Comparing the systems
I'm glad you accept the reasonable doubt standard. that shows your genuine interest to understand these issues. I think we could compare, lets say parts of anarchist Spain in 1936 to 39 with those parts 20 years before or 20 years after. However we would need to look at a wide range of factors, not just income level or GNP or other such indications of crude material wealth. I presume that if you doubt govt or other agency colllected 'poverty levels' you also doubt govt or other agency collected 'income levels' stats as not a sufficient guideline.
So, in our hypothetical study we would need to consider qualitative issues like: how happy were they? how free did they feel? How much control did they feel over their own lives? and more quantitative stuff too like what were the literacy levels, health levels, education levels, etc. Such a study would be very difficult, but not impossible. So, if such a study was carried out, in a way you thought well organised and fair, and it found that the people in those areas of Anarchist Spain were happier, healthier, more educated, felt more free, more in control of their, lives, etc. Not actually better off in terms of money in the bank, but rated higher on most aspects of quality of life than the same people 20 year before or after. THEN - just as a thought experiment - would you say ‘this indicates beyond a reasonable doubt that a better system is possible’.
And a wider question to us all: why has such an experiment not being carried out to TEST which of the various systems we have on offer is the best? Surely such a social experiment COULD be carried out, to at least give us a deeper understanding of how capitalism,communism, anarchism, etc may compare of various aspects. If we can calculate much more strange stuff like the quantity of dark matter in the universe, surely a well designed experiment to see how the different social and economic system perform should not be beyond us? My suggestion is that the power elites of capitalism do not WANT such an experiment carried out, because they fear it may not show capitalism in a good light.
As to WHY the social experiment to compare systems is not carried out - as we know many much more damaging ones have been carried out, secretly. Like experimenting LSD on soldiers, etc. Ones that they thought would have military uses. So, i doubt it is ethical concerns. I think it highly likely that the power elites dont want such a well constructed, controlled, experiment or even an 'observational study' because the results are likely to reveal fundamental weaknesses in capitalism. if they were so confident that capitalism would come out the best system, i think it likely that such an experiment would have already been undertaken.
In addition when people collect together in large groups to tentatively TRY something different we notice that the police turn up pretty quickly. And with weeks or even just days some excuse (public order/protection of property/hygiene,etc) is thought up to physically attack those people and remove them from where ever it is. Again, if they were so confident that capitalism would come out the best system then surely the capitalist power elite would simply laugh at such attempts? Why not just stand back and say: ‘Ha, ha, those stupid hippies - let them TRY, we know they are going to make a mess of it!’. It’s like if a little 4 year old girl hits you, you laugh at it - just let her pound away pathetically. she cant do much damage.
But if a strong 24 year old man attacks you, you react very differently. We only react with such fear and violence to things that are SERIOUS THREATS. So, i think the extreme reaction of police violence and powerful media criticism that anything like the occupy movements gets is because the power elite knows that collective, intelligent action by ordinary people is a REAL threat to their power... anyone here who supports capitalism supports that domination by power elites. a domination which is directly contrary to the freedom of individuals to control their own lives.
I'm glad you accept the reasonable doubt standard. that shows your genuine interest to understand these issues. I think we could compare, lets say parts of anarchist Spain in 1936 to 39 with those parts 20 years before or 20 years after. However we would need to look at a wide range of factors, not just income level or GNP or other such indications of crude material wealth. I presume that if you doubt govt or other agency colllected 'poverty levels' you also doubt govt or other agency collected 'income levels' stats as not a sufficient guideline.
So, in our hypothetical study we would need to consider qualitative issues like: how happy were they? how free did they feel? How much control did they feel over their own lives? and more quantitative stuff too like what were the literacy levels, health levels, education levels, etc. Such a study would be very difficult, but not impossible. So, if such a study was carried out, in a way you thought well organised and fair, and it found that the people in those areas of Anarchist Spain were happier, healthier, more educated, felt more free, more in control of their, lives, etc. Not actually better off in terms of money in the bank, but rated higher on most aspects of quality of life than the same people 20 year before or after. THEN - just as a thought experiment - would you say ‘this indicates beyond a reasonable doubt that a better system is possible’.
And a wider question to us all: why has such an experiment not being carried out to TEST which of the various systems we have on offer is the best? Surely such a social experiment COULD be carried out, to at least give us a deeper understanding of how capitalism,communism, anarchism, etc may compare of various aspects. If we can calculate much more strange stuff like the quantity of dark matter in the universe, surely a well designed experiment to see how the different social and economic system perform should not be beyond us? My suggestion is that the power elites of capitalism do not WANT such an experiment carried out, because they fear it may not show capitalism in a good light.
As to WHY the social experiment to compare systems is not carried out - as we know many much more damaging ones have been carried out, secretly. Like experimenting LSD on soldiers, etc. Ones that they thought would have military uses. So, i doubt it is ethical concerns. I think it highly likely that the power elites dont want such a well constructed, controlled, experiment or even an 'observational study' because the results are likely to reveal fundamental weaknesses in capitalism. if they were so confident that capitalism would come out the best system, i think it likely that such an experiment would have already been undertaken.
In addition when people collect together in large groups to tentatively TRY something different we notice that the police turn up pretty quickly. And with weeks or even just days some excuse (public order/protection of property/hygiene,etc) is thought up to physically attack those people and remove them from where ever it is. Again, if they were so confident that capitalism would come out the best system then surely the capitalist power elite would simply laugh at such attempts? Why not just stand back and say: ‘Ha, ha, those stupid hippies - let them TRY, we know they are going to make a mess of it!’. It’s like if a little 4 year old girl hits you, you laugh at it - just let her pound away pathetically. she cant do much damage.
But if a strong 24 year old man attacks you, you react very differently. We only react with such fear and violence to things that are SERIOUS THREATS. So, i think the extreme reaction of police violence and powerful media criticism that anything like the occupy movements gets is because the power elite knows that collective, intelligent action by ordinary people is a REAL threat to their power... anyone here who supports capitalism supports that domination by power elites. a domination which is directly contrary to the freedom of individuals to control their own lives.