bss03

You tried to compare socialism at its best against capitalism at it worst.

I think you are confused. I don't believe I've tried to make a comparison between socialism and capitalism in this thread. Perhaps that was someone else?

If capitalism works perfectly, by design- anyone has a fair shot.

I don't believe "fairness" is a defining characteristic of Capitalism. Can you please provide a definition of Captialism so that I can be sure we are talking about the same thing?

We’ve really not moved on that far intellectually from the witch trials.

Cognitive biases seem to be unavoidable. Even if you are well-educated about a particular bias, it often takes reflection (internally or externally motivated) to recognize it in your decisions / behavior.

Fallacious reasoning is often just as good at convincing an audience, which is one of the reasons they are still in use despite many or most being documented and named in ancient times.

Individual training in critical thinking skills can help, but theocrats (in specific) and authoritarians (in general) spend a lot of effort making sure that public education is robbed of that. But, that's not enough to "intellectually move on"; even with that training, bias occurs. So, we have to build systems for bias detection and remediation if we want a just global society.

Rent seeking existed long before the term ever existed just like fascism. It has always been bad

IIRC, Adam Smith (from "Wealth Of Nations") decried rent-seeking behavior and implicitly defined a "free market" as one without (free of) rent-seeking, as a form on monopoly, among other things.

So, yes, it was a recognizable problem in Capitalism before it was ever given name, and I wasn't trying to deny that, just to note that the whole time I've been alive it's consistently gotten worse.

The intent was to shame as a method of correction to prevent / reduce the behavior of leaving useless comments, and I believe it has been minimally, but somewhat effective at that.

Although, my first comment was so vague and satirical that I didn't even upvote it.

I'm using the standard meaning of authoritarian socialism: "Academics, political commentators and other scholars tend to distinguish between authoritarian socialist and democratic socialist states, with the first represented in the Soviet Bloc"

Lenin proposed the idea of a centralized, rightist vanguard party that would seize power on behalf of the people

Which became "communism" / authoritarian socialism.

People hate socialism because they believe it is a right/freedom be able to privately own and control the "means of production" from tools to assembly lines to mines and groves.

Thatcher said it best: "There can be no liberty unless there is economic liberty." and by economic liberty she means that ability to own / exclusively control any (non-sentient) thing.

(end LI5)

Personally, I think authoritarian socialism (sometimes called "communism") is problematic due to the authoritarian part. I think libertarian socialism (often called "anarchism") is problematic because "warlords" (selfish people willing to use violence to hoard property) will naturally arise from any sufficiently large group and I think they are best opposed via a State with a "monopoly" on violence. But, I am convinced that rent-seeking behavior has been choking Capitalism for a while and it's only gotten worse since I was born (1980)... something needs to rein it in, and I think that something has to be very democratic and significantly socialist, but I don't really have a name for it myself.

and contributed nothing more.

This comment could have be a vote.

I linked to the video elsewhere in the thread, behind a spoiler tag.

Yeah, plenty of traumatic scalpings around spinning shafts; safety regulations are written in blood.