Do you take his offer?

[AConfusedSocialDemocrat]

Let us imagine you were approached with an offer. A magician of great power would make it thus that the whole world became a fairly "generous" welfare state. It would have strong civil liberties that were, by the standards of states, quite good. It would be the sort of society a left social democrat might aim for. Enviromental catastrophe would be averted, and geographical inequality of wealth eliminated. There would still be graduations in wealth, but far less extreme. Crime would still be punished but much more gently.

The catch was that it would remain like that forever. It would not degenerate politically or economically, but it would not get better either. There would be improvements flowing from cultural and technological advance, but the political development would be forever frozen.

At first you shudder back from the offer. "But I'm an anarchist/communist!" The magician shrugs and says it's not in his power to give you an communist society. At least he is promising something that will save civilization from collapse through enviromental degredation, and will no longer leave millions to starve, his offer will eliminate war and the threat of nuclear war, which might break everything that has ever been achieved.

Further, he continues, it would be irresponsible for you to risk all that he can offer for the mere possibility of utopia.

Do you take the offer?

[Philosophos]

no. what's the point of being like this at the whole time? Pretty much the same as being happy all the time or raining all the time or eating the same food all the time...

You must have shitty things in your life to apreciate the good ones.

[LeonJWilliams]

No.

We must always fight for better.

[#FF0000]

There would be improvements flowing from cultural and technological advance, but the political development would be forever frozen.

lmao no this is begging for a catastrophe

[roy]

this belongs in chit-chat as a magician is not going to turn the world into a welfare state. maybe you could get right to the heart of what you're saying here?

[#FF0000]

this belongs in chit-chat as a magician is not going to turn the world into a welfare state. maybe you could get right to the heart of what you're saying here?

"bloobloobloo a capitalist welfare state is better thn nothin u guys should vote and shouldn't pass up reformsno i don't actually read what people think why do you ask"

[AConfusedSocialDemocrat]

You must have shitty things in your life to apreciate the good ones.

What about the slave labour in the far east, sex slavery in western Europe, and deforestation in south America? At least with the wizard's offer you stamp this out once and for all, with no risk of Stalinism. If you have the power to end all this suffering, wouldn't it be somewhat immoral not to?

[AConfusedSocialDemocrat]

this belongs in chit-chat as a magician is not going to turn the world into a welfare state. maybe you could get right to the heart of what you're saying here?

You have a chance to remedy the world's ills instantly, even though you don't get your prefered system, would you take it, or stick to your guns.

[#FF0000]

What about the slave labour in the far east, sex slavery in western Europe, and deforestation in south America? At least with the wizard's offer you stamp this out once and for all, with no risk of Stalinism. If you have the power to end all this suffering, wouldn't it be somewhat immoral not to?

The thing here is that you seem to think that you can have capitalist social democracy without the problems you talk about in the first place unless, yeah, magic.

It's a silly question

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Where's a wizard to do away with social democrats?

[AConfusedSocialDemocrat]

The thing here is that you seem to think that you can have capitalist social democracy without the problems you talk about in the first place unless, yeah, magic.

I admit that magic is an essential part of the question, however, I just want to know how utilitarian you are. Do you take the weak tea drinker's utopia, albeit fairly boring, or do you reject his offer and struggle, even though you are not sure of the consequences?

[#FF0000]

I admit that magic is an essential part of the question, however, I just want to know how utilitarian you are. Do you take the weak tea drinker's utopia, albeit fairly boring, or do you reject his offer and struggle, even though you are not sure of the consequences?

I'm gonna reject his offer because a government that won't change while everything around it is would be a recipe for disaster.

[AConfusedSocialDemocrat]

Fair enough.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

Nah.
If we want change, we must do it ourselves. There is no magic that can save us if we will not save ourselves.
Even if I could live in a social-democracy, I would still not be free. As the popular saying goes: "liberty or death".

[zoot_allures]

Re this thread: it's always amusing how some people fail to get the idea of a thought experiment / hypothetical situation. "If a genie were to grant you three wishes, what wishes would you --" "No such thing as genies, fool!"

Anyway, yes, I'd probably go for it, for two reasons: (1) I tend to be pretty skeptical that we'll ever actually achieve our goals (sorry); (2) environmental destruction is probably the most severe threat we face right now, and I think there's a chance it'll cause societal collapse or even drive us to extinction before the end of the century, if we don't stop it (well, everybody admits there's a chance, but most would say it's too slight to worth worrying about; my view is that the chance is unknown and unknowable).

[Kindness]

Yes, I'd accept it without a second thought. While it's not ideal, it would lead to the end of poverty, war, and other forms of human suffering caused by those two. To ignore that possibility for some kind of ideological purity is childish at best.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I would say no.

Societies that don't evolve, die.

[Pessimist]

I would be sorely tempted because it is difficult for me to really imagine revolution actually happening. The class consciousness among capitalists when crisis breaks out and the huge amount of tools afforded to capitalist states (especially during crisis) makes revolution seem impossible to me. On the other hand, just because it seems impossible during our life times doesn't mean it would be impossible forever, and I would hate to "doom" our decedents to capitalism. I know it's a copout but I really can't decide.

[Paul Pott]

Meaningless question.

[Poison Frog]

If its still a capitalist system, there will still be expansionist war and exploitation. I know it's a hypothetical but I can't accept a hypothetical capitalism in which people are no longer exploited - that's the nature of it. A generous welfare state won't prevent the fact a majority of the world has to lose in order for the strongest capitalists to win. How would "geographical inequalities of wealth" be ended by providing welfare?

[Starship Stormtrooper]

I would say no, in this magical brave new world the working classes would continue to be exploited regardless of how much they produce comes back as welfare. Further while this might be an improvement on the present, it is hardly an improvement on what would be possible if only we fight hard enough.

[Zostrianos]

Yes. Given the choice between the hope of true socialism which probably will not happen, and the guarantee of something that's not as good, but that may be the next best thing (and is a huge improvement from the status quo), I pick the latter. I don't care what anyone thinks. It's the choice between living miserably while dreaming of an unlikely paradise, and living well (not the paradise, but a better life nonetheless).

[Kindness]

I think many people here fetishize revolution, but the real point of the revolutionary is not to bring about revolution for its own sake, but to spark change that improves people's lives. If that can be done through reforms within capitalism, then I don't see why that is bad, especially if no violence is necessary. Yes, socialist revolution would be nice, but the most important thing is to improve the lives of the majority of humanity and other sentient creatures. If social democracy does that, then I support it.

Unfortunately, I don't think a permanent improvement in the lives of the working class can be won through reforms alone, which is why I support revolutionary change. The wizard scenario is an interesting thought experiment, but it unfortunately has no basis in reality.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'd rather take my chances with a crappy present and an uncertain future than be chained to a political system that's set in stone and will never be changed for all eternity, regardless of cultural, technological & economic advances (which is a complete impossibility anyway, but just playing along with the question...)

[ind_com]

Why would Obama wear a magician costume to convince us? :confused:

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Let us suppose that I have been drinking heavily and that I no longer know what historical materialism is, or how the problems of the capitalist society arise from the material base. The answer is still no. Not only do ossified social systems cause problems in the long term, the eventuality of positive change - I don't buy the magician's bourgeois delusions about "utopias" - is better than living in an eternal liberal capitalist state.

[o well this is ok I guess]

This wizard sounds bougie as fuck
he's first on the firing line

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Can I wish for half the earth to be killed off and me instated as ruler of the ninth dimension?

[Lokomotive293]

What's the relevance of this question? Something like that will never happen.

[Crixus]

Let us suppose that I have been drinking heavily and that I no longer know what historical materialism is, or how the problems of the capitalist society arise from the material base. The answer is still no. Not only do ossified social systems cause problems in the long term, the eventuality of positive change - I don't buy the magician's bourgeois delusions about "utopias" - is better than living in an eternal liberal capitalist state.
I tried to thank that post twice.

[RedAtheist]

No I would not doom humanity to live forever in a world where;

-A certain set of people have to live their entire lives being unemployed, because it's advantageous for capitalists to have a class of people who can potentially replace their current workers (trust me, being unemployed is mentally damaging no matter how nice the government is)

-Another set of people have to spend their entire lives doing degrading manual labour because the distinction between mental and manual work will never be challenged

-People behave towards each in ways that are selfish and competitive, using each other as tools for advancing their own interests

-The culture encourages people to have superficial values and emphasis other people's (in particular women's) appearances and what they own, over who they are

-Humans have no real control over the economy that they create with their labour and feel powerless in the face of blind economic forces

-Workers spend eight hours every day being told what to do by someone they did not elect and power ultimately rests in the hand of the small handful of people who own corporations

Ultimately, a benevolent economic dictatorship is still a dictatorship. I am not dooming humanity to live under an eternal dictatorship of any kind. I long for freedom not more comfortable chains.

[Red Economist]

Nope. Freedom is also the freedom of the human race to screw up periodically. And hopefully learn from it's mistakes.

[Art Vandelay]

The people who voted yes ought to be ashamed. What kind of leftists say, 'oh no we'll except wage slavery as long as you don't appropriate too much of our surplus value, just take a little.'

[Pessimist]

The people who voted yes ought to be ashamed. What kind of leftists say, 'oh no we'll except wage slavery as long as you don't appropriate too much of our surplus value, just take a little.'

I don't think it's about what someone would find "acceptable" so much as their estimation of the likelihood of successful revolution.

[one10]

This thread is pointless and something we should no longer ponder in. It's quite silly and pathetic.

[Thelonious]

Questions like this always annoy me. It is reminiscent of the hypothetical questions my 7 year-old son asks me: "Oye, papa.... if you could get seventy-five quadrilionty, milliondy dollars but you could only use it to buy dinner for all the hungry people every night, or use it to travel to another galaxy, what would you do?"

[smellincoffee]

I could accept it if, and only if, it was capable of withstanding changes to the status quo -- disasters, running out of resources, etc. Such a condition would never be met, and that is why states will always self-destruct. Power structures calcify and collapse. Utopia can't handle the wildness of reality.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

No, but I'd ask the wizard to give me a lifetime supply of 10%ABV beer that has no calories and won't cause hangovers, acid reflux, memory loss, cirrhosis, brain cell death, or the spins. And a personal teleporter that can teleport up to 5 people at once.

[Red Commissar]

Does the wizard have a staff? If yes, I'll defeat him and take the staff. Then I'll get about doing inane things with it. Maybe I'll use it to create communist revolution on request, better than his original offer.

[Klaatu]

Sorry but I do not believe in magic

[Forward Union]

No because the key issue is workers control of the means of production for a reason. Have you ever had a job? I don't agree with the idea that individuals run their own private dictatorships over huge (or even sometimes small) sections of the economy.

[Mackenzie_Blanc]

The magician offering the deal does not exist, so this thought experiment does not provide us with any insight. Also, the idea of "frozen political activity" is highly utopian, similar to what Fukuyama writes in his End of History, and goes against the lessons of history.

[Rafiq]

The question presumes that contradictions objectively coexistent with capitalist relations are a phenomena existent seperatly. Just as water must be wet, these contradictions are intristic to capitalist relations inevitably, to remove them is to remove capitalist relations. Yes, of course any utopia would be accepted. But to think that which enrages a slave is a low standard of living and not the internal cataclysmic strive for emancipation is to lose legitimency in your understanding of slavery.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Althusser]

No wonder the social-democrat doesn't understand that capitalism wouldn't be able to function if all the world's nations were equal let alone welfare states.

[Chris]

I would nod and smile and say yes, and try to get the poor delusional bloke some help with a psychiatrist.