Pro-Capitalism

Hi /newpol/, socialist here. Convince me to become pro-capitalism/Libertarian.

Government owning the means of production versus the individual owning them...

gb2/North_Korea/ kekekekekekekeke

Capitalism provides lower prices (not always lower than central planning) and higher quality (nearly always higher than central planning) in a market, given the equivalence of other factors.

However, more importantly, in a centrally planned economy or something similar, personal incentive to excel does not exist because it is typically not rewarded.  Obviously you get exceptions, like Che Guevara, who was a respectable and honorable man who worked for the sake of others, but for the common man, this is almost always true. This is the main problem with socialism, I think.

>>4
Che Guevara was a terrorist and murderer of women and children.

>>4
Did Che Guevara ever even run (or whatever the socialism PC word is for owning/operating) a business?

>>5
Do you also view the US military as terrorists and murderers of women and children? GTFO hippy faggot

>>7
Those arguments do not nor do they have to contradict each other.
Che Guevara was a terrorist and murderer of women and children.
"The US military is a legitimate and (intends to be a) respectable combat/defense unit acting under a system of moral guidelines."
Both can be true.

>>5
If you're referring to the executions he carried out at La Cabana, those were legal executions according to the current government, ergo, they're just as justified as a military killing people.

If you're referring to his warfare tactics, such is the nature of warfare.  We here in the United States bomb women and children too, you know.

>>9
Would you say then that the people of Cuba are better off because of the Communism they have endured since the revolution?

It doesn't bother you that politcal dissenters are jailed in Cuba? That the people aren't allowed to leave the island if they choose? That the poverty is extreme?

>>10
Oh, there's no question Cuba sucks, but this conversation wasn't about Cuba, it was about Capitalism vs. Socialism (and then you turned it into an argument about Che).

>>11
So, start a new thread about Che?

>>11
Cuba is Socialist and it sucks.

So Che did a real good thing for his people, didn't he? He was a great man to bring all that oppression to Cuba..

Capitalism - 1
Socialism - 0

Che - burn in hell for all eternity.

>>13
So you hate him just because a nation he helped develop turned into a shithole after he died?

By that logic, you must hate the Founding Fathers as well.

Che help TURN Cuba into a shithole.

..And no, I don't hate the Founding Fathers because the US is not and never has been a shithole. The US LEADS the world, not follow.

>>4

First I ought to clarify, I'm not a central planning socialist (ie I don't think the USSR was a great place to live). I think that the means of production should belong to the workers themselves rather than the state (would that not make the state the biggest capitalist of them all?). I'm not sure if there would be markets in this society, though there could be. I suppose the ideal would be for money made to reflect the amount of time spent working and how valuable the work is to society. The state would do most of the things modern left-liberals want like healthcare, environmental regulation, and stuff like that. More radically there would probably be a national bank.

Second, lower prices? Sure. Better quality? Depends on the market for the product. If its going to get sold in a place like wall-mart then, no. China's (which is capitalist in all but name) products suck. If its being sold to rich people then, yes, better quality. Better in both cases than the USSR or Mao's China? Yes.

I have no opinion on  Che.

Here's how it USED to work in the US...
The Democrats governed from the center with a SLIGHT leaning to the Left ie, soaking the rich A LITTLE BIT more to help pay for gov't and the infrastructure upkeep and the social safety net..
The Republicans governed from the center with a SLIGHT leaning to the Right ie cutting taxes on the rich and Corporations (so they could offer more jobs to Americans) and letting Corps. contract for the military work
Both parties destroyed that little balancing act by going to extremes.

>>1
Read books by Rothbard and Mises, basically the Austrian school. Lysander Spooner's written works are also good. He was more of an anarchist, but libertarians look up to him nonetheless. Don't read that Ayn Rand trash though.

>>1
PROTIP: Always read what they tell you NOT to read...

>>19
http://boards.4chan.org/b/

>>14 alski pojaf ojkfcaoa opaqja jpo apovc  aqpofjpcjop paqcjoaq qadwjo p oqdwipdixcp pqdj jpq  pqdjd  pojwqdj  dpo qwjo































































































http://www.tradedee.com/08-404276-B003TO5J2I-The_Graveyard_of_Death.html

>>18
By the graces of >>19, >>1 should then also read Ayn Rand.  In fact, I would let >>1 make his own opinions regarding Ms. Rand and her Objectivism and how it favors or harms capitalism.

>>22
She disliked libertarians, OP asked about convincing him to become a pro-capitalist (more accurately pro-market)/libertarian, rather than an objectivist. I would not go by any "grace" from a /b/tard such as >>19 if OP knew what was good for him.

Whether or not he desires to read Rand or not is his own prerogative however.

>>23
I don't even like /b/..