Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
/——/ And you don’t think the workers in China are forced labor?Any economic system whose cohesion depended upon the enslavement of twenty million Africans over the four centuries of the Atlantic trade was born with one foot in the grave.
Good riddance.
I don't know why Marxist philosophy gets credited so often with "predicting" things as though everything must boil down to us being in some crazy race to impose our socioeconomic theories upon everyone else or something. Wikipedia offers:My point was not to denigrate Marx as analyst of capitalism or deny his insights into its history and its contradictions. My problem isn’t that I have read too little Marx (and Lenin and Trotsky), but too much. I was speaking of the changes to be expected and the process of getting there.Um, much of that has already occurred and Marx, being human, wrote interesting, pertinent stuff for human beings to consider - at no point more so than the present. Can't help reflexively responding fearfully like one of Wolff's Ivy League professors when simply asked a question about Marx? Okay, best move along then.Nobody knows the future. What will scientific / technological change bring? Will there will be a major war with nuclear weapons? Will ecological disasters strike? Will there be political movements in the West capable of forcing new social-democratic reforms? If Western alliances were to self-destruct due to a failure of leadership, then the question would arise whether China or other world leadership might emerge. China is not looking for this sort of responsibility. Clearly there is no “working class” leadership possible along old-fashioned Marxist lines.
It’s a conundrum and I think there are no easy answers.
I know (and I think you do too) that there is no present or future “working class leadership possible along old-fashioned Marxist lines” to lead society out of the crisis of capitalism. The “death agony of capitalism” will probably be with us for some time, and may well bring humanity down with it. It certainly won’t be replaced by a “dictatorship of the proletariat” in the advanced countries, as Marx predicted. That is all I’m saying. Given the consciousness and organization of American workers, I don’t see how that much can be argued with. The old slogan of “socialism or barbarism” was probably more or less correct, but the future remains murky in the extreme.
Ew, a two month "dictatorship", .. Horrors!In Marxist philosophy, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a state of affairs in which the proletariat holds political power. ... The Paris Commune (1871), which controlled the capital city for two months, before being suppressed, was an example of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
I went back and listened to the talks more extensively. The Marxism these professors discuss for the most part does indeed leave out the key part of Marxism that Marx himself (let alone Lenin & Trotsky) emphasized. They are academic Marxists that talk of “Marxist philosophy,” of commodity fetishism, in the broadest of terms. The cooperative Mondragon-style organization of cooperative production under capitalism was not what Marx polemicized for, but rather against — at least he thought it mostly “utopian.”I don't know why Marxist philosophy gets credited so often with "predicting" things as though everything must boil down to us being in some crazy race to impose our socioeconomic theories upon everyone else or something. Wikipedia offers:My point was not to denigrate Marx as analyst of capitalism or deny his insights into its history and its contradictions. My problem isn’t that I have read too little Marx (and Lenin and Trotsky), but too much. I was speaking of the changes to be expected and the process of getting there.Um, much of that has already occurred and Marx, being human, wrote interesting, pertinent stuff for human beings to consider - at no point more so than the present. Can't help reflexively responding fearfully like one of Wolff's Ivy League professors when simply asked a question about Marx? Okay, best move along then.Nobody knows the future. What will scientific / technological change bring? Will there will be a major war with nuclear weapons? Will ecological disasters strike? Will there be political movements in the West capable of forcing new social-democratic reforms? If Western alliances were to self-destruct due to a failure of leadership, then the question would arise whether China or other world leadership might emerge. China is not looking for this sort of responsibility. Clearly there is no “working class” leadership possible along old-fashioned Marxist lines.
It’s a conundrum and I think there are no easy answers.
I know (and I think you do too) that there is no present or future “working class leadership possible along old-fashioned Marxist lines” to lead society out of the crisis of capitalism. The “death agony of capitalism” will probably be with us for some time, and may well bring humanity down with it. It certainly won’t be replaced by a “dictatorship of the proletariat” in the advanced countries, as Marx predicted. That is all I’m saying. Given the consciousness and organization of American workers, I don’t see how that much can be argued with. The old slogan of “socialism or barbarism” was probably more or less correct, but the future remains murky in the extreme.
Ew, a two month "dictatorship", .. Horrors!In Marxist philosophy, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a state of affairs in which the proletariat holds political power. ... The Paris Commune (1871), which controlled the capital city for two months, before being suppressed, was an example of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
But,.. pertaining to the OP video,.. one might be tempted to say something like In Marxist philosophy, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a state of affairs such as found in areas with lots of cooperative business and industry such as Mondragon or the UPs mentioned, where workers enjoy far greater autonomy and security than elsewhere. Much reduced estrangement, abandonment, loss of housing, etc...
Major point being, like it or not, we're social animals. Designed and mostly raised to cooperate extremely well with one another. The main reason we've survived as a species. Competition, on the other hand, has risks and benefits. Good for play. Little to no benefits where applied to producing things in general from the perspective of the doer. Lots of potential risk / loss.
Major point being, like it or not, we're social animals. Designed and mostly raised to cooperate extremely well with one another. The main reason we've survived as a species. Competition, on the other hand, has risks and benefits. Good for play. Little to no benefits where applied to producing things in general from the perspective of the doer.
You say that as though workers everywhere had gathered together at some point and agreed they should become "the" rulers. Nonsense. It's just this kind of seemingly pointless simplification / reductionism that had me gagging the whole way through my college Philosophy and Political Science classes. Marx and Engels wrote particularly thoughtful and pertinent stuff. They were far from alone however. Many came before. Many after. This is certainly not about them particularly, nor anyone's vision of a socialist utopia, nor whatever. A workplace is one thing. Governing society is another.I believe we need to accept that it is now clear that capitalism has developed in a way which undercuts all possibility of the working-class becoming a ruling class.
China's state capitalism also uses forced labor today not unlike US prisons, but you would be hard pressed to find any Chinese atrocities in Africa that rival white Europeans and North Americans centuries ago:/——/ And you don’t think the workers in China are forced labor?
Ah, zee old both zides do it / two wrongs make it okay chestnut../——/ And you don’t think the workers in China are forced labor?Any economic system whose cohesion depended upon the enslavement of twenty million Africans over the four centuries of the Atlantic trade was born with one foot in the grave.
Good riddance.
So you've been living in a cave under some rock in England imagining yourself somehow above it all?Under capitalism, you reap what you sow. Some do well, some don't so some were joyful and some wallowed in misery.
Under socialism, you will now all wallow in and share the misery.
You mean like buying more bombs to replace the ones currently being dropped by the socialist military?And a large proportion of National debt is the cost of paying Socialist policies off.
Bravo! Clearly, you can make this shit up!A stimulus Cheque will go straight onto national debt because most of it will go on household bills and food.
Here's a link for you to read on Socialism.You mean like buying more bombs to replace the ones currently being dropped by the socialist military?And a large proportion of National debt is the cost of paying Socialist policies off.
Or were you banging on about the socialist Post Office?
Bravo! Clearly, you can make this shit up!A stimulus Cheque will go straight onto national debt because most of it will go on household bills and food.
nationalinterest.org
So, in other words, you have no real answer. Nothing to offer. Well, Happy New Year's Eve and thanks for playing!Here's a link for you to read on Socialism.You mean like buying more bombs to replace the ones currently being dropped by the socialist military?And a large proportion of National debt is the cost of paying Socialist policies off.
Or were you banging on about the socialist Post Office?
Bravo! Clearly, you can make this shit up!A stimulus Cheque will go straight onto national debt because most of it will go on household bills and food.
WKD: These 3 Countries Tried Socialism. Here's What Happened
Who would have thought?
So not only economics is not your Forte, history too!!
So, in other words, you have no real answer. Nothing to offer. Well, Happy New Year's Eve and thanks for playing!Here's a link for you to read on Socialism.You mean like buying more bombs to replace the ones currently being dropped by the socialist military?And a large proportion of National debt is the cost of paying Socialist policies off.
Or were you banging on about the socialist Post Office?
Bravo! Clearly, you can make this shit up!A stimulus Cheque will go straight onto national debt because most of it will go on household bills and food.
WKD: These 3 Countries Tried Socialism. Here's What Happened
Who would have thought?
So not only economics is not your Forte, history too!!
So you continue to view this as some simplistic Capitalism vs. Socialism battle - 'cause, ya know, it's just gotta be one or the other, right? - never mind the one being about accumulation of material while the other evidently deals, oddly enough, with the people's needs - apples vs. oranges - And never mind that this is exactly all every fucking died hard, billionaires' ass-kissing, capitalist apologist ever offers - Distraction! Opinions! By the veritable boatload! But never with verification! We tried that! It can't work! We're broke! Because all you're really expressing is fear itself.Imagine we live in a Socialist country, where"s the motivation to succeed in business if the end product is taken off you or partially taken off you. Would you be happy to go into a pub and ask for a pint of beer, pay for a pint of beer and walk out with three quarters of a pint. I imagine your happiness will wear thin soon, assuming you were fucking gullible enough to think it was a good idea in the first place.
In the UK; TV (BBC), coal, gas, electric, telecommunications, railways, steel, healthcare and postal services were nationalised, the tax payer footing the bill when they made losses. Low and behold, all failing so coal, gas, electric, telecoms, rail, steel and postal services privatised. And if you want to share in their business profits, you go to a broker and buy shares in them.
Year on year, more and more people want the TV licence scrapped, get it off the public and turn it into a business.
Healthcare is funded across the planet in all countries in the same way, it's just the ratio on how it's funded between countries that's different. In the UK, some 74%-76% is footed by the tax payer. NHS worked well in the 1940's when implemented but times have changed. The cost needs evened out to reduce the tax payers cost and reduce the tax burden.
If Socialism is so fantastic, how can a nationalised business that's a monopoly make a loss? Because it's staff were on strike every year, staff were unproductive and where's the incentive to do well. It meant no profit was generated so it had little money to invest in infrastructure.
And the funny thing is, we have idiots celebrating Socialism over Capitalism. And why do they celebrate Socialism? Because 'on paper' Socialism is the best system to have, but in the real world, it doesn't work. Open your fucking eyes and look what's going on in reality.
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
while the other evidently deals, oddly enough, with the people's needs
