Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 
Send Topic Print
Socialism (Read 28312 times)
MeisterEckhart
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 10456
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #315 - Jun 16th, 2022 at 9:50am
 
FutureTheLeftWant wrote on Jun 16th, 2022 at 9:27am:
MeisterEckhart wrote on Jun 16th, 2022 at 8:52am:
That is exactly how socialism, as interpreted by Lenin, then Stalin, then Mao was deployed.

The familial / sexual elements in it are almost exactly those practised by chimpanzees and (even more directly) by bonobos.

Funny how this 'revolutionary' philosophical ideal follows a deeply primal evolutionary pattern of behaviour.

Even funnier is how so many are certain they know what Karl Marx was really thinking: usually a half-baked mudcake of (Vladimir Ilyich) Lenin and John Lennon.



This is literally bullshit LOL!! In any case socialist thought wasn't set in amber by Lenin.

No. All true. Chimpanzee and bonobo females mate with as many males as they can, the effect being that no male chimpanzee/bonobo can ever be sure which offspring is his. Plato and the apes eh! Who'da thought!

Socialist thought wasn't set in amber by Lenin eh! Only in practice.

Socialism: Level the hierarchy, establish another one, then imagine there's no heaven, possessions, religion, borders or countries.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
FutureTheLeftWant
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6625
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #316 - Jun 16th, 2022 at 9:51am
 
MeisterEckhart wrote on Jun 16th, 2022 at 9:50am:
No. All true. Chimpanzee and bonobo females mate with as many males as they can, the effect being that no male chimpanzee/bonobo can ever be sure which offspring is his. Plato and the apes eh! Who'da thought!

Socialist thought wasn't set in amber by Lenin eh! Only in practice.

Socialism: Level the hierarchy, establish another one, then imagine there's no heaven, possessions, religion, borders or countries.




Name one socialist nation that's the sexual free for all you describe....
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
MeisterEckhart
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 10456
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #317 - Jun 16th, 2022 at 9:55am
 
FutureTheLeftWant wrote on Jun 16th, 2022 at 9:51am:
MeisterEckhart wrote on Jun 16th, 2022 at 9:50am:
No. All true. Chimpanzee and bonobo females mate with as many males as they can, the effect being that no male chimpanzee/bonobo can ever be sure which offspring is his. Plato and the apes eh! Who'da thought!

Socialist thought wasn't set in amber by Lenin eh! Only in practice.

Socialism: Level the hierarchy, establish another one, then imagine there's no heaven, possessions, religion, borders or countries.




Name one socialist nation that's the sexual free for all you describe....

The former Soviet Union.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 10813
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #318 - Jun 16th, 2022 at 5:10pm
 
Frank wrote on Jun 16th, 2022 at 7:45am:
If only Marx had read Ecclesiazusae… If only Plato hadn’t… But how can anyone still be nostalgic for their utopian fantasy?
Peter Jones


Neither Marx nor the ancient Greeks understood the implications of modern fiat currencies.

So your either/or proposition: a choice between  utopia or the current unsustainable 'survival of the fittest' capitalist chaos  - is uncomprehending nonsense. 
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 10813
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #319 - Jun 16th, 2022 at 5:14pm
 
MeisterEckhart wrote on Jun 16th, 2022 at 9:55am:
The former Soviet Union.


No longer exists, times change, try again...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 40523
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #320 - Jun 28th, 2022 at 5:45pm
 
Oded Galor, an economist from Brown University, locates his investigation into inequality in precisely the terrain where Piketty daren’t look. At the centre of his argument is the idea of the Malthusian Trap, a problem encountered by agricultural civilisations from ancient times up to the industrial revolution.
A village that successfully cultivates crops will at first experience a surplus of food. This will allow its inhabitants to sustain more children and the population will increase. But that puts a greater strain on the food supply and the standard of living falls. In this cruel cycle, progress leads to failure. An extreme example is the culture of Easter Island, which flourished, consumed all the island’s resources, and collapsed.

Societies remained stuck in this cycle for thousands of years. But then something happened, a change, ‘triggering the phase transition in which the human species escaped from this poverty trap’, Galor writes. Suddenly ‘the Malthusian equilibrium quite mysteriously vanished and tremendous growth ensued’. The countries that escaped surged ahead. Those that did not were trapped in poverty. This, he argues, is at the root of the global inequality that we see around us now.

The escape was triggered by the industrial revolution, with its combination of population growth and new technology. Larger populations are, Galor writes, ‘more likely to generate both a greater demand for new goods, tools and practices, as well as exceptional individuals capable of inventing them’. This coincides with an emphasis on the value of education, which in turn drives more invention in a self-reinforcing cycle of improvement and growth.

The Journey of Humanity really comes alive when Galor digs into the deepest roots of inequality, explaining that ancient societies with agriculture based on grain developed faster than those based on tubers such as cassava, sweet potatoes and yams. ‘Grains could be more easily measured, transported, stored and therefore taxed,’ he writes, which led to societies that were complex and hierarchical. ‘Thus, the suitability of soil for either grains or tubers meaningfully influenced the formation of states.’

Even within grain-producing civilisations, the type of grain cultivated had deep implications for a society’s character and long-term prospects. The cultivation of rice, for example, ‘requires large-scale and therefore shared irrigation systems’. This has tended to form a more ‘collectivist, interdependent culture’. However, ‘land that is suitable for the cultivation of wheat, which requires a lower degree of cooperation, has contributed to the emergence of more individualistic cultures’.

According to Galor, global inequality is not simply a political or economic construct. It emerges from factors including geography, the volatility of weather systems, the incidence of disease and the presence of cultivable plant species at particular latitudes.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-trouble-with-thomas-piketty

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 10813
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #321 - Jun 29th, 2022 at 1:38pm
 
[quote author=Frank link=1604108705/320#320 date=1656402340]

"The cultivation of rice, for example, ‘requires large-scale and therefore shared irrigation systems’. This has tended to form a more ‘collectivist, interdependent culture’. However, ‘land that is suitable for the cultivation of wheat, which requires a lower degree of cooperation, has contributed to the emergence of more individualistic cultures’."

So......what? Both cultures have been marked by internecine warfare amidst creativity. 

"According to Galor, global inequality is not simply a political or economic construct. It emerges from factors including geography, the volatility of weather systems, the incidence of disease and the presence of cultivable plant species at particular latitudes".

So....what? In the 9th century,  Constantinople (Europe), Baghdad (M.E) and Chang'an (China) - all with populations around one million - were capitals of the  most advanced civilizations on the planet (ie late Roman, early Islam, and Tang dynasty China, respectively).    London and Paris were pigstys  at the time.

Picketty is looking for solutions for the egregious inequality in the modern global post industrial AI and IT economy.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 40523
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #322 - Jun 29th, 2022 at 5:11pm
 
What is Socialism?  by Leszek Kolakowski
This 1956 essay was seized by the censor and the student journal for which it had been written was closed down. The essay was then pinned up on a bulletin board at Warsaw University until - very shortly afterwards - the authorities took it down. From then on underground copies of it were circulated. It remained unpublished in Poland until after the fall of communism.

We intend to tell you what socialism is. But first we must tell you what it is not - and our views on this matter were once very different from what they are at present.

Here, then, is what socialism is not:
- a society in which someone who has committed no crime sits at home waiting for the police;
- a society in which it is a crime to be the brother, sister, son, or wife of a criminal;
- a society in which some people are unhappy because they say what they think and others are unhappy because they do not;
- a society in which some people are better off because they do not think at all;
- a society in which some people are unhappy because they are Jews and others are happier because they are not;
- a state whose soldiers are the first to set foot in the territory of another country;
- a state where people are better off because they praise their leaders;
- a state where one can be condemned without trial;
- a society whose leaders appoint themselves;
- a society in which ten people live in one room;
- a society that has illiterates and plague epidemics;
- a state that does not permit travel abroad;
- a state that has more spies than nurses and more room in prisons than in hospitals;
- a state where the number of bureaucrats increases more quickly than that of workers;
- a state where people are compelled to lie;
- a state where people are compelled to steal;
- a state where people are compelled to commit crimes;
- a state that possesses colonies;
- a state whose neighbours curse geography;
- a state where cowards are better off than the courageous;
- a state where defence lawyers are usually in agreement with the prosecution;
- a tyranny, an oligarchy, a bureaucracy;
- a society where vast numbers of people turn to God to comfort them in their misery;
- a state that gives literary prizes to talentless hacks and knows better than painters what kind of painting is the best;
- a nation that oppresses other nations;
- a nation that is oppressed by another nation;
- a state that wants all its citizens to have the same views on philosophy, foreign policy, the economy, literature, and morality;
- a state whose government determines the rights of its citizens but whose citizens do not determine the rights of their government;
- a state in which one is responsible for one's ancestors;
- a state in which some people earn forty times as much as others;
- a system of government that is opposed by the majority of the governed;
- one isolated country;
- a group of underdeveloped countries;
- a state that employs nationalist slogans;
- a state whose government believes that nothing matters more than its being in power;
- a state that makes pacts with criminals and adapts its worldview to these pacts;
- a state that wants its foreign ministry to shape the worldview of all mankind at any given moment;
- a state that is not very good at distinguishing between slavery and liberation;
- a state that gives free rein to proponents of racism;
- a state that currently exists;
- a state with private ownership of the means of production;
- a state that considers itself socialist solely because it has abolished private ownership of the means of production;
- a state that is not very good at distinguishing between social revolution and armed invasion;
- a state that does not believe that people under socialism should be happier than people elsewhere;
- a society that is very sad;
- a caste system;
- a state where people can be pushed around, humiliated, and ill-treated with impunity;
- a state where a certain view of world history is obligatory;
- a state whose philosophers and writers always say the same things as the generals and ministers, but always after the latter have said them;
- a state where city maps are state secrets;
- a state where the results of parliamentary elections can always be unerringly predicted;
- a state where slave labour exists;
- a state where feudal bonds exist;
- a state that has a monopoly on telling its citizens all they need to know about the world;
- a state that thinks freedom amounts to obedience to the state;
- a state that sees no difference between what is true and what it is in its interest for people to believe;
- a state where a nation can be transplanted in its entirety from one place to another, willy-nilly;
- a state in which the workers have no influence on the government;
- a state that believes it alone can save mankind;
- a state that thinks it has always been right;
- a state where history is in the service of politics;
- a state whose citizens are not permitted to read the greatest works of contemporary literature, or to see the greatest contemporary works of art, or to hear the best contemporary music;
- a state that is always exceedingly pleased with itself;
- a state that claims the world is very complicated, but in fact believes that it is very simple;
- a state where you have to go through an awful lot of suffering before you can see a doctor;
- a state that has beggars;
- a state that is convinced that no one could ever invent anything better;
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 40523
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #323 - Jun 29th, 2022 at 5:12pm
 
....

- a state that believes that everyone simply adores it, although the opposite is true;
- a state that governs according to the principle oderint dum metuant;
- a state that decides who may criticize it and how;
- a state where one is required each day to say the opposite of what one said the day before and to believe that one is always saying the same thing;
- a state that does not like it at all when its citizens read old newspapers;
- a state where many ignorant people are considered scholars; the politics of its government will not allow you to discover this;
- a state that does not like it at all when its regime is analysed by scholars, but is very happy when this is done by sycophants;
- a state that always knows better than its citizens where the happiness of every one of its citizens lies;
- a state that, while not sacrificing anything for any higher principles, nevertheless believes that it is the leading light of progress.

That was the first part. And now, pay attention, because we are going to tell you what socialism is. Here is what socialism is:

Socialism is a system that ... But what's the point of going into all these details? It's very simple: socialism is just a really wonderful thing.

http://savingcommunities.org/docs/kolakowski.leszek/whatissocialism.html
https://archive.clivejames.com/books/kolak.htm

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 40523
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #324 - Jun 30th, 2022 at 12:00pm
 
Frank wrote on Jun 28th, 2022 at 5:45pm:
Oded Galor, an economist from Brown University, locates his investigation into inequality in precisely the terrain where Piketty daren’t look.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-trouble-with-thomas-piketty


Piketty has answered the call for brevity with a book which by his standards is the equivalent of a Post-it note. It’s certainly ‘brief’ – but is it a ‘history of equality’?

Alas, no. What we have instead is an eye-wateringly left-wing manifesto for dismantling economic inequality, both domestically and internationally. ‘Inequality is first of all a social, historical and political construction,’ Piketty writes, and the best way to tackle it is by creating ‘a new form of democratic socialism, decentralised and self-managing, ecological and multicultural, making it possible to structure a different world that is far more emancipatory and egalitarian.’

To start with, we need higher taxes. Much higher. Piketty notes: ‘Confiscatory tax rates have been an immense historical success.’ Any worries that this might crush business formation or choke economic growth are misplaced, as ‘it is the battle for equality and education that has made economic development and human progress possible, and not the veneration of property, stability and inequality’.

Inheritance also needs reform. It should be taxed and shared out, so everyone gets a piece. We need inheritance for all, along with a universal basic income and guaranteed employment, with the aim being ‘the gradual decommercialisation of the economy’. If that fixes inequality within countries, the inequality between countries can be reduced by liquidating the institutions of globalisation, such as the IMF, OECD and World Bank. Instead, we need a new set of transnational organisations with powers to levy taxes on the world’s largest corporations. The proceeds would be shared with poorer states, particularly the West’s former colonies.

In the sections where Piketty finally touches on the history of inequality, he turns his attention to the age of empire, and to the hideous injustices of that time, many of which, he says, still affect lives. ‘Colonialism and military domination permitted western countries to organise the world economy to their benefit,’ he writes, in a sentence that has the feel of tautology about it – the West dominated because it was dominant. This leads him to ponder ‘the reasons for the fiscal and military superiority developed in Europe’, which enabled countries such as Britain, France and Spain to exploit other nations.

At this point you can sense Piketty’s discomfort. An analysis of the deeper origins of European dominance would involve accepting that rapid economic advancement doesn’t only result from the drive for social and economic equality. It can come from more acquisitive instincts, which are politically unacceptable to a collectivist like him.

As a result, he condemns the West for being dominant and for driving global inequality, but is unable to say how it came to dominate in the first place. It is a significant gap in the argument.

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 10813
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #325 - Jun 30th, 2022 at 12:26pm
 
Frank wrote on Jun 29th, 2022 at 5:11pm:
We intend to tell you what socialism is. But first we must tell you what it is not - and our views on this matter were once very different from what they are at present.


Interesting, let's see if we can learn anything about "socialism".

Quote:
Here, then, is what socialism is not:
- a society in which someone who has committed no crime sits at home waiting for the police;


Correct. Likewise for all the following  absurd propositions until we  get to

Quote:
- a state that wants all its citizens to have the same views on philosophy, foreign policy, the economy, literature, and morality;


Certainly "socialism" despises the depredations  of the owners of private capital at the expense of workers.

Quote:
- a state whose government determines the rights of its citizens but whose citizens do not determine the rights of their government;


Socialist governments seek common prosperity, self-interested reptilian-brain-driven capitalists seek their own enrichment regardless of the common welfare.

The rest of the comments purporting to say what "socialism is not " is ideological garbage, so lets' see if we can skip to the section which tells us what "socialism" is.....
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 10813
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #326 - Jun 30th, 2022 at 12:30pm
 
Frank wrote on Jun 29th, 2022 at 5:12pm:
....


That was the first part. And now, pay attention, because we are going to tell you what socialism is. Here is what socialism is:

Socialism is a system that ... But what's the point of going into all these details? It's very simple: socialism is just a really wonderful thing.

http://savingcommunities.org/docs/kolakowski.leszek/whatissocialism.html
https://archive.clivejames.com/books/kolak.htm


Ah...all of that, just to show you, like the author,  are blinded by the TINA fallacy...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 40523
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #327 - Jun 30th, 2022 at 1:23pm
 
thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 30th, 2022 at 12:30pm:
the TINA fallacy





You like that, don't you?? Nobody ever mentions it but you. You set it up yourself and then shoot it down yourself. Makes your life easy. It's like labelling everyone else a fascist. Don't  have to think, just label everything the same and then dismiss it all.
And then say, "refuted above", like a little budgie. 
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jun 30th, 2022 at 2:06pm by Frank »  

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 10813
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #328 - Jun 30th, 2022 at 2:04pm
 
Frank wrote on Jun 30th, 2022 at 1:23pm:
thegreatdivide wrote on Jun 30th, 2022 at 12:30pm:
the TINA fallacy



You like that, don't you?? Nobody ever mentions it but you.


I first came across the term in Bill Mitchell's MMT blog, dedicated to exposing the delusions of mainstream 'flat-earth' neoliberal economics. 

Apparently the TINA fallacy was first proposed by Thatcher, faced with union calls for her to resign. 

(Hey, it took 1500 years for people to move on from Aristotle's conception of geocentricity, hopefully won't take that long to achive public sector debt-free money-creation). 
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 40523
Gender: male
Re: Socialism
Reply #329 - Jul 26th, 2022 at 12:08pm
 
Every man knows there are evils in the world which need setting right. Every man has pretty definite ideas as to what these evils are. But to most men one in particular stands out vividly. To some, in fact, this stands out with such startling vividness that they lose sight of other evils, or look upon them as the natural consequences of their own particular evil-in-chief.

To the Socialist this evil is the capitalistic system; to the prohibitionist it is intemperance; to the feminist it is the subjection of women; to the clergyman it is the decline of religion; to Andrew Carnegie it is war; to the staunch Republican it is the Democratic Party, and so on, ad infinitum.

I, too, have a pet little evil, to which in more passionate moments I am apt to attribute all the others. This evil is the neglect of thinking. And when I say thinking I mean real thinking, independent thinking, hard thinking.
...


The whole gospel of Karl Marx can be summed up in a single sentence: Hate the man who is better off than you are. Never under any circumstances admit that his success may be due to his own efforts, to the productive contribution he has made to the whole community. Always attribute his success to the exploitation, the cheating, the more or less open robbery of others. Never under any circumstances admit that your own failure may be owing to your own weakness, or that the failure of anyone else may be due to his own defects - his laziness, incompetence, improvidence, or stupidity.
Henry Hazlitt

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 
Send Topic Print