Debate: Capitalism vs. Democracy
Side: democracy

Oh. Wikipedia goes very well with your ideals doesn't it? Individuals with freedom to chose changes. Pitty wikipedia is becoming more of a controlled website with flags or locking down pages because of the disorder and chaos that allowing freedom for everyone created.1) Second hand smoke. I never suggested this causes major illness. Regardless, it affects other people's freedom to choose fresh air.2) Drink driving. You cannot possibly be suggesting that driving drunk does NOT affect the safety of a person's driving?! Lies and statistics is it? So we can all choose to drive drunk because the hazards are simply the rhetoric of skewed studies?3) So murder has consequences? That is where the line is drawn. Or not drawn. Someone can choose to murder, just there are consequences.What about those wrongly convicted? There are many cases of this, and even ONE person wrongly convicted and put to death as a result is unjust. The legal system is flawed, but despite this you say "freedom of choice!" hand in hand with "capital punishment". "Faulty science" when it works in your favor, or "punishment fitting the crime".Ridiculous.LOL What are the conditions in which you save the baby? For example, option 1) save your own baby 10 babies die, option 2) save 10 babies, your own baby dies. You can pick option 1, save a baby, and still be randian. You can still be randian, walking down the road, spot a baby falling into a deadly hole, and pluck him away from the danger. No sacrifice there.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/sacrifice.html China is a prime example of Authoritarian Capitalism. Call it "not what true capitalists want" call it "corporatism", but you miss my point: My point was that this authoritarian capitalism is more powerful (it profits better, gains capital better, and in doing, holds more power) than neoliberal capitalism. If your version of capitalism and freedom of choice is put in place in USA now, the country may be quickly taken over by more powerful countries. Am I wrong? I'm sure you have something to say about that.Ok. Freedom of choice creates Disorder? No evidence?Anarchy, civil war, economic crisis as a result of neoliberal capitalism.(Ok the last one you will reject...)These are examples of freedom of choice descending into disorder.There are some good results from the first two, I will freely admit that. But you must, in turn, freely admit that there are bad results also.I am not saying legalization of drugs alone, or prostitution alone, bla bla bla. Again you reduce my argument to single components. I'm saying freedom of choice of >everything< will create chaos.But that's not what you want. Give freedom of choice, you say, to everyone! But if they step over the line, you say, fucking kill them!There is plenty to debate about regarding global warming, I suggest this debate is only around because of the simulation of society. You probably didn't read that so I will give you a summary:Hyper-reality creates models of a 'real' without origin or reality. The implications of this is a liquidation of all referentials, a loss of distinction between the real and the imaginary and society substituting signs of the real for the real itself. This creates a simulated generation of difference between the ‘real’ and the imaginary.One could place my climate change argument inside this description. Correct. Because of our hyper-real simulated society, it is just as valid to suggest something backed by facts, to one that is backed by no facts.I'm not saying global warming will make the whole human race extinct! Yes, we now more than ever, have ways to survive but many marginalized poor would die. That you are content with this result shows me that you are randian.Yep, I'm a liberal.What then are you? If you decry both conservative and liberal.Heres a political compass, see where you sit.http://www.politicalcompass.org/testI'm (it may or may not surprise you):Economic Left/Right: -6.62Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21 Quite far left, economically, and a bit less than halfway Social Libertarian.I'd be in a (bourdieu) aggregated class with Gandhi and Nelson Mandela.Now, I understand it is just a test and faulty in ways a test is, but it is interesting to see nonetheless.