Marxism

[No Robots]

Yehuda Ashlag calls for a second stage of communism. He calls it altruistic communism:

The second phase of communism, being Altruistic Communism, must be hurried, since the shortcomings and force used in Egoistic Communism, deter the world from this method altogether. Hence, it is time to uncover the final stage of Altruistic Communism, which possesses all the pleasantness, and has no blemish.--The Solution

This is the way forward for mankind.

 

[bilby]

You claimed collectivism is what has made China an economic power, when it was cheap labor, little environmental controls, and poor working conditions..

Then why isn't Nigeria an economic power? They have all three of those in spades.

 

[steve_bank]

The only thing Marxism has going for it is that capitalism is not doing very well either. Both have a terrible record.

OTOH, well managed and regulated capitalism seems to be able to cope.

Barely, if it can be kept out of the hands of Trump, et al. Which now seems doubtful.

The question is what would work better on the scale of an America?

Practical details not ideology or philosophy.

Marx wrote in a relatively simple economic and social reality.

 

[steve_bank]

You seem to be an apologist for China. You claimed collectivism is what has made China an economic power, when it was cheap labor, little environmental controls, and poor working conditions..

Well, no, I'm not, and I didn't. No need to respond to the rest of your post, which is based on that false premise and which mainly complains about political issues rather than economic. I know books per se aren't exactly your thing, but learning to read the posts you're responding to (before responding to them) would still be salutory.

Another non response to content.

By the way, please do not use emojis. They scare the hell out of me.

 

[No Robots]

The question is what would work better on the scale of an America?

Practical details not ideology or philosophy.

Marx wrote in a relatively simple economic and social reality.

Basic components of Marxism were implemented in the United States by Franklin D. Roosevelt.

 

[lostone]

You seem to be an apologist for China. You claimed collectivism is what has made China an economic power, when it was cheap labor, little environmental controls, and poor working conditions..

Well, no, I'm not, and I didn't. No need to respond to the rest of your post, which is based on that false premise and which mainly complains about political issues rather than economic. I know books per se aren't exactly your thing, but learning to read the posts you're responding to (before responding to them) would still be salutory.

Another non response to content.

By the way, please do not use emojis. They scare the hell out of me.

Pardon my emoji. A little bit of fear is good for you - a little more fear, not so much so. We should all be more than a little scared now.

 

[Politesse]

You seem to be an apologist for China. You claimed collectivism is what has made China an economic power, when it was cheap labor, little environmental controls, and poor working conditions..

Well, no, I'm not, and I didn't. No need to respond to the rest of your post, which is based on that false premise and which mainly complains about political issues rather than economic. I know books per se aren't exactly your thing, but learning to read the posts you're responding to (before responding to them) would still be salutory.

Another non response to content.

By the way, please do not use emojis. They scare the hell out of me.

If you want to have a talk about content, respond to the content of my posts. There's a reason I posted them. That's what I'm interested in talking about. Or dont, it's a free world, but don't complain about being ignored when you yourself ignore all feedback entirely. There's nothing to respond to in a seemingly random list of complaints about China that has nothing to do with what I wrote, or for that matter the supposed topic of the thread. I could do a line-by-line agreement or rebuttal with every specific point you made, and it's obvious your next post would just be "So you're saying you worship Mao and Marxism is perfect? What about these random news stories I sort of remember a summary of?" and just going off on your own thing again. My initial post in this thread was not complicated. It was one sentence long, and contained no big words. You cannot credibly tell me that you were unable to read or comprehend it.

 

[steve_bank]

How is western economics ‘not working’?

We have a growing affordability problem and other problems, however

1. Water, electricity and sewage to every dwelling.
2. Plenty of food 24/7. An obesity problem not a starvation probblem.
3. Higher education open to most, upward mobility.
4. A political system where some do rise from8 the bottom to the top.
5. A wide range of clothing.
6. Personal transportation, aka cars. A national road system.
7. 24/7 entertainment.
8. Vacation and sick time.
9. Excess wealth that supports and entertainment class and academe class. Your favorite musicianor taking a class or degree in art, mythology or philosophy. You can take a degree in art history even thoogh it has no practical value.
0. A professional athlete class. Making money playing golf, and these days skateboarding and BMX bike racing.

This has never existed before, it is all new. So if it is not rowing, compared to what?

Marxist based stems provided little of the above.

Expecting any system to be all things to all people is an impossible ex[ection.

 

[bilby]

A political system where some do rise from8 the bottom to the top.

Name one.

 

[bilby]

Excess wealth that supports and entertainment class and academe class.

This has never existed before, it is all new.

Sure. Those renaissance artists? Never existed. Had to wait for the USA to exist first.

 

[Bomb#20]

The question is what would work better on the scale of an America?

Practical details not ideology or philosophy.

Marx wrote in a relatively simple economic and social reality.

Basic components of Marxism were implemented in the United States by Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Yes; but in all fairness to Roosevelt, his Japanese-American internment camps were a lot nicer than Soviet gulags.

 

[lostone]

How is western economics ‘not working’?

We have a growing affordability problem and other problems, however

1. Water, electricity and sewage to every dwelling.
2. Plenty of food 24/7. An obesity problem not a starvation probblem.
3. Higher education open to most, upward mobility.
4. A political system where some do rise from8 the bottom to the top.
5. A wide range of clothing.
6. Personal transportation, aka cars. A national road system.
7. 24/7 entertainment.
8. Vacation and sick time.
9. Excess wealth that supports and entertainment class and academe class. Your favorite musicianor taking a class or degree in art, mythology or philosophy. You can take a degree in art history even thoogh it has no practical value.
0. A professional athlete class. Making money playing golf, and these days skateboarding and BMX bike racing.

This has never existed before, it is all new. So if it is not rowing, compared to what?

Marxist based stems provided little of the above.

Expecting any system to be all things to all people is an impossible ex[ection.

Those things are not unique to capitalist cultures

 

[Bronzeage]

Okay, that makes us Number One.

San Marino has us beat: 1600.

Back to second place.

I'd have said third, though it's kind of ambiguous since a lot of changes are so gradual. Out of curiosity, what break since 1789 in the continuous system of government do you think disqualifies Britain? The authority of Parliament to fire the King was established in 1688, the "Glorious Revolution". The last time a monarch vetoed a law was 1708. The King was personally commanding the army in the field as late as the 1740s. But I don't see any changes since then that are more significant than our own constitutional amendments. What do you see?

The US Constitution was ratified in 1789 and it's been tweaked 17 times, as the situation demanded. One of the seventeen Amendments repealed a previous Amendment. At that time, the King of England still held a great deal of power, especially in foreign policy, and more importantly to us, colonial governance.

The UK doesn't have a comprehensive Constitution which is the basis for all subordinate laws. They rely on a collection of acts of Parliament and some vague traditions.

 

[bilby]

The UK doesn't have a comprehensive Constitution which is the basis for all subordinate laws.

That's right. It has three; One for England and Wales, and separate ones for Northern Ireland, and for Scotland.

None of the three are collected in a single document, nor are English, Northern Irish, or Scottish constitutional laws superior to the "subordinate" laws which have non-constitutional roles.

That doesn't imply that any of these three jurisdictions lack a constitution, nor that their constitutions are not comprehensive; Just that these systems are much older than that of the USA, and pre-date the fashion for written constitutions with special legal status and extraordinary measures to limit amendments. An English constitutional law, like any other English law, can be modified by a simple majority Act of Parliament.

A constitutional law is just a law about how government works, as distinct from a law about what citizens and residents can or must do.

 

[Harry Bosch]

How is western economics ‘not working’?

We have a growing affordability problem and other problems, however

1. Water, electricity and sewage to every dwelling.
2. Plenty of food 24/7. An obesity problem not a starvation probblem.
3. Higher education open to most, upward mobility.
4. A political system where some do rise from8 the bottom to the top.
5. A wide range of clothing.
6. Personal transportation, aka cars. A national road system.
7. 24/7 entertainment.
8. Vacation and sick time.
9. Excess wealth that supports and entertainment class and academe class. Your favorite musicianor taking a class or degree in art, mythology or philosophy. You can take a degree in art history even thoogh it has no practical value.
0. A professional athlete class. Making money playing golf, and these days skateboarding and BMX bike racing.

This has never existed before, it is all new. So if it is not rowing, compared to what?

Marxist based stems provided little of the above.

Expecting any system to be all things to all people is an impossible ex[ection.

Those things are not unique to capitalist cultures

True. Non capitalist countries also have the above, but in far less quantities.

 

[Politesse]

9. Excess wealth that supports and entertainment class and academe class. Your favorite musicianor taking a class or degree in art, mythology or philosophy. You can take a degree in art history even thoogh it has no practical value.

That one seems like an especially bizarre inclusion on the list, considering the enormous pressure capitalist governments press against doing exactly this, to the point that many philosophy, classics, and art departments have been dismantled, or reduced to a pale shadow of what they once were. If anything, so-called "useless degrees" were far more at home during the mercantilist era, when social capital was more critical to the aristocracy than the direct management of investments. A humanities degree was an entirely acceptable focus for a young man of the 17th century, and it was still common for people of a certain class to take the Grand Tour as a prelude or capstone to their careers whether or not academic. Today, a business, legal. or political science degree is expected even of the very wealthy, and Latin or Greek are entirely optional electives. It may be allowed for a student to major in philosophy, and those who have money to burn may choose to, but it is never encouraged, and in some cases is not even permitted. Wisdom beyond immediate gain is becoming an endangered species even within the academic system. Not long ago, a member of the college council at my institution said aloud in a public meeting, "If not to prepare the students for a Healthy Workforce, what is the purpose of higher education at all?" The value of a citizen is synonymous with their value to an employer; that is a "Capitalist" ideology, not a Marxist one.