communist man; marx on nature

[jaycee]

What is humanities real essence, and what is humanitys relationship with the natural world?

i started this discussion in the Buddhism thread but i would like to develope it more here.

Marx said that communism will see 'the reintergration of man into himself, the supercession of mans self estrangement (alienation).' This is showing that without alienation man will return to a more 'natural state', this is what i think Marx was refering to when he claimed that communism is the begining of 'mans real history.' engels reffered to the develoment of class society and civilisation (marx refers to the 'sewage of civilisation') in particular as a 'fall' for humanity, he did this not because he was a primitavist and wanted to return to primitive comunism, but because he recognised that in progressing from primitive communism to class society (a move which was completely necessary and unavoidable) we lost much of the freedom and equality which these primtive societys offered. Most importantly the move into class society was the beginning of our fall into alienation and repression. This has reached its most extreme levels under capitalist society. This is why Marx saw communism as 'fully developed naturalism; it is the genuine resolution of the conflict between man and nature, and between man and man, the true resolution of of the conflict between existence and being, between freedom and necessity between individual and species.'


Marx saw that under private property mans connection with nature has been reduced to natures 'utility' for humanity and is increasingly viewed as just anothr commodity. Marx saw that ' the supercession of private property is therefore the emanicipation of all human senses...Need or enjoyment have therefore lost there egoistic nature, and nature has lost its mere utlity in the sense that its use has become human use (rather than use for commodity production).'


I think that under communism humainty will abolish alienating labour, and will greatly lessen the weight of mental repression. This will mean all the human needs and desires will be fulfilled and humanity will return to a more authenticly human existence.

[overlord]

I think that under communism humainty will abolish alienating labour, and will greatly lessen the weight of mental repression. This will mean all the human needs and desires will be fulfilled and humanity will return to a more authenticly human existence.


And they say Marxism isn't a religion!

[BobKKKindle$]

Dude, Why are you restricted?
Excuse me if the Follwoing is somewhat rambling

As you seem to understand, Both Capitalism and Primitive Communism are what marxists call 'modes of production' as are Feudalism, Oriental Despotism, etc. A mode of Production is a way of economic activity and production; it is the means by which Commodities are produced. A Mode of Production is composed of two components.

1. The Forces of production - This basically refers to the apparatus that is used to produce commodities, especially machinery. The Expansion of the forces of production is more commonly known to you as Economic Growth.

2. The Relations of Production - This is how the production process if organised in terms of different economic class. Under Capitalism, there are two main classes. The Capitalists form a minority, and they own and control the means of production. They do not work themselves, choosing instead to purhcase the Labour Power of the Workers, which they use to Produce Commodities, which they they then sell to make a profit. The Workers form a majority, and because they do not own the Means of Production, are forced to sell their wage labour in order to survive.

Socialists do not opposse Capitalism full stop. It must be admitted that Capitalism has led to huge advances in the Forces of production. However, we believe that these forces have reached such magnitude that there is the potential to satisfy all our needs and wants. The Reason why we are unable to achieve our desires is becauses the Relations of production prevent us from doing so; they encourage alienaiton, inequality, and insecurity. So Socialists call for a revolutionary transformation of the Relations of production, thats all there is to it. We Want the primitive relations of production, with the modern forces of production. No, no religion. We do not claim to have an answer to everything. That is all there is to it. Communism can be thus summed up : Fun Over Pointless profits.

Specifically on the question of labour, marxists believe that labour should be something of the Individual's own choosing and should be an end unto itself, instead of something merely to produce commodities - Unlike Capitalism. Under Capitalism, Workers themselves do not own the means of production means that they are forced to sell their labour power to survive. If you do not have someone to sell your labour power to, then you are forced to live on the Welfare system. This means that they are forced to take any work that is avaliable, and the work avaliable is often extremely limited in vareity. The Work itself is very often boring, repetitive, and alienating. Even if the task has a quantum of intrinsic interest (as increasingly many jobs don't) the monotony of its obligatory exclusivity drains its ludic potential.

Under Communism, as you seem to be pointing out, work would return to what it once was - an act of creativity, expression, and fun. I think the Rallying Cry of all Socialists should be - "workers of the World, have fun!"

[jaycee]

i'm restricted for not supporting WW2 and anti-fascism and for arguing that Stalinist Russia entered WW2 because it was an imperialist nation.

I knw that socialist don't oppose capitalism full stop, because it was once progressive. However i would argue that in the present period marxists should, as it is no longer progressive in any way.

You seem to agree with my basic points, what is your view of the relation of man and nature and communsm, do you think we will regain a deeper connection with both our nature as humans and nature itself.

[Tungsten]

bobkindles

Socialists do not opposse Capitalism full stop. It must be admitted that Capitalism has led to huge advances in the Forces of production. However, we believe that these forces have reached such magnitude that there is the potential to satisfy all our needs and wants.
You're wrong. We live in a finite world with finite capacity with finite time. All needs and wants cannot be satisfied. Particularly because the latter are near-infinite.

The Reason why we are unable to achieve our desires is becauses the Relations of production prevent us from doing so;
Reality has prevented you from doing so. Communism rests of the assumption that it'll have a limitless abundence of goods to distribute, which it won't have because there aren't and there'd no incentive to produce them anyway.

We do not claim to have an answer to everything.
That's a first. Now address the problem of how you're going to guarantee this endless abundence.

Specifically on the question of labour, marxists believe that labour should be something of the Individual's own choosing and should be an end unto itself, instead of something merely to produce commodities - Unlike Capitalism.
Doing your own thing without producing commodities in the process won't put food on your table or fuel in your car.

The Work itself is very often boring, repetitive, and alienating. Even if the task has a quantum of intrinsic interest (as increasingly many jobs don't) the monotony of its obligatory exclusivity drains its ludic potential.
Whatever. (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/profundusmaximus.jpg)

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by jaycee+--> (jaycee) What is humanity's real essence, and what is humanity's relationship with the natural world?[/b]

What seems to be the prevailing characteristic of our species is curiosity...we like to "know stuff" and really hate being ignorant.

The "natural world" is our enemy...it imposes arbitrary and cruel limits on our desires.

Dinosaurs like Tungsten take refuge in "nature" as a "justification" for their privileges.


Tungsten
We live in a finite world with finite capacity with finite time. All needs and wants cannot be satisfied. Particularly because the latter are near-infinite.

His "needs and wants" are "near infinite" and there are "natural limits" to meeting "infinite needs and wants". It logically "follows" that an army of people should be condemned to life-long toil to satisfy him.


Communism rests of the assumption that it'll have a limitless abundance of goods to distribute, which it won't have because there aren't and there'd no incentive to produce them anyway.

The productive capacity of modern technology is known. The "incentive" to produce a "limitless abundance" is because we want that.

What we reject is the idea that we should spend a lifetime of drudgery supporting a class of parasites like yourself.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[BobKKKindle$]

Doing your own thing without producing commodities in the process

This is what Capitalism does - it only values activities that are productive in the sense that they produce a commodity or service. People are valued in terms of their income. This means that activities that are socially important and valuable but not monetarily productive - such as caring for disabled kids, or just kids full stop - are not valued, since they do not 'put food on your table or fuel in the car'. And it is also the case that activities that are socially useless are rewarded very well - A Capitalist sitting in his office whilst workers produce springs to mind.

[Tungsten]

redstar2000

The "natural world" is our enemy...it imposes arbitrary and cruel limits on our desires.
And what are you going to do about it?
"Dear natural world, unless you provide us with a living we'll denounce you as a reactionary and shoot you."

His "needs and wants" are "near infinite" and there are "natural limits" to meeting "infinite needs and wants". It logically "follows" that an army of people should be condemned to life-long toil to satisfy him.
Who's "him"?

The productive capacity of modern technology is known.
And it's known to be finite. "Limitless abundence" is not possible, no matter how much you "want" it.
bobkindles

This is what Capitalism does - it only values activities that are productive in the sense that they produce a commodity or service.
Which is a good thing. An commodity or service is useful if it satisfies some purpose which the user wants fulfilled. The reason you think that some things are "socially useless" is because you personally don't happen to care for those things even though other people might. This worldview is consistent with the egotism usually displayed by communists.

People are valued in terms of their income.
Erm...no, people have income in terms of how they're valued.

- such as caring for disabled kids, or just kids full stop - are not valued, since they do not 'put food on your table or fuel in the car'.
Then it is not socially important. What you're trying to pass off as "socially important", is actually what you believe to be important. You don't have any right to start forcing other people to put your values above theirs. That's dictatorship.

[BobKKKindle$]

And what are you going to do about it?

Assert Control over our lives and nature - thus destroying the estrangement that exists under Capitalism and achieving the highest end of mankind. All of science - has been Man's attempt to understand and impose his masterdom over the world around him. Communism will represent highest degree of Liberation possible - with modern technology and the highly developed Forces of production we sieze from Capitalism will free us from nature, and the demise of Wage labour will signify our control over our own lives.


Then it is not socially important. What you're trying to pass off as "socially important", is actually what you believe to be important. You don't have any right to start forcing other people to put your values above theirs. That's dictatorship.

No. Society's perceptions and values are determined by the values of the ruling class and the system under which a Society operates. Under Capitalism, Profits and commodities are put below humanity. Communism will be the opposite. People are not rewarded in terms of their value - if that was the case, Capitalists would recieve no income because their sole purpose is to make profit and they play no part in producing the Commodities aside from providing the means of produciton, which they have not produced themselves.. Even feedback into the production process to expand the production appratus is just a means to make more profit, and workers are required to expand the apparatus.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Tungsten
Who's "him"?

That be you. :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Tungsten]

redstar2000

That be you. :lol:
That be not me. But let's pretend you're right. If you're *****ing about toil in service of one "me" with infinite wants, then imagine what it'll be like after the revolution where there's no longer one "me", but six billion "me's" to provide for, all with infinite wants. I'm sure you'll find the required work "fulfilling".
bobkindles

- thus destroying the estrangement that exists under Capitalism and achieving the highest end of mankind
The highest end being what?

No. Society's perceptions and values are determined by the values of the ruling class and the system under which a Society operates.
My values are determined by me- not the government or "the system". The same is probably true of everyone else- they determine their own values, which would explain the wide diversity of viewpoints that exist.

Under Capitalism, Profits and commodities are put below humanity.
I put my house above your life because you're of no value to me. You probably put your house above my life because I'm probably of no value to you. This is natural and proper. The only thing I'm not allowed to do is impose my own personal value system on you by violence.

Communism will be the opposite.
What's the opposite? Where we all impose our values on each other? I can't see that working to anyone's benefit.

[Connolly]

That be not me. But let's pretend you're right. If you're *****ing about toil in service of one "me" with infinite wants, then imagine what it'll be like after the revolution where there's no longer one "me", but six billion "me's" to provide for, all with infinite wants. I'm sure you'll find the required work "fulfilling".

The only thing needing fuelfilling will be the machinary.


And it's known to be finite. "Limitless abundence" is not possible, no matter how much you "want" it.

Who said it was infinite?

The World health organisation claims we have the ability to produce 12 times enough food for the present global population. I am a witness to the wastage of production here in Ireland.

We have the energy resources through wind, hydrogen, thermal, solar, tidal and nuclear to provide almost endless supplies of energy.

Millions of tonnes of plastic is dumped each year with no renewable use.

Tonnes of metal is unused and dumped.

Trees are being cut down for composte, yet tonnes of food is dumped with no useful purpose.

If anything, with all that waste - we have the resources - not the will.

Abundance is possible, capitalism creates it daily - then destroys it.

[Zero]

Further than discarding resources because of the abundance; we are paying farmers not to produce to their full capacity so that our economy wont go bust! Imagine that! Theres hundreds of thousands of people all around the world dieing of hunger, yet we're destroying our excess, and paying off our farmers so they won't produce as much.

No, you know what, thats not as suprising as the fact that people are supporting this.

[jaycee]

i think the assertion that nature is our enemy is a bit strange, the extremes of nature can be our enemy (such as hurricanes etc) but nature also sustains all life and unless we treat nature properly we will disrupt the fine balaance that allows us to survive. Under communism we will not only develope technology further we will also be able to develope in truly sustainable ways as we won't be forced by the drive for profit to take blindly from nature. This will allow a greater understanding of the relationship between man and nature.

[Janus]

i think the assertion that nature is our enemy is a bit strange, the extremes of nature can be our enemy
Not only that but nature places limits such as on crop production, etc.


Under communism we will not only develope technology further we will also be able to develope in truly sustainable ways
That's something that needs to happen soon at the rate that unlimited development is going.