Results 201 to 220 of 539
Money only relates to power over politicians in any form that would be relevant, unless they try to buy your company off. This is why the policies are what they are.
However, in the original train of thought on free market capitalism it would mean that government can not pass any laws that helps dictate over economy by any means
If you look at the free market movement that is happening here in America right now we actually advocate for more power to local governments for that reason, because there definitely needs to be adjusting time. However, we can not allow the major corporations to create these complexes we see here today.
If economic policy stays out of government in general these corporations will not be able to be tax exempt. Not receive all the subsidies they receive. All of it, they are big and giant because our politicians have been bought out by the big and giants. Government needs to stay out of economic policy period.
Yes the corporations get big in modern day because the ones running them are all the same people running our policies, I think its like 70 percent of congress right now is a businessmen/women. This is not free market capitalism like I said its corporatism. If you look at people like Al Gore for instance, he forces gas taxation for carbon, he proposes that businesses in America have to pay money based on carbon output, but yet hes on the board of apple inc manufacturing all of their products in china with absolutely no carbon restrictions. So basically, hes getting rid of the middle and lower class and making his products monopolize, as well as taking in governmental benefits from the taxation laws. Do you see how government influence is the problem?
Way to miss the point. The definition of a state has been clearly defined and you're going off of a definition in a very broad sense. A state holds monopoly over governance and decision making and ensures it has the monopoly on violence. Its an organ of class based rule, not just a country with a governing body. Under communism/anarchy there will be no state, and while there is a state there shall be no true freedom
"But here steps in Satan, the eternal rebel, the first free-thinker and emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge." ~Mikhail Bakunin
The difference (broadly) between Marxism and Anarchism is on the necessity for a transitional period (we're all socialists). But the transitional period is capitalism under the revolutionary proletarian dictatorship. It's not socialism. It's attempting to become socialism. But it isn't socialism until capitalism (that is, property, wage labour, commodity production, classes and states) have been consigned to the dustbin of history.
No, I didn't state that it had changed, you really must learn to read. I said that parties, called 'socialist', had changed their policies, orientations and frameworks. Other parties, also called 'socialist', have not changed their policies, orientations and framework. What a party is called is not necessarily a reflection of what a party believes. Do you think that whatever Barak Obama does is 'democracy', as he's a Democratic president? So why do you believe that whatever Francois Hollande does is 'socialism', just as he's a Socialist president?
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
I'd rather avoid any and all ideas that capitalism and the state can be reformed to be more decentralized. The whole system needs to be smashed and the former ruling elite forced to bow until they've broken through the floor. I'd hate a "freer capitalism" just as much as I hate the current capitalist machine that keeps churning ever forward on people's blood, sweat, tears. No longer should people have to sell their bodies in anyway shape or form just to survive. The civil liberties we're given are to work and starve: That's a threat! We're forced by economic need to work for a capitalist to survive, we're forced to sell our bodies, our labor, our time and peace of mind, just to survive. We grow the fruit while we're given the rind and told to protect the scraps we have to pay for. Physically slavery requires people to be housed and fed, while economic slavery requires people to house and feed themselves. Bills are given to take further away from the people because TINSTAAFL (There is no such thing as a free lunch) people get charged for their wants and needs and are forced to sacrifice themselves and their time to survive. They produce and still they have to pay for what they're forced to produce, and the finished product more expensive often than the effort taken to put into it.
If anything the stateless capitalism will lead to harsher conditions for those forced into economic servitude. Class struggles will become more rigid, and competition between firms more fierce and probably more violent. It will lead to corporations and firms themselves becoming nascent states, conquering others to grow. The state is synonymous with the existence of the conqueror and the conquered. I guarantee you what you advocate will do far more to harm the world than the current existing statist capitalism
"But here steps in Satan, the eternal rebel, the first free-thinker and emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge." ~Mikhail Bakunin
So are you going to answer my question I asked you, does there need to be a state in the transitional period yes or no. Now that every society is basically capitalist what would the next phase be?
Was the USSR a socialist country in the phase of transition by your definition
When did I advocate for anyone having their freedom restricted? This is just desperate phrasemongering now. But the point is you can't make 100% of people happy. Any decision will necessarily hurt some people. Communism is the first time the mass majority of people are happy.
There is no state in communism. Note that "state" in Marxist theory has a concrete and complex meaning which only partially matches other definitions.
If it was so good then why did 'we' turn back? Because of 'corporate power'? Well, guess what: capitalism creates 'corporate power'. If we 'get' back there,
Actually, it was opposite. It was terrible and reforms were enacted because of the influence of the working class. This greatly improved the standard of living.
This is pretty stupid. People are starving because of their choices? Is this freedom?
This is terribly wrong. The post-WWII period was marked by a greater amount of government interference into economy, thanks to the power exerted by the working class. The working class power, government interference into economy and quality of life were all linked factors with a high correlation. This was later overturned with the adoption of neoliberalism.
Less government intervention can also mean less free market: for instance, oligopolies form, which lock out small business. Small business is also empowered by economic policy.
This is wrong. For instance, 100,000 people die in the U.S. every year due to lack of healthcare (New England Journal of Medicine 336, no. 11 [1997]). This does not happen in, for instance, many European states, which have enacted social democratic policies and thus established greater access to health care. In these countries, where a system of single-payer healthcare exists, the quality and availability of healthcare is much better, while the cost is lower, compared to these which do not have this system.
Last edited by RedWorker; 31st October 2014 at 23:24.
That's the definition of a state. A state is the governing and decision making aspect of society. If there is a neighborhood with one neighborhood leader and they rule the laws of the neighborhood, the state is the neighborhood leader. If there is a group of 50 people telling the other 20 in a society of 70, the 50 people are the state, it just acts as the governing body. This is why I said I had a paradigm with socialism. There is no governing body, but obviously there is.
Did you ask me that? I hadn't noticed.
The existence of the state isn't a matter of will, the state is a product of class society, which is why is why it's an oxymoron to be in favour of capitalism but against the state. Capitalism causes a state. And as long as capitalism exists, there will be a state. It is only when society has been transformed that the state ceases to exist.
Of course the USSR wasn't a 'socialist state', I've told you at least twice it was a capitalist state. And the only transition it made was from capitalism, to a less-efficient form of capitalism, to a more brutal form of capitalism.
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
This may not be directed at me but I'll answer it most definitely.
I'd have to say there may need to exist a transitional state with the goal of defending the revolution and carrying it ever forward. While the state exists there will be no freedom, but when it is gone, its necessity disappears, it will wither away. It'll no longer be necessary for a single or multi party system to lead and direct the revolutionary efforts. The state shall be that of the majority, of the proletariat and those of other classes that support the efforts of tye emancipation of humanity and the abolition if capitalism.
The USSR was a DOTP until it degraded from the inside, Lenin's NEP and the persecution of anarchists as well as the death of important members lead to it's decay into state capitalism
"But here steps in Satan, the eternal rebel, the first free-thinker and emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge." ~Mikhail Bakunin
Youre running in circles here I already explained how we have not had a free market for a long long time.
You, are completely completely wrong. Government started practicing keynisian economics with FDR. These policies he created is now what we face. These economic plans are the boom and bust cycles we see. You say its the proud working class. What working class revolution happened post ww2 I am just curious?
And I hate to break it to you, but the government policies that FDR passed on us are now bankrupting us. Guess what, I am paying a majority of my money into social security, but im not going to be able to get it back by the time I retire. Guess what else, every year taxes get raised on the working and low class to pay off the debt of the government spending because of their policies, and the inflated dollar of keynasian economics
You say that all these people die in the healthcare in 1997, take a look at the 50s and compare the living standard to now, and take a look at all the policies that have been created to make healthcare sky rocket.
Oligopolies only form when policies get rid of small business, not when free market is functioning. How is small business empowered by government influence? Like today? Are you serious, just because certain towns have a small local government help out a business its only because soo much power has been given to the big business by the federal government that this needs to even exist.
Youre blaming capitalism and not really understanding why.
You're a lost case.
Nut* Case
"But here steps in Satan, the eternal rebel, the first free-thinker and emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge." ~Mikhail Bakunin
Does ur business you own practice profit sharing?
No, but I pay my employees well and they enjoy working with me, and let me emphasize with me they work. I'm not sitting on my ass doing nothing
"But here steps in Satan, the eternal rebel, the first free-thinker and emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge." ~Mikhail Bakunin
By the end of this thread you will probably have redefined every word in English language. And probably some French ones as well. It amuses me to no end that you think you're fooling anyone; here's a hint: if your argument only works if you carefully redefine every term so that no statement means what an average speaker of the language would naturally assume it means, your argument is wrong, to put it as politely as is humanly possible.
Soooo complete owning of production and economy is capitalism now? Ok then. And when we live in a communist utopia and the majority of people tell me something I don't agree with that's not them governing me because only capitalism is governing ok.
So then how do we get from capitalism to communism
Ok good job on insulting my character and not proving me wrong by any means what so ever.
Does there need to be a transition from capitalism to your ideal communism?
Ok so your a capitalist.
I haven't insulted your character, I've pointed out the tiresome, childish and dishonest way in which you argue - in which many of your fellow right-"libertarians" argue in fact.
And yes, obviously no one can snap their fingers and institute a global classless society - not that this has anything to do with your fantasies about Germany under Hitler being a transitional society (?). Which again rest on redefining terms left and right.
Yep. I own and operate a business. I'm petit-bourgeois and I'm guessing you're a proletarian? Well I can hire you for 10/hr starting next spring, you'll get lots of free time! But like me you won't make a lot, the government and local laws make it impossible to run a business and be profitable in my area despite minuscule growth. Competition is strong and they can set more competitive prices than my tiny business. I'm also a libertarian Marxist/anarchist communist by ideology. Class position and ownership of means of prediction has nothing to do with personal philosophy
"But here steps in Satan, the eternal rebel, the first free-thinker and emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge." ~Mikhail Bakunin
