We keep getting this or the other free marketeer's views on this site. I'ld like to occasionally post a Marxist view so I'm starting off with something generic...a brief look at class consciousness. You're welcome to comment on or even slag off the article. Debating is good and constructive in times of crisis.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e20933.htm
PeakOil is You
The workingman's dilemma
The workingman's dilemma
by americandream » Sat 04 Oct 2008, 00:08:29
- americandream
- Permanently Banned
- Posts: 8650
- Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Re: The workingman's dilemma
by forbin » Sat 04 Oct 2008, 05:20:44
thanks for the alternate veiw, about time !
IMO the Adam smith group and markism are all from the same century and have both been proven to be lacking ( look this is not a troll - my opinion ok ? ) in the real world.
in the future the historians will talk about the fanatical veiws of both these theories and their repecive flaws.......
either that or we'll be throwing rocks at each other
Forbin
IMO the Adam smith group and markism are all from the same century and have both been proven to be lacking ( look this is not a troll - my opinion ok ? ) in the real world.
in the future the historians will talk about the fanatical veiws of both these theories and their repecive flaws.......
either that or we'll be throwing rocks at each other
Forbin
- forbin
- Peat
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Mon 16 Jun 2008, 03:00:00
Re: The workingman's dilemma
by americandream » Sat 04 Oct 2008, 09:46:13
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('forbin', 't')hanks for the alternate veiw, about time !
IMO the Adam smith group and markism are all from the same century and have both been proven to be lacking ( look this is not a troll - my opinion ok ? ) in the real world.
in the future the historians will talk about the fanatical veiws of both these theories and their repecive flaws.......
either that or we'll be throwing rocks at each other
Forbin
IMO the Adam smith group and markism are all from the same century and have both been proven to be lacking ( look this is not a troll - my opinion ok ? ) in the real world.
in the future the historians will talk about the fanatical veiws of both these theories and their repecive flaws.......
either that or we'll be throwing rocks at each other
Forbin
In a nutshell, Marxism simply advocates a collective society living according to its needs.
- americandream
- Permanently Banned
- Posts: 8650
- Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Re: The workingman's dilemma
by allenwrench » Sat 04 Oct 2008, 09:46:14
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'W')e keep getting this or the other free marketeer's views on this site. I'ld like to occasionally post a Marxist view so I'm starting off with something generic...a brief look at class consciousness. You're welcome to comment on or even slag off the article. Debating is good and constructive in times of crisis.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e20933.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e20933.htm
If one is selfless, communism's works fine. It is only when selfishness is injected that communism fails miserably.
If we were ants or bees communism would work great. When the ideal of communism comes to be applied in real life, the perfect theory becomes corrupted with the ego of the imperfect leaders.
The world has had lots of time to practice at perfecting communism and we can say communism seems to be a failure. That does not mean forms of communism or socialist governments will die off. For some it may mean the lesser of two evils.
In our future, Americans may find themselves to lean more to a community based life, As the crude dries up the gov may find it hard to help all those in need. Localized groups and communes of sorts may be all we have to turn to. II will say for communism to be fair minded and even handed, all workers would periodically exchange jobs (best they could) from top to bottom. That way favoritism would not be such a problem.
But who wants to go from the ivory tower to shoveling shit, so lets get real - we are dealing with human egos here. And even if we wish to 'try' and do good, one cannot replace highly skilled workers with the shit shoveler. So no matter how we slice it, there will always be exceptions to the rule.
Same with us in our democracy of sorts. human leaders make mistakes and just like the communists, we citizens have little or no recourse to fix those mistakes That is why revolutions come about for change. But we must be careful about what we are revolting against, as what we replace it with may be worse than what we have destroyed.
In the end, I choose a democracy of sorts and when the democracy fails them replace it with bits and pieces of socialized areas, but all the while trying to keep the democratic foundation and as much personal freedoms in force best we can.
-
allenwrench - Tar Sands
- Posts: 862
- Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2008, 03:00:00
Re: The workingman's dilemma
by americandream » Sat 04 Oct 2008, 09:52:28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('allenwrench', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'W')e keep getting this or the other free marketeer's views on this site. I'ld like to occasionally post a Marxist view so I'm starting off with something generic...a brief look at class consciousness. You're welcome to comment on or even slag off the article. Debating is good and constructive in times of crisis.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e20933.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e20933.htm
If we were ants or bees communism would work great. The reason the ideal of communism fails is because imperfect humans have to apply the perfect ideals.
When the ideal of communism comes to be applied in real life, the perfect theory becomes corrupted with the ego of the imperfect leaders. We have to remember what is logical is not always practical when it comes to humans. If one is selfless communism's works fine. It is only when selfishness is injected that communism fails miserably.
The world has had lots of time to practice at perfecting communism and we can say communism seems to be a failure. That does not mean forms of communism or socialist governments will die off. For some it may mean the lesser of two evils.
In our future, Americans may find themselves to lean more to a community based life, As the crude dries up the gov may find it hard to help all those in need. Localized groups and communes of sorts may be all we have to turn to. II will say for communism to be fair minded and even handed, all workers would periodically exchange jobs (best they could) from top to bottom. That way favoritism would not be such a problem.
But who wants to go from the ivory tower to shoveling crap, so lets get real - we are dealing with human egos here. And even if we wish to 'try' and do good, one cannot replace highly skilled workers with the crap shoveler. So no matter how we slice it, there will always be exceptions to the rule.
Same with us in our democracy of sorts. human leaders make mistakes and just like the communists, we citizens have little or no recourse to fix those mistakes That is why revolutions come about for change. But we must be careful about what we are revolting against, as what we replace it with may be worse than what we have destroyed.
In the end, I choose a democracy of sorts and when the democracy fails them replace it with bits and pieces of socialized areas, but all the while trying to keep the democratic foundation and as much personal freedoms in force best we can.
I think the wherewithal for achieving a transparent and collectively organised society may well be worth examining if only to determine the extent to which this concept is applicable as an alternative to the current system of failed socialised free enterprise. You know, the means by which we may avoid past failures
- americandream
- Permanently Banned
- Posts: 8650
- Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
And who says that such a thing isn't possible? 