User talk:Michaeljsouth

It [the factory model school] was the use of illicit government power to funnel money to the interests of particular people that owned capital, to the detriment of their competitors (e.g. the set of people that made handmade/artisan version of whatever was produced in those factories). No one that understands capitalism would call that capitalism, as Alex has returned to doing despite having it amply explained at the beginning of the thread that that is certainly not what a capitalist means when a capitalist says "capitalism".

Having government control over a large segment of the economy (which the public school system is) is socialism. Co-opting that endeavor to make people in certain positions in industry wealthier, which is what the factory model school was, would perhaps be fascism with shades of oligarchy exploiting socialism.

To be capitalist, when they started with the idea "hey, we need workers to staff our factories and consumers to buy our stuff" (and that, basically, _is_ the idea they had), they would have followed that up by saying "let's invest PRIVATE MONEY in some buildings and teachers and call them places of education and advertise and see if we can get people to send their kids to them!". If it had been done that way, it would have been a capitalist endeavor, done by capitalists with the tools of capitalism (investment, enticement of other free people to freely exchange with you by presenting an appealing product).

It probably would have failed, miserably, and quickly, too.

But instead you had "let's see if we can use government force to do this". Capitalism is out the door immediately once government is involved like that. Now you have people having their money taken by force from the government (taxes that pay for schools), consumers forced to consume that product (truancy laws forcing them to go to schools), and the whole system manipulated by these low life scum to make said scum richer.

But don't think for a second that those particular scum are the only ones that have sought to exploit this decidedly un-free, un-competitive, un-capitalist system. Every group that has worked to get their ideas into that system is guilty of the same thing. They may be doing it to push an ideology (christianity, environmentalism, academicism [a term I made up to refer to the idea that trades are bad, academics good], feminism, nationalism, capitalism) instead of a business model, but they are doing the same thing that the industry giants did back in the day--attempting to use government force to manipulate children's minds and behavior into whatever mold they are sure that it would be best for everyone to fit into.

And that, my friends, is not capitalism, doesn't remotely resemble capitalism, doesn't have anything to do with capitalism. Michaeljsouth (talk) 08:15, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Fuck This Jam for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fuck This Jam is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Fuck This Jam until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 06:38, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Meredith Holmes for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Meredith Holmes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Meredith Holmes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rogermx (talk) 20:09, 27 June 2019 (UTC)