Forum Post: read marx people...christ sakes.
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 3, 2011, 9:48 p.m. EST by hss
(9)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
It's more relevant to the world's situation than ANYTHING being said here. I'm worried about you guys.
i have read marx. no its not that relevant.
sorry, i do know exactly what feudalism is. You trying to talk about its main features and then say that other features of feudalism are not the feudalism is silly. The dominant or single most relevant point is land ownership, certainly, but there are other features of feudalism, one of which is most certainly taxes, and to the point, by definition taxation as such begins in feudal systems. It is remarkably futile and silly to argue with me. It would be wiser to stop and take your opportunity to chat with the DJIN. capitalism is ALSO a system which has NEVER existed.
the core issues; 1. Corporate Personhood. 2. Caste Warfare; they started it. 3. Its legal to lie to the USA public. 4. They are OUR airwaves. They should be used for WETHEPEOPLE not leased by the government to corporations. Put Local colleges in charge of all the media. Arrest and seize all mass media devices and then give those devices straight out to the local colleges, including the land they sit on. We need education public media; not legalized lying and propaganda wars against the people. 5. Education reform. Everyones being kept stupid and ignorant on purpose in school and repugnicons want to argue about how to pay or punish teachers. We need child centered education reform, not a con scam to privatize education and thus score all our children for corporate zombotification. 6. Free market system. Not slave market system. Not caste market system. Not Caste warfare market system. Not rigged Casino. Not making something off of nothing and making bubbles to grease a gravy train either. Free market system. We must have one of those. Its time to have one of those. We have NEVER YET had one of those. 7. Realistic regulation of the government to regulate and control corporations so that what they do is fair and just and ethical and under control instead of a parade of unleashed godzillas turning the masses into to toe jam. 8. Real and direct representation, including no more lobbying, and including an evolutionary use of the internet with organized forums and wikis replacing the old style of congressional/ mayoral office.
"Right, but that still doesn't preclude taxation, which is in fact necessary to regulate the value of money"
nope. taxation period of any kind is merely and only a means to the end of creating a caste system. And even deeper, taxation dynamically entropizes a system, so its not only not necessary to regulate money, its the single largest entropic contributor to the system. The ONLY reason why we pay taxes is thats the feudal system; the idea that we pay anything remotely approaching the same thing or fair to what the rich pay is preposterous. The whole point of taxes is to distribute wealth from the poor to the rich. period.
gawdoftruth (Santa Barbara, CA) 1 points 0 seconds ago
"the end goal product should be that every small community takes care of its own. Any federal system is a problem definition of something requiring more serious attention to solve. long term social programs managed by nation sized meta entities is a disaster not only socially and civilly but to the people who get third rate borg social services. A well functioning system does not need a welfare system, it only has a highly evolved net which catches people and only involves less than one percent of the population at any given time, not punishing but rehabing and educating folks. Until such time as that end goal is achieved, no hand outs is a paradox... you have to spend time and thus money in order to fix the problems till their fixed past needing time or money."
"Why aren't u in office???"
aspergers syndrome. you want to run,? i can ghost write your platform? :)
↥
"Understood we need more ideas then politicians anyway. The fixes are so simple but so difficult to get implemented."
↧ gawdoftruth (Santa Barbara, CA) 1 points 0 seconds ago
i'm running for chief of staff. bit early to announce yet since i have no clue whos running on my ticket for president?
http://forums.keller2012.com/index.php i created this forum org structure. but scott keller turned out to be an idiot.
your still missing the point. your playing with math. your right. its something more like the 99.99 percent. There are 4000 or 100,000 persons depending on wether we are talking the inner or outer circle of oligarchs keeping the rest of us trapped in a "capitalism" Hotel California con scam. While you can climb upward from the bottom there are increasingly more powerful glass cielings. And on fact one of the effects of the recent bush era caste war changes is that the people who imagined themselves to be in the inside are amongst those that are losing it all. The real question is not how YOU define it. The real question is; as a system org structure, how does it operate? Thats 100 thousand peeps keeping 3 million peeps as cattle.
Don't listen to GawdOfTruth, this idiot argued with me about socialism and said he doesn't want socialism but a democracy where everyone collectively works together for the common good....uh HELLO...lmfaoo
egalitarian democracy is fundamentally different from socialism, in the end people will of course over all end up listening to me and disregarding you.
egalitarian? sounds wonderful.
"capitalism is ALSO a system which has NEVER existed." so true. but i am inclined to believe that a laissez-faire climate would be ideal for a truly free market.
i don't know what you mean by that. Somehow i don't think we agree there.
laissez-faire means free of state intervention. what i think most people don't realize is that all the rules & regulations proposed by the far left actually benefit BIG businesses exponentially more than SMALL ones.
yeah, the problem with that is that the only way to prevent corporate abuse is to have strong rules and regulations.
unfortunately, the 'strong rules and regulations', generally speaking, only end up helping BIG business and thus BIG government. those rules & regulations make it easier for businesses to exercise monopolies. rules & regulations are NOT ever going to create a free market, and a free market is crucial to a free society.
I'm sorry, but thats simply backwards; fighting for corporate oligarchy to have a free hand. corporate oligarchy is the problem, excessive corporate powers and abuse are the problem, deregulation is the problem.
GRanted we do need to cut out 99 percent of the old rules and replace them with something 100 times shorter, simpler, and more ethical and straight forward.
Your idea of what will or will not make a free market is ludicrous. without such rules and regulations it will always be a slave market. inequalities will lead to oligarchy. maybe you should study up on the iron rule of oligarchies.
if 'strong rules and regulations' enforced by the state prevented corporate abuse... it wouldn't exist...
true that.
it doesn't ring relevant? yet we currently having a struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat?
how relevant is it? will it make any difference? will it offer any solutions? your historical contexts is great for you to understand and merely complicates my job. Its not relevant and it has no serious solutions for us. we need science, not a dead ideology to lead us here. If you find some insight there, great, thats something to hold on to and keep to yourself. the rest of us are not going to read marx when we should be reading sociology and civil engineering textbooks.
Historical contexts are vital in understanding what is going on today. I feel he did point out the problems we face today and why. Yet we still accept that same system he challenges in his works, the system that continues to alienate us. So in order to conjure up a solution we need to get to the basis of the problem and that is what Marx points out.
game theory points it out better. sociology points it out better. Systems theory points it out better. you can only think marx is relevant if you are stuck in a marx ideology rut and have not read the relevant sciences.
Actually Marx is read in both sociology and anthropology and his works contribute to a lot of the social sciences today. Many scholars as Marx stress the Division of Labor and the exploitation and alienation that follow it. I am not stuck in a Marx ideology I just feel people downplay his ideology.
i'm not arguing that. lets have it in the class room not from a marxist missionary. Its relevant where it is, and so if you know that then you should be preaching to get to sociology textbooks- not marx. See the difference.
Its downplayed for a reason,. its ideology. not science. its dangerous and half mad.
Would you like empirical data proving this ideology? I am sure our government will be more than happy to fund research against them.
you can use empirical methods to show that about 20 percent of it is right and empirical methods to show that about 30 percent of it is wrong and the rest of it is not subject to empirical analysis. About the same as with Ron Paul. Half genius, half insane, yes, brilliant, no, not worth diving into for people to get educated in this movement, not a solution, not going to help get the work done.. just more noise and distractions compared to actual science textbooks. in terms of simple ratio, marx is wrong more often then he is right, so theres not a lot of point in even going there.
Marx can be wrong in some but he is right in other. Doesn't mean we should disregard the right because of the wrong.
we should disregard it ALL because its NOISE compared to SIGNAL. marxism is an IDEOLOGY not a SCIENCE.
SCIENCE is driven by IDEOLOGY. There is not one SCIENCE that is not THEORETICAL driven. If there is, please enlighten me.
your again missing the point. marxism is merely an ideology. sociology and game theory and systems theory are all a million times more relevant and a million times more sane.
marxism is a mental cage. we are not interested in marxism, we will not study it and we frankly are annoyed that we have to keep batting away marxist BS. No. We are not marxist, we are not interested in marxism and we are not going to read marxist materials when the aforementioned textbooks are a million times more relevant and important. DROP IT, and try to go read some textbooks yourself. or etc.
I've read enough kind Sir... I just wonder why is Marx & Weber under Foundations of German Social Theory. Silly scholars they made a mistake in putting them under a Science.
everything has a time and place, everything in its time and place, in season, in order, ...
more importantly, 99 percent of the population have a negative knee kerk reaction, theres nothing in marxism so important that we need to go against that problem. talking about marx is just caste war stupidity, because you are really only serving the corporate oligarchy by promoting a non solution rebel without a clue ideology- not a science centered problem solving process.
Agreed. Everything that Marx wrote in the 19c rings true today. Doesn't that tells us something?
that we should all dress in high collared jackets and fight with muskets? agreed.
If you take the theoretical basis of his work then you'll understand. Until then we fight with muskets.
the theoretical basis of his work was that he felt the people were tired of getting shafted. And, he was right. However, that doesn't mean that his system worked. The problem with governing people is (suprise) people, and until that problem is solved...hopefully not for a long time...you can have all the idealistic arguments you want but the system will STILL not function as intended.
So he had an Utopian idea that doesn't work out too well in practice. Great in theory horrible in practice. He at least addressed where is the root of our class struggle. We take it from there.
...so you're staging a revolution based on an idea that's "Horrible in practise"? what's the end game here? If your inspiration is admittedly broken shouldn't you find a new one before you bet the farm on it?
History shows us that Communism has failed. (not in Cuba though, something we really don't hear much about) but anyways... Socialism is a "mild" form of Communism regardless of anyone that tries to tell me contrary. But why every time Communism is mentioned is like mentioning the Devil. The ideals are amazing but how can we put this into practice is the question. & to add, The Cuban Revolution didn't start because they wanted Communism but because they wanted change.
communism- and socialism-without a healthy (yes I said healthy) dose of capitalism doesn't work because people are people. The ideals aren't amazing "everyone get's the same, because of everyone's equal." But, and I say this in the most un-elitist way possible, not everyone is equal. A engineer spends nearly a decade getting fully educated, a doctor even more. Should they be paid the same as a janitor? Not saying the janitor is less of a person, but they should not be compensated. And without the promise of a greater reward, what possible motive is there for people to excel and strive to be better? You can talk about altruism all you want but at the end of the day people want a tangible reward for hard work, and a hug and a happy feeling doesn't cut it.
Yes, there needs to be a limit or wealth disparity, and there needs to be a safety net for the troubled and downtrodden, and the wealthy should pay the largest chunk of the support. but do not tell me the ideas behind communism are fantastic, because they simply are not
I am not here to say "hey let's repeat history and fail again". All I said is that ideally people should be granted food, clothing, shelter, and health. Basic necessities. Compensation is one thing and greed is another and I feel capitalism runs in greed. So I still do stand corrected, communism has great ideals.
that's charity and human kindness, those aren't a political ideology, they're human traits. Communism is economics, and shoddy economics at that.
Charity? Human kindness? One person doesn't have more right than the other to have these things. It should be a given because people have the right to labor, make clothes, grow food, and build homes but it is up to charity for them to gain access to any of those things?? Communism in its "economics" guarantees a lot of this. Last time I checked it is social and political not just pure economics.
So communism isn't a dirty word but charity is?
First of all, nobody has the "right to labour"; if you have a skill, it is your job to market it and find an application for it. But you're right, people need shelter and food. How much did you donate last year again? Communism if anything relies MORE on human kindness and charity, because my giving everybody the same thing regardless of skill level or their contribution it makes an awfully tempting target for corruption and theft. You're a doctor, you spent your entire early adulthood training only to discover that you could've saved yourself the time and become a factor worker.
How easy would it be to start charging more under the table because society "owes" you a debt for your services?
Any system involving humans must work within human nature and communism, for all it's idealism, makes it easier than any for our inner demons to shout out our better angels.
Do people become Doctors to make money or to actually save lives? & most people can't market their "skills" because the "skills" they do have are only applicable to what is called "unskilled" labor. "Unskilled" labor that doesn't even pay enough for the expenses of rent, food, etc. But how do you gain these "skills" when you aren't even given the opportunity to gain them? Education? Who has access to education? There's so much in play, we can't forget the many forces that work to perpetrate inequalities.
people go into med school to save lives they STAY IN IT because they know they'll be well compensated for it. That's human nature. And i'll have you know I'm putting myself through university by paying for it. Through, y'know, a unskilled labour job. At which point me and my engineering degree are going to make an actual contribution to society.
Well pat yourself on the back and be happy of your circumstances that not many people have.
Don't mean to sound like a jerk. Just that people don't wake up one day and say "hey let me not go to college and not get a better job". There's only so much that is available to (certain) people.
Listen, the education system in the states is fucked to hell and back again, I'll grant you that. However, the point I've been trying to make is that communism and socialism are not the social panacea that a lot of people seem to assume they are. That's all, Imhotep out.
I still believe some aspects of it should be used to fix our political/social/economic climate of today. We are always doomed to repeat history because we never study it. Communism didn't work in the past, and capitalism damn sure is not working now. Now we await the new, not the already tried.
No, in an abusive relationship first you determine that you're upset enough to do something about it (gathering of like minded people in OWC), then get the hell out and determine your future from there (gathering of ideas at OWC). There will be an eventual stand to spread around but at the moment it's a gathering of will and ideas.
but you don't move out if you don't have anywhere else to stay. All I'm sezzing is don't burn down the farm until you have somewhere else to put the cattle.
That's agreed, there's no burning of anything going on at the moment. There will be a stand, give it time to form.
Marx is a genius and his words are true. Don't confuse marxism with Soviet and Chinese Fascism
your again missing the point. marxism is merely an ideology. sociology and game theory and systems theory are all a million times more relevant and a million times more sane.
marxism is a mental cage. we are not interested in marxism, we will not study it and we frankly are annoyed that we have to keep batting away marxist BS. No. We are not marxist, we are not interested in marxism and we are not going to read marxist materials when the aforementioned textbooks are a million times more relevant and important. DROP IT, and try to go read some textbooks yourself. or etc.
Followers of Marx killed over 100,000 million people in one century. I am really excited about your plan.
Marx can be wrong in some but he is right in other. Doesn't mean we should disregard the right because of the wrong. reply permalink ↥ ↧ gawdoftruth (Santa Barbara, CA) 1 points 0 seconds ago
we should disregard it ALL because its NOISE compared to SIGNAL. marxism is an IDEOLOGY not a SCIENCE. reply permalink edit delete ↥ ↧ gawdoftruth (Santa Barbara, CA) 1 points 0 seconds ago
more importantly, 99 percent of the population have a negative knee kerk reaction, theres nothing in marxism so important that we need to go against that problem. talking about marx is just caste war stupidity, because you are really only serving the corporate oligarchy by promoting a non solution rebel without a clue ideology- not a science centered problem solving process. reply permalink edit delete
I'm almost done reading "Das Kapital" part one. My view is that Marx was right about capitalism, but wrong about socialism. That is to say, he was right to predict that capitalism would inevitably collapse under its own contradictions. But my views about the system that should replace it are somewhat different. I think a market economy is the best system for distributing goods and services, as long as the benefits of socially produced wealth(known as economic rent) are captured for public use rather than private gain.
yup. You're a nutbar. Congratulations.
Check the link after the edit mark on this page for a working list of goals http://occupywallst.org/forum/first-official-release-from-occupy-wall-street/
and this Warning from the orignal Tea Party before it got hijacked http://occupywallst.org/forum/an-open-letter-and-warning-from-a-former-tea-party/