Marxism

[Loren Pechtel]

Bloomsburg(financial)
BBC
France 24
NHK Japan
ABC
CBS
NBC
NPR
PBS

You've convinced me! I need to stop reading actual books and just watch the news. Dan Rather knows what's goin' on.

Books are good--but but books are also bad. You can't learn much about what's going on in the world from books because they're out of date. They have too long a lag time to be useful for things like looking at the overproduction mess in China.

 

[Politesse]

Bloomsburg(financial)
BBC
France 24
NHK Japan
ABC
CBS
NBC
NPR
PBS

You've convinced me! I need to stop reading actual books and just watch the news. Dan Rather knows what's goin' on.

Books are good--but but books are also bad. You can't learn much about what's going on in the world from books because they're out of date. They have too long a lag time to be useful for things like looking at the overproduction mess in China.

Yeah dude, fuckin' no shit. Believe it or not, I do in fact read the news as well. What I do not do is only read the daily news, and form my entire worldview based on heavily sanitized, under-researched half-considered national propaganda.

 

[Elixir]

Iceland is number one and they have us beat by 400 to 500 years

Oh yeah? One little weekend invasion will fix that! Our boys could use the training.

 

[bilby]

Don't be such a Debbie Downer. We once split our Republic in two, killed 600,000 people and got back together, so I wouldn't worry too much about today's factionalism.

As it is, the United States hold second place on this planet for the longest continuous system of government. Iceland is number one and they have us beat by 400 to 500 years.

What the heck are you on about? Iceland was ruled by Denmark until WW1; it was an independent constitutional monarchy until WW2; then it was conquered by Britain to preempt a German invasion; then it was occupied by Canada; then it was occupied by the US; and in 1944 it abolished the monarchy and adopted its current system.

Okay, that makes us Number One.

"Longest continuous system of government" seems like an odd title for a democracy (or any citizen thereof) to aspire to.

The longest lived regimes are generally dictatorial shitholes.

Democracies are supposed to constantly adapt, as their circumstances (and the aggregate opinions of their citizens about how to address those circumstances) change.

 

[Bomb#20]

Don't be such a Debbie Downer. We once split our Republic in two, killed 600,000 people and got back together, so I wouldn't worry too much about today's factionalism.

As it is, the United States hold second place on this planet for the longest continuous system of government. Iceland is number one and they have us beat by 400 to 500 years.

What the heck are you on about? Iceland was ruled by Denmark until WW1; it was an independent constitutional monarchy until WW2; then it was conquered by Britain to preempt a German invasion; then it was occupied by Canada; then it was occupied by the US; and in 1944 it abolished the monarchy and adopted its current system.

Okay, that makes us Number One.

San Marino has us beat: 1600.

 

[No Robots]

Mankind is evolving from anti-social to pro-social existence. This requires discipline. As Waton puts it:

How can egoistic and anti-social individuals be converted into pro-social persons? Only through dictatorship. Consider again the three revolutions and their effects upon the people. The Cromwell regime was a dictatorship, yet it trained and disciplined the English people towards a pro-social state. The result is that the English people are now far more pro-social than they were before the Cromwell regime. Again, the Jacobine regime was a severe dictatorship; but it made the French people more pro-social. The Stalin regime is a terrible dictatorship, but the result will be that the Russian people will become pro-social.

Eventually, people will internalize the requisite pro-social discipline and external compulsion will no longer be necessary. "I will put My law in their minds and inscribe it on their hearts."

 

[DBT]

That assumes that everyone is going to be rational, no psychopaths, no sociopaths, no selfishness, no one acting unreasonably....?

 

[No Robots]

^Yup. Something to work toward.

 

[DBT]

^Yup. Something to work toward.

How do you work toward eliminating physical conditions, where the brain of a sociopath is literally wired differently, with no possibility of feeling empathy or remorse?

Diversity ensures that people think differently. You can ask ten different people the same question and get ten different answers. For instance, how many of those who are asked are going to agree on matter of politics, religion, ideology?

 

[No Robots]

^There are externally imposed constraints on individual behavior, eg. law. Cultivating internal discipline is just that, a question of cultivation and discipleship. At present, there are few who are able to overcome ignorance, prejudice, superstition and narrow self-interest. These few need to band together and establish themselves as a community committed to the life of reason and intellect. The expectation is that this community will grow to ultimately encompass the whole of mankind. Marxism provides the framework for this community. Marxism is itself the fruit of a long and arduous intellectual development that extends from the Bible to Spinoza and Hegel. Constantin Brunner, Harry Waton and Yehuda Ashlag are three early twentieth century thinkers whose work further advanced this cause. There are many more recent contributors to this effort.

 

[Bronzeage]

Don't be such a Debbie Downer. We once split our Republic in two, killed 600,000 people and got back together, so I wouldn't worry too much about today's factionalism.

As it is, the United States hold second place on this planet for the longest continuous system of government. Iceland is number one and they have us beat by 400 to 500 years.

What the heck are you on about? Iceland was ruled by Denmark until WW1; it was an independent constitutional monarchy until WW2; then it was conquered by Britain to preempt a German invasion; then it was occupied by Canada; then it was occupied by the US; and in 1944 it abolished the monarchy and adopted its current system.

Okay, that makes us Number One.

"Longest continuous system of government" seems like an odd title for a democracy (or any citizen thereof) to aspire to.

The longest lived regimes are generally dictatorial shitholes.

Democracies are supposed to constantly adapt, as their circumstances (and the aggregate opinions of their citizens about how to address those circumstances) change.

It's not an aspiration, it's an observation. I think the US has done a pretty fair job of adapting and aggregating over the past 250 years and we still have a President, a Congress, and a Supreme Court.

 

[Bronzeage]

Don't be such a Debbie Downer. We once split our Republic in two, killed 600,000 people and got back together, so I wouldn't worry too much about today's factionalism.

As it is, the United States hold second place on this planet for the longest continuous system of government. Iceland is number one and they have us beat by 400 to 500 years.

What the heck are you on about? Iceland was ruled by Denmark until WW1; it was an independent constitutional monarchy until WW2; then it was conquered by Britain to preempt a German invasion; then it was occupied by Canada; then it was occupied by the US; and in 1944 it abolished the monarchy and adopted its current system.

Okay, that makes us Number One.

San Marino has us beat: 1600.

Back to second place.

 

[Bomb#20]

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?

 

[Bomb#20]

Mankind is evolving from anti-social to pro-social existence. This requires discipline. As Waton puts it:

How can egoistic and anti-social individuals be converted into pro-social persons? Only through dictatorship. Consider again the three revolutions and their effects upon the people. The Cromwell regime was a dictatorship, yet it trained and disciplined the English people towards a pro-social state. The result is that the English people are now far more pro-social than they were before the Cromwell regime. Again, the Jacobine regime was a severe dictatorship; but it made the French people more pro-social. The Stalin regime is a terrible dictatorship, but the result will be that the Russian people will become pro-social.

Eventually, people will internalize the requisite pro-social discipline and external compulsion will no longer be necessary. "I will put My law in their minds and inscribe it on their hearts."

"He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother."

 

[DBT]

^There are externally imposed constraints on individual behavior, eg. law. Cultivating internal discipline is just that, a question of cultivation and discipleship. At present, there are few who are able to overcome ignorance, prejudice, superstition and narrow self-interest. These few need to band together and establish themselves as a community committed to the life of reason and intellect. The expectation is that this community will grow to ultimately encompass the whole of mankind. Marxism provides the framework for this community. Marxism is itself the fruit of a long and arduous intellectual development that extends from the Bible to Spinoza and Hegel. Constantin Brunner, Harry Waton and Yehuda Ashlag are three early twentieth century thinkers whose work further advanced this cause. There are many more recent contributors to this effort.

There have always been externally imposed constraints in the form of laws and treaties, contracts and agreements, yet we have people acting in their own interest to the detriment of others, and given the diversity in thought and belief that we have, creating division and conflict.

 

[No Robots]

There have always been externally imposed constraints in the form of laws and treaties, contracts and agreements, yet we have people acting in their own interest to the detriment of others, and given the diversity in thought and belief that we have, creating division and conflict.

The overall trend of history is toward ever greater integration and cooperation: families to clans to bands to tribes to nations to supernations. This development is always accomplished in spite of violent resistance. Until now, the constraints on behavior have been generally imposed externally. The next phase is the acquistion of internally imposed constraint.

 

[steve_bank]

Bloomsburg(financial)
BBC
France 24
NHK Japan
ABC
CBS
NBC
NPR
PBS

You've convinced me! I need to stop reading actual books and just watch the news. Dan Rather knows what's goin' on.

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..

China arbitray declared international waters Chinese. They have shot at Philippine fishing boats and claimed a Japanese island as Chinese.


Wjhen China fiud mineral resources in Tibet it sexed control. It annex Indian land as a transportation corridor/. China now selects the Dali Lama.

China is engaged in militarism. It but an artificial island, Oil and other resources.

In the news Australia and China are strengthening militray cooperation to counter China.

As you are well read on China I assume you know who Sun Yat Sen was? The Chinese revolution, Chag Kai Shek and how the situation with Taiwan came to be? The actual post war legal status of Taiwan?

The economic importance of Taiwan and why we might go tp war with China over it?

On what do you base your views on Marxism, western economics, and China?

Are you Marxist or just an extreme ideological repressive?

If you have a retirement plan the Chinese economy and potential militray conflict with China is very much important if you pan to have a retrenchment.

It is not idle academic debate.

Feel free to elaborate your views on China, after all we are all friends here.

To the OP would you ay are the vestigial remains of Marxism in China today? A benefit or hindrance.

NHK covers Indo-Pacific issues.

 

[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.

 

[lostone]

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.

 

[Politesse]

Both have a terrible record.

Expecting an economic ideology to produce a stable and happy society by itself is a dubious proposition at the outset.