How I think this is gonna work...

[TheDifferenceEngine]

I'm unsure what exactly all the different branches preach (marxist, leninist, trotskyist, stalinist, maoist, anarchist, WTF?)
so I'll just go ahead and outline my ideas:

First, lets meet individual A, he's a medium-qualified worker, he has a family and one of his two children is wheelchair bound.

He is deserving of a slightly-more-than-decent house for being slightly more qualified than the average worker and, since he has a family and a disabled resident he gets a single-floor house with wide rooms.

(Before anyone asks "where is the space for these houses going to come from?" Marx did say that a communist society should disperse the population evenly throughout the country, so yeah; lots of freakin' space.)

Since individual A is medium-skilled he recives a pay packet according to his pay teir, plus a little bit extra for having to support a family and a little bit more for the support of his disabled child.

(Everyone being equally paid would result in brain drain. But to narrow down the gaps pay teirs should be introduced, the highest teir should only be about double- ish the size of the lowest and what with family support and other assorted odds and ends, no-one should be too well or worse off than any other guy.)

When individual A does his weekly shopping he takes his earnings down to the local Depot and collects the things he wants and needs, "paying" with his earnings.

(It would be pretty nasty to actually abolish private property, so you just buy the stuff you want from the state, with the earnings you get from the state.)

I'll post about such issues as foriegn travel and law and order in my next installment.

[BobKKKindle$]

He is deserving of a slightly-more-than-decent house for being slightly more qualified than the average worker

Reactionary Statement. Why do you assume that having more advanced qualifications entitles one have greater access to goods and services? Many menial jobs are just as important to the fluid functioning of the economy and society as labour that required high qualifications, and those engaged in menial labour have similar needs to those in skilled labour, so why should they recieve less? Not Having qualifications may be demonstrative of unequal economic oppurtunities resuling from differences in family disposable income, not personal failure, an absence of sacrifice and hard work, or the absence of a will to succeed. Your statement is in direct opposition to the maxim that would govern a communist society;

"From Each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs"


It would be pretty nasty to actually abolish private property, so you just buy the stuff you want from the state, with the earnings you get from the state

This statement suggests you are advocating a command economy, which is essentially state capitalism, whereby workers do not have control over the means of production, but instead of being concentrated in the hands of Capitalists, ownership and control over the means of production lies in the hands of State bureaucrats. This would result in the same alienation (the lack of control workers have over the products of their labour and the means of production) that occurs under Capitalism.

[BobKKKindle$]

Just one more thing; If you want some more information about the various forms of radical Leftism (A topic I found really interesting when I first became a Socialist) I highly recommend this site:

http://reds.linefeed.org/vocab.html

Revleft also has a good dictionary of Famous Leftists and Ideologies under OI

[OneBrickOneVoice]

I'm unsure what exactly all the different branches preach (marxist,)

Marxist means you follow the ideas put forward by Marx (ie Dialectal materialism). It means you are a scientific socialist rather than the utopian ones that came before him.


leninist, trotskyist, stalinist, maoist,

All forms of Leninism. Leninism states that a revolutionary vanguard and party that is organzed along the lines of democratic centralism an is made up of class conscious workers is necessary for a revolution.

Trotskyists are Leninists except they hold the belief that Stalin was evil and that there should be a permanent revolution, although that idea wasn't pioneered by him (trotsky). Marx first coined it in 1850 I think.


anarchist, WTF?)

Anarchists sorta just believe things will all come together when they feel like it. They believe that a party is not necessary and that there will be no need for a worker's state or dictatorship of the proletariat after the revolution.

Anarchists = Revolution ==> Communism

Communists = Revolution ==> Socialism ==> Communism


First, lets meet individual A, he's a medium-qualified worker, he has a family and one of his two children is wheelchair bound.

He is deserving of a slightly-more-than-decent house for being slightly more qualified than the average worker and, since he has a family and a disabled resident he gets a single-floor house with wide rooms.

why is that? He should have the same house as other people because his job is most likely just as important as other "less skilled" jobs. It is the less skilled jobs that are often the grimiest and toughest.

Perhaps early in socialism this could be the case, but I don't think so.

[TheDifferenceEngine]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2006 04:00 pm
Perhaps early in socialism this could be the case, but I don't think so.
That's what i'm talking about, a few hundred years of this to wear away the dog-eat-dog attitude then on to the whole utopia thing...

Right?

[Bretty123]

I don't think Marx was looking to abolish private property but he was looking to abolish bourgeoise private property i.e. means of production etc.

[phoenixoftime]

I think the challenge is to provide workers with the opportunity to educate themselves throughout their careers - punishing people for being less skilled isn't going to improve their qualifications.

I do believe that their should be rewards for the quality of your work, commitment etc., but this shouldn't be based on how much education you could afford from the Capitalist days.

[Cryotank Screams]

He is deserving of a slightly-more-than-decent house for being slightly more qualified than the average worker and, since he has a family and a disabled resident he gets a single-floor house with wide rooms.

This is impossible, see below quote;

"All things for all men, since all men have need of them, since all men worked to produce them in the measure of their strength, and since it is not possible to evaluate everyone's part in the production of the world's wealth... All is for all!"-Peter Kropotkin.


It would be pretty nasty to actually abolish private property

Why? Elaborate.