Just curious. Anybody still think that this system

[socialist_n_TN]

can be "reformed" into working for the rest of us?

[mike_c]

1. no, but I haven't thought so for some time....

eom

[Selatius]

2. That notion died with John F. Kennedy.

That's my fear. You can't pass real reform without a threat hanging over your head. That's not a Republic but a tyranny.

[villager]

4. That's for goddamned sure. And was underscored when they got King and RFK shortly after

Everyone knew we weren't a "Democracy" anymore after that.

Most have spent the last few decades anesthetizing that fact away, or whistling past the graveyard.

But the graveyard can't be ignored, now.

[RKP5637]

6. Yep, they murder the good people and blame it on others. n/t

[zappaman]

71. Who is "they"? n/t

[knowbody0]

3. we need to reboot the whole damn thing

socialized capitalism?

[white_wolf]

9. Just curious, what would "socialized capitalism" look like? n/t

[riderinthestorm]

22. Scandinavia? nt

[knowbody0]

28. greed would be penalized

profit sharing with employees, etc. etc.

[TBF]

16. Won't work ... and it's not because of the socialism.

Capitalism by definition put profits ahead of everything else. That is exactly what we need to reverse.

[knowbody0]

30. well, I am of the opinion

that a moral code could be implemented, with employees as shareholders and responsibilities to the community. the greater good?

[socialist_n_TN]

33. "the greater good?" In a capitalist system???

There's no such thing. Profit is ALL that matters in the capitalist system.

[deadinsider]

44. Which necessitates competition...

...thus we have one of the major Contradictions of Capitalism: the quasi-natural concentration of wealth.

Subsequently, it results in a crisis, followed by another, and another, until an end point in which the system is moribund and cannot be revived by all the old tricks. The system implodes because the fix to each crisis ironically deploys more of the same: systemic contradictions within capitalism itself.

Also, regulation within the capitalist system will last for a time, but the inevitable concentration of wealth becomes a concentration of political power. The co-opted political system then serves the capitalists to de-regulate and undo past social gains.

These are some of the reasons why Marx felt that the current relations of production fit a dialectic model: it is inevitable that it collapse and be replaced.

I don't believe he had everything right (but I'm still quite a novice regarding his thought), but I do believe he saw something akin to historical truth regarding socio-economics. His theories may not fit exactly within the context of the 21st century, but I can hardly say he was even slightly wrong rather than slightly right.

[socialist_n_TN]

55. Well it sounds like you got a pretty solid grasp on

the basics of Marx with your post here. Of course, I don't consider myself a big time theorist either. :)

As to your last paragraph, the longer this goes on, the more correct he shows himself to be. Even during the Interregum when capitalism was "regulated" the Marxists I knew said it was just a temporary thing historically.

The capitalist apologists fav line about Marxism when I was a kid was something along the lines of, "See Marx was wrong. He didn't see the rise of REGULATED capitalism through the efforts of the unions." But of course he did, maybe not the specific types of regulation that was enacted, but he did anticipate the patchwork that tried to hold the Frankenstein's monster together at all costs. He also anticipated this patchwork's eventual failure.

I honestly see him being more and more correct the longer I live.

[deadinsider]

59. Another thing that is of utmost importance to the naysayers...

Marx emphasized that capitalism must be 'ripe' in order for any change to be permanent or authentic. I have read that he worried that a revolution before the time was right may lead to catastrophic failure. Lenin also shared this view at the outset of the Russian Revolution.

I believe this insight, and accompanying anxiety on his part, can be related to another of his crisis of capitalism concepts: technology. (Note: I will fail to mention here his other concern: how to get the different classes to join forces against the ruling elite).

Technology is progressive and naturally increases the economies of scale, which then increases unemployment, which then has a negative effect on menial income. However, technology must have an end-point, the 'ripening' aspect (IMO): it must become so pervasive and so efficient as to replace a majority of labor leading to another crisis concept (I'm guessing its the summation of Marxist thought):

Namely, the tendency of the rate of profit to fall which creates the ever more aggressive business cycles of booms and busts.

1. First there is a quasi-natural concentration of wealth due to the ability to produce more at a cheaper cost due to technology.
2. Next there is high unemployment as human labor is usurped by more efficient forms of technology. This also alienates workers from their crafts and careers as they become obsolete.
3. Consequently there arises a decrease in aggregate demand (the rate of profit to fall) due to a surplus of labor i.e. stagnating wages and unemployment.

I've also read critiques that suggest he perilously omitted any mention of the power of nationalism i.e. patriotism as a means to divide the masses. But I feel that is not true as he expounded upon the socioeconomic superstructure upon many occasions. In my mind, this implicitly encompasses racism, cultural-ism, and nationalism as a useful means of division.

The beginning of my understanding was reading "The Iron Heel" by Jack London. That opened my eyes and it is only lately that I'm attempting to become an academic of his thought albeit through self-taught.

[JanMichael]

88. Good thought out post. Thank you.

"Iron Heel" was also a big influence on me as well.

[apocalypsehow]

83. Hmmm...this post stirs the misty fog of memory of OP's past....

...Welcome ba-, errrr, I mean, to DU.

[deadinsider]

93. Thanks comrade

You're post is a bit cryptic to me. I'm assuming you think that I posted under another name or something.

Or you may have run into some of my posts a month or so ago. I'm usually commenting on threads where I see with the socialism-communism vs capitalism angle.

d.i.

[RKP5637]

5. It would be great, but I don't see how it will happen. The cornered money, such

huge amounts, the global money cartel, and the bribed politicians, and R = D for the most part, I can't see how it will be changed significantly. None are going to give up their greed, control and mega-money.

And, I still think a lot of Americans still don't get what's going on ... and on top of that much of MSM is nothing but propaganda. And a dumbed down populace.

It would take an extremely strong charismatic leader and the masses really getting engaged into what is going on ... sadly many Americans IMO are naive and the propaganda is soooo intense.

Possibly a major great depression might do it, sadly.

[socialist_n_TN]

8. "Possibly a major great depression might do it..."

Stay tuned. The crises of capitalism are getting bigger and bigger as it reaches it's culmination and eventual collapse.

[RKP5637]

20. Looking back in history, and I don't claim to be an expert ... but most change to

me has not come about benevolently. People IMO do not do things good/bad for the benefit of society unless it affects them directly. Now, not all people are that way, but IMO a good many are ... some people in positions of power know what is going on is horribly wrong, but nothing happens for a multitude of reasons ...

In this case, IMO, nothing will happen until financial impact severely hits the very monied. Yes, I think that is coming too, a major great depression. The capitalistic model as it currently stands is seriously flawed IMO. None will touch it because greed, money, politics and power are blended in today's US into a toxic mix.

[white_wolf]

7. Possibly, with the threat of revolution hanging over the heads of the elites.

But once we go that far, why bother with mere reform that will eventually be undone? I could see the point of reform if it was as easy as electing people, but it isn't that easy. Any reform will have to be fought for, so why stop at reform?

[socialist_n_TN]

11. I agree. If we make the mistake of the 30s again

our grandchildren (in your case your children :)) will be fighting this all over again. This time we have to smash it and institute a true worker's democracy.

[Yupster]

47. That is one of the problems with revolutions

They tend to get more radical each round.

If the Russians stopped at one Karensky might have put together a democracy, but then another revolution six months later kicked out Karensky and the communists took over and the bayonets came out.

Same thing with the French Revolution. After a while it was the revolutionaries sending themselves to the guillotine.

Both cases ended with dictatorship.

Revolutions are a lot easier to start than they are to controll.

[socialist_n_TN]

56. And who brought out the bayonets after the October

Revolution? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't the Bolsheviks.

[socialist_n_TN]

85. And another thing. The Bolsheviks came to power

in October BECAUSE Kerensky and his cohorts in the Kadets, Decembrists, Mensheviks and Right Social Revolutionaries wouldn't heed the masses cries for "Bread, Land, and Peace". The Bolshies did and the PEOPLE put them into power.

[Zorra]

10. N.F.W. nt

[socialist_n_TN]

12. I guess I'm stupit tonight Z.......

N.F.W.?

[white_wolf]

13. I'm just guess here, but: No Fucking Way.

[Zorra]

14. No f'ing way.

Not your fault, bro...I'm having some clarity issues lately.
:hi:

[socialist_n_TN]

17. Clarity issues huh?

We probably shouldn't go there. I agree with your sentiment BTW. Can I start calling you comrade yet, sis? :)

[Zorra]

50. Absolutely right, we probably shouldn't go there,

and I'm not sure if I am ready for comrade yet, but after witnessing the past 11 years of rampant insane destructive laissez faire capitalism I'm getting very close. Haven't yet been able to consolidate ideas and concepts for a transition into a workable socialist model that efficiently serves collectively yet still allows for reasonable individual liberty and opportunity at the same time, and that also includes some type of failsafe mechanism to prevent state totalitarianism. I believe OWS is spawning a rEvolution that will eventually lead to that awesome new and improved system most of us are dreaming of and hoping for.

The current system is RIP-FUBAR. Watching it play out as it regresses would almost be funny if it wasn't so insidiously toxic to all forms of life.

Anyway, we either change it or the free market capitalists will definitely somehow kill us all off relatively soon as a consequence of their blind unbridled greed.

So, if you believe this headspace puts me in the comrade sphere, then by all means feel free to call me comrade.
;-)

[socialist_n_TN]

53. Probably not yet comrade-to-be.....

:) However as I've said often the best recruiters for Marxism are the capitalists. I'm patient, so we've got time!

I personally would like to see a nationwide council, even if unofficially elected by the GAs of the Occupy movement, transparently and vigorously debate the transition to a socialist economic structure. God knows, the Stalinists made enough mistakes to blacken the name of Marx for a few generations. And yes, even Trotsky made some. It's a VERY complicated situation, but there should be enough historians and theorists out there to be able to take on the project and figure out exactly HOW to avoid the mistakes of the past. We are smart animals after all.

One way that I've toyed with to avoid the rise of the bureaucracy would be to rotate the heads of the bureaus every few months or years. You could also rotate the heads of the planning commissions. That would lower the danger of one person gaining too much power over a long term. Not eliminate the danger perhaps, but lower it.

ON a tangent, the complication of this situation is why I immediately turn off to any posts that ask for SPECIFICS of how a socialist system would work, usually from doubters. How are you supposed to sum up an entire economic system in an internet post?

[white_wolf]

54. In regards to your last sentence. To paraphrase Marx

It is not our job to write cookbooks for chefs of the future. As to you comment on the capitalist being the best recruiters you are right. I voted for Obama in 08 and was an FDR-style liberal, but now the capitalist have convinced me that FDR type reforms are dead and even if you bring them back they will be removed. So why not fight to end the cycle?

[Zorra]

63. "How to avoid the mistakes of the past"

Yep, and avoiding as many future mistakes as possible as well.

There are a lot of compassionate, kind, insightful, perceptive, intelligent, dedicated, and righteous freedom loving and wise people involved in OWS that genuinely want to change things democratically to make this world a much kinder and more humane place for the vast majority of people and other life on the planet.

That's the type of leadership We the 99% need and must always be to be successful.

I'm *ecstatically* humbled by the people and experiences I've had with OWS so far, particularly by these amazing dedicated younger folks that are teaching me what democracy really is and how democracy really works in real time. How'd they get so damn smart?
:bounce:

[white_wolf]

64. We were raised in the Clinton and Bush years and realize conservatism sucks?

Seriously, having 8 years of George W. Bush for president should have been nationwide child abuse.

[white_wolf]

58. Nice to see you again Zorra. I haven't seen you in awhile. I hope you're doing good.

[Zorra]

62. I'm doing awesome

but don't worry, things will get better soon.

Been waiting for OWS for a long time. It's the real start toward effecting positive constructive change.

Backatcha w_w!

[JanMichael]

89. You made one point that I agree 100% with. Well two points.

1. "The current system is RIP-FUBAR."

Agreed.

2. "Watching it play out as it regresses would almost be funny if it wasn't so insidiously toxic to all forms of life."

Really agreed. It would be a hoot except for the enomously negative impacts on so many vulnerable groups of people.

[Autumn]

26. clarity issues

and that's just what it is.:thumbsup:

[AnOhioan]

15. The system has always been skewed..it is just getting worse over time

[socialist_n_TN]

18. Yeah. Without a competing system, the pretense has just

about gone.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. no.

[Fire Walk With Me]

21. No, not since and including Reagan and those who formed their plans just after WWII.

[riderinthestorm]

23. No. K and R for a clear, concise question. nt

[socialist_n_TN]

25. Thanks, but.........

I've been arguing with folks ever since this OWS thing started about this "reform" thing. The Oakland police riot and the coordinated actions in other places just kind of put the question on the front burner again.

[Autumn]

24. Not a chance. The deck is stacked against us

and they deal the cards.

[socialist_n_TN]

32. That's when the people take the deck

nm

[Odin2005]

27. No me.

[City Lights]

29. Not in my lifetime.

Perhaps someday, after America has collectively hit bottom. We're not there yet, though.

[white_wolf]

31. Not yet, but we are falling fast. Whether that is a good thing or not is a matter of perspective.

[City Lights]

34. Agreed. IMO, change won't come until those with power are suffering.

Who knows where the rest of us will be by the time that happens. :-(

[jimlup]

35. No it can't but I will confess to occassionally forgetting that I know that /nt

I guess that as I get older it is easy to become complacent and just want to worry about my own stuff but yeah - we're in deep shit and the sooner we realize it the better.

[socialist_n_TN]

36. Well it's honest to admit that

:) And no doubt I can relate to getting tied up in my own little turf and forgetting the big stuff. But don't worry jim. Anytime we forget, the capitalists will do something (OAKLAND!) to remind us. :)

[white_wolf]

38. Everyone forgets from time to time.

There are times when I'm too occupied with class to focus on politics, even worse there are times when I just don't feel like focusing on politics, because I feel like I'm doing no good. Luckily, I'm getting better on that front, because the bastards on top always seem to find the perfect way to piss me off.

[socialist_n_TN]

40. That's the ticket wolf........

"...the bastards on top always seem to find the perfect way to piss me off." Yep they won't let you forget. Too greedy for that.

[jimlup]

66. Indeed!

[Starry Messenger]

37. Well, you already know what I think.

;) k&r

[socialist_n_TN]

39. I do comrade, I do.........

:) I'm just hoping a few more folks realize what you and I have known for a while now. As I told the guy above, just when you think things have settled down and you maybe start to forget, the capitalists do something (OAKLAND!) to remind you.

As I've always said, the best recruiter for Marxism are the capitalists.

[Downwinder]

41. Yes -- but it requires continued care.

We can't walk away and expect it to take care of itself like we did in the '60s. Once we get their attention, we have to keep the pressure on. Otherwise it will go back to business as usual.

[emilyg]

42. No.

[deadinsider]

43. Do not give up...

"If you can't fly then run, if you can't run then walk, if you can't walk then crawl, but whatever you do you have to keep moving forward."

- Martin Luther King Jr.

"Let it not be said of this Atlantic generation that we left ideals and visions to the past, nor purpose and determination to our adversaries. We have come too far, we have sacrificed too much to disdain the future now."

- JFK

"Once the inner connection is grasped, all theoretical belief in the permanent necessity of existing conditions collapses before their collapse in practice."

- Karl Marx

"I praise, I do not reproach, nihilism's arrival. I believe it is one of the greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity. Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength!"

-Friedrich Nietzsche

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkxdXj7PxRU

[undergroundpanther]

45. no

It cannot be reformed until millions of people ,stop working,stop believing in money,get together feed each other,protect each other, educate the low info voters,and stand up& do what must be done.That is storm the bastille and make sure the rich are rendered broke and powerless. Than get the petty criminal trash, the ones who think brutality like what happened in oakland is ok.and lock 'em up or take their passports put them in a leaky boat in the middle of the atlantic ocean...

[deadinsider]

46. Yes, it will take a cultural shift...

In a capitalistic society we are indoctrinated to competition's primacy; both through education and practice.

Not only are we taught to believe in the eminence of self-interest, but we must exercise its tenants in order to survive. So ingrained is this parasitic model that alternatives have historically been scoffed at as hopelessly 'utopian'.

As you've stated, only when cooperation is exalted and raised in the social consciousness to that of necessity can we realize fundamental change. That is very true.

Yet, do not lose hope for that necessity is beginning to manifest itself to most of the 99% (actually I'd say to most the 95%) in one way or another. This necessity is at once confusing and humbling. Most find that where they had existed heretofore was merely within the American Dream, but their situation has forced upon them the actual American Reality.

And once one's eyes see the world for what it is, rather than the world as it ought to be, self-delusion becomes an impossibility, even while blinking.

"From the moment absurdity is recognized, it becomes a passion, the most harrowing of all."

- Albert Camus

[Yupster]

48. When I was in college

we were taught that would take the rise of "communist man" who worked for the good of society and not for himself.

In the meantime, order would be enforced by a dictatorship of the proletariate until man's thinking could be changed.

In reality a new ruling class took power and just used the bayonet to keep themselves in power and communist man never arrived although zek did.

I guess reading Animal Farm would be the best explanation.

[deadinsider]

60. You've just cited my favorite book.

I'll offer some of my insights if you'd be so kind as to indulge me...

It is true that Orwell modeled Animal Farm generally after the Russian Revolution. However, I think he knew better than pinning himself down to one interpretation. What I found in the novelette was a remarkable likeness to current day capitalism and I think it can be related to both of our viewpoints through a common theme: totalitarianism.

The founding ideals of both the USA and USSR were for justice, equality, and freedom (recall that Soviet Russia passed universal suffrage before America). Singularly, Stalin's rise to power (something Lenin was explicitly worried about before his death) marked the beginning of the end of that ideal in Russia. In contrast, America has seen ups and downs with regard to our founding ideals. Suffrage for women and minorities were not immediate but had to be won as well as labor rights to name a few things we take to be "American."

See my former post (#59) as why I feel Soviet Socialism failed and its just taken a bit longer for the American system to succumb.

USSR: the revolution was too soon to the lack of technological advance at the time of its arrival in 1917.
USA: the revolution has not yet occurred due to the lack of capitalism becoming ripe enough for failure.

I am beginning to make the connections Marx talked about: each of these, though at once seemingly opposite situations, are actually one in the same. In the USSR, capitalism was underdeveloped at the time of revolution, and in the USA it has been allowed to slowly mature toward inevitable collapse.

There is a better chance that if a revolution happened in the here and the now that it would have better success than in Russia 1917.

If you are interested I would suggest looking into Marx a bit more, he is quite revealing. Learn the differences between capitalism, socialism, and communism. And I should give a shout out to the anarchists as well. I am less versed in their thought and should follow my own advice more vigorously: learn more from those who have spent their lives dedicated to alternative socioeconomic systems.

Thanks for the reply. I think I'm going to read Animal Farm again ;)

[white_wolf]

61. It is also worth pointing out that Orwell was a socialist.

Snowball who is a stand in for Trotsky, seems to be portrayed as generally well meaning character, who had the best intentions of the farm at heard.

[Yupster]

65. Thanks for teh recommendations

I guess mine would be the book Red Victory by W Bruce Lincoln.

It's a pretty detailed yet readable history of the Russian Revolution.

I used it extensively when I taught college history.

[deadinsider]

73. I'll have to look into that book

Admittedly, I do pontificate a bit when it comes to the Soviets.

You were correct about the tyranny of the proletariat and such; this was Marx's remedy for the bourgeoisie response to losing power.

To sum it up according to Marxist thought (at least what I glean off of it):

1. Capitalism must collapse due to its inherent contradictions (he is a Hegelian so this is not seen as a probability but rather a necessity; I've covered some of his technical reasons in former posts within this thread).

2. Socialism (what you were citing) is formed to combat the elites inevitable violent response and to indoctrinate the masses (again I talked about this earlier: convince everyone of the primacy of cooperation over competition). Socialism is tyranny in a way, Marx did call it the 'tyrnanny of the proletariat,' yet it is supposed to be democratic, even within the military.

3. Once 2 is finished, the socialist state 'whithers away' and is replaced by a stateless (not exactly, but close) society in which decisions are made at a local level and direct democracy is practiced vs. representative democracy.

The anarchists of Marx's day disagreed with the socialist phase, and, seemingly, predicted it would only ossify into a new repressive system.

One thing to keep in mind (that was enlightening to me): communism and classical anarchism is one and the same. They differed on the need and results of socialism alone. Oh and: the 'socialism' and 'communism' tags came from Lenin and some other guy, but Marx merely identified unnamed stages.

To this date: there never ever has been a true communist state <- that's an oxymoron actually.

There have been socialist states. All have failed to give way to communism.

[socialist_n_TN]

81. I just finished Trotsky's "The History of the Russian Revolution"

GREAT book. He was such a readable author. And lest anybody think it's just propaganda, it's as annoted as any work of history that I've ever seen.

[lonestarnot]

49. With a national general strike, yes I do. :)

[Capitalocracy]

51. A revolution is definitely necessary

But revolutions can come in many different forms. I'm hoping we can achieve a peaceful and transformative one.

[Douglas Carpenter]

52. if it cannot be reformed than all this OWS business and all other protest are a waste of time

In a very harsh and cruel world - liberal social-democracy is the closest thing to a just system that has ever been created. As bad of a model that American style capitalism is and as degenerate as the system has become - the protest continues. Under bureaucratic-collectivism protest were annihilated. There simply isn't an alternative to reforming the system. It's not like it can be overthrown. That's not going to happen. I support the OWS precisely because I support reforming the system. But having said that the New Deal in America and social-democracy in Europe occurred in large part because the bourgeoisie were threatened with the possibility of being overthrown. It may very well be that serious reformation does require such a threat.

[socialist_n_TN]

57. Disagree with your premise that if it can't be reformed

then it's all a waste of time. See my post 50 for some ideas.

[Fool Count]

67. Reformed? Hell, yeah. Sure it can. Just like the French monarchy

was "reformed" in 1789.

[quaker bill]

68. Yup, and it will be

how far and how long are the only real questions.

[yawnmaster]

69. yep. sure can. eom

[rucky]

70. literally. re-formed. n/t

[Raksha]

72. K & R - This is a great thread and I'm learning a lot from it.

For the record, I fall into the camp that believes capitalism cannot be reformed; that it ultimately collapses under it's own weight (top-heavy) or gets torn apart by its own internal contradictions...choose your metaphor!

[socialist_n_TN]

87. Hey Raksha. It IS a great thread isn't it?

Glad you could contribute! :)

[deadinsider]

74. To illuminate Marxist use of Hegel's dialectic 'system'

Marx adopted Hegel's historical dialectic but 'turned it on its head,' as he predicted he would.

Hegel surmised that all of history is a series of an idea (thesis) vs an opposing idea (antithesis) which resulted in a new idea (synthesis). I should mention Hegel did not name them thus; some other dude came along and applied those labels - they stuck.

Hegel, without going into his seemingly mystical zietgeist crap, was saying that we are here, in this place now, not because of our choosing, but because it was the inevitable evolution of human thought (of couse Darwin hadn't arrived on the scene yet, but you get the point).

Now Marx adopted this dialectic and applied it to socioeconomics. He basically looked at history through that lens:

Hunt and Gather > Feudalism > Capitalism > Socialism > Communism

And if you're not totally convinced of this: just look at those pinkos on Star Trek. Enough said ;)

On edit: it quite amazes me that I missed 3 obvious misspelling after proof reading this.

[white_wolf]

77. One small correction.

I've always understood that there was a "slave society" between Hunt and Gather and Feudalism.

[deadinsider]

78. Nope

In capitalism's infancy, slave labor was key (and also during the feudal stage, of course).

Look at what the Age of Discovery wrought upon the natives of the Americas: a time before the ture Industiral Revolution took place. Plenty of Incans, and Mayans, and Aztecs, and North American tribes suffered at the hands of the Europeans due to slave labor.

Then we shipped in some people from Africa.

Find out about Mt. Potosi and the silver mines. In fact, the raping of natural resources in the Americas made the Spanish Empire, and, consequently, led to the success of capitalism sans advanced technology.

Edit: and Marx does not leave this out either. And I shouldn't say 'nope' in the subject line; we are slaves now, are we not?

[white_wolf]

79. You may be right.

I've just always seen a lot of Marxists say there was a slave based society that came before Feudalism, but I'm no expert so I could be getting bad information.

[deadinsider]

94. Actually 'you' are right

The more I thought about it the more it became obvious: between the 'hunt and gather' and 'feudalism' stage lay the obvious: the great Roman Empire (amongst others, such as the Egyptians - in the Western Hemisphere). I believe the East (re: China, India, etc) may also differ a bit from the Western progression of the relations of production according to Marx.

I'll have to research how the stage between hunt and gather and feudalism is identified by Marxists.

However, slavery seems common to me among all of them: from chattel property to wage repression.

Your comrade,

d.i.

[Cal Carpenter]

75. Nothing in capitalism is meant to create good conditions for most people

It is a system that will always result in concentration of wealth and, accordingly, ofpolitical power.

It's about damn time to let go of the myths we have about this.

Any attempts at reform are short-lived at best, lip service at worst.

If the truth of our economic conditions don't make this clear to people, then they are treating politics and economics as a religion, 'believing' in something regardless of contradictory material evidence.

We are moving in one direction, and one direction only. If we go 59 miles per hour or 60 miles per hour, it doesn't make a whit of difference to the vast majority of people.

Until we can just accept these facts collectively (despite what we may want to believe), we are fucked.

[deadinsider]

76. Exactly true.

I, back then a really really naive communist sympathizer, was railing against capitalism during the mid 90s - within the great economic boom. I had little understanding of Marxism but had read much dystopian literature that resonated with me (all I needed to see a dim light somewhere in my mind): The Iron Heel; Brave New World; We; Looking Backward; and 1984.

According to Marx, we have been tricked because they've dressed our chains with roses.

But they're rotting, mainly cause the bastards are too cheap to buy more; that and they now just depend on our dependence (hows that for fucking irony?).

Edit: I should say that "Looking Backward" by Bellamy is not dystopian, but utopian literature. But it is essentially supporting communism; I included it therefore, so 'f' off ;)

On double-plus good edit: the 'f' is not meant for anyone in particular beside those d-bags that nitpick over posts and their holy perfection.

[deadinsider]

80. So no one in the DLC, Third Way, have a comment...

I'm interested to hear your point of view.

[socialist_n_TN]

82. They never do............

Anytime something like this is posted, they disappear.

[white_wolf]

84. I'll comment for them. "The system is working as intended."

[socialist_n_TN]

86. Well with that I'd actually agree.

:) The system is working as intended to concentrate wealth at the top.

[deadinsider]

90. Clarifying my former post #59

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e8rt8RGjCM&feature=related

This video is excellent: rather succinct and not too technical.

Notice how I concentrate only on "technology" in my former post (though my argument still makes sense, but can probably be challenged in a way I'm unaware of) whereas this video illustrates the concept on a much more rudimentary and holistic level.

Concentrating on technology in my former post was at once a volitional omission and unintentional ignorance on my part. As I stated before, I'm attempting to become more of an academic of Marxist economics. There is a lot there to remember and connect. But I wanted to share this video in an attempt to clarify the concept; leaning on an actual academic.

Marx has a lot of other cool concepts like his thoughts on the nature of man that I found to be enlightening:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_human_nature

Also, the 'ripening' of capitalism for systemic failure may need a more global perspective. Meaning that the so-called '3rd world' needs to develop technologically in order for the entire system to truly collapse. I feel this way while thinking, in a rudimentary way, of the cheap labor of China et al as a way of combating the 'tendency of the rate of profit to fall' with cheap labor.

I think what we are seeing in China and India is the assimilation of the peasantry into the proletariat class in these developing countries.

Any thoughts? Can anyone cite any good books for me to read and the others that are following this thread that may be interested?

The question that remains: Is this the final crisis of capitalism, or just another bust? I personally think its the latter, but I hope for the former (which almost seems sadistic, I know). I wish change could come easy, but it rarely does. If I must be one of those that suffer for it, so be it. <- I should say its easy for me to say since I don't have any children; I can't imagine the hardship and anxiety some of you parent out there are having to endure (or those that are worse off than I am in other ways).

Here some recent articles I found interesting:

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/233607/20111018/roubini-nouriel-roubini-dr-doom-marx-karl-marx-financial-crisis-banks-banking-sector-capitalism-debt.htm

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-29/give-marx-a-chance-to-save-the-world-economy-commentary-by-george-magnus.html

Thanks for the feedback to those that have shared in this thread.

Your comrade,

d.i.

[moondust]

91. Doubt it.

[PETRUS]

92. No.

Reform has been tried. And the question is not whether the current economic and political order will endure. It can't. The question is whether the rest of us will sit around and let those in power play their dangerous games until things collapse and hope there will be something left for us to work with, or worth living for. Maybe we'll get lucky, but I'd rather see us wise up, organize ourselves, and put a stop to the madness.