ask Santa.
Since this is interesting…
-
from every one to there abilitys, to everone to there needs.
-Karl Marx
i have here a letter writen by a Comrade in kingston Ont. to myself so see what you thinkwhen the revolution comes, we can expect to see what’s happening in
argentina now start to happen here. but we must realize that capitalism is
strongest here than anywhere else, so the revolution most likely wont begin
in the “first world”. the revolution has already begun in argentina, and if
it’s successful, it will spread. it begins with the emergence of the
toiling masses onto the political scene. now this just doesn’t happen
overnight, and it can’t happen purely by our efforts alone, we merely wish
to guide the revolution so that it will not crumble and revert back to some
sort of capitalistic despotism. we wish to ensure the revolution will be
successful and the power remains firmly in the hands of the working class.
but unfortunatly, the working class learns in a mannor that’s different than
we have. the working class, generally speaking, learns through trial and
error, in other words, it learns through experience. when people are
working 8 to 16 hours a day, they’re exhausted, mentally and physically. if
these people have children, that’s another fulltime job in itself and they
have no time off until their children reach an age where they can begin to
look after themselves. the last thing these people want to do after work is
go to a meeting or back to school or brush up on marxism, so they sit
infront of a tv, drink, take drugs, turn to religion, etc, basically they
try to escape, if only for a little while. this does not mean the working
class will forever be stuck in their rut. in bourgeois (capitalist)
democracies, the working class tests the policies of various cliques of the
ruling class by electing them. the trick for the capitalists is to make as
much money as possible while maintaing their order. because there is so
much wealth in the first world, this is somewhat easier for them to do.
it’s in the third world where there is little money and all the countries
are in debt to things like the IMF and World Bank that this process becomes
vital. the working class elects new cliques of the ruling class to try to
solve their problems, this is not possible on a capitalist basis. people
seek the path of least resistence to solve a problem, so when the course of
bourgeois politicians has run out and proved themselves impotant to solve
the crisises of the masses, the masses will and are turning to more radical
alternatives. in argentina, the working class has elected many people who
were supposidly to “solve” argentina’s problems, but the situation only got
worse. in a mass frenzy of rioting we saw the beginning of the argentinian
revolution. the masses entered the political scene, although not yet
knowing any form to express their views. in time, “neighbourhood
assemballies” began to form, and they’re continuing to form and are
currently entering a phase of duel power with the “legit” government.
“neighbourhood assemballies” are the beginnings of what we call soviets.
soviets are workers’ councils, the basis of government in a socialist
society. in argentina, the neighbourhood assemballies are linking up
nationally and have formed the National Workers’ Assembally. they’re
entering workplaces and popularizing the neighbourhood assemballies and
promoting the formation of workplace committees. what the state of a
socialist society would look like is basically this, only our form of the
“National Workers’ Assembally” would be the national representation of the
wishes of the soviets. it may not go by that name, but the name doesn’t
matter, it’s the content that counts. the soviets would be the form of
government. basically, how they operate is delegates from workplaces are
elected (and subject to recall at ANY time) to represent the workers of that
particluar workplace on the soviet. the practice would be that everyone has
the right to have their voice heard, unlike today where that only exists as
the rhetoric of the ruling class. in the workplaces, the committees would
be the management, and all who sit on the committees would be elected and
subject to recall at ANY time. now let me be clear that it is not marxists
who came up with the soviet as the form of government in a socialist
society. marxistrs are by no means responsible for the formation of
soviets. the working class almost has an instinct to form them in times of
crisis and revolution. marxists simply realized that the soviet is the most
democratic form of government ever devised and practiced, and we’ve realized
that it is the only way a planned economy can opperate successfully. in
russia the soviets were liquidated and the mismanagement of stalinism proved
disasterous. (if you wanna know more about what happened in russia, i
highly suggest you pick up a copy of “The Revolution Betrayed” by Leon
Trotsky, you can also find it online at http://www.marxists.org ) the planned
economy needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen, and the soviet is
the most democratic form of government. basically, when the revolution
happens here, canada will be in a constant state of popular control.
socialism can by no means be imposed. only the working class can cast off
the capitalist class. the argentinian working class, when they cast off
their capitalists, cannot cast off ours, that job is up to the canadian
working class. but when the revolution spreads in the third world, the
canadian working class will take notice, and this will help us. they will
see what we’ve been saying by example, and not just theory. now, i realize
i’ve written a lot, but don’t worry, i’m almost done!! to answer your
question of what would happen, basically, with a planned economy, we can cut
back the working week with increases in pay. this will create a shortage of
labour, in which the unemployed will find employment, thereby eliminating
unemployment. economically speaking, when people have more money and are
spending it, it stimulates growth. we’d see a durastic rise in our already
high standard of living. we’d also see an explosion of culture. as
aristotle said, the egyptians discovered mathematics because their priest
caste wasn’t subject to physical labour. they had idle time. in their idle
time, they persued intellectual interests. too further this, the entire
beginnings of human developement occured with the emergence of slave
society. slave labour freed up the time of their owners, thereby allowing
them to discover new technologies and techniques of going about doing
things. idle time would be the most important right under socialism.
socialism is international or it will fail. the USSR proved this, socialism
cannot exist soley in one country. when the revolution occurs here, we will
use our advanced technology and techniques of production to aid the people
in the “third world” we would teach them the better ways of production,
thereby raising their standard of living. as the revolution spreads to
every corner of the world, we’d increase international cooperation,
eliminating the need for national states, eventually creating a socialist
federation of the world. anyways, i’m all done typing this long rant out.
hope this helps.- Brent MacVicar
-
how many hours do you work a day :smile:???
as you shown, people screw things up. Capitalism doesn’t have to have greed, but by hell it finds it’s way there, just like in many communist societies. I do not denounce communism as a theory, because it is the best one out there, but just like crystal pepsi, it doesn’t go well with public. people do not want to work as many as others. people are envious of each other.
IMO the ultimate goal in life is happiness. if a society can be made to make me a happy mindless drone that did work to benefit the state, i would do it. the truth is that no one with the power to set that up would do it for the good of the people. another problem would be that my fellow mindless drones just might decide to work else, because other people would work for them. you cannot deny that. you cannot deny man’s jealous envious nature.
I’m with you all the way in theory, but i would like to think that i am more of a realist (and maybe pessimist :smile: ), because i realize communism would never work with man.
but hey, you can always make a commune, and as long as you make enough money to pay taxes, you can live how you like.
…all in all, i support capitalism. not that it is better, but it works.
-
my god mini-freek, thanks for the book!
you might not have to wait long. the same might happen in japan. they are going down, and their banks are going to stop insuring deposits. I smell trouble.
i’m feeling happy now…no one denounced my opinions on questions one and two…yet :smile:
-
No one is here to say that anyone else is wrong, just to share our opinions, Horten
-
I think the US have the biggest muscles on the block so ,of course, their going to flex them. Being Canadian and watching and listening to our ridiculous government fumble itsway around world affairs, Im totally behind almost anything the States does. Our Canadian Prime Minister is a f#@%@*$ joker.A Stupid looking bastard. The US has direction, there decisive. They are the New World Romans.
As for the Middle east, just let them kill each other, same goes for India and Pakistan.
I dont belive Yannys 14
-
Well done fellow comrade!
HortenFlyingWing, read number #2 in my post above. John Locke once said that man is nothing more than a clean slate who’s actions are predetermine by his environment. Remember, back many centuries ago, Feudalism was an accepted way of life. However such people as Enlightened Thinkers (Locke, Voltire (sp)) thought otherwise.The Japanese economy thrived for several decades by strictly controlling competition (very socialistic). Would-be monopolists are always emerging as natural products of capitalism, threatening to do away with competition from capitalist, not socialist motives. If people have been able to raise their standards of living it has been partly because of the work of labor unions and those who have agitated for minimum wage and maximum work day laws, all denounced as harmful to free competition.
Also the idea of Norway having one of the highest standards of living supports communism. Norway is much of a well regulated, welfare state (I think taxes of over 50% on income), socialism. Don’t want pure communism? I don’t blame you. However Lenin’s NEP was able to successfully combine forms of capitalism with Communism. Rewards do not always have to come in the form of money. Simply put, money can’t buy you happiness.
-
I totally agree. but how can a clean slate be made “ungreedy”? It would be hard to do that, my friend, it would be hard to eliminate greed.
I think norway has 60% income tax, and to tell the truth, i think that is a little insane. Norway does not have to spend its money on a massive military, and the many other things larger countires have to spend money on. It would be hard to put that same system n a country like america, so i don’t delude myself to think it is possible.
I think man can get along fine with capitalism. If communism is ment to eliminate greed, then that is totally not true, because greed still exists… unless the state takes you when you are a baby and programs “ungreedy” babies…but thats not going to happen…yet…
-
i think the best way to eliminate greed is for the leaders to be rotated on a ragular basis this is ware the “recaled at any time” part come in, as soon as there human instincs get the best of him/her the peaple elect some one new to fill his spot on the council.
-
On 2002-03-26 12:52, mini_phreek wrote:
i think the best way to eliminate greed is for the leaders to be rotated on a ragular basis this is ware the “recaled at any time” part come in, as soon as there human instincs get the best of him/her the peaple elect some one new to fill his spot on the council.well, things aren’t that easy. for one, a lot of leaders are dictators and such for life. now i’m sure your party lines would not want the end of a regime like that, so there’s a loop in logic.
another thing is that someone doesn’t need to be in power more than one day to be corrupted. special interests run everything, in any sort of country. only if every rich and or powerful person was murdered, would you solve that problem…but you would only cause a lot more problems.
-
thats why it’s importent to see that no one person be in charge instede we have an elected councel subject to recall at any time
-
“another thing is that someone doesn’t need to be in power more than one day to be corrupted. special interests run everything, in any sort of country”
Well by special interests you mean “money under then the table” then I think that it more of a capitalistic notion. Look at the US Government on the years when special interests have caused scandals and corruption (especially before the direct election of centers).
"I think, in order to have freedom, one must not be constrained by outside forces that seek to control one’s actions when they effect no one but oneself to a reasonable degree. Under a Communist government this true freedom, if the right conditions were maintained, would be more prevalent than in our current world. Right now government censorship in the US is not so much a problem as censorship by money. The facts is simple: Those with the bucks get to have there say.
First, In order to run for president a person needs funding for his campaign, and in recent times a large amount of this comes from the candidates own pockets. None of the current or recent major presidential candidates has been poor or middle class (although some have started that way).
Second, it takes money to publish papers, books, pamphlets, even websites. It takes money to publish ideas, and, obviously, those without are censored. Under Communism financial censorship could not take place since all are in the same economic class. People would be equally endowed with the means to express themselves. Also, there would be no wealthy lobbyist groups to perpetuate evils such as HMOs, tobacco, etc. Currently these groups are able to inflect harm on the general because of their riches."
-
I don’t think that we can call the US a successful attempt at democracy yet, it’s only been 200 years, which really isn’t long at all.
-
“Very true indeed. To eternity, 200 years is not a very long time. A lot of people I know say Communism is dead, that it died out with the cold war. Communism has failed once, and people say it fell because of humankind’s greedy nature. When the Democracy of Athens and the Roman Republic failed, people said they failed because of humankind’s stupid nature. Here we have another lesson to learn: Just because an idea failed once does not mean it always will. Also, maybe this time we will not wait 1,820 years to realize this.”
-
"Well by special interests you mean “money under then the table” then I think that it more of a capitalistic notion. Look at the US Government on the years when special interests have caused scandals and corruption (especially before the direct election of centers). "
I guess you mean “senators”… yess, there is always need for reform, but you can’t tell me that the people in power always truly look out for what is best for the people. a capitalist society allows people to work for their money, what they own…their power. A communist society with corrupt leadership (and in my opinion 99.9% of all leadership is corrupt) is even worse than a corrupt capitalist society. capitalism at least has social mobility, and it allows people that work to get the dividends they deserve.
people who work hard usually get the benefit of hard work, over time. Communism will not be a quick fix, and nor a long time fix. man’s greedy nature will never permit it. if it was successful anywhere, it will start going downhill after one generation. capitalism will always exist as long as there is ownership. as long as someone is better than anyone else in any sort of way, capitalism exists.
That’s why i feel the need to repeat myself. Communism is either endorsed by lazy, possibly down on their luck people, or idealists. both fail to see straight.
You would have to tell me greed can be exterminated…if you can’t tell me that, a pure communist society wouldn’t endure forever. At least in America, and even more so in Europe, capitalism exists but under restrictions set by the government. yes, people demanded change and reform, and yes for the good of the people corperations can’t run as wild as they did 100 years ago. But at times, people get greedy, like in france. a 35 hour work week? A society that doesn’t want to work will collapse.
Rebuild the WTC larger:
http://www.rjdbiz.com/rebuildwtc/index.html
“The only enemy more powerful than an invisible enemy is an invincible enemy”[ This Message was edited by: HortenFlyingWing on 2002-03-27 07:54 ]
-
Communism does not work. What kind of motivation does one have ,if no matter how hard you work, the next guy who does nothing gets the same reward. Where is the reinforcement? It stands against human nature. Greed inst the only factor.
-
Ummm… i guest i missed my password…im dumb, the above post is mine.
-
Communism is an ideal system of government…
for a community of about 200. Too many people is a major factor in the flaws of every government. It simply isn’t possible to have a good system (passable yes, even better than average, but not good) with millions of individuals to cater to. With a small community it would be possible to insure that everyone either contributed to the whole or did not undeservedly (is that a word?) benefit from the labors of the others. With larger populations it becomes impossible to monitor individuals…
oh, never mind, I could go on all day. -
smaller community as in the Amish, sure. peer pressure controls a small amount of people. code and ethic cannot control 6 billion.
remember, communism is the perfect system in theory…as long as you are willing to work as much as I!
-
I agree. I was simply defending the idea of communism. It may not be practical for a country with a population in the millions, but it would be a beautiful system if it worked. Of course capitalism is not a perfect system either, again a good idea, but it does seem to work much better than communism on a large scale. I just wish that a system based on something other than greed could be made to work.
-
Question: Globalization poses major problem to communism. The globalization of economies makes a plan like the controlling of businesses by a less educated/ leaderless class difficult.
Answer: The most difficult part of this plan is keeping the working class’s standard of living equal, or higher than it was before the revolution. Without capital, and with the extreme dependency on international trade to maintain the standard of living, it will be impossible to maintain a socialist society. The Workers Pary must ITSELF generate education equal to that of the Capitalists. I see no other way of keeping the Capitalists down after the revolution than to simply do as well or better financially than they did. Without funding, The movement would stagnate do to lost support by a now poorer working class. Business would crumble as would hopes to stay in power.
The masses as a whole will certainly support anything which betters their daily lives. In order to keep their support they must believe that just that is happening. No matter who you are or what your beliefs, you know that this will take capital of some sort. Unless the new “workers nation” wishes to become isolationist, it must produce at an equal or higher rate in a very short period of time. That is why communism must first be self-sufficient and on a GLOBAL BASIS. Communism is the universal revolution.
Does socialism mean equal shares for everyone?
No. People are different and have different needs. Some needs will be more expensive (in terms of resources and labour needed to satisfy them) than others.
Suggested Topics
