Does National Socialism have any truth or relevance to it?
- Thread starter ~Derek~
- Start date
Einherjar86
Active Member
No it doesn't. Capitalism favors competition, which small business thrives upon. Don't condemn big business just because it's been more successful. Small businesses don't. This is the problem. People attack capitalism because they think they're only attacking big business, but that's not true. Socialism will only hurt small business because it will distribute small business earnings throughout the poor and poverty-stricken. Look at the Soviet Union and collective farming. The Kulaks were basically small business farmers; farmers who were more successful than others. The government took all their land and equipment and deported them (hopefully it wouldn't be that extreme in America) and gave everything they took to the poor farmers. Well, what happened? Why were the poor farmers poor? Because they were the farmers who, well... weren't as good at their job. They ended up having no idea what to do, how to cycle the land, they ATE their horses and cattle (because they thought the government was going to give them some; damn reds), and agricultural production went lower than it did during Tsarist Russia.
And that's what happens with socialism in a nutshell. The Kulaks were the backbone of the society-they helped their neighbors learn how to farm better, they helped each other out financially-and when they were gone, that society collapsed. Capitalism actually promotes employment and competition, which is how a society should run. Small businesses provide jobs for people from the lower classes, so yes; a class hierarchy is created. However, if someone of the lower classes has the capability to excel, then he or she will. If not, then they remain in that position. That's how it works. The truth is, people can hold such positions and be perfectly fine doing that for the rest of their life. Maybe someday they'll save enough money to start their own business, who knows? But that's how it works.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Occasionally; but not always. Small business contributes to a large portion of the economy in America. I definitely am not a fan of Wal-Marts and the like; but small business can survive alongside them. We just always hear about the horror stories of big businesses running small businesses out of money. There are plenty of them that still are able to succeed.
On a side note, I don't like how huge corporations like Wal-Mart do business. That's not the capitalist way, that's the modern dog-eat-dog way. In true capitalism there is a respect for your competition and a desire to see it succeed as well.
Less and less as large businesses crush them, despite grassroots movements to stop abominations such as Wallmart...
Besides which, large businesses dominate entire industries. Small businesses are limited to certain areas, such as groceries, book stores, etc...
Besides which, large businesses dominate entire industries. Small businesses are limited to certain areas, such as groceries, book stores, etc...
Valerie
¯\(ã)/¯
- Aug 29, 2005
- 6,765
- 4
- 38
Businesses like Wallmart, Target, etc., are like jacks of all trades, they sell lots of things but don't specialize in anything. I would assume people would want to go to a store dedicated to a specific product rather than a giant store with a limited selection of something specific. I know I'd rather go to an independant music store to shop for CDs rather than Best Buy.
Einherjar86
Active Member
You are correct in a certain respect, yes; but as I said before, that's not how capitalism is supposed to work. In true capitalism, businesses want their competition to succeed. That is how the economy thrives, employment goes up, and everyone gets paid. That's the kind of capitalism I support. So as you see, I'm partly revolutionary as well because I don't support corporations like Wal-Mart. However, I'm not a socialist. I'm a supporter of true and correct capitalism.
I just don't want to see earnings taken from those who worked hard and given to everyone else. I want to see everyone working. That's where the greatest amount of self-respect and contentment with one's society lies.
I just don't want to see earnings taken from those who worked hard and given to everyone else. I want to see everyone working. That's where the greatest amount of self-respect and contentment with one's society lies.
Death Aflame
voice of dissent
- Feb 1, 2004
- 2,504
- 2
- 38
- 38
In some ways, but I would say that the creation and sustainment of socioeconomic hierarchy specifically is largely the result of capitalism's influence. Culture, of course, is an entirely different manner and I would say its relationship to capitalism is more reciprocal in nature, as you posit.
Zephyrus
Tyrants and Slaves
Death Aflame
voice of dissent
- Feb 1, 2004
- 2,504
- 2
- 38
- 38
Capitalism devours everything, including (and even especially) tradition. Thus the contemporary state of capitalism is simply the latest example of this.
You assume wrong. It would make sense, except that Wallmart undersells everything and is also really convenient because it has everything in one place. People are stupid, or something along those lines...
Ok, that's not really valid. You're talking in theoretical terms, I'm talking in practical terms. Every system (communism, socialism, capitalism) works great in theory. I support true capitalism. I also support true communism. But it never works out like that.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Because as WeAreInFlames and others have pointed out, you have businesses like Wal-Mart that play a much rougher and dog-eat-dog kind of game. They are essentially running their competition out of business. That's not true capitalism. As I've said, in true capitalism, competition is the ultimate goal. Businesses WANT to see their competitors succeed.
Valerie
¯\(ã)/¯
- Aug 29, 2005
- 6,765
- 4
- 38
When I say something specific, I mean something specific. You won't see Averse Sefira records or anthing like them in Wal-Mart's music section. The same goes for other various things.
Zephyrus
Tyrants and Slaves
So would you say that a bigger business buying out a smaller business is a corruption of true capitalism?
edit: @ Einherjar
edit: @ Einherjar
Right. But metalheads are a minority. People into Averse Sefira are a minority among metalheads. Wal-Mart goes as far as carrying Cannibal Corpse. Very few people are going to take issue with their music selection.
Zephyrus
Tyrants and Slaves
Heh, I'm listening to their latest right now. But they are on Candlelight, which is widely distributed. If Walmart gets any bigger and expands it music selection, Candlelight isn't too far from the labels it would have in stock.
Einherjar86
Active Member
I'm sorry, I'm trying to keep up with this whole thing. I have to leave in a few minutes and I'm trying to say everything I possibly can! All I mean is that, between true communism and true capitalism, I will still choose capitalism. I think that it provides a more respectable and individually progressive situation that ALSO allows society to benefit as well. As I said before, I would rather see people rewarded for their achievements, and praised for competition rather than have competition stifled so that everyone might be equal. I can see that, even based on this very preliminary description, how a dog-eat-dog kind of capitalism might soon develop; but if business owners are true capitalists, that won't happen and people will be free to pursue their own interests and goals to the benefit of society. I understand that you could also provide a description of "true" communism that should in theory work when applied in the world; but even if you did, I would still choose capitalism because that's what I believe in.
Similar threads
