NY Times Strands
- Steely_D - Apr 24, 2024 - 1:32am
Wordle - daily game
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Apr 23, 2024 - 9:38pm
The Moon
- haresfur - Apr 23, 2024 - 9:29pm
April 2024 Photo Theme - Happenstance
- fractalv - Apr 23, 2024 - 8:32pm
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- Bill_J - Apr 23, 2024 - 7:15pm
China
- R_P - Apr 23, 2024 - 5:35pm
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl?
- islander - Apr 23, 2024 - 4:54pm
The Obituary Page
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 23, 2024 - 3:53pm
Trump
- haresfur - Apr 23, 2024 - 2:44pm
Joe Biden
- R_P - Apr 23, 2024 - 2:36pm
Israel
- black321 - Apr 23, 2024 - 2:24pm
Radio Paradise Comments
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 23, 2024 - 2:07pm
Economix
- islander - Apr 23, 2024 - 12:11pm
USA! USA! USA!
- R_P - Apr 23, 2024 - 11:05am
NYTimes Connections
- geoff_morphini - Apr 23, 2024 - 8:41am
One Partying State - Wyoming News
- sunybuny - Apr 23, 2024 - 6:53am
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- sunybuny - Apr 23, 2024 - 6:52am
Today in History
- Red_Dragon - Apr 23, 2024 - 6:33am
YouTube: Music-Videos
- Red_Dragon - Apr 22, 2024 - 7:42pm
Ukraine
- haresfur - Apr 22, 2024 - 6:19pm
songs that ROCK!
- Steely_D - Apr 22, 2024 - 1:50pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- q4Fry - Apr 22, 2024 - 11:57am
Song of the Day
- oldviolin - Apr 22, 2024 - 9:59am
Republican Party
- R_P - Apr 22, 2024 - 9:36am
Mini Meetups - Post Here!
- ScottFromWyoming - Apr 22, 2024 - 8:59am
Malaysia
- dcruzj - Apr 22, 2024 - 7:30am
Mixtape Culture Club
- miamizsun - Apr 22, 2024 - 7:02am
Canada
- westslope - Apr 22, 2024 - 6:23am
Russia
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Apr 22, 2024 - 1:03am
Broccoli for cats - you gotta see this!
- Bill_J - Apr 21, 2024 - 6:16pm
TV shows you watch
- Manbird - Apr 21, 2024 - 5:25pm
Name My Band
- DaveInSaoMiguel - Apr 21, 2024 - 3:06pm
What's that smell?
- oldviolin - Apr 21, 2024 - 1:59pm
Main Mix Playlist
- thisbody - Apr 21, 2024 - 12:04pm
George Orwell
- oldviolin - Apr 21, 2024 - 11:36am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - Apr 20, 2024 - 7:44pm
What Did You See Today?
- Welly - Apr 20, 2024 - 4:50pm
Radio Paradise on multiple Echo speakers via an Alexa Rou...
- victory806 - Apr 20, 2024 - 2:11pm
Libertarian Party
- R_P - Apr 20, 2024 - 11:18am
Remembering the Good Old Days
- kurtster - Apr 20, 2024 - 2:37am
Vinyl Only Spin List
- kurtster - Apr 19, 2024 - 9:21pm
The Abortion Wars
- Red_Dragon - Apr 19, 2024 - 9:07pm
Words I didn't know...yrs ago
- Bill_J - Apr 19, 2024 - 7:06pm
Things that make you go Hmmmm.....
- Bill_J - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:59pm
Baseball, anyone?
- Red_Dragon - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:51pm
MILESTONES: Famous People, Dead Today, Born Today, Etc.
- Bill_J - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:44pm
2024 Elections!
- steeler - Apr 19, 2024 - 5:49pm
Ask an Atheist
- R_P - Apr 19, 2024 - 3:04pm
Country Up The Bumpkin
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 19, 2024 - 7:55am
how do you feel right now?
- miamizsun - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:02am
When I need a Laugh I ...
- miamizsun - Apr 19, 2024 - 5:43am
Live Music
- oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 3:24pm
What Makes You Laugh?
- oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:49pm
Robots
- miamizsun - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:18pm
Museum Of Bad Album Covers
- Steve - Apr 18, 2024 - 6:58am
Europe
- haresfur - Apr 17, 2024 - 6:47pm
Business as Usual
- black321 - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:48pm
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum
- VV - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:26pm
Science in the News
- Red_Dragon - Apr 17, 2024 - 11:14am
Magic Eye optical Illusions
- Proclivities - Apr 17, 2024 - 10:08am
Just for the Haiku of it. . .
- oldviolin - Apr 17, 2024 - 9:01am
HALF A WORLD
- oldviolin - Apr 17, 2024 - 8:52am
Little known information... maybe even facts
- R_P - Apr 16, 2024 - 3:29pm
260,000 Posts in one thread?
- oldviolin - Apr 16, 2024 - 10:10am
WTF??!!
- rgio - Apr 16, 2024 - 5:23am
Australia has Disappeared
- haresfur - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:58am
Earthquake
- miamizsun - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:46am
It's the economy stupid.
- miamizsun - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:28am
Eclectic Sound-Drops
- thisbody - Apr 14, 2024 - 11:27am
Synchronization
- ReggieDXB - Apr 13, 2024 - 11:40pm
Other Medical Stuff
- geoff_morphini - Apr 13, 2024 - 7:54am
Photos you have taken of your walks or hikes.
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 12, 2024 - 3:50pm
Things You Thought Today
- Red_Dragon - Apr 12, 2024 - 3:05pm
Poetry Forum
- oldviolin - Apr 12, 2024 - 8:45am
Dear Bill
- oldviolin - Apr 12, 2024 - 8:16am
|
Index »
Radio Paradise/General »
General Discussion »
RightWingNutZ
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 131, 132, 133 ... 169, 170, 171 Next |
(former member)
Location: hotel in Las Vegas Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 8:16pm |
|
dionysius wrote: It's more than a critique; it's a program!!! It does not have to be revolutionary violence that accomplishes that program; in fact I'd prefer it it if it weren't. But it is more than just sniping at capitalist excesses and injustices, and more than mere reformist amelioration of the same. It is a fundamental overhaul that privileges people over markets, and erases real class distinctions and barriers. Modern Marxism must be peaceful, nonviolent, democratic, and determined. Hardnose, commonsense agitation, education and organization are the only tools towards accomplishing this, not elitist "vanguard" ideologies and unfocused anarchism. You can have capitalism, too, but only within a socialist framework, if you want social justice and equality linked to freedom of action and productivity. There's our Hegelian synthesis.
And you said to Kurt—
It does not mean public ownership of everything!!! My toothbrush is mine, and yours is yours. However, the open land, water, air, uranium and opera is for everyone to share, equally. The largest possible public domain, in all senses. The commons, rather than fenced-off private lots of different sizes.
It means public provision of the necessary things of life, however that society chooses to define it. Be it education, food, housing, employment, heath care, etc. A classless society, with true equality of opportunity, and not one way, one track, one enclave for rich people and others for everyone else. Merit and work rewarded, not greed and placement and networking. A solid floor beneath everyone, with room for personal improvement above that. A real synthesis of Adam Smith and Karl Marx. A market that serves us, and not us the market.
Not utopia. But a better place than now.
It is interesting, and I must point out the difference— I said analyzing, and I meant objective... you chose critique, which implies a judgment... to me, Marxism is a materialistic tool to understand the machinations of capitalism in economic terms of labor, profit, capital investment, etc., with no social chafe attached... I have always thought that the weakness of Marx's conclusions (critiques) was his failure to see a way to operate within the system of capitalism with collective bargaining — labor unions — workers of the world, unite! But again, to me, Marxism, with its objective materialism, is an excellent mode of analysis for all economic systems... I am kind of groping in the dark here, and I apologize for that...
I know I be so elite but here is something I find interesting from the Stanford Encyclopedia—
Historical materialism - Marx's theory of history - is centered around the idea that forms of society rise and fall as they further and then impede the development of human productive power. Marx sees the historical process as proceeding through a necessary series of modes of production, culminating in communism. Marx's economic analysis of capitalism is based on his version of the labour theory of value, and includes the analysis of capitalist profit as the extraction of surplus value from the exploited proletariat. The analysis of history and economics come together in Marx's prediction of the inevitable economic breakdown of capitalism, to be replaced by communism. However Marx refused to speculate in detail about the nature of communism, arguing that it would arise through historical processes, and was not the realisation of a pre-determined moral ideal.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 7:59pm |
|
dionysius wrote:
It does not mean public ownership of everything!!! My toothbrush is mine, and yours is yours. However, the open land, water, air, uranium and opera is for everyone to share, equally. The largest possible public domain, in all senses. The commons, rather than fenced-off private lots of different sizes.
It means public provision of the necessary things of life, however that society chooses to define it. Be it education, food, housing, employment, heath care, etc. A classless society, with true equality of opportunity, and not one way, one track, one enclave for rich people and others for everyone else. Merit and work rewarded, not greed and placement and networking. A solid floor beneath everyone, with room for personal improvement above that. A real synthesis of Adam Smith and Karl Marx. A market that serves us, and not us the market.
Not utopia. But a better place than now.
I think that phrase contradicts itself. Who gets to decide who lives where and who does what ? No room for individualism, darn that ism thing again. I prefer the beach, yet the government decides that I should live in North Dakota. I want to be a marine geologist, but the government says we don't need any and I must make doorknobs for public housing, because we need more doorknobs. Equal opportunity for what ? To do what I really want to do ? Or equal opportunity to do for the government ? Edit: and who decides Mac or PC ?
|
|
dionysius
Location: The People's Republic of Austin Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 7:44pm |
|
kurtster wrote: But what about the part of a Socialistic society where the government owns everything, there is no private property ? Am I missing something or are we ignoring a crucial part of what Socialism really is ? How do you reconcile privacy and private property with the program ? How does one have motivation without ownership or the possibilty of ownership of personal property for example ? We rent everything from the government and have no form of private transportation ?
It does not mean public ownership of everything!!! My toothbrush is mine, and yours is yours. However, the open land, water, air, uranium and opera is for everyone to share, equally. The largest possible public domain, in all senses. The commons, rather than fenced-off private lots of different sizes. It means public provision of the necessary things of life, however that society chooses to define it. Be it education, food, housing, employment, heath care, etc. A classless society, with true equality of opportunity, and not one way, one track, one enclave for rich people and others for everyone else. Merit and work rewarded, not greed and placement and networking. A solid floor beneath everyone, with room for personal improvement above that. A real synthesis of Adam Smith and Karl Marx. A market that serves us, and not us the market. Not utopia. But a better place than now.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 7:30pm |
|
dionysius wrote: It's more than a critique; it's a program!!! It does not have to be revolutionary violence that accomplishes that program; in fact I'd prefer it it if it weren't. But it is more than just sniping at capitalist excesses and injustices, and more than mere reformist amelioration of the same. It is a fundamental overhaul that privileges people over markets, and erases real class distinctions and barriers. Modern Marxism must be peaceful, nonviolent, democratic, and determined. Hardnose, commonsense agitation, education and organization are the only tools towards accomplishing this, not elitist "vanguard" ideologies and unfocused anarchism. You can have capitalism, too, but only within a socialist framework, if you want social justice and equality linked to freedom of action and productivity. There's our Hegelian synthesis.
But what about the part of a Socialistic society where the government owns everything, there is no private property ? Am I missing something or are we ignoring a crucial part of what Socialism really is ? How do you reconcile privacy and private property with the program ? How does one have motivation without ownership or the possibilty of ownership of personal property for example ? We rent everything from the government and have no form of private transportation ?
|
|
dionysius
Location: The People's Republic of Austin Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 7:12pm |
|
romeotuma wrote:
To me, at its essence, Marxism is a materialistic methodology for analyzing capitalism...
It's more than a critique; it's a program!!! It does not have to be revolutionary violence that accomplishes that program; in fact I'd prefer it it if it weren't. But it is more than just sniping at capitalist excesses and injustices, and more than mere reformist amelioration of the same. It is a fundamental overhaul that privileges people over markets, and erases real class distinctions and barriers. Modern Marxism must be peaceful, nonviolent, democratic, and determined. Hardnose, commonsense agitation, education and organization are the only tools towards accomplishing this, not elitist "vanguard" ideologies and unfocused anarchism. You can have capitalism, too, but only within a socialist framework, if you want social justice and equality linked to freedom of action and productivity. There's our Hegelian synthesis.
|
|
Manbird
Location: ? ? ? Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 7:10pm |
|
dionysius wrote:
:sigh: The name "communist" and some Marxist trappings and rhetoric were hijacked by repressive Russian nationalists, and this somehow becomes everyone's historical misunderstanding of Marxism. That's why I won't use the term, though I prefer it to "socialist" for a number of etymological reasons. People are right to equate Hitler and Stalin—not much to choose between them, really. We need to look to ourselves and our motivations, always. Chauvinistic nationalism of any stripe is bad news, and that includes American nationalism. I agree: Communism is having to share the same stupid bowling ball with everybody at Johnson's 16th St. Mega Lanes even the sweaty guy with the fat fingers who smells like fish tacos and italian sausage all day.
|
|
dionysius
Location: The People's Republic of Austin Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 6:53pm |
|
hippiechick wrote: Well, they call themselves Communists, but, really they are Totalitarians.
:sigh: The name "communist" and some Marxist trappings and rhetoric were hijacked by repressive Russian nationalists, and this somehow becomes everyone's historical misunderstanding of Marxism. That's why I won't use the term, though I prefer it to "socialist" for a number of etymological reasons. People are right to equate Hitler and Stalin—not much to choose between them, really. We need to look to ourselves and our motivations, always. Chauvinistic nationalism of any stripe is bad news, and that includes American nationalism.
|
|
hippiechick
Location: topsy turvy land Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 6:46pm |
|
kurtster wrote: I am only speaking in terms of a sovereign State government, not about a kibbutz or farming commune in Montana, for example. And the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics only disolved some 15 years ago, not 100 years ago, and China is still around last I looked along with Cuba and North Korea. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Meet the new boss same as the old boss ...
So what is the new paradigm I'm missing here anyway ?
And the only thing synthethic going on around here is how we make money.
Well, they call themselves Communists, but, really they are Totalitarians. Although he never used the terms himself, the triad thesis, antithesis, synthesis is often used to describe the thought of German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. The triad is usually described in the following way: - The thesis is an intellectual proposition.
- The antithesis is simply the negation of the thesis, a reaction to the proposition.
- The synthesis solves the conflict between the thesis and antithesis by reconciling their common truths, and forming a new proposition.
According to Walter Kaufman, although the triad is often <1> thought to form part of an analysis of historical and philosophical progress called the Hegelian dialectic, the assumption is erroneous. Hegel used this classification only once, and he attributed the terminology to Immanuel Kant. The terminology was largely developed earlier by the neo-Kantian Johann Gottlieb Fichte, also an advocate of the philosophy identified as German idealism. The triad is often said to have been extended and adopted by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, however, Marx referred to them in The Poverty of Philosophy as speaking Greek and "Wooden trichotomies".
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 6:16pm |
|
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 6:14pm |
|
sirdroseph wrote:Yea, really it all comes down to eatin and poopin. May all your traffic lights be forever green, my brother.
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 6:08pm |
|
kurtster wrote: I am only speaking in terms of a sovereign State government, not about a kibbutz or farming commune in Montana, for example. And the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics only disolved some 15 years ago, not 100 years ago, and China is still around last I looked along with Cuba and North Korea. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Meet the new boss same as the old boss ...
So what is the new paradigm I'm missing here anyway ?
And the only thing synthethic going on around here is how we make money.
Yea, really it all comes down to eatin and poopin.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 6:01pm |
|
hippiechick wrote: In theory, communism is not a bad thing. If a group of people is agreeable to living communally, then it works.
However, Stalinism, Trotskyism, etc. isn't true communism. It's the ruling class having everything they want, while the rest suffer. If it was true communism, The government would be out working with the people.Besides, you are talking about -isms that existed 100 yrs ago. Things have changed. The terms used in the 20th Century are no longer applicable. Start trying to think out of the box, Kurt.
Are you familiar with thesis, antithesis, synthesis?
I am only speaking in terms of a sovereign State government, not about a kibbutz or farming commune in Montana, for example. And the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics only disolved some 15 years ago, not 100 years ago, and China is still around last I looked along with Cuba and North Korea. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Meet the new boss same as the old boss ... So what is the new paradigm I'm missing here anyway ? And the only thing synthethic going on around here is how we make money.
|
|
hippiechick
Location: topsy turvy land Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 5:17pm |
|
kurtster wrote: I have a long held belief that it is not unreasonable to equate Communism to an organized religfion, where the State is the Religion. Its all about what is best for the State before everything else. An evil religion. That's my over simplified take. I have heard some of my own friends defend the actions of the government recently by stating that the government's needs should come before the people's. I am left speechless in response to that. If that's how most American's feel about things, then it is truly over in my opinion and this is just the endgame.
In theory, communism is not a bad thing. If a group of people is agreeable to living communally, then it works. However, Stalinism, Trotskyism, etc. isn't true communism. It's the ruling class having everything they want, while the rest suffer. If it was true communism, The government would be out working with the people.Besides, you are talking about -isms that existed 100 yrs ago. Things have changed. The terms used in the 20th Century are no longer applicable. Start trying to think out of the box, Kurt. Are you familiar with thesis, antithesis, synthesis?
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 4:50pm |
|
Argonaut wrote: Kurtster, this your statement. It clearly makes the very point I have been trying to say regarding the socialism. It isn't a question, it is a statement. And I won't NEGLECT to mention the hundreds of millions of people who were murdered if they failed to toe the communist/socialist line. The communist/socialist states make Hitler PALE IN COMPARISON. More people have been killed by communism/socialism than the ENTIRE COMBINED HISTORY of this earth. Capitalism is a progressive, simply because it is not feasible for it not to be. The very survival of corporations who do not move forward would be in doubt, whereas in communist/socialist states, such SURVIVAL IS IRRELEVANT, hence the stagnation that is rampant in communism/socialism.
I have a long held belief that it is not unreasonable to equate Communism to an organized religfion, where the State is the Religion. Its all about what is best for the State before everything else. An evil religion. That's my over simplified take. I have heard some of my own friends defend the actions of the government recently by stating that the government's needs should come before the people's. I am left speechless in response to that. If that's how most American's feel about things, then it is truly over in my opinion and this is just the endgame.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 3:21pm |
|
Argonaut wrote: No no, not 'take a swing'. There somebody asked 'what is wrong with socialism', so I've typed a definitions. Sarcastically and being really really angry. You are just proving now that Obama IS a socialist, no?
I've said he was from the beginning. I was the one who posed the question, what is wrong with calling Obama a Socialist, since so many here deny that he is yet profess to be Socialist or favor Socialism themselves. Perhaps they feel he isn't Socialist enough to be called a Socialist, I don't really know, that's why I asked. I ask lot's of questions here. Sometimes I know the answers before I ask and sometimes I really do not know the answers. I toss sketty on the wall to see what sticks. Does not mean that my views can be ascertained by the kinds of questions I ask. I poke and nudge and sometimes go off the rails, but not with the intention of getting personal or down right mean. Sometimes emotions do get the best of me, but I am of the opinion that the stupidest question is the one not asked.
|
|
GeneP59
Location: On the edge of tomorrow looking back at yesterday. Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 3:21pm |
|
Hey, Sen. Edwards. What do you call 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the lake? ...... A good start! But they missed you.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 3:11pm |
|
hippiechick wrote: Doesn't it concern you that so many elected officials, people who should be reasonable, believe this ridiculous lie?
It is the D's and the LDSM who keep giving this crap about O's birth certificate the light of day. They could ignore it like so many other things that they ignore so well, like the will of the people and this would fade away. It is only kept in the highlight of things because it is used to discredit groups with legitimate concerns and points of view by associating the birthers to their complaints in an effort to discredit everyone on the opposing side.
|
|
samiyam
Location: Moving North
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 3:10pm |
|
Argonaut wrote: No no, not 'take a swing'. There somebody asked 'what is wrong with socialism', so I've typed a definitions. Sarcastically and being really really angry. You are just proving now that Obama IS a socialist, no?
"Tell me the truth, you aren't really out here for the "hunting", are you?" ~ The Bear ~
|
|
musik_knut
Location: Third Stone From The Sun Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 8:48am |
|
hippiechick wrote: You're right. I put JE's name in on edit. He threw these people, who were completely devoted to him, under a garbage truck and went back and forth several times. As disgusting as they come.
Well, politically, I believe we've heard the last of Sen. Edwards. Good riddance to him *and any like him*.
|
|
hippiechick
Location: topsy turvy land Gender:
|
Posted:
Feb 24, 2010 - 8:47am |
|
musik_knut wrote:
Andrew Young of Sen. Edward's group? Almost anything said in a negative light about Sen. Edward's will pass the first smell test with me. What a deceiving worm. We are talking about the same Young? Or do I have names jumbled up?
You're right. I put JE's name in on edit. He threw these people, who were completely devoted to him, under a garbage truck and went back and forth several times. As disgusting as they come.
|
|
|