Log in

View Full Version : Socialist Environmentalism



More Fire for the People
30th April 2005, 16:42
To the capitalist, earth and humanity are seen in values of wealth; to the socialist, earth
and humanity are seen in values of well-being. Both the capitalist and the socialist are
trying to maximize their perspective's value. These values cannot both increase to
maximum and thus conflict is created. To our luck and nature's, the socialist and the
working class are the majority and oppose the capitalist.

Only in a socialist world is environmentalism possible. Only the socialist values things in
well-being. We seek to collectively own the Earth, and only collectively can we save it.
We propose a new pricing system for commodities that is,

The sum of the cost of production, worker's wage, social negative impact, and
environmental negative impact divided by products produced

Rather than the capitalist ideal pricing of,
The sum of worker's wage and cost of production divided by products produced plus
desired profit (surplus value).

In example,
In the capitalist's ideal society the price of a product which cost $500 in production
and the worker was paid $30 and made 50 products with a profit of $2 a product the
price would be: $12.60.

In the socialist's society the price of a product which cost $500 in production and
the worker was paid $130 and made 50 products and had no negative social impact
but had an environmental impact of $50,000 a year the price would be,
($500 + $130 + ($50,000 / 365 days)) / 50 products = $15.34.

The worker makes more, can buy more, lives in a better society, has a clean
environment to live in, and jointly owns the business he works at.
In our society, land will not be a private commodity of the rich but a common
commodity owned by all people. All property, from the Alps to the farms to the
Himalayas to the markets to Death Valley to the community itself will be
democratically and scientifically managed.

By Rotmutter 4/30/05

cubalibra
2nd May 2005, 14:19
This is why I believe the world bank will be the cause of the end of the world if we don't act soon enough. If Che were alive today, I would assume this is where he would plan his next revolution. A revolution to free the world of this wretched, gutless organization.

workersunity
7th May 2005, 04:13
I agree with the originator of the thread

Xvall
8th May 2005, 23:00
Yes. Free enterprise will, ultimately, kill us all. It's quite possible that it's wreaked so much havoc upon the environment that our impending destruction is unavoidable.

SonofRage
8th May 2005, 23:06
Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 09:19 AM
If Che were alive today, I would assume this is where he would plan his next revolution.
I'm always bothered by such statements. How could we possibly know such a thing, and why would it matter? This a lot like the whole "What would Jesus Do?" idea.

Matthew The Great
9th May 2005, 01:08
The American government will never do anything about the environment "because Jesus is coming soon, anyway". Why should they try to save their "temporary" home?

The root of the problem here is organized religion. Particularly Christianity (because to be elected to American government you have to say you are a Christain.)

More Fire for the People
9th May 2005, 01:51
The problem does not lie within all of Christianity, it lies within the supporters of Dominion Theology. Dominion Theology is promoted by pastors who say only their view is correct and all other views are of the devil. These pastors receive funding through corporations.

Corporations need the masses to be fooled into thinking their religion is on the right-wing and bigoted church leaders need corporate funds.

Thus we have the Republican Party.

apathy maybe
18th May 2005, 02:36
It is well known (in socialist circles) that capitalism and environmentalism can not co-exist. Capitalism assumes an infinite amount of resources (or possibly it just doesn't take into account the finite nature of resources).

Traditional socialism isn't any better. Nature is there to be exploited and so on. However socialism is by its nature better suited to embrace the need for restraint.

Under capitalism everyone owns a car (or more then one), a washing machine (or more then one) and so on. However when the car (or washing machine etc) isn't being used it just sits there.

Socialism provides the environment where others can use these. Thus removing the need to produce a washing machine for every household. Thus saving resources, thus being better for the environment.

Capitalism encourages competition and accumulation of scarce resources. Socialism provides the opportunity for communities to share a limited amount of resources.

codyvo
18th May 2005, 20:36
I agree, this is why I think Capitalism is like animus (the snake that eats it's own tail).

workersunity
24th May 2005, 03:23
check out the author john bellamy foster