To each according to his needs .....

[ckaihatsu]

The critique is mostly based upon the incredible vagueness of saying "could readily sort out..." It still requires some sort of explanation of how such things would be sorted out.

Well, yes and no -- considering that the *current* situation is one of needing to overthrow capitalism worldwide, that is *enough* of an answer for anyone to become political, on the revolutionary left.

To the *degree* that we can extrapolate, or envision, realistic possible future scenarios with the world's self-liberated working class in control of mass production, we can strengthen our political base in common and have a more-focused political resolve. Like anything having to do with planning it's an investment of material time and effort, and may or may not provide adequate (political) returns for that amount of investment. It's definitely subject to the material dynamic of diminishing returns....

[RGacky3]

The critique is mostly based upon the incredible vagueness of saying "could readily sort out..." It still requires some sort of explanation of how such things would be sorted out.

Its been done over and over again, in short, democracy and socialization, to different degrees, and theres never been a defence of capitalism comapred to that, there is no argument I've heard showing that democracy and socialism would make things worse than capitalism.

[Baseball]

Well, yes and no -- considering that the *current* situation is one of needing to overthrow capitalism worldwide, that is *enough* of an answer for anyone to become political, on the revolutionary left.

To the *degree* that we can extrapolate, or envision, realistic possible future scenarios with the world's self-liberated working class in control of mass production, we can strengthen our political base in common and have a more-focused political resolve. Like anything having to do with planning it's an investment of material time and effort, and may or may not provide adequate (political) returns for that amount of investment. It's definitely subject to the material dynamic of diminishing returns....

Yes. In other words, the "political Left" is exhibiting nothing more than a glorified temper tantrum. They complain and moan, scream bloody murder (and sometimes more than just scream), and at the end of the day have absolutely no idea of what to do next. And then revel in that lack of insight like its some sort of great wisdom, rather than what it is... pure childishness.

[Baseball]

Its been done over and over again, in short, democracy and socialization, to different degrees, and theres never been a defence of capitalism comapred to that, there is no argument I've heard showing that democracy and socialism would make things worse than capitalism.

Simply repeating "democracy" and "socialism" answers nothing. There needs to be an ARGUMENT for people to vote one course of action over another.

[ckaihatsu]

Yes. In other words, the "political Left" is exhibiting nothing more than a glorified temper tantrum. They complain and moan, scream bloody murder (and sometimes more than just scream), and at the end of the day have absolutely no idea of what to do next. And then revel in that lack of insight like its some sort of great wisdom, rather than what it is... pure childishness.

Well that's a very *creative* fabrication, but you're enjoying the luxury of a characterization that is detached from any underlying situation or account. This means you're not even attempting to make a verifiable argument -- you're just spinning off some concoction that suits you and your political inclination.

*Anyone* can just make up a bunch of shit....

Simply repeating "democracy" and "socialism" answers nothing.

"Vote" -- as in go through a formal ritual that is administered by the state, which is, in turn, in service to the prevailing plutocratic interests in society -- ? Working within the constraints of the existing political system is not what working-class control of the means of mass production requires.

There needs to be an ARGUMENT for people to vote one course of action over another.

The arguments have been made, and a little effort on your part is all that's required to identify these points and to respond to them, in turn, on their merits. You're not doing that.

[RGacky3]

Simply repeating "democracy" and "socialism" answers nothing. There needs to be an ARGUMENT for people to vote one course of action over another.

Democracy is the replacement, meaning the economy is run democratically rather than plutocracy (the market).

[Pretty Flaco]

In a truly communist society, everyone will drive flying ferraris, turn water into wine, transform bread into fish capable of feeding thousands, and be able to cure the sick by touch.
I don't know why that went from technology, to Jesus.

[ckaihatsu]

In a truly communist society smiting would be our revolutionary duty.


x D

[Baseball]

[QUOTE]

Well that's a very *creative* fabrication, but you're enjoying the luxury of a characterization that is detached from any underlying situation or account. This means you're not even attempting to make a verifiable argument -- you're just spinning off some concoction that suits you and your political inclination.

Presumably, a capitalist solution to solve the "underlying situation or account" would not be well received in the nascent socialist community. So saying 'we don't know' is not a viable answer. You do know what you don't want. Saying we don't know what we want is not a strength, but a weakness.

"Vote" -- as in go through a formal ritual that is administered by the state, which is, in turn, in service to the prevailing plutocratic interests in society -- ? Working within the constraints of the existing political system is not what working-class control of the means of mass production requires.

I didn't say it did. But even in a socialist system however so designed, saying the answer is "democracy" says nothing. Democracy is the way to settle disputes. It does not measure the value of the proposed solutions.

[ckaihatsu]

Presumably, a capitalist solution to solve the "underlying situation or account" would not be well received in the nascent socialist community.

There *is no* capitalist "solution" to the problems of the world -- that's why we're socialists. If voting or other kinds of participation in the status quo could actually, realistically be effective actions towards eliminating hunger, poverty, homelessness, joblessness, etc., then there would be no reason to be socialists. Choosing to *be* a revolutionary socialist is not a choice taken lightly, especially over a period of several years -- one has to have clear reasons for doing so, especially for oneself, since it's obviously not the norm in society.

So saying 'we don't know' is not a viable answer. You do know what you don't want. Saying we don't know what we want is not a strength, but a weakness.

No one here is saying "I don't know." This entire discussion board full of thousands and thousands of threads and posts are not merely elaborate expressions of "I don't know" over and over again.

In *my* case what I *do* want is at my blog entry.

I didn't say it did. But even in a socialist system however so designed, saying the answer is "democracy" says nothing. Democracy is the way to settle disputes. It does not measure the value of the proposed solutions.

Perhaps we can arrive at and possibly discuss a definition of 'economic democracy' -- if there are no objections from anyone at this thread...(?)

[Baseball]

P

erhaps we can arrive at and possibly discuss a definition of 'economic democracy' -- if there are no objections from anyone at this thread...(?)

Define it as you wish.

But be prepared to defend it on its own terms.

[ckaihatsu]

---

I'm of the position -- more "permissive" than that of others here -- that, as long as a post-capitalist society had *enough* people self-tasked to the industrial mass production of goods and services necessary for a humane functioning of society, then there would be a certain *surplus* available for general leisurely consumption -- this would include beer.

I have two responses to this issue:

- One is that there could very well be a "core" of hobbyist-like liberated laborers who wind up plotting society's technical and artistic trajectory from their own interests and inclinations, as long as they have a sufficient political base by which to do so, for using society's collectivized implements. These would be the liberated scientists and artists of a post-capitalist society, free to pursue their large-scale-enabled visions as long as there were no legitimate political grounds for denying them their proportionate access to collectivized implements.

- A second would be that there *could* be a "division of labor" in a post-commodity economic context, by which *mass demands* could be fulfilled by *mass liberated labor*, and *not* dependent on a perpetual avant garde sector of society for forward progress. In this way liberated labor would *not* be tied into being one and the same as those who politically *support* a project, and, likewise, those who *are* political and provide proposed plans for the use of society's collectivized machinery would not be constrained to their own ranks for the subsequent *implementation* of those (mass-approved) plans, as with their own liberated labor alone.

I have a model that provides for the enactment of this second, more flexible, option, enabling a truly mass-based post-commodity political economy -- it's at my blog entry, and one excerpt is here:

Infrastructure / overhead

communist administration -- Distinct from the general political culture each project or production run will include a provision for an associated administrative component as an integral part of its total policy package -- a selected policy's proponents will be politically responsible for overseeing its implementation according to the policy's provisions

labor [supply] -- All workers will be entirely liberated from all coercion and threats related to basic human living needs, regardless of work status -- any labor roles will be entirely self-selected and open to collective labor organizing efforts on the basis of accumulated labor credits

consumption [demand] -- A regular, routine system of mass individual political demand pooling -- as with spreadsheet templates and email -- must be in continuous operation so as to aggregate cumulative demands into the political process

http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?u=16162

communist economy diagram

http://postimage.org/image/1bvfo0ohw/

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...21&postcount=3

[freedom_fighter]

One thing I dislike about answering these questions is that we are hypothesizing about a situation deep into the future.

Aren't you actually talking about a situation happening right now in North Korea and the USSR 20 years ago?

All of these theories have been tried in the last century. Use your heads and use history to guide your viewpoints. You might learn something and perhaps you might even abandon this totalitarian, murdering ideology.

[#FF0000]

Aren't you actually talking about a situation happening right now in North Korea and the USSR 20 years ago?

All of these theories have been tried in the last century. Use your heads and use history to guide your viewpoints. You might learn something and perhaps you might even abandon this totalitarian, murdering ideology.

Neither the USSR nor North Korea reflect what we want. Even Marxist-Leninists don't want a repeat of the USSR, no matter how positive they think it might have been early on.

[SpineyNorman]

Aren't you actually talking about a situation happening right now in North Korea and the USSR 20 years ago?

All of these theories have been tried in the last century. Use your heads and use history to guide your viewpoints. You might learn something and perhaps you might even abandon this totalitarian, murdering ideology.

lol (note to self: ensure freedom_fighter goes on The List ready for the great purge come the revolution)