Dean
1st June 2011, 18:47
...its a simple problem-solving mechanism:
If the problem of hunger is restricted to our history, we can then seek to resolve the intricate issues of human inter-personal relations. The state of the individual in need is a state of oppression, for the simple reason that it disallows the free actualization of the human being: in such a state, one is tied above all to the very struggle to exist before one can exist as a free person:
"Mankind thus inevitably sets itself only such tasks as it is able to solve, since closer examination will always show that the problem itself arises only when the material conditions for its solution are already present or at least in the course of formation."1
"The realm of freedom really begins only where labour determined by necessity and external expediency ends; it lies by its very nature beyond the sphere of material production proper. ...Freedom, in this sphere, can consist only in this, that socialized man, the associated producers, govern the human metabolism with nature in a rational way, bringing it under their collective control instead of being dominated by it as a blind power..."2You may note (and it is sure to disappoint propertarians) that there is no Utopia here. No vision of perfection. Here, socialism is the solution of one problem, only to focus on other problems. It is the foundation of a society presupposing the satisfaction of basic human consumption.
The Rest (http://thethinred.blogspot.com/2011/05/individualism-utopian-socialism.html)
Socialism is the foundation of civil society on premises which allow more subtle problems to be solved. These premises are like any similar practices in political society: equal involvement on equal footing is the only way to create a fair political culture.
Any propertarians want to keep arguing the fantastical interpretation of socialism?
If the problem of hunger is restricted to our history, we can then seek to resolve the intricate issues of human inter-personal relations. The state of the individual in need is a state of oppression, for the simple reason that it disallows the free actualization of the human being: in such a state, one is tied above all to the very struggle to exist before one can exist as a free person:
"Mankind thus inevitably sets itself only such tasks as it is able to solve, since closer examination will always show that the problem itself arises only when the material conditions for its solution are already present or at least in the course of formation."1
"The realm of freedom really begins only where labour determined by necessity and external expediency ends; it lies by its very nature beyond the sphere of material production proper. ...Freedom, in this sphere, can consist only in this, that socialized man, the associated producers, govern the human metabolism with nature in a rational way, bringing it under their collective control instead of being dominated by it as a blind power..."2You may note (and it is sure to disappoint propertarians) that there is no Utopia here. No vision of perfection. Here, socialism is the solution of one problem, only to focus on other problems. It is the foundation of a society presupposing the satisfaction of basic human consumption.
The Rest (http://thethinred.blogspot.com/2011/05/individualism-utopian-socialism.html)
Socialism is the foundation of civil society on premises which allow more subtle problems to be solved. These premises are like any similar practices in political society: equal involvement on equal footing is the only way to create a fair political culture.
Any propertarians want to keep arguing the fantastical interpretation of socialism?