oppressive capitalist government or oppressive bourgeois government

[spice756]

Why do people here keep using the word oppressive capitalist government, capitalist parties, capitalist government, oppressive government, bourgeois government, and oppressive bourgeois government?

These terms are wrong the government are not capitalist they are bureaucracy. The capitalist may control the government by lobbying to influence political policy, but the government are not capitalist/bourgeois. Such a system would be state-capitalism.

It is like saying the oppressive government or oppressive state this is so wrong. Now I do know because of the hierarchy class the government has to do want they say. :(If 15% are poor or lower class they not going to get much say than if 80% or 90% who are poor or lower class.

Because under the democracy the majority rule. With the exception of corrupted republican or democratic party doing lobbying.

And do to corrupted republican or democratic party having no moral values you got big businesses controlling the government .

[The Feral Underclass]

I think people use the term 'bourgeois government' because it's interests are for the bourgeoisie. A bourgeois government exists to defend property rights and serve the interest of the bourgeoisie. In fact many of the members of bourgeois governments also directly own aspects the means of production.

[Bud Struggle]

These terms are wrong the government are not capitalist they are bureaucracy.

I kind of agree. Watching the way the bureaucracy of the Socialist Soviet Union became the bureaucracy of the Capitalist Russia in a heartbeat it's easy to think that their allegiance is only to the people in charge not any particular ideology.

For that matter I believe that the bureaucracy of the United States could have been transfered to the Soviet Union without any undue problems.

Bureaucracies are like machines--they serve whoever turns them on.

[Lynx]

I live in a plutocracy.

[danyboy27]

IBureaucracies are like machines--they serve whoever turns them on.

yea, i agree on that but i dont think bureaucracy is a form of governement, its the way the institutions work.

[RGacky3]

And do to corrupted republican or democratic party having no moral values you got big businesses controlling the government .

You got this backward, most politicans are not "corrupt", they are doing politics the only way politics can be done in a Capitalist society, which is in favor of big business, its not that they have, "No moral values" they are doing politics, plain and simple. You cannot take big business out of government, its impossible, as long as they have the money, they will have the power.


Bureaucracies are like machines--they serve whoever turns them on.

Excactly.

[spice756]

I think people use the term 'bourgeois government' because it's interests are for the bourgeoisie. A bourgeois government exists to defend property rights and serve the interest of the bourgeoisie. In fact many of the members of bourgeois governments also directly own aspects the means of production.


Well sure some goverment people have friends who are capitalists.And some goverment people own businesses.

[spice756]

You got this backward, most politicans are not "corrupt", they are doing politics the only way politics can be done in a Capitalist society, which is in favor of big business, its not that they have, "No moral values" they are doing politics, plain and simple. You cannot take big business out of government, its impossible, as long as they have the money, they will have the power.

If you ban lobbying and goverment people who have friends than own businesses you will not have this problem.

[RGacky3]

If you ban lobbying and goverment people who have friends than own businesses you will not have this problem.

Yes you will, because big business still controls the resources of a country, and as long as that is the case they have the country by the balls.

[funkmasterswede]

I blame Gramscianism for this conflation.

[spice756]

sorry spelling problem.

[spice756]

Yes you will, because big business still controls the resources of a country, and as long as that is the case they have the country by the balls.

How so?

It is like saying that big business or ruling class rule the state.If you ban lobbying and goverment people who have friends than own businesses than the problem is gone.How would big business or ruling class rule state then?

:confused::confused:

[PRC-UTE]

the bourgeoisie do not have to lobby their own state- competing sections of the bourgeoisie do. it's an important distinction. it is their state, that's why we call it a bourgeois / capitalist state, even leaving aside TAT's point that many of their ministers are also capitalist owners.

look at the way laws are written, they are written for the capitalists. the czech govt banned the communist youth there on the grounds that it is illegal to call for collectivised property!

[RGacky3]

How would big business or ruling class rule state then?

If the government does'nt play by the Capitalists rules, the Capitalists can just invest elsewhere. And they will, governments have to compete for business, because the success of their contry depends on Capitalists. They government has to make the Capitalist happy, because the countries well being depends on Capitalist investment.

Remember Capitalism is global, governments are not.

[spice756]

If the government does'nt play by the Capitalists rules, the Capitalists can just invest elsewhere. And they will, governments have to compete for business, because the success of their contry depends on Capitalists. They government has to make the Capitalist happy, because the countries well being depends on Capitalist investment.

Remember Capitalism is global, governments are not.


You meen take the businesses to other country?That sounds more bribing than control.

Or the rich pack up and move?

Some say there should be laws to ban offshoring and banning goods coming from other country.

[RGacky3]

You meen take the businesses to other country?That sounds more bribing than control.


Its not bribing at all, its common sense, capital flight is a big problem in areas that have tried Social-Democracy, so is lack of investement, its not bribing its common sense, Caitalists will do business in places that offer the most profit, and governments have to offer the most profit to ge business, they want the Capitalist to make MORE money, so the Capitalist can invest, pay taxes, make the country wealthy, so the governemnt MUST make sure Capitalists are happy.


Some say there should be laws to ban offshoring and banning goods coming from other country.

Never gonna happen and even if it did it would'nt change much, because Capitalists still control the resources, and most of the big guys are international anyway.

Think about a town, who's gonna have more power, the guy that owns all the shops, the farms, the factories, the mines, the offices? Or the guy who is elected for 4 years to sign laws and order the police. The guy thats owns everything has a lot more power.