Should CEO's give up corperate jets?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by maxrule, Feb 13, 2009.

  1. #101 bkadoctaj, Feb 17, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 17, 2009
    Wait for aaronman to post in this thread again. Oh, mission already accomplished.

    Nah, but really, the change is happening. Marx felt it was inevitable. This was because it requires a spiritual evolution of the class consciousness into a
    human consciousness. This happens when humanity begins to face the contradictions of its existence. Have you noticed our unsustainable living? Have you noticed the hate crimes that occur most in the "free" countries? Have you noticed how monopolies stifle the creativity that kept capitalism alive and functioning smoothly at its beginning, when there were plenty of resources for the taking (from those who were using them more sustainably)? And for what man? Progress... Progress to what? Big numbers for the mighty dollar? Inflation? Not being able to buy food or go to school or afford medicinal aid? No the state isn't the answer... it's in the process of failing to provide all that it promised.

    Oh, and does the market care about you? What invisible hand is there anymore? As far as I know, it's all manipulated by the hand of those who print the money for the sake of buying real assets. Even if you live the paranoid life like aaronman, you see the truth in what I just said. Is this the life you'd be living if you could choose? Well, if not, why can't you choose?

    We need to update and humanize this vocabulary. A little more spirituality in politics perhaps?

    Who defines crime? Who has the right to now? You feel like your vote matters or something, aaronman? As for successful freeloading... haven't you seen it in our current globalizing world? It would also blow my mind if you denied that.

    Collective production to decline? Gasp... maybe we'd have less pinwheels! After all, this production rate is really sustainable!

    No reward for hard work? No need for it with all of our great technology, I would think. ???
  2. Such a movement will fail if not properly organized and any organization will be pointless if it doesn't have a strong leadership (Focus?). There will always be people who disagree no matter how right or wrong anyone is and a peaceful movement will not be able to convert everyone. So if I am not missing something (Or mistaken), the only option left is force. Sounds cheerful, huh?

    Lastly, what if communism is not the answer you are seeking? (Not saying capitalism is either) Part of being human is being fallible and that includes every aspect of your beliefs.
  3. Exactly. Who would define crime?
  4. Maybe restating myself, but, anyways...

    What if communism isn't the proper evolution?
  5. What is proper, and if you know, what if communism IS? We can play hypotheticals all day, it's just up to each one of us to decide how we're going to continue to live.

    I don't know. Right now it's the self-existent state. Impressive and indirect. Not frank and humane living. You can justify parts of what we've got if you want... but a part of you hurts deep down when you lie to yourself to see what you want to see.

    That state comes with ALL THIS.
  6. #106 Kasu, Feb 17, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 15, 2016
    Revolutions have happened in the past, it's not really a question of 'is it possible?', we've seen it happen, people can come together and the leadership exists. If not, we'll just keep trying until we get it right.

    Well, if everyone started freeloading, than their needs wouldn't be available to them, because they wouldn't have been produced. Garbage would pile up, water would be dirty, and everyone would be starving. Do you think that when power is placed within popular control, where everything is controlled by the participation of everyone, that people would let this happen? Do you think that people are idiots, and that they don't know what needs to be done? People know they have to work, because if they didn't then they would be living in horrible conditions.

    It's common sense, you don't need the threat of starvation and violence to get people to work.

    Society would be organized in such a way by the transitional socialist stage to effectively and democratically deal with all these problems. The people will be in control. People know what's best for themselves, their children, and their communities.

    There's no reward for hard work under capitalism. Under capitalism, you get paid the same poverty level wage no matter how productive you are, because of the wage-slavery. In socialism, hard work is rewarded entirely. Innovation would be rewarded with the product of innovation.

    If new technology is produced to make labor easier, society will utilize the new technology, install it where ever it can, and use it to make labour easier. The necessary amount of labour would decrease, and more leisure will be afforded to all. People won;'t just sit around with all that leisure, people are naturally adventurous, they would want to explore, create, invent, innovate, read, write. People are creative when they're in control over their own lives. In fact, culture and arts would be expanded at an unprecedented rate. Technologies would be created to benefit mankind, not for a profit.

    In fact, the profit-motive system actually stands in the way of technological process. Intellectual property and copyright laws stop innovation. Private ownership of the pharmaceutical industry blocks new cures for diseases to be utilized, because they aren't profitable in the long run. Under socialism, cures for diseases will be found to cure diseases, not for a profit, although, everyone who contributes will not go unrewarded.

    Everyone has their place in society, and society will make equal use of everyone and their talents, their dreams, and their potential. This is not a Utopia, but the result of the emancipation of labour, and the means of production and thus control over society, put under public control.

    Firstly, it will start by the public taking control over the state and establishing a dictatorship of the proletariat. This is not a dictatorship of a person or group of individuals, but rather a dictatorship of a class over another class, much like how the capitalists hold their dictatorship over us. During this period, society will be reorganized. Industries will be expropriated and put under public control. During this period, some basic transitional demands will be gradually put into place, for the transition to communism. Once the capitalists are effectively liquidated into the rest of society, the state will become useless and will gradually wither away, leaving a classless stateless society based on democratic control.
  7. What magic bullet is there that says communism is good and correct that I don't know of? What sure fire way do you have of implementing it? Who administrates? Can you trust them to administrate? How are criminals handled? What is a crime? What are the punishments? What if someone is unhappy with how things are run and wants out? Can people protest? What do you do when those protests are only going to achieve problems? Or what if there tactics are questionable? How are difference of opinions handled? Are people with differing opinion always wrong? I think going on would be pointless.

    You can't really expect everyone to cooperate and what happens when they don't, do you send them away? Kill them? Lock them up? Or let them continue to attack your personal paradise? Without knowing the answers to these communism fails to impress that it is natural evolution or even feasible.

  8. I also can't expect you to release your stereotyped understanding of what communism really is. I'll give you my take: it's not the label.

    Check out an old thread called "Was Marx Correct After All?" It would be great to expand on this discussion there.
  9. I agree with you here, they are a hinderence to a free market society and promote monopolies.

    Everything else you said... garbage. :D (jk)
  10. Could you elaborate on what you mean by "stereotyped understanding of what communism really is". A working system needs to be implemented, properly administrated and finally maintained. I fail to see how any of those conditions hold the least bit true at the current time nor do I see how they can become true in the any future other then the distant. Without these I see communism as already dead on its feat as an ideal.

  11. #111 Kasu, Feb 17, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 17, 2009
    And on innovation:

    Under capitalism, innovation is actually difficult, because you can't effectively get the means to innovate. An example of this is with my comrade's father, who's the project manager of a Nano-technology research company. They want to produce a nano-technology that would go into a persons blood stream, and kill cancer cells within the body. It would be a cure for cancer.

    Well, they tried going to several corporations to receive funding, but the corporations determined that new nano-technology to cure cancer would not be profitable for them in the long-run.

    And so, they took their request to the pentagon. The pentagon told them that they could care less about the technology's potential to cure cancer (and other diseases), but if they could make the technology kill braincells, they can get all the funding they could want.

    This is a classic example of how capitalism is actually standing in the way of innovation, and is inherently destructive. Under communism, what ever you need to innovate, be that supplies, the education, materials, or even some extra labour, society will provide those needs too you.

    There is no blue-print for communism, it's a theoretical system based on an objective understand of the structure of society. Society will be under the democratic control of the people. With the people in control, they know what needs to be done, and thus have the power to find solutions to such problems.

    Crime will already be lower under communism, besides the rare cases of psychologically troubled people. But even for those, society will make use of the psychologically impaired, letting them live in a safe productive environment where they can be happy and find their place. Rape and murder obviously can't be tolerated under any society, so they will be dealt with. Maybe rehabilitation resorts? Maybe labour camps. What ever the people decide.
  12. Does the average American know best? European? Etc.? If they don't how will anything be different then?

    Why will crime be lowered? Is greed going to disappear? Lust? Hate? Etc.?
  13. The average American has to dedicate his life to selling himself hourly and daily, producing products that aren't his, getting paid a small wage to keep him coming back, every day. People don't have time to read or educate themselves, but they are getting alienated. They aren't class conscious yet. When class consciousness reaches a level where revolution becomes possible, the common sense will exist enough to rationally plan communal aspects. These decisions aren't rocket science, people know what's best for them and their families.

    Why do people commit crimes? Why do they mug people, rob stores, and commit violent crimes? Because they're so alienated from the class system. In a classless society, there will be none of that. Why rob someone when your needs are already available to you? Such an action would have a negative backlash, because it's anti-social. Under a socialist system, anti-social actions won't be tolerated, and won't be necessary.
  14. #114 Gloom, Feb 18, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 18, 2009
    How about the people that have enough time to learn the facts yet don't do care to do the research? Or the countless others that know the facts yet ignore them and choose poorly?

    There will always be people wanting more then their needs, there will always be those that don't care about your values and will still follow their anti-social impulses and compulsions. For such a notion to be true all want needs to be eliminated and then we are starting to get to the point where suppression is the most logical (?) option. Also, doesn't motivation for self-improvement disappear along with want, that looks like a bit of a dead end, huh? :p
  15. Such arguments are the result of political and social demoralization, not theoretical insight.
  16. #116 Gloom, Feb 18, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 18, 2009
    Or valid questions/issues communism will be forced to eventually answer/address?
  17. You're questioning the effectiveness of people, like people are too stupid to know what needs to be done. But if people don't have the capacity to make such basic decisions, then should the threat of violence and starvation be used? Have some faith in humanity, or we might as well not strive for a better tomorrow.
  18. To be percise I am questioning the effectiveness of the system, not people.
  19. The system will be based on the people, not the other way around.
  20. Communism isn't an ideal, it's a belief. Ideals have to meet reality at some point.

    Communism isn't a top-down system. I hope you weren't thinking it was. It is a spontaneous expression of the will of the people. If you don't believe in such a thing, I can see why my view of communism doesn't make sense to you.

Share This Page