Michael Hardner Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 DoP - Why is that "all somebody needs to know" ? It's pretty dismissive and anti-intellectual to say that, I think... There are lots of things to be known about Marxism, and other topics whether or not you agree with them. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
DogOnPorch Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 DoP - Why is that "all somebody needs to know" ? It's pretty dismissive and anti-intellectual to say that, I think... There are lots of things to be known about Marxism, and other topics whether or not you agree with them. Fine, show me a country that has excelled under Marxism/Communism/Socialism. Then we'll delve into its finer points. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Michael Hardner Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 Fine, show me a country that has excelled under Marxism/Communism/Socialism. Then we'll delve into its finer points. Why do you need such an example to even discuss the topic ? We can talk about Freud too, even though his theories have been discredited. His influence is huge, even though he was dead wrong. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
DogOnPorch Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 This thread is about the contradictions of the occupy movement... Question: why is it that young communists try to look like Trotsky while older ones take the Lenin look? Or even odder...why do none use the Stalin stach? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Michael Hardner Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 Yes - ha ha ha - now... my question is sitting there like a fried egg... Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
DogOnPorch Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 Yes - ha ha ha - now... my question is sitting there like a fried egg... Is it? Why don't you TELL me how to respond to a post...lol. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Michael Hardner Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 Is it? Why don't you TELL me how to respond to a post...lol. I just want to point it out, in case you're worried people will think you're avoiding a question. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
DogOnPorch Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 You want to avoid examples because there are no good examples of Communism working. But, sure...let us wax whimsical about Marx and the struggle of the Proletariat. The last manifestation of what would be called 'The Old Country' for me was the Volga German Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. It's gone and forgotten. I wonder where? How's that for dismissive and anti-intellectual? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 You want to avoid examples because there are no good examples of Communism working. You asked for Marxism/Communism/Socialism. There's Norway, and of course China who must be doing something right given the hordes of capitalists who seem to be falling all over each other to get a piece of. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted June 7, 2012 Report Posted June 7, 2012 You asked for Marxism/Communism/Socialism. There's Norway, and of course China who must be doing something right given the hordes of capitalists who seem to be falling all over each other to get a piece of. While Norway has elements of social democracy, it is in no way Socialism. China WAS apparently Socialist but then Hong Kong and evil Capitalism fell into their lap. And loe...did they remove their Mao jackets and discover polyester. In the country, life goes on has it has for centuries... Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Claudius Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 You asked for Marxism/Communism/Socialism. There's Norway, and of course China who must be doing something right given the hordes of capitalists who seem to be falling all over each other to get a piece of. Yes so you're willing to live in the utopia that is China? No, not remotely right? That's because you know full well that their system enslaves most of them. I can agree with you on Norway, but that's a social democracy, which we are as well (sort of), and so is most of Europe. Quote There is virtually no difference between the 3 major parties once they get into power.
Jack Weber Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 Yes so you're willing to live in the utopia that is China? No, not remotely right? That's because you know full well that their system enslaves most of them. I can agree with you on Norway, but that's a social democracy, which we are as well (sort of), and so is most of Europe. China does enslave it's populous but no longer from the "Left"... We are now dealing with Authoritarian Capitalist ( see: The Modern Face of Fascism) China... Kinda makes a mixed market economy a much better prospect,doesn't it? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Claudius Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 (edited) China does enslave it's populous but no longer from the "Left"... We are now dealing with Authoritarian Capitalist ( see: The Modern Face of Fascism) China... Kinda makes a mixed market economy a much better prospect,doesn't it? Okay whatever. I confess I'm not sure entirely what your point is but it sounds suspiciously like when the USSR crumbled and many pro-communists couldn't wait to claim that it "wasn't really communism". When people see China for what it is the same people jump all over themselves to claim "it was never really communism".Now I don't know if that's what you're doing, but the truth is these arguments amount to claiming that even when a pro-communist is wrong about something somehow they're still right. If the USSR was communist and it failed, even if they evolved away from someone's notion of "communism" then communism still failed them. If China was communist but they aren't now and they are in the state they are in (a 2000 year old nation that Kyoto still considers to be a "developing nation") then communism failed them too. If you want to make examples of communism "working" then you need to use countries where the people are still pretty happy and/or dedicated to it. An example I would use if I were to argue the opposite side would be Vietnam or Cuba. Edited June 8, 2012 by Claudius Quote There is virtually no difference between the 3 major parties once they get into power.
Jack Weber Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 Okay whatever. I confess I'm not sure entirely what your point is but it sounds suspiciously like when the USSR crumbled and many pro-communists couldn't wait to claim that it "wasn't really communism". When people see China for what it is the same people jump all over themselves to claim "it was never really communism". Now I don't know if that's what you're doing, but the truth is these arguments amount to claiming that even when a pro-communist is wrong about something somehow they're still right. If the USSR was communist and it failed, even if they evolved away from someone's notion of "communism" then communism still failed them. If China was communist but they aren't now and they are in the state they are in (a 2000 year old nation that Kyoto still considers to be a "developing nation") then communism failed them too. If you want to make examples of communism "working" then you need to use countries where the people are still pretty happy and/or dedicated to it. An example I would use if I were to argue the opposite side would be Vietnam or Cuba. I agree with all of that and I'm not a Marxist apologist so that's not what I'm getting at... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
dre Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 Perhaps,but that's the fallacy of Marx' theories... He never accounted for the human failings of Man's lust for power and greed...The very things his theories were designed to curtail! And in all cases when any governemnt implemented Marxist theories they ended up with disastrous authoritarian results... He not only accounted for that he counted ON it. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Jack Weber Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 (edited) He not only accounted for that he counted ON it. He counted on it as it relates to unfettered Capitalism... He never realized the very same thing could be extrapolated out of his own theories... Edited June 8, 2012 by Jack Weber Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Claudius Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 I agree with all of that and I'm not a Marxist apologist so that's not what I'm getting at... Fair enough. Apologies for misunderstanding. Quote There is virtually no difference between the 3 major parties once they get into power.
dre Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 (edited) He counted on it as it relates to unfettered Capitalism... He never realized the very same thing could be extrapolated out of his own theories... No he basically just made predictions on what would come after capitalism. What he didnt predict was that the capitalists would be smart enough to prevent the revolution completely... Thats where modern social democracies have so far proved him wrong. Through a web of social programs (table scraps) and a false sense of control (partisan democracy), that the "underclass" could be kept comfortable and apathetic enough to not turn activist. We have ended up with something about half way in between... Edited June 8, 2012 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Michael Hardner Posted June 8, 2012 Report Posted June 8, 2012 You want to avoid examples because there are no good examples of Communism working. You're turning your refusal to discuss thing on me since, I think you were asked first. But I don't want to scroll up the thread so here: I have no good examples of Communism working on a large scale. But, sure...let us wax whimsical about Marx and the struggle of the Proletariat. The last manifestation of what would be called 'The Old Country' for me was the Volga German Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. It's gone and forgotten. I wonder where? How's that for dismissive and anti-intellectual? It's gone, yet Western democracies adopted socialism into their model that persists even today, so maybe not forgotten. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
cybercoma Posted June 9, 2012 Report Posted June 9, 2012 All one really needs to know about Communism...errrr....Marxism...is that anywhere it has been tried, mass death follows. Marxism isn't something that's tried. Communism is the result of the historical process, according to Marx. Where 'Communism' has been tried in the world, it was not the result of the historical process, but forced upon society from the top down. Marxism has never existed on this planet the way Marx described it as happening. Quote
cybercoma Posted June 9, 2012 Report Posted June 9, 2012 No he basically just made predictions on what would come after capitalism. What he didnt predict was that the capitalists would be smart enough to prevent the revolution completely... Thats where modern social democracies have so far proved him wrong. Through a web of social programs (table scraps) and a false sense of control (partisan democracy), that the "underclass" could be kept comfortable and apathetic enough to not turn activist. We have ended up with something about half way in between... It wasn't even really so much that. He never talked much about what would come after Capitalism. He basically talked about the process of history and how Capitalism and class relations would develop over time. He stops at the "beginning of history" as he calls it, when capitalism falls and the classless society begins. Quote
August1991 Posted June 9, 2012 Author Report Posted June 9, 2012 (edited) You know these cycles of crises that the capitalist system keeps going through (ie, the Depression)? It was Marx that called it. You know the internet that brings people together so they can form protests like OWS? Marx called that too. You know how very few people live in rural areas anymore? Marx called that as well. He was a historian of society and if you read his work it's clear that he was right about just about everything, except the Revolution.Everything that you claim Marx first "called" was readily apparent to anyone alive in 1848. There had been financial bubbles, stock market crashes, urbanization, popular revolts. (Heck, even here in colonial Canada we had two severe, violent revolts in 1837 in our two "urban" centres.) 1837 was also the year of a Great Panic (the previous name for a depression).In 1837, Karl Marx was 19 years old and still living in Germany. While it is true that Marx (as did many others) "called" these facts, Marx gave entirely erroneous explanations for their cause. Marx invented an absurd theory in which "capitalist" markets misprice "value" and hence, according to Marx, capitalism has an inherent contradiction and will necessarily collapse. Well, Marx's understanding of "value" was wrong. And his whole theory is nonsense. Like Marx, the Ancient Egyptians accurately observed that the sun rose in the east in the morning and set in the west in the evening. And like Marx, they developed an absurd theory about a guy with a boat carrying the sun across the sky. Just because you observe some truth accurately does not mean that your theory to explain the truth is also accurate. The reason he wasn't right about the Revolution is that we moved from capitalist society to mixed-economies, where we demand government intervention at the slightest sign of trouble (interest rate adjustments, stimulus, unemployment insurance, etc).The reason he wasn't right about the Revolution is that his theory was nonsense.As to your other points about government intervention, that's a work in progress. We still don't understand how markets work exactly, and we don't really know why they sometimes fail to work. People like Alfred Marshall, Keynes, Coase, Cournot, Robert Lucas, Nash did far more to understand these questions than Marx ever did. ----- IMHO, Karl Marx was a Luddite. He offered an explanation for why capitalism would collapse. In moderrn times, he would be like someone who hates cell phones/social media, notes that they always change and offers an explanation for their ultimate demise. I reckon that Marx is still popular because some people (ie. Russians, Leftists in general) don't like markets, don't like new-fangled stuff. (Russians are notoriously stubborn and western Leftists notoriously avoid risk so it's no wonder that they first believed Marx was right.) Marx is the guy who drives through your goal posts and tells you to stop playing hockey in the street. He tells you to get off his lawn. Edited June 9, 2012 by August1991 Quote
August1991 Posted June 9, 2012 Author Report Posted June 9, 2012 It wasn't even really so much that. He never talked much about what would come after Capitalism. He basically talked about the process of history and how Capitalism and class relations would develop over time. He stops at the "beginning of history" as he calls it, when capitalism falls and the classless society begins.I agree. Quote
Huston Posted June 18, 2012 Report Posted June 18, 2012 While it is true that Marx (as did many others) "called" these facts, Marx gave entirely erroneous explanations for their cause. Marx invented an absurd theory in which "capitalist" markets misprice "value" and hence, according to Marx, capitalism has an inherent contradiction and will necessarily collapse. Odd how you can it is an absurd theory to say it is mispriced or misplaced "value" when you gave a link to the Great Panic of 1837. If we take the preceding and subsequent Great Panics, all involved rampant speculation. If we take one of the notable figureheads of the Occupy movement David Greaber in his book Debt the First 5000 Years, capitalism, especially since the advent of the stock market, was strife with fraud and rampant speculation. Quote
Huston Posted June 18, 2012 Report Posted June 18, 2012 The reason he wasn't right about the Revolution is that we moved from capitalist society to mixed-economies, where we demand government intervention at the slightest sign of trouble (interest rate adjustments, stimulus, unemployment insurance, etc). Capitalism has had interest rate adjustments and stimulus. Capitalism has always relied on the state in order to exist. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.