"Karl Marx or Henry George?" (London)

[JimN]

http://s3.postimage.org/1yyl3tpd5/henrygeorge.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/)

Discussion between the Socialist Party and David Wetzel.

Former Leader of Hounslow Council and tax reformer Dave Wetzel (see http://markwadsworth.blogspot.com/2011/10/dave-wetzel-on-bbc-politics-show.html (http://markwadsworth.blogspot.com/2011/10/dave-wetzel-on-bbc-politics-show.html)) subjects his views to the Marxian socialist criticism that a tax on land values will make no difference to the position of the majority class of wage and salary workers as it would still leave the rest of capitalism intact.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011, 8:00pm

Chiswick Town Hall, Heathfield Terrace, London W4 4JN

All welcome. Audience participation. Free entry

Full details of this and all SPGB meetings can be found here:
http://www.meetup.com/The-Socialist-Party-of-Great-Britain/events/35679142/ (http://www.meetup.com/The-Socialist-Party-of-Great-Britain/events/35679142/)

[The Idler]

Can this be recorded and shared? Won't be able to make it but would love to see/hear it somehow.

[Rafiq]

Bullshit strawman argument from start.

Pathetic. If I was the ruler of this site, i'd restrict Utopians.

[Tim Cornelis]

Bullshit strawman argument from start.

Pathetic. If I was the ruler of this site, i'd restrict Utopians.

Imposing a land-value tax sounds a lot less utopic than overthrowing the existing order, seizing power, restructuring society, abolishing money, and so forth--imho.

But then again "utopian" is often used to smear anyone who does not strictly adhere to Marxist orthodox historiography. In that case "utopic" is essentially meaningless.

[Rafiq]

Imposing a land-value tax sounds a lot less utopic than overthrowing the existing order, seizing power, restructuring society, abolishing money, and so forth--imho.

But then again "utopian" is often used to smear anyone who does not strictly adhere to Marxist orthodox historiography. In that case "utopic" is essentially meaningless.



Actually thats bullshit. It is more Utopian to think imposing land tax will fix capitalism than to demand for its abolishment all together. Read Zizek.

Also, Marxists do not call for building a new society. We demand this one be destroyed, and from there society will formulate a better one. Your talking out of your ass, by the looks of it.

Plus, Marxists have never said tax reform changes nothing. We say it cannot stop capitalisms inevitable fate...

This whole 'debate' is a Utopian strawman jerkfest, much like the OP's posts.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Actually thats bullshit. It is more Utopian to think imposing land tax will fix capitalism than to demand for its abolishment all together. Read Zizek.

Also, Marxists do not call for building a new society. We demand this one be destroyed, and from there society will formulate a better one. Your talking out of your ass, by the looks of it.

Plus, Marxists have never said tax reform changes nothing. We say it cannot stop capitalisms inevitable fate...

This whole 'debate' is a Utopian strawman jerkfest, much like the OP's posts.

Henry George was a progressive reformer who was also an advocate for worker's rights and a land tax. He was not a revolutionary. I don't know why you're comparing him to people like Karl Marx. (other than the thread's title, of course...)

He also gave a very respectful eulogy to Marx upon Marx's death:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/remembrance-karl-marx-t146789/index.html?t=146789

[The Idler]

If you want to restrict people because you disagree with them, you should try a more repressive right-wing forum.

[JimN]

If I was the ruler of this site, i'd restrict Utopians.

Just about sums you up.

[Rafiq]

If you want to restrict people because you disagree with them, you should try a more repressive right-wing forum.



Idiot, a forums repressiveness has no correlation to it's spot on the political spectrum. There are Fascist sites less "repressive" than RevLeft. You're just like the man in your avatar, a Liberal

[Ballyfornia]

Bullshit strawman argument from start.

Pathetic. If I was the ruler of this site, i'd restrict Utopians.

I think you need a tampon

[The Idler]

Idiot, a forums repressiveness has no correlation to it's spot on the political spectrum. There are Fascist sites less "repressive" than RevLeft. You're just like the man in your avatar, a Liberal
While utopians are trying to usher in a classless society, you're writing up a tendency blacklist for if you're ever "ruler" of a site such as this one. Tell me how that's not political?

[Tim Cornelis]

I think you need a tampon

My guess, you're about to receive a verbal warning for sexism.
---------------------------
@Rafiq
Will you please stop denouncing everyone who does not precisely agree with you as "petite-bourgeois", "liberal" and "utopians"? Excessive use of such words make them meaningless.
-----------------------

Actually thats bullshit. It is more Utopian to think imposing land tax will fix capitalism than to demand for its abolishment all together. Read Zizek.
True, but do you at least agree that the demand of imposing one tax is more easily realizable than destroying the old society and formulating a new one?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Actually thats bullshit. It is more Utopian to think imposing land tax will fix capitalism than to demand for its abolishment all together. Read Zizek.

Also, Marxists do not call for building a new society. We demand this one be destroyed, and from there society will formulate a better one. Your talking out of your ass, by the looks of it.

Plus, Marxists have never said tax reform changes nothing. We say it cannot stop capitalisms inevitable fate...

This whole 'debate' is a Utopian strawman jerkfest, much like the OP's posts.

Calm down, comrade. Marx and Engels themselves called for land value taxation, right in the Principles of Communism and the Communist Manifesto.

What they opposed was land value taxation being the single tax for society.

[khad]

What are you idiots on about?

This site is called REVleft. If you aren't a revolutionary, then in the OI you go. That's the way it's been since the beginning. What's more is that many of you have been on the site for quite some time without understanding something so basic.

And ballyfornia gets an infraction.

[Hit The North]

Also, Marxists do not call for building a new society. We demand this one be destroyed, and from there society will formulate a better one. Your talking out of your ass, by the looks of it.


Of course Marxism calls for building a new society - through the supercession of existing society, not on its ruins. You sound nihilistic when you go banging on about "destroying society". Because capitalism is the precondition for socialism it is incorrect to argue that socialism will be built on the ruins of the former.

As for Henry George, he was an honourable man but, as a thinker, he had obvious limitations which are not difficult to spot.


Originally posted by Explosive Situation
He also gave a very respectful eulogy to Marx upon Marx's death:Any eulogy to Marx which begins with a confession that the author never met Marx or had read any of his work, is not really worth a great deal.

[Rafiq]

Calm down, comrade. Marx and Engels themselves called for land value taxation, right in the Principles of Communism and the Communist Manifesto.

What they opposed was land value taxation being the single tax for society.

So does this not prove that this "debate" is a Strawman Argument from start?

[hatzel]

So does this not prove that this "debate" is a Strawman Argument from start?

How could anybody know that, when the debate hasn't taken place yet? All we can see is that the SPGB intend to critique Georgism from a Marxist perspective (remember that Marx himself criticised George's ideas (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/letters/81_06_20.htm), so it's not like the SPGB have pulled this criticism out of thin air), and that Mr Wetzel intends to defend Georgism from this Marxist critique. Why do you have such a problem with this concept? :confused:

[Travis Bickle]

Calm down, comrade. Marx and Engels themselves called for land value taxation, right in the Principles of Communism and the Communist Manifesto.

What they opposed was land value taxation being the single tax for society.

A solution to the instability created by speculation was presented to Engels by the Proudhonists of his time. This was the transfer of the ground rent to the state which would have eliminated the benefits of speculation and thus improved the physic fabric of the industrial cities. Engels rejected transfering the ground rent to the state. (Cap. II 371)

The relations of a tenant to a landowner Engels derrogated to 'a quite ordinary commodity transaction between two citizens' (Cap. II 308)

[Yazman]

If you want to restrict people because you disagree with them, you should try a more repressive right-wing forum.

It's not your job to tell users when to post, or where. This constitutes harassment and I won't allow you to tell users to leave the site. This sort of attitude is unwelcome and if you can't help but make posts like this, don't bother.

If you want to tell people to leave the site because you don't like what they said, you should try another site.

This post constitutes a warning, do it again and I'll infract you.

[Rafiq]

How could anybody know that, when the debate hasn't taken place yet? All we can see is that the SPGB intend to critique Georgism from a Marxist perspective (remember that Marx himself criticised George's ideas (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/letters/81_06_20.htm), so it's not like the SPGB have pulled this criticism out of thin air), and that Mr Wetzel intends to defend Georgism from this Marxist critique. Why do you have such a problem with this concept? :confused:


http://s3.postimage.org/1yyl3tpd5/henrygeorge.jpg (http://www.postimage.org/)

Discussion between the Socialist Party and David Wetzel.

Former Leader of Hounslow Council and tax reformer Dave Wetzel (see http://markwadsworth.blogspot.com/2011/10/dave-wetzel-on-bbc-politics-show.html (http://markwadsworth.blogspot.com/2011/10/dave-wetzel-on-bbc-politics-show.html)) subjects his views to the Marxian socialist criticism that a tax on land values will make no difference to the position of the majority class of wage and salary workers as it would still leave the rest of capitalism intact.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011, 8:00pm

Chiswick Town Hall, Heathfield Terrace, London W4 4JN

All welcome. Audience participation. Free entry

Full details of this and all SPGB meetings can be found here:
http://www.meetup.com/The-Socialist-Party-of-Great-Britain/events/35679142/ (http://www.meetup.com/The-Socialist-Party-of-Great-Britain/events/35679142/)

hm

[Manic Impressive]

hm
What do you think Marxian Socialist means?

[Travis Bickle]

Good conference.

Embarrasing moment for Marxist critique.

[Rafiq]

Good conference.

Embarrasing moment for Marxist critique.



It was set up to make the Marxists lose initianally. Basically a big liberal self high five.

[hatzel]

It was set up to make the Marxists lose initianally. Basically a big liberal self high five.

It really wasn't. It was set up by the Marxists (SPGB), inviting Mr Wetzel (who also describes himself as a Marxist, by the way, though admittedly not of the revolutionary ilk) to attend one of their meetings in order to talk about the intentions of the Labour Land Campaign (http://www.labourland.org), of which he is president. Simply a discussion.

[Blackscare]

Everyone move along, Rafiq's just going through one of his numerous (though admittedly more obnoxious than usual) phases. When he gets tired of jumping into threads he doesn't understand and calling everyone a liberal or Utopian, he'll just move on to something else he doesn't understand and start calling people stalinists or whatnot. It's like watching someone go through their teenage years through the medium of politics. All the smug posturing and hilariously unfounded arrogance, it really warms my heart.


Anyway Rafiq it seems that once again you've misread the OP and gone off on some god-awful nonsensical rant. I'd advise you to re-read the OP and get back to use with a reasoned argument for your position (whatever that may actually be, aside from everyone being liberal scum blah blah blah). If you don't, and you continue to hurl accusations without a shred of explanation, much less evidence, I'll infract you for trolling. Because all I can gather is, someone posted a thread trying to advertise an upcoming debate and you jumped in, guns-a-blazin', incoherently ranting about liberals and utopianism.

[Rafiq]

You're abusing your power as an Admin, resorting to personal insults and then you dare threaten to infract me?

To be honest, you've always been the forum prick. You are unpredictable in your attacks on users randomly. The reason I didn't respond thoughrouly is because I'm on my fucking phone but if you like, just for you, you sorry sack of shit, I'll explain everything when I get home.

Now, piss off, not only from me, but from every other user you spend your worthless life harassing. I truly hope the worst for you.

[Rafiq]

My politics have evolved over the past year and a half a lot. I've been through three fucking tendancys. By the looks of it blackscare is talking out of his ass and assuming things. You have no Idea what I've been through you fucking asshole. I've recieced beatings, been through psychological torture techniques used on me, have almost died, and witnessed things you couldn't eve imagine (FROM MY FUCKING OWN FATHER), all for my political views and my atheism. Libsocialism was my desperate resort, after my days of learning were suppressed (my books burned, computer destroyed, etc). Everything you fuckers are witnessing is my recovery from the terrible Winter of this year. I managed to change things, I keep this shit to myself but the hell if I'm going to let some Internet asshole throw accusations and dismiss this part of me as a phase. Fuck you, really, FUCK you

And you sorry sack of shit, here I stand, alive, and still red at heart. After everything that was attempted on me. Kids here whine about how their parents are republicans or whatever, HELL at least you fucks aren't forced to stay awake for nights being beaten and screamed at with propaganda and had to accept it. Sure I'm an idiot, but I'm recovering from it. Wanna know what the Liberal Muslims did when I came for help desperatly? Sold me out. Now you know why not only do I hate them from a materialist perspective, I hate those fuckers from the bottom of my heart and hope no mercy upon them.

I'll have my fucking revenge. Wait and see.

[Blackscare]

The sort of explanation I was looking for was your position relating to this thread, I don't care about your life story. Now, I may have been a prick to you just now, and you're right, now that I'm involved I shouldn't infract you myself so I'll see if I can't bring it up to someone else, but you have to realize that you were being just a bit of a prick yourself in this thread. Go back and re-read, you've made no solid points and have not fleshed out your argument at all. All you've done is resort to aimless ad-homs. Now, I probably shouldn't have resorted to ad-homs myself but we're all human. And yes, you are obnoxious and I am a prick, such is life. Other posters here are obnoxious but at least put up some sort of an argument, but when you just run into a thread flinging around accusations out of fucking nowhere, that's not acceptable. I don't care about this particular issue, just your disruptive and unproductive behavior in this thread.

[Blackscare]

Woa, I think I just stepped on some sort of cathartic land mine. The whole reason I talked about this "phase" wasn't really anything to do with your politics per se, because most people should know I tend to vacillate politically myself, it's that you're parroting the form of certain other users who seem to live to call others liberals. But, somehow, you do it with even less tact. Take this thread for instance, talking about a debate between the SPGB and a reformist liberal pseudo-marxist. All it takes is the mere mention of a liberal for you to totally flip your shit and start lobbing around insults out of nowhere. No direction or anything, and KC or whoever at least would have had the contextual reading skills to understand that this is a thread about a debate with a liberal/whatever. The point is to catch other posters "in the act" of be a liberal, not to totally shit yourself whenever the concept or related things come up in general.

[EDIT]

If you want to hash this personal shit out with me some more, lets do this via PM. This thread's been shat upon since post #2 all the way to here, so lets do OP a favor and get out of here.

[Rafiq]

I said I'll defend my points whenI get home.

Go crawl back in your hole until then.

The only reason I released that information is because you said this is one of my 'phases'. Maybe next time you shouldn't make dart-throwing assumptions about people when you don't even have a dart board. My goal wasn't to make you care. This is the third time you've harassed me and this time I'm not going to be so polite about it.

[Rafiq]

I'll just pull the quotes you probably got pissed off about:



Bullshit strawman argument from start.

Pathetic. If I was the ruler of this site, i'd restrict Utopians.





So does this not prove that this "debate" is a Strawman Argument from start?

It is a straw man argument. The OP is hands down a Utopian Socialist, I don't think any sensible person would even dare disagree with that. As to why it is a straw man argument, I think that's pretty fucking obvious, and if you don't think so, go the first page and take a look at post #20.

This just furthermost shows what a real prick you are, all of the posts I made in this thread (Besides one and the other off topic ones) remain legitimant and fully in accordance with the board rules.

Now this one:



It was set up to make the Marxists lose initianally. Basically a big liberal self high five.

I didn't know it was set up by Marxists so this post was crap, I'll admit. But judging from the OP's post, it very well seemed that this was set up by The reformist.

The OP is a Grade A Utopian&Idealist,

As for why I called the Chomskyan a Liberal, well, why don't you read the damn conversation? I mean only an Idiot would think Chomsky isn't a liberal.

I think The Idler is none other than Noam Chomsky himself, sometimes.

So there you have it Blackscare. You had your annual "Be a fucking hostile grouch to Chapayev/Rafiq" day.

[Blackscare]

I'll just pull the quotes you probably got pissed off about:









[QUOTE]It is a straw man argument. The OP is hands down a Utopian Socialist, I don't think any sensible person would even dare disagree with that. As to why it is a straw man argument, I think that's pretty fucking obvious, and if you don't think so, go the first page and take a look at post #20.

No argument was presented, do you even know what a strawman is? That's when you attack a position as if it was your opponents positions when in fact it isn't.

Do you see that happening? Here's what I see: post 1# someone posts a link to an upcoming event, which is a debate including someone I assume you don't like. The structure and tone of the post leads me to believe that it was simply lifted from another site and posted as a short summary. There's some basic information about the event and a short description. Nobody as of yet has made any sort of "argument", much less a strawman.

Post #2: The idler asks if said even will be recorded because they will not be there.

Post #3: you totally flip your shit and go off on a rant about how some unclear target is a utopian/liberal dick. Something about strawmen, etc. The first two posts don't include any arguments being made, so I don't know where this came from. Seeing how you totally hogged the limelight for the next 15 or so posts, accomplishing little other than throwing around ad-homs at everyone, I'm concluding that you were being disruptive for no reason. I don't care about what you think of Noam Chomsky or the idler, because frankly it has nothing to do with the content of this thread or any of the posts that led up to your little tirade.


This just furthermost shows what a real prick you are, all of the posts I made in this thread (Besides one and the other off topic ones) remain legitimant and fully in accordance with the board rules.

Italics: I'd hardly call you throwing around instlts and consistently misusing the word strawman "legitimate", but luckily for you that's not my job. Bolded: it's only "fully in accordance with the board rules" if you can properly illustrate that you were doing anything other than flaim-baiting. Doesn't seem like you've contributed anything of use to this thread, which might I remind you is about an upcoming debate, not a platform for you to vent about who you hate on this website.



I didn't know it was set up by Marxists so this post was crap, I'll admit. But judging from the OP's post, it very well seemed that this was set up by The reformist.

The OP is a Grade A Utopian&Idealist,

As for why I called the Chomskyan a Liberal, well, why don't you read the damn conversation? I mean only an Idiot would think Chomsky isn't a liberal.

I think The Idler is none other than Noam Chomsky himself, sometimes.

Blah blah blah, bunch of crap that has nothing to do with the purpose of this thread. I won't "go back and read the conversation", because it's a conversation that you went out of your way to derail in the first place. I know you've having tons of fun hunting wiberals but try to keep it topical and constructive.




So there you have it Blackscare. You had your annual "Be a fucking hostile grouch to Chapayev/Rafiq" day.

I'm just about to sit around the dinner table and celebrate ;) Do you like stuffing or yams? Also it's ironic because you stormed into this thread being a hostile, disruptive douche and now you're complaining about me.

[Rafiq]

The OP said that Marxian socialists say land tax solves nothing while DNZ pointed out it was one of the tenets of the Communist Manifesto made by MARX, ergo it was a strawman argument. Go back and see what happened you fool.

[o well this is ok I guess]

So there you have it Blackscare. You had your annual "Be a fucking hostile grouch to Chapayev/Rafiq" day. On the other hand, you have a "be a fucking hostile grouch to everyone" day almost every day.
So
like
Chill, man.

[Manic Impressive]

The OP said that Marxian socialists say land tax solves nothing while DNZ pointed out it was one of the tenets of the Communist Manifesto made by MARX, ergo it was a strawman argument. Go back and see what happened you fool.
Oh wow totally didn't expect that, so in fact you are arguing for reformism?

[Rafiq]

Oh wow totally didn't expect that, so in fact you are arguing for reformism?



No, we know it changes things slightly, but the hell if that means I support the bpurgeoisie doing it

[JimN]

I'm not a utopian socialist.


It was obvious from the original post that it was about a meeting organised by the Socialist Party of Great Britain.


To make a strawman argument you have to first make an argument. I did not. I simply posted information about an upcoming event in the upcoming events section. Whether one of the speakers at the meeting was going to make a strawman argument is something you would have to attend the meeting to find out.


In my opinion Rafiq has been successful in achieving his goal. To disrupt the thread, get another poster (who he dislikes) infracted and obtain personal gratification from mud slinging and insulting behaviour.

[Rafiq]

Your shit threads don't get much posts or attention, either, so don't act like I am blocking a discussion for you.

I got a warning telling a user to leave and I told the admin how come no one warned the Idler

[JimN]

Your shit threads don't get much posts or attention,

So why do they bother you so much?



so don't act like I am blocking a discussion for you.

Telling someone what to do will probably not get the reaction you're looking for from a libertarian-socialist.


I got a warning telling a user to leave and I told the admin how come no one warned the Idler

I thought that's what you did. You couldn't just take the warning on the chin, could you?

[Die Neue Zeit]

On the level of reforms, a substantive land value tax could replace "property" taxes (which also tax improvements to land), payroll taxes, consumption taxes (a.k.a. VATs and end-user sales taxes), and the lowest income tax brackets.

[Revolution starts with U]

It's not your job to tell users when to post, or where. This constitutes harassment and I won't allow you to tell users to leave the site. This sort of attitude is unwelcome and if you can't help but make posts like this, don't bother.

If you want to tell people to leave the site because you don't like what they said, you should try another site.

This post constitutes a warning, do it again and I'll infract you.

This makes total sense. It's not a double standard or anything :drool:

Person A: "Anybody who disagrees with me should be restricted from visiting the main portion of the site."
Person B: "Maybe it is you who should try another site."
Mod 1: "A is fine, but B is getting a warning for harrassment, specifically for telling people to leave the site Person B, you should leave the site."

Are you going to give yourself a warning now?