Le Rationale Skeptics

Why does anyone take le rational skeptics seriously? I mean come on, pic related has got to be the dumbest shit that I have ever read.

Real writers are more difficult to find. It's not the quality of the person they're listening to that a normie will care about, but the convenience of finding them first.

anyones else remember cavemen having markets and private property?

Yes.

t. encino man

Remember how a few cavemen would band together to form a super-monopoly over all fur-trading and would murder anyone who dared to introduce competition, while enslaving the local population to produce food for them in exchange for barely enough furs to allow them to survive the winter, thus ensuring their workforce was locked in a permanent cycle of working if they wanted to live to see the following year? Remember how the super-monopoly segmented off their workers and introduced the idea that everyone was out to get them, ensuring that no two workers would ever be able to see past their paranoia, thus guaranteeing that no one would share their possessions thus creating a constant demand for the super-monopoly's furs?

Haha you silly leftists capitalism is literally as old as human history!

If it's sufficiently obvious that a person's opinion is stupid and wrong, it's reasonable and necessary to assume that this stupidity serves some sort of purpose. In this case, it's because most people literally do not know what "capitalism" is, not just lolberts.

I seem to remember Zizek *sniff* talk about how early human tribes always shared their shit with eachother.

there was no one guy hoarding all the food while others in the tribe starved.

Also, wait, wouldn't most tribes have generally shared resources, anyway? I cannot imagine a single situation where a group of a couple dozen cavemen would be better off hoarding possessions than if they pooled them together.

You can't really have capitalism in a society where the group as a whole can very quickly and easily choose to murder the guy who's stockpiling all the red berries and dried meats.

Someone's never been to /r9k/ or furaffinity

I think OP is Muke

"Rational skeptics" should proceed from precise, rigorous, objective definitions of things so as to avoid, say, accidental equivocation fallacies. Here their implicit definition of "capitalism" - people exchanging goods and coordinating production in literally any fashion - is clearly not the same as the definition used by those who "ask for an alternative to capitalism," because such a position would immediately reduce to absurdity. And this should be obvious to the "skeptics." But instead, mr skeptic makes the fallacy of equating anti-capitalist definitions of capitalism with "people exchanging goods and coordinating production in literally any fashion" so that he can improperly extend an argument about the latter to one about the former which doesn't otherwise apply. But hey, they use the same word, so it's totally kosher!

Unfortunately "rational skepticism" is not about aggressively policing one's own argument structure for errors so as to avoid being wrong insofar as possible, it's about trusting your instincts and those of your in-group and assuming everyone who differs from them must be committing a fallacy of some sort, somewhere, whether or not you can actually find it in their argument, and whether or not the "fallacy" you do find is a genuine one, rather than valid reasoning you have mistaken as one, perhaps through a fallacy of your own.

On the one front they're absolutely obsessed with being "scholars of rigor," and on the other, they are militantly averse to any of its other-than-superficial trappings and their analytical poverty knows no conceivable bounds.

Cavemen did not trade furs tho.

Iirc material accumulation doesn't really come about until people start experimenting with bronze, then politics shift to a form of gift economy/primitive accumulation because bronze required particular knowledge and techniques. Before that most economies were based around alcohol production, beer etc, which would be one of the few things that lasted long enough to actually accumulate.

Then you have things like Revolutionary Incan Socialism.

But in any event this faggot is just using the "capitalism is when people trade" meme. It's entirely wrong and ignores the specific changes in political economy throughout the ages.

...

into the /leftytrash/ it goes

What?

Naturalism is reactionary autism.

...

That's not how dialectics work.

...

Nazbol tho

I don't have the images on hand because I'm at work, but user once posted excerpts from a book about native American civilization, and part of it was about the Inca and their centrally planned economy. The great Inca would tax various tribes by compulsory service, and during that time they'd either be building roads or making clothing or whatever, and the government would provide for all their needs during that time. When the Spanish get there they find warehouses overflowing with goods of all sorts, but no money because the Inca either made everything themselves or it was provided by the state.

So no, not actually Socialism, but definitely not capitalism.

Incan empire had a planned economy with no markets.
That's not socialism per say but its funny to meme about. There was a thread on it a while ago.

Did anyone save that pretty long post explaining that the USSR was the direct result of enlightenment ideas brought to their logical conclusion from a month or two back?

I cringe every time I remember Bat'ko and Pierre licking his nuts. I understand you guys want to offer an alternative to SJW outrage cult and engage with people with different views but you don't have to cuck yourselves so hard to do it.

I know Pierre did but when did Bat'ko praise him?

According to most anthropological accounts even in those societies members will either hide part of the food or eat it if the opportunity presents itself

Wouldn't it rot?

That doesn't really describe Holla Forums. Most people here think the SJWs didn't go far enough in their war against fun.

I'm assuming it was just until no-one else could see them eat it

It amuses me to no end how Holla Forums is completely incapable of truly understand leftist ideology. It's almost like you refuse to comprehend it and would rather live in a strawman fantasy land where all leftists are whatever you don't like.

I am a leftist. This board is fucking overflowing with tankies.

Any arguments we make are handwaved away with "not ALL leftists…" in one form or another.

It takes some serious brain damage to somehow link weather and economy to create this analogy.

It doesn't make sense in one field either. How did we invent firearms if bows existed since we were cavemen? Because we wanted improve in that field, not stagnate indefinitely.

He doesn't try to refute it either, he just doesn't want to fucking think therefore defaults to the conservative opinion.

What kind of a retard comes here to teach the regulars what they really believe?

Yes, you're a completely normal leftist non-newfag that got caught in the wordfilter

If someone went up to a fascist forum and started yelling at them for being free market absolutists they'd tell that person they were confused too. Stop excusing your intellectual dishonesty because your brain hurts too much not making strawman arguments and broad mischaracterizations.

not really. Holla Forums doesn't have a majority anything and there seems to be more anarchists and leftcoms than tankies.

Maybe the leftcoms and anarchists are all just lurking then, because there are an awful lot of posts by "leftist but actually reactionary" types.

ｓocially ｃonservative

...

I didn't call Holla Forums a fascist forum, you did. You could have saved a lot of time and just said you're retarded from the get.

Excuse me? The SJWs "didn't go far enough" because they were pointed 90 degrees away from the correct direction the whole fucking time. We call them "centrists" not because they're "like us, but more moderate," but because they don't stand for worker ownership of the means of production, but rather an exploitative system with a "socially diverse" exploiting class.

If it was that one sided then the revelation that BO was enforcing tankie autism wouldn't have caused such a shitstorm

...

David Graeber talks about societies like this all the time. The primary form of exchange isn't bartering, gifts or a direct product like capitalism but "favors" and communal debt.