URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       True Left
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Questions & Debates
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 31001--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: antihellenistic Date: September 20, 2025, 1:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote][quote]"The incentive to engage in production activities
       is the intention to address the problem of consumption needs
       ethically experienced by consumers. With the hope that when we
       are no longer workers in the field of producer management, we
       will still be properly served by other managerial
       workers."[/quote]
       That has nothing to do with what I asked. You are no longer
       debating. You have reverted to talking to yourself.[/quote]
       What I mean is this: society’s behavior will not change merely
       by being forced to pay taxes. They must also transform the very
       way they produce, distribute, and consume. What was once carried
       out through voluntary transactions must be reshaped into
       transactions that are planned and grounded in ethical
       considerations.
       [quote][quote]"B made an agreement with party A"
       "B and A can be absolutely blamed"[/quote]
       You are initiating violence.[/quote]
       Putting an end to voluntary economic transactions based on
       market laws—so as to prevent deceptive labor contracts and the
       exploitation of workers in the name of efficiency—is a form of
       action that is inherently anti-violence.
       [quote][quote]"if we want to act in a socialist manner, A, who
       is able to earn money from gambling, must help B to obtain money
       as well."[/quote]
       So if A loses the $10 bet, must B give A $5?[/quote]
       Of course, B, who has already become a fellow comrade in the
       collective, must help A who has lost their 10 dollars, so that A
       and B feel interdependent and mutually supportive in order to
       ease life’s burdens and bring an end to prejudice between
       individuals and between groups. The way an individual or a group
       conducts their economic activities will also shape their
       attitude and behavior toward others.
       Economic activity based on individual ownership and the
       uncertainty of market laws will produce behavior that is
       aggressive, dynamic, innovative, and insensitive (the kind of
       economic activity favored by Western people).
       Economic activity based on collectivism and centralized planning
       under ethical leadership will produce a society that behaves
       with empathy, self-awareness, sensitivity, and attains a
       definite goal of liberation.
       [quote][quote]"Even better, if A considers that gambling causes
       income uncertainty, A should end the gambling and have the money
       that exists and circulates within gambling be reorganized so it
       can be redistributed to people struggling with life, such as
       B."[/quote]
       If neither A nor B gamble, then A and B have $10 each. Why
       should A give B money?[/quote]
       If the scenario is one in which there is no gambling and both A
       and B receive equally sufficient wages, then socialist life is
       realized and there is no longer any need for acts of giving.
       However, if one of them happens to experience a shortage, then
       from a socialist standpoint, the one who is better off will
       provide assistance to the one who is in need.
       [quote][quote]"Bad behavior will never be right, even if done
       voluntarily."[/quote]
       Non-violent bad behaviour should be allowed (and arguably even
       encouraged). This is how we find out who is inferior. If you use
       the threat of violence to discourage non-violent bad behaviour,
       you conceal who is inferior.[/quote]
       People who still wish to conduct economic activities based on
       market laws and voluntary transactions could, in principle, be
       allowed to continue doing so—provided they do not interfere with
       those groups and communities who wish to live outside of market
       laws in their economic life. Yet this has never truly happened
       in reality, and I doubt that those living under market laws
       could coexist peacefully with those living in a socialist and
       planned manner within a single guided nation. If such a plan
       were indeed possible, then we could regard those who wish to
       live according to market laws as a community with bad behaviour,
       but still non-violent.
       [quote][quote]"A voluntary attitude of defeating others who are
       innocent is wrong"[/quote]
       What is wrong with the following?
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eerOqp4GQk[/quote]
       As long as the act of destroying one another does not undermine
       the viability of life for those who do not wish to be involved
       in such activities, then such activities may be permitted to
       continue. But can such a situation truly exist? I do not know
       how it could ever be achieved...
       [quote]"a racist attitude carried out voluntarily is also
       certainly wrong"
       We already covered this:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/re-national-socialists-were-socialists-3223/msg30795/?topicseen#msg30795
       [quote]"Racist behavior carried out between both parties
       voluntarily is still wrong."
       If group P unanimously asks group Q to treat P as the outgroup
       and Q as the ingroup, and group Q unanimously agrees, I would
       not initiate violence against either group. I would only
       prohibit both groups from reproducing.[/quote]
       But if P and Q, fearing violence from you, avoid doing the
       above, we would never know that they should be prohibited from
       reproducing.[/quote]
       Apply the same reasoning to the group that prefers to live in
       environments defined by economic and social competition. Their
       preference will likewise produce social and economic
       discrimination—and can escalate into racism and even global
       colonialism.
       [quote][quote]"Voluntarism inevitably opens the space for
       violence"[/quote]
       Pick one.[/quote]
       A voluntary attitude of accepting violent practices is never
       permissible under any circumstances. I would even reprimand a
       child who takes pleasure in the harsh and traditionalist
       behavior of their father and mother. And I would confront the
       parents themselves far more forcefully, if I were able to do so.
       I will not choose any of the options you provided. The choices
       you offered are inadequate and unworthy of acceptance.
       [quote][quote]"discipline will cultivate empathy within
       ourselves and our surroundings, even if we do not yet feel
       willing to agree "[/quote]
       This is exactly what traditionalist parents say while torturing
       children. This is why you are my enemy: you are a torturer in
       service of tradition.[/quote]
       I want to hold traditional parents, as well as racist and
       capitalist individuals, strictly accountable through
       uncompromising discipline of ideas and social accountability, so
       that they come to understand the errors and absurdities of their
       beliefs and behaviors. Do you not desire a strong, dictatorial
       leadership to crush the traditionalist behaviors of humanity?
       [quote][quote]"If the issuer of an agreement deliberately writes
       it in a way that is difficult to understand in order to trap and
       exploit the signatory, then as socialists we would oppose the
       issuer of that agreement and call them a “fraud.”"[/quote]
       If the signatory has trouble understanding it, the signatory can
       refuse to sign. By signing, the signatory expresses willingness
       to risk the consequences of whatever the agreement (including
       the parts the signatory had trouble understanding)
       entails.[/quote]
       If a person who signs an agreement from a deceitful promisor is
       unaware of the trickery within the contract, then the state must
       intervene to protect them when fraudulent practices occur in the
       execution of that agreement. That is the socialist approach… Not
       all humans are intelligent… Not all humans can fully comprehend
       the various forms of deception employed by Western-style
       political and economic management.
       [quote][quote]"A discussion about proper products also means
       rejecting unfit products disguised in any form. This includes
       not only “feces,” but also “pornography.”"[/quote]
       So you (still) want to ban pornography. Again you are advocating
       initiated violence.[/quote]
       Pornography fuels human desire for sex, which can result in the
       birth of a new individual—someone thrust into existence without
       their consent. This new life may inevitably face suffering,
       exploitation, or violence. From a socialist and ethical
       standpoint, such practices are profoundly problematic: they
       perpetuate harm before life even begins, reinforcing systems
       where human beings are treated as objects rather than autonomous
       subjects.
       #Post#: 31004--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: September 20, 2025, 5:12 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "What I mean is this: society’s behavior will not change merely
       by being forced to pay taxes."
       I said:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/re-national-socialists-were-socialists-3223/msg30874/#msg30874
       [quote]If I make $1 profit per day but all profits above $10 per
       month are taxed at 100%, what incentive would I have to do
       business more than 10 days per month, you moron?[/quote]
       So if all profits above $10 per month are taxed at 100%, you
       expect me to still do business every day. This is precisely why
       you are a moron.
       "What was once carried out through voluntary transactions must
       be reshaped into transactions that are planned and grounded in
       ethical considerations."
       Translation: you want to initiate violence and call it
       "ethical".
       "Putting an end to voluntary economic transactions based on
       market laws—so as to prevent deceptive labor contracts and the
       exploitation of workers in the name of efficiency—is a form of
       action that is inherently anti-violence."
       Don't gaslight me.
       "Of course, B, who has already become a fellow comrade in the
       collective, must help A who has lost their 10 dollars"
       By similar logic, if A damages property, should B have to pay
       half the damage fees?
       "Apply the same reasoning to the group that prefers to live in
       environments defined by economic and social competition."
       We already covered this:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/re-national-socialists-were-socialists-3223/msg30820/#msg30820
       [quote]"People with a capitalistic and competitive mentality
       will be targeted to be prohibited from reproducing."
       But they should be allowed to go to whichever restaurant they
       want to go to. Which you oppose. Which makes you the initiator
       of violence.[/quote]
       "A voluntary attitude of accepting violent practices is never
       permissible under any circumstances."
       Word tricks will not save you. Where is the violence in a
       voluntary transaction?
       "Do you not desire a strong, dictatorial leadership to crush the
       traditionalist behaviors of humanity?"
       Yes, insofar as traditionalist behaviour initiates violence
       (which it does, as it involves torturing people until they
       agree). You, on the other hand, want to crush non-violent
       behaviour that you dislike (by torturing people until they agree
       with you), which makes you the traditionalist and the initiator
       of violence. In other words, I want a strong, dictatorial
       leadership to crush YOU.
       "If a person who signs an agreement from a deceitful promisor is
       unaware of the trickery within the contract, then the state must
       intervene to protect them when fraudulent practices occur in the
       execution of that agreement."
       "Deceitful" and "trickery" imply knowingly false information in
       the contract. This is not what we are talking about. We are
       talking about terms that the signatories do not understand:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/re-national-socialists-were-socialists-3223/msg31001/#msg31001
       [quote]If the issuer of an agreement deliberately writes it in a
       way that is difficult to understand[/quote]
       "Pornography fuels human desire for sex, which can result in the
       birth of a new individual"
       The exact opposite is true:
  HTML https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5039517/
       [quote]Traditional factors that once explained men’s sexual
       difficulties appear insufficient to account for the sharp rise
       in erectile dysfunction, delayed ejaculation, decreased sexual
       satisfaction, and diminished libido during partnered sex in men
       under 40. This review (1) considers data from multiple domains,
       e.g., clinical, biological (addiction/urology), psychological
       (sexual conditioning), sociological; and (2) presents a series
       of clinical reports, all with the aim of proposing a possible
       direction for future research of this phenomenon. Alterations to
       the brain's motivational system are explored as a possible
       etiology underlying pornography-related sexual dysfunctions.
       This review also considers evidence that Internet pornography’s
       unique properties (limitless novelty, potential for easy
       escalation to more extreme material, video format, etc.) may be
       potent enough to condition sexual arousal to aspects of Internet
       pornography use that do not readily transition to real-life
       partners, such that sex with desired partners may not register
       as meeting expectations and arousal declines. Clinical reports
       suggest that terminating Internet pornography use is sometimes
       sufficient to reverse negative effects[/quote]
       It is not a coincidence that rightists who want to increase
       "white" birth rates are the ones wanting to ban pornography, you
       moron.
       #Post#: 31121--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: antihellenistic Date: October 3, 2025, 9:30 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote]"What I mean is this: society’s behavior will not change
       merely by being forced to pay taxes."
       I said:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/re-national-socialists-were-socialists-3223/msg30874/#msg30874
       [quote]If I make $1 profit per day but all profits above $10 per
       month are taxed at 100%, what incentive would I have to do
       business more than 10 days per month, you moron?[/quote]
       So if all profits above $10 per month are taxed at 100%, you
       expect me to still do business every day. This is precisely why
       you are a moron.[/quote]
       If you restrict competitive business practices of an individual
       or a group by removing incentives through 100 percent taxation,
       you must be able to ensure that they do not create
       gentrification of the environment and disrupt a planned and
       guided way of life.
       [quote][quote]"What was once carried out through voluntary
       transactions must be reshaped into transactions that are planned
       and grounded in ethical considerations."[/quote]
       Translation: you want to initiate violence and call it
       "ethical".
       ...
       [quote]"A voluntary attitude of accepting violent practices is
       never permissible under any circumstances."[/quote]
       Word tricks will not save you. Where is the violence in a
       voluntary transaction?[/quote]
       The practice of voluntary economic transactions tends to result
       in individuals and groups competing to defeat one another in
       social life and in labor. Such attitudes inevitably foster
       coarseness of character and a drive for domination, even between
       ethnic and racial groups, in the pursuit of victory in economic
       competition and the conquest of market share. Moreover, it
       produces the exploitation of workers by business owners under
       the guise of “efficiency” and “improving the quality of
       production of an enterprise or corporation.” It is an ethical
       endeavor for an individual or a collective to put an end to
       voluntary transactions that operate under the laws of the market
       mechanism. You must look to the impact on the surrounding
       community in order to judge whether such voluntary transactions
       are truly good, or whether they in fact amount to a form of
       exploitation...
       [quote][quote]"Putting an end to voluntary economic transactions
       based on market laws—so as to prevent deceptive labor contracts
       and the exploitation of workers in the name of efficiency—is a
       form of action that is inherently anti-violence."[/quote]
       Don't gaslight me.[/quote]
       I am striving to remind you to truly understand and educate
       society about socialism in the right way… None of my intentions
       are aimed at trying to “gaslight” you.
       [quote][quote]"Of course, B, who has already become a fellow
       comrade in the collective, must help A who has lost their 10
       dollars"[/quote]
       By similar logic, if A damages property, should B have to pay
       half the damage fees?[/quote]
       If A destroys the property of an exploiter of labor and of those
       with aggressive and Westernist character, then B is obliged to
       aid A by any means, including by covering the costs of the
       damage in order to safeguard A’s reputation. But if A destroys
       the property of innocent people, then B is obliged to admonish A
       as a fellow member of the collective.
       [quote]"Apply the same reasoning to the group that prefers to
       live in environments defined by economic and social
       competition."
       We already covered this:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/re-national-socialists-were-socialists-3223/msg30820/#msg30820
       [quote]"People with a capitalistic and competitive mentality
       will be targeted to be prohibited from reproducing."
       But they should be allowed to go to whichever restaurant they
       want to go to. Which you oppose. Which makes you the initiator
       of violence.[/quote][/quote]
       They [those with capitalistic personalities] must be compelled
       to follow planned and coordinated activities. They cannot be
       allowed to move about freely, in order to prevent them from
       engaging again in underground economic transactions and in
       economic competition governed by market laws within the
       community. Alternatively, they may live in restricted spaces
       under constant supervision. Thus, they are not only forbidden
       from reproducing, but their movements must also be strictly
       limited.
       [quote][quote]"Do you not desire a strong, dictatorial
       leadership to crush the traditionalist behaviors of
       humanity?"[/quote]
       Yes, insofar as traditionalist behaviour initiates violence
       (which it does, as it involves torturing people until they
       agree). You, on the other hand, want to crush non-violent
       behaviour that you dislike (by torturing people until they agree
       with you), which makes you the traditionalist and the initiator
       of violence. In other words, I want a strong, dictatorial
       leadership to crush YOU.[/quote]
       I loathe the exploitation by landlords and capital owners, and I
       despise the manipulative, harshly disciplinarian, and aggressive
       conduct of parents toward their children — I desire an absolute
       dictatorship to crush them all. I hate with precise intent. And
       to end those exploitations, I must strive to see voluntary
       economic transactions and market-law competition eradicated by
       force if they cannot be eliminated by gentler means.
       #Post#: 31230--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: October 19, 2025, 12:24 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "It is an ethical endeavor for an individual or a collective to
       put an end to voluntary transactions"
       You are initiating violence.
       "If A destroys the property of an exploiter of labor and of
       those with aggressive and Westernist character, then B is
       obliged to aid A by any means, including by covering the costs
       of the damage in order to safeguard A’s reputation. But if A
       destroys the property of innocent people, then B is obliged to
       admonish A as a fellow member of the collective."
       That's not what I asked.
       "They [those with capitalistic personalities] must be compelled
       to follow planned and coordinated activities."
       You are initiating violence.
       "I must strive to see voluntary economic transactions and
       market-law competition eradicated by force if they cannot be
       eliminated by gentler means."
       You are initiating violence.
       #Post#: 31231--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: SodaPop Date: October 19, 2025, 12:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "They [those with capitalistic personalities] must be compelled
       to follow planned and coordinated activities."
       Usually under capitalism one does not need to compel
       companies\anyone to bid on a contract. For example, a state
       government could open a contract for a new freeway overpass and
       advertise it to relevant construction companies which in turn
       bid on that contract. The best bid usually wins the contract.
       The construction of the overpass is a "planned and coordinated"
       activity of the state, and no one had to be forced to partake in
       it...
       #Post#: 31287--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: antihellenistic Date: November 5, 2025, 7:38 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote][quote]"It is an ethical endeavor for an individual or a
       collective to put an end to voluntary transactions"[/quote]
       You are initiating violence.[/quote]
       The attitude of voluntary transaction also implies a voluntary
       participation in transactional activities that produce
       unemployment, poverty, and social violence within a community.
       Such outcomes can arise because some parties fail to achieve
       consumers' voluntary choices when engaging in buying and selling
       activities within the law of voluntary exchange. However,
       voluntary consumption by many people results in biased choices
       regarding products and services. Consumers tend to choose
       products that satisfy them, regardless of the exploitation and
       alienation of labor that occurs in the production process. They
       also tend to ignore the fact that unsatisfactory but still
       consumable products are also worth purchasing to ensure that all
       production sites receive a profit.
       [quote][quote]"If A destroys the property of an exploiter of
       labor and of those with aggressive and Westernist character,
       then B is obliged to aid A by any means, including by covering
       the costs of the damage in order to safeguard A’s reputation.
       But if A destroys the property of innocent people, then B is
       obliged to admonish A as a fellow member of the
       collective."[/quote]
       That's not what I asked.[/quote]
       In other words, you still haven’t been able to answer my
       argument.
       [quote][quote]"They [those with capitalistic personalities] must
       be compelled to follow planned and coordinated
       activities."[/quote]
       You are initiating violence.
       [quote]"I must strive to see voluntary economic transactions and
       market-law competition eradicated by force if they cannot be
       eliminated by gentler means."[/quote]
       You are initiating violence.[/quote]
       To retaliate with violence against those who first initiated
       violence (the capitalist society and the adherents of market
       law) is an act of resistance, and there is nothing wrong with
       that.
       #Post#: 31288--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: antihellenistic Date: November 5, 2025, 7:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote]Usually under capitalism one does not need to compel
       companies\anyone to bid on a contract. For example, a state
       government could open a contract for a new freeway overpass and
       advertise it to relevant construction companies which in turn
       bid on that contract. The best bid usually wins the contract.
       The construction of the overpass is a "planned and coordinated"
       activity of the state, and no one had to be forced to partake in
       it...[/quote]
       The practice of contracting based on the law of supply and
       demand that you described results in failure for those who lack
       bargaining power. In the end, this leads to poverty and
       unemployment for the weaker side. Such a situation causes
       parties to compete against one another merely to win contracts
       and earn wages to survive. This, in turn, hinders mutual trust
       and instead fosters aggression and hostility between them.
       Therefore, if everything I have described occurs, it becomes
       difficult for human beings of genuine virtue, sensitivity, and
       socialist disposition—the kind you desire—to emerge.
       #Post#: 31290--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: SodaPop Date: November 5, 2025, 8:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote]The practice of contracting based on the law of supply
       and demand that you described results in failure for those who
       lack bargaining power. In the end, this leads to poverty and
       unemployment for the weaker side. Such a situation causes
       parties to compete against one another merely to win contracts
       and earn wages to survive. This, in turn, hinders mutual trust
       and instead fosters aggression and hostility between them.
       Therefore, if everything I have described occurs, it becomes
       difficult for human beings of genuine virtue, sensitivity, and
       socialist disposition—the kind you desire—to emerge.[/quote]
       There is certainly a lot wrong with capitalism, and it initiates
       violence in various ways. The following would be one example:
       [quote]Commodification is the process of transforming
       inalienable, free, or gifted things (objects, services, ideas,
       nature, personal information, people or animals) into
       commodities, or objects for sale. It has a connotation of losing
       an inherent quality or social relationship when something is
       integrated by a capitalist marketplace. Concepts that have been
       argued as being commodified include broad items such as the
       body, intimacy, public goods, animals and holidays.[/quote]
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodification#:~:text=Commodification%20is%20the%20process%20of%20transforming%20inalienable%2C%20free%2C,%5B8%5D%20public%20goods%2C%20%5B9%5D%20animals%20%5B10%5D%20and%20holidays.
       #Post#: 31291--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: November 5, 2025, 11:35 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "The attitude of voluntary transaction also implies a voluntary
       participation in transactional activities that produce
       unemployment, poverty, and social violence within a community.
       Such outcomes can arise because some parties fail to achieve
       consumers' voluntary choices when engaging in buying and selling
       activities within the law of voluntary exchange."
       This is not violence. This is inequality. You are an
       egalitarian.
       "In other words, you still haven’t been able to answer my
       argument."
       No, you avoided my question. My question was:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/re-national-socialists-were-socialists-3223/msg31004/#msg31004
       [quote]if A damages property, should B have to pay half the
       damage fees?[/quote]
       to which your response was:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/re-national-socialists-were-socialists-3223/msg31121/#msg31121
       [quote]if A destroys the property of innocent people, then B is
       obliged to admonish A as a fellow member of the
       collective.[/quote]
       thus avoiding what I asked (in bold).
       "those who first initiated violence (the capitalist society and
       the adherents of market law)"
       Voluntary transactions are by definition non-violent. (Hint in
       bold.)
       "The practice of contracting based on the law of supply and
       demand that you described results in failure for those who lack
       bargaining power."
       Imagine a singing contest organized by a recording studio with a
       recording deal as the prize. Two contestants A and B show up. A
       sings better (according to the criteria of the recording studio)
       and is given the recording deal. Can B be taken seriously if B
       complains that it is wrong for B to not also get a recording
       deal merely because B "lacks bargaining power" (ie. can't sing)?
       "Such a situation causes parties to compete against one another
       merely to win contracts"
       How else, if not by listening to both A and B sing to see who is
       better, is the studio supposed to decide whom to sign onto its
       label?
       "This, in turn, hinders mutual trust and instead fosters
       aggression and hostility between them."
       Only if B has a jealous personality. Therefore the problem is
       B's personality, not the singing contest.
       "if everything I have described occurs, it becomes difficult for
       human beings of genuine virtue, sensitivity, and socialist
       disposition—the kind you desire—to emerge."
       Therefore we must eliminate jealous people, not eliminate
       singing contests. Moron.
       #Post#: 31292--------------------------------------------------
       Re: National Socialists were socialists
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: November 5, 2025, 11:51 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "There is certainly a lot wrong with capitalism, and it
       initiates violence in various ways. The following would be one
       example:
       [quote]    Commodification is the process of transforming
       inalienable, free, or gifted things (objects, services, ideas,
       nature, personal information, people or animals) into
       commodities, or objects for sale. It has a connotation of losing
       an inherent quality or social relationship when something is
       integrated by a capitalist marketplace. Concepts that have been
       argued as being commodified include broad items such as the
       body, intimacy, public goods, animals and holidays.[/quote]"
       Commodification of animals obviously initiates violence because
       the animal being commodified did not consent to this. But
       commodification of animals long predated capitalism even
       according to your own link:
       [quote]The commodification of animals is one of the earliest
       forms of commodification, which can be traced back to the time
       when domestication of animals began.[10][/quote]
       To be precise:
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestication_of_vertebrates#History,_cause_and_timing
       [quote]The first domesticate was the domestic dog (Canis lupus
       familiaris) from a wolf ancestor (Canis lupus) at least 15,000
       years ago. [/quote]
       compared to:
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism#History
       [quote]Capitalism, in its modern form, can be traced to the
       emergence of agrarian capitalism and mercantilism in the early
       Renaissance, in city-states like Florence.[43][/quote]
       therefore can the latter be blamed for the former?
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page