bonifartius 𒂼𒄄 @bonifartius@social.cleverlibre.org

@scientist @yogthos @zleap
> By a majority vote! Also known as a democracy!

say it, how are the owners stripped of their things? what happens to the owner? what happens if the owner doesn't comply with being robbed? what if the owner takes something like the coca-cola recipe and just burns it?

probably some stooges will come to kidnap him for harming exactly _no one_. nobody hurt. sure, ruin a life just because of some worker owned coop pipe dream. very fair!

you know who also was the "majority"? the nazis & the communists :)

> [NHS rant]

note that the NHS isn't owned by the people. the "neoliberal capitalists" couldn't meddle with it if the people really would own it. they only can "privatize" it because the state is absolutely corrupt and the people have no say over what happens with the money they are forced to pay. that's a peek of what happens with collectivism. the state as well could decide that from tomorrow all NHS funds go to yet another war and you couldn't do jack shit about it without getting jailed.

@scientist @yogthos @zleap
> For example, a few days ago I volunteered to help restore some peatland in the local area (because it's a good cause)

yes. that's voluntaryism. you decided freely to do something.

> But, people can volunteer to take part in harmful activities.

if things are so harmful that your rights are injured. you have the right to self defense and to compensation.

> In fact, in the context of ecological degradation, that's the norm, not the exception.

you are _so_ special that you aren't the norm?

> Do you volunteer to feel angry or sexual attraction? Or is that more of an instinctive response that takes will power to control (or not)

is this a serious discussion?

@scientist @yogthos @zleap
> Or force, just as colonial capitalism did, does.

still isn't inherent to capitalism. you even required the qualifier "colonial" :)

> You're mistaking ethics with the idea of an economic system.

no.

> For example, if a majority vote, votes for a communist 'lite' policy of, for example, turning private corporations into worker-owned cooperatives, then, strictly speaking, the majority are forcing the minority to give up some power.

and how are they going to turn them into the "worker-owned cooperatives"? by asking pretty please? you can try to veil it in nice words, in the end collectivism will always have to use violence. the previous owners are robbed of what was theirs and are probably lynched if it is done like history has shown it will be.

> And not a moment too soon.

guess you'll volunteer for the death squads hunting down dissidents, eh?

@scientist @genmaicha @yogthos @zleap
> working democracy

show me a working democracy

> [something about "the rich"]

being against communism isn't about being rich.

nobody in their sane mind would promote something which roots in the idea that a mob telling you what to do with your time, labor and the fruits of your labor is the right thing to do.

communism can only look good if you are hating yourself or are completely evil: the idea that you have to violently rob others of the fruits of their labor and to subjugate them into forced labor. just to make sure they will feed people like yourself. who either are so depressed that they think everyone hates them or are so evil that everyone hates them and no one will cooperate with them out of free will.

@scientist @yogthos @zleap
> What's the opposite of "collectivism"?

voluntaryism

@scientist @yogthos @zleap someone who wants to take things owned by others by violence to "redistribute" and "collectivize" them. either for personal gain or out of stupidity that it will fix social problems. i try to not blame ill intend if plain stupidity will do.

see, i subscribed to the collectivist bs when i was younger. i now see that it always will end in violent oppression, no matter how sophisticated the theories might get. you just can't collectivize if there are people who don't want to participate.

there are some sane collective models like genossenschaften - haven't found a proper translation, it's a coop where people can exit and do _own_ their share - which are good. those only properly function in a market economy though.

@scientist @yogthos @zleap capitalism can be violent, collectivism has to be.