he really believed all the stuff he claims to believe, he wouldn’t notice that he has less than the Capitalist.  I mean, the Zebra doesn’t notice the lion has a furrier mane, does it?  Nor would Karl think there is anything wrong with the Capitalist having more stuff.  The zebra doesn’t think the lion is wrong for trying to eat her, she just knows she needs to stay away from hungry lions.  So, if Karl really believes what he says, he would be happy with his lot in life.

But Karl is not happy.  Karl wants to “organize” the workers to follow him or some other Marxist into this workers’ paradise he envisions.  But this implies that Karl does see the distribution of material goods as a moral issue, and that people do have free will.  If they didn’t, why would he even think it possible to organize the workers?  If we are all just organisms responding to outside stimuli that has no governing law, he wouldn’t be able to organize the workers because whatever he tried would have a different effect on every human (remember, no governing law over the reaction to stimuli).  But then, why even try to organize?  If Karl is right, organizing the workers to overthrow the Capitalist would make as much sense as organizing the zebras to overthrow the lions.  Do we see Karl out on the plains of the Serengeti organizing the zebras?  Nope!  Why?  Because Karl knows he’s full of it.

The truth is, Karl is a lazy, envious, covetous and cowardly thief.  He wants what others have, but he is too lazy to go earn it himself.  He is too cowardly to take it himself, so he sends the government to take it for him.  And he wants to feel good about all of this so he designs this lunatic ideology of his (or, in this case, he follows the one Marx created for the same reasons) to convince others that he is the ‘better person.’  BUNK!  The truth is, Karl is trying to rationalize his laziness, covetousness, cowardice and desire to steal in such a way that he can claim to be both moral and altruistic.

Karl, life isn’t fair.  You know what else?  You can’t make it fair.  You know why?  Because natural law says it can’t be fair?  And you know why that is?  Because, if life were fair, there could be no natural selection, hence, no ‘evolution,’ and therefore, no life.  Which brings us to yet another piece of rational evidence against your Marxist model.

36 thoughts on “Celebrating National “Pick On An Idiot” Day

  1. Marxism is not moralistic. Maybe your average ‘socialist’ who votes democrat and abhors the Soviet Union, makes moral arguments.

    Anyways capitalism is not economically viable for the majority of the people. Why wouldn’t the powerless seize power? Because it is ‘morally wrong’ and violates ‘natural law.’

  2. It can be argued, any economic system even slavery, works for everybody. The problem is class conflict, it is a fact that private profit seeking is at conflict with those who work for wages. Decreasing wages and increasing prices, establishing a monopoly, are the goals of the bourgeoisie. This is at odds with the working class. Have you proven that ‘he who has the gold makes the rules,’ is false?

  3. This is the problem with Marxism; all theory, no application.

    The fundamental problem with Marxist thought is that it is far too presumptuous for it’s own good, and only implies the dark side of the human factor. The advancement of time and technology does increase the risk of monopoly yes, but also increases the potential for entrepreneurship; while on the contrary, advances the irrelevance of Marxism.

    In a Capitalist system, every worker has the same potential to become a “bourgeoisie” as the “bourgeoise”. Competition among the bourgeoise benefits everybody. Also, Marxism never touches up on the motivation of the workers, instead asserts that whatever the state thinks is best for the workers, is best for the workers. Somebody who works a job in a Capitalist system, may not work that job singularly out of the desire for a wage, but rather, they enjoy some factor of a job not outlined in Marxist reading material. Somebody who loves coffee, may love making coffee; so they become a barista, or they seek out entrepreneurship, and open their own coffee shop(s). Maybe somebody loves cars or motorcycles, so they seek to become a mechanic or a detailer, or they seek entrepreneurship and open their own garage(s). These are the intangibles that Marxism never seeks to confront, instead justifying a poverty mentality as a way to combat greed and corruptions (while they state reaps all the spoils of Marxist labor). Greed, corruption, and exploitation are just extractable byproducts in the system.

    PS: Marxists sure do love their iPhones, Macbook Pros, and double espressos from Starbucks…

    • Are you twelve? Do baristas love working for low wages, because they love working with coffee, Do you think love of working with coffee can pay for the expenses of life. Lets not have this bs about potential. The capitalist system benefits those with capital, sure a man may rise up every once in a while, but the overwhelming majority experience is those with capital getting more capital. Competition between the bourgeoisie, is a competition for profits. profits are best derived from having a monopoly, having low labor cost and high selling price. How is intense competition in creating these conditions, going to help the workers? The true question is why should workers go to a factory, make money for another person? Why should the workers not seize power and rule themselves?

      • I think sports players play for the love of what they do, as do teachers, many researchers and scientists. You’re objection has been dismissed.

        Computers are getting cheaper, as are cell phones. YOur objection to higher costs is dismissed.

        People are paid what they are worth. If you are more inventive or more productive, you WILL get paid more. I’ve seen it in my life and that of my friends. Your objection about low wages is dismissed.

        Reality seems to have trumped your utopian daydreams. Got anything else?

        • Why should the workers not seize the means of production? The wages of the people who make cellphones and computers are way down, the third world workers who make the cheap products, certainly don’t live in this utopia of yours.

          • Karl,

            The third world workers who make those phones make more than you tell people they do. I know. My business partners are Chinese and they are complaining about having to actually pay living wages to their employees if they want to keep people who know what they are doing (just as I told you it works). It’s also why the demand for oil is going up in China — because the peasants are starting to have enough money to buy cars.

            You see, the REAL issue here is that YOU want to live like a rock star without working. It is that simple.

            • (sarcasm)Wow I didn’t know I and Chinese workers, are living in a nice little capitalist world, where all I have to do is work hard and believe in myself and one day I’ll have a middle class life. Gee thanks capitalism.(sarcasm)

              • Karl,

                Your sarcasm betrays you — because there IS a growing middle class in China, and it is growing because the Chinese realize they have to allow capitalism to control the population and grow their economy.

                Really, dude, your ignorance is astounding.

      • Do baristas love working for low wages, because they love working with coffee,
        DO YOU THINK LOVE OF WORKING WITH COFFEE CAN PAY FOR THE EXPENSES OF LIFE?

        Why do you think it should?

        So they have no responsiblity for learning a marketable skill?
        What if everyone in your marxist heaven were to aspire no higher than to flip burgers, or be a barista?
        Why not? why take the effort to educate yourself, and take on more responsibilties, if your pay is the same as someone who’s total skill set is to ask if you want room for cream?

        History proves out the above senario.

  4. The point to my “people working because they love something related to their work” is not rather people love their pay rate. My point that these is incentive for people that causes them to work in a particular industry that may supersede the simple desire to make the largest wage possible.

    Karl, your argument is overly presumptuous as I previously stated. You are implying that nobody except for those with capital, are benefitted. In a Capitalist system, everybody benefits from profit. Companies make their profit, workers are provided with extra labor hours which increases the earning potential for each worker along with benefits and other incentives, companies promote from within, economies are stimulated, and the government makes more in tax dollars. There is risky though, because everything is contingent on potential. Potential does not automatically guarantee profits. Potential guarantees opportunity. Everything else is up to the individual worker or the entrepreneur. That is why education is equally important. Last time I checked, a worker didn’t want a system of fairness that would allow their family to starve, so that everybody in their community could all starve equally.

    Intense competition opens up markets for entrepreneurs and creates jobs. In a competitive market, employers are looking to create jobs that will keep them competitive with competition in accordance with their budget. More profit = bigger budget = more jobs = better quality product. As far as I understand, the potential for monopoly and greed, still yields a better outlook for people than a collective poverty mentality, and big government ownership in the name of “the people” or “the better good”.

    Im curious, in the mind of a marxist, what is a “just wage”? $90,000 a year? $200,000 a year? or is a just wage all of us making $10,000 a year while the big government keeps everything else? He uses emotional language like “cheap”, and uses terms like low wages, but doesn’t provide us with reasonable figures to justify setting prices/wages. Karl barbs at the human element of motivation to work, but offers no alternative. Karl, in no way, goes out of his way to explain why the working class should take over the means of production AND furthermore, fails to present that in a practical sense. Does Karl have any sense of reality, of is he stuck with Will Hunting syndrome, where everything that adds substance to his worldview is outlined in some textbook, manifesto, or political novel?

    • The means of production should be taken over by the proletariat. Because only the proletariat is capable of using the means of production, for use. Instead of profit seeking. Asking what is a fair price and wage is facetious. The new system would be one, with production based pay. Capitalism claims to pay employees based on productivity. The truth is that worker productivity is up and wages stay stagnant. Extra labor hours are meaningless, since for every hour you work, the bourgeoisie receives a bigger benefit, than the worker. Intense competition is a myth, Especially when capital is concentrated in the hands of a few. Capital gets concentrated over time, Monopolies and oligopolies form,

      • Karl,

        Once again, real life dismisses you. Every time your “working class” takes over a business, they destroy it — by doing exactly what you just said — consuming it. They do not know how to re-invest. And if they do not care for profit as you claim, there will never be anything to re-invest.

        IDIOT!

  5. Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
    –Abraham Lincoln

  6. I am a electrician, without my skillset that computer your using isn’t much good.
    We do not hire people who dig ditches to do electrical installation.
    But without men with shovels to dig the foundations, the building can’t be built, to house the electrical apparatus that make your present life possible.

    Each man, rising to his potential, agreeing to work for the compesation he is comfortable with dependant on the local market for that skill, Capitalism is so good that it has created the greatest nation in the history of mankind, and produced such a abundace of goods and services that. we have over-created so much, that we have inavertantly created a counter-society that has become dependant living on our excess production.
    And now we are in danger of losing it all, as the parasites are openly calling for the desruction of the host!

    • Instead of working for exchange-value, men should work for use-value. Use-value is the inherit necessity and use of an object. Exchange-value is the price of a service or product in a market. If labor can be independent and produce with no worry of exchange-value, will create a system of the needs of people being met. Why not have a system where the worker controls their labor. No selling your labor in a flooded labor market is not controlling your labor. You have to have capital to control labor, any business venture requires capital. Through capital you can buy labor from men and use it to create commodities, The system should be one where the people get together and decide what is needed and produce it. Not one where capital and the drive for more capital is what decides how labor is used.

      • The system should be one where the people get together and decide what is needed and produce it

        And if I disagree?
        Then the mob should decide where I work, and what I will do. Then they will decide IF me and my family will eat dependant on their idea of my needs?

        Gotta tell you karl,
        I ain’t liking your “utopia” already!

        • Individuals make up society, society would most likely try to achieve the system that would allow for individuality. if you are concerned about competing with the Joneses, Your consciousness has yet developed into a new form compatible with a socialist world. With exposure to socialist life you will gradually learn to give up the mental defects, capitalism imparts onto the people.

          • With exposure to socialist life you will gradually learn to give up the mental defects

            Or be shot, Die in a labor camp, or in a engineered famine
            Show me where this has not happed!
            Marxism has killed more people than all the wars in mankinds history!
            Exactly what makes you think you’d survive?
            Let me recommend “The aquariums of Pyongyang”
            It will give you some insight into your future, should the marxist succeed here!

      • Karl,

        Once again, you are not changing anything except what something is called. You are STILL calling or a value system, only your system is more subjective than the one we have now. So, rather than help, your system would make things worse — which is why it always ends in dictatorship.

        Try living in the real world for a while, would you.

        • How is profit-seeking is not subjective, if not parasitic and an unstable form of managing the means of production?

          • How is profit-seeking is not subjective, if not parasitic and an unstable form of managing the means of production?

            You are confusting “Crony-capitalism” (Government run socialism) with TRUE Capitalism.
            Capitalism cannot be parasitic, because the market weeds out the bad actors quickly and efficiently.

            The system should be one where the people get together and decide what is needed and produce it

            We saw that with Solindra,over half a BILLION dollars and Compact Power. The company that for 150 million taxpayer dollars has yet to produce a SINGLE battery!

            The Capitalist market does not suffer such fools!

          • Easy: you do not HAVE to buy ANYTHING. But to put YOUR system in place, people will be FORCED — TRULY FORCED — to comply.

            Once again, you are a lazy, covetous person who seeks to justify his theft through govt. force (because you are also a coward).

            The easiest solution would be for you to stop whining, get to work and learn to be content with whatever you can earn.

            • The lazy and covetous are those who live off the backs of the laborers. Then proclaim they have the natural right to do so.

              Crony-capitalism is a late stage of capitalism where the concentration of capital has reached a point where government loses it popular(people-based) characteristics and becomes an arm of the bourgeoisie on a more exclusive basis. It is the right-wing that is confusing crony-capitalism with socialism. He who has the gold makes the rules, there is no such thing as an impartial night-watchmen state.

              • Karl,

                If your fictitious “workers” had the ability to put together and run the means of production, they would — they wouldn’t need to STEAL it (and those are YOUR words).

                The assertion that govt. is an arm of the Capitalist is more fiction. In case you haven’t noticed, it was Govt. that FORCED BP to give up Billions WITHOUT TRIAL, and then STOLE GM from its rightful owners. Once again, reality spits in your face.

                Karl, YOU are an IDIOT!

                • BP entered a plea agreement. When was GM stolen? How? I don’t find anything about the gov’t confiscating GM stock.

                  The peasants and slaves for thousand of years lived in slavery and serfdom. Does that mean Slavery and feudalism will continue forever? Of course not. Capitalism is on its way out.

  7. “Capitalism cannot be parasitic, because the market weeds out the bad actors quickly and efficiently.”
    Exactly. The smart business minds succeed, the bad ones fail. That is the epitome of potential in Capitalism. Potential is not a fool-proof system that guarantees good results. Potential is a system for the possibility of Good results (in Karl’s mind though, your mind has to independently create mass and energy, to yield anything “good”, just like free-will).

    “The peasants and slaves for thousand of years lived in slavery and serfdom. Does that mean Slavery and feudalism will continue forever? Of course not. Capitalism is on its way out.”
    Communism was birthed out of response to Capitalism, and where is the most practical practitioner (USSR) of Communism now? Seems like Capitalism outlasted that! What about all of the Communist nations today? What are they doing? Starting to lean towards more free-market type economies.

    This system of “slavery and feudalism” has provided the best living conditions in the world. Why would we want to exchange that for poverty and starvation?

    As I have been saying, Karl has nothing practical to add to this conversation. Everything he has to say sounds like it is coming straight out of Humboldt County College’s economics text. Instead of reciting theory on what workers should do, and presuming that all workers think/feel the same exact way, why don’t you go out of your way to speak to these “slaves” about how they feel about working under such an oppressive system…

    • The “Good” actors are the most parasitic, the ones who make the most profit, The profit derived from the backs of the workers.

        • Why do you still continue with the idea that worker’s receive the fruit of their labor. Do the super rich put in more hours of over-time than there are hours in a year, to earn income in the millions and billions.

          • Ah, the Communist’s crutch – the labor theory of value. Nothing but an attempt to equate the stupid with strong backs to the intelligent who create value with their intellect.

            You are actually quite the simpleton, aren’t you Karl?

          • Karl,

            NOT my problem. YOU are the one who said there is no such thing as exploitation then keeps crying about exploitation. I’m just pointing out the consistent string of contradictions coming from your lazy, greedy, cowardly and immoral drivel.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.