Trump
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 27, 2024 - 10:26pm
Wordle - daily game
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 27, 2024 - 9:41pm
NY Times Strands
- geoff_morphini - Sep 27, 2024 - 9:33pm
how do you feel right now?
- GeneP59 - Sep 27, 2024 - 7:42pm
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group
- GeneP59 - Sep 27, 2024 - 7:11pm
The Obituary Page
- GeneP59 - Sep 27, 2024 - 6:45pm
Live Music
- oldviolin - Sep 27, 2024 - 4:38pm
How's the weather?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Sep 27, 2024 - 4:33pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- haresfur - Sep 27, 2024 - 4:31pm
Are you ready for some football?
- haresfur - Sep 27, 2024 - 4:29pm
Name My Band
- oldviolin - Sep 27, 2024 - 4:13pm
September 2024 Photo Theme - Hot
- oldviolin - Sep 27, 2024 - 3:09pm
YouTube: Music-Videos
- R_P - Sep 27, 2024 - 3:01pm
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see
- buddy - Sep 27, 2024 - 2:31pm
The Image Post
- geoff_morphini - Sep 27, 2024 - 2:16pm
Israel
- R_P - Sep 27, 2024 - 1:21pm
Comics!
- oldviolin - Sep 27, 2024 - 12:52pm
USA! USA! USA!
- R_P - Sep 27, 2024 - 12:22pm
Radio Paradise Comments
- oldviolin - Sep 27, 2024 - 12:09pm
Things You Thought Today
- buddy - Sep 27, 2024 - 11:37am
Vinyl Only Spin List
- kurtster - Sep 27, 2024 - 11:32am
hurricane relief
- miamizsun - Sep 27, 2024 - 8:29am
NYTimes Connections
- maryte - Sep 27, 2024 - 8:25am
Bob's you Uncle
- oldviolin - Sep 27, 2024 - 8:23am
Poetry Forum
- oldviolin - Sep 27, 2024 - 8:20am
Song of the Day
- oldviolin - Sep 27, 2024 - 8:17am
Immigration
- black321 - Sep 27, 2024 - 8:00am
Social Media Are Changing Everything
- Proclivities - Sep 27, 2024 - 6:58am
Today in History
- Red_Dragon - Sep 27, 2024 - 6:36am
RightWingNutZ
- Isabeau - Sep 27, 2024 - 6:32am
Russia
- Red_Dragon - Sep 27, 2024 - 5:37am
punk? hip-hop? metal? noise? garage?
- sirdroseph - Sep 27, 2024 - 4:38am
Ukraine
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 27, 2024 - 2:23am
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl?
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 27, 2024 - 12:25am
2024 Elections!
- islander - Sep 26, 2024 - 9:21pm
What Are You Going To Do Today?
- GeneP59 - Sep 26, 2024 - 9:03pm
Mixtape Culture Club
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Sep 26, 2024 - 8:39pm
Signs o' the Apocalypse in the news...
- oldviolin - Sep 26, 2024 - 8:38pm
Derplahoma!
- Red_Dragon - Sep 26, 2024 - 7:25pm
The end of the world
- Steely_D - Sep 26, 2024 - 7:18pm
Why Everything You Believe Is Immoral, Irresponsible, Irr...
- Isabeau - Sep 26, 2024 - 4:50pm
Go Figure!
- thisbody - Sep 26, 2024 - 4:17pm
The New Star Trek Movie... what'd ya think??
- thisbody - Sep 26, 2024 - 3:52pm
Music makes beer taste better
- thisbody - Sep 26, 2024 - 3:28pm
NASA & other news from space
- thisbody - Sep 26, 2024 - 2:59pm
Feminism: Catch the (Third?) Wave!
- thisbody - Sep 26, 2024 - 2:45pm
Baseball, anyone?
- ScottFromWyoming - Sep 26, 2024 - 1:52pm
260,000 Posts in one thread?
- oldviolin - Sep 26, 2024 - 10:48am
What do you snack on?
- thisbody - Sep 26, 2024 - 10:30am
FOUR WORDS
- oldviolin - Sep 26, 2024 - 10:30am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - Sep 26, 2024 - 9:39am
NY Times Spelling Bee
- Proclivities - Sep 26, 2024 - 8:41am
What is this Dog/Wolf song
- thisbody - Sep 26, 2024 - 8:31am
Kamala Harris
- Steely_D - Sep 26, 2024 - 6:38am
Economix
- black321 - Sep 26, 2024 - 6:26am
Britain
- thisbody - Sep 26, 2024 - 5:29am
Buddy's Haven
- miamizsun - Sep 26, 2024 - 5:12am
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously
- R_P - Sep 25, 2024 - 1:08pm
What the hell OV?
- oldviolin - Sep 25, 2024 - 12:47pm
Environment
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Sep 25, 2024 - 9:01am
RP Goes Skiing (and Other Sports/Exercise/Dancing)
- ScottFromWyoming - Sep 25, 2024 - 8:19am
Lyrics that strike a chord today...
- thisbody - Sep 25, 2024 - 5:46am
Country Up The Bumpkin
- oldviolin - Sep 24, 2024 - 7:51pm
Concert Reviews
- oldviolin - Sep 24, 2024 - 7:33pm
Education
- ScottFromWyoming - Sep 24, 2024 - 5:30pm
Artificial Intelligence
- Beaker - Sep 24, 2024 - 5:19pm
Infinite cat
- kcar - Sep 24, 2024 - 2:56pm
I like cheese
- Isabeau - Sep 24, 2024 - 11:42am
Which Book?
- GeneP59 - Sep 24, 2024 - 9:19am
Pretty Darn Good Bass Lines - among the best....
- miamizsun - Sep 24, 2024 - 7:15am
What Makes You Laugh?
- Red_Dragon - Sep 24, 2024 - 6:52am
~ Have a good joke you can post? ~
- Coaxial - Sep 24, 2024 - 5:38am
WTF??!!
- miamizsun - Sep 24, 2024 - 5:14am
Musky Mythology
- thisbody - Sep 24, 2024 - 5:04am
MANBIRD: appropriate or not? Dicuss.
- miamizsun - Sep 24, 2024 - 5:02am
|
Index »
Radio Paradise/General »
General Discussion »
RightWingNutZ
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 135, 136, 137 ... 172, 173, 174 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: La Villa Toscana 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.
|
|
|