Conquer Club

Snorri1234 wrote:I still think "to f*ck Norse off" is the most probably reason.

yes, i voted that aswell.

Nappy crier wrote:My word....tonky totally sucked the life out of this thread, by drowning it with words!

Let's rekindle the flames!

ill do again, if i must...

good lord though, that looks like a ton of writing.

got tonkaed wrote:I dont really think your assesment of things is correct there mtg....if we are talking about what socialism is theoretcially trying to do, it is to give workers the control over the means of production. Essentially, in the purest of forums, we are talking about giving the control of how things are produced to those who in fact produce them.

So the Communist Manifesto IS socialism after all. Thank you for making that so very clear to people like Snorri who have that pie-in-the-sky worldview that the two aren't pretty much the same thing.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:I dont really think your assesment of things is correct there mtg....if we are talking about what socialism is theoretcially trying to do, it is to give workers the control over the means of production. Essentially, in the purest of forums, we are talking about giving the control of how things are produced to those who in fact produce them.

So the Communist Manifesto IS socialism after all. Thank you for making that so very clear to people like Snorri who have that pie-in-the-sky worldview that the two aren't pretty much the same thing.

Id say in response to anyone who thinks the communist manifesto is socialism...your being too simplistic. Socialism as an ideal type is probably too broad to be fully encapsulated in the manifesto, though elements and foundational discussions about elements included in socialism certainly are there.

got tonkaed wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:I dont really think your assesment of things is correct there mtg....if we are talking about what socialism is theoretcially trying to do, it is to give workers the control over the means of production. Essentially, in the purest of forums, we are talking about giving the control of how things are produced to those who in fact produce them.

So the Communist Manifesto IS socialism after all. Thank you for making that so very clear to people like Snorri who have that pie-in-the-sky worldview that the two aren't pretty much the same thing.

Id say in response to anyone who thinks the communist manifesto is socialism...your being too simplistic. Socialism as an ideal type is probably too broad to be fully encapsulated in the manifesto, though elements and foundational discussions about elements included in socialism certainly are there.

Socialism is very different from Communism, strictly speaking...we'd have to view that within a Marxist historical materialist dialectic paradigm, though, and analyse the specifics of the transition phase during the "dictatorship of the proletariat" that socialism is to se whether Communism, or blissful anarchy, is really possible.

If public control of all resources and by all I do mean all, right down to the basic neccessential commodities and all the institutions of business and manufacture, is socialism, then the Communism Manifesto is, at heart, a socialist document.

The biggest flaw in it though it not the idea, but the lack of mechanism: Nowhere does Marx state how exactly the state is supposed to insure the freedom of the people it is intented to serve, nowhere does he explain the actually benefit of the total public control of essentially everthing under the sun and moon, nowhere are there any hints as to how to organize a government to effiecently administer the myriad institutions and nowhere does Marx talk about fundiamental personnal rights to handle their own affairs.

Which is why I believe that any attempt to establish a fully socialist society is doomed to failure; it is a recipe for a totalitarian regime that affords it's citizens no privacy nor any gurenteed civil liberties.

Until I see a document more like the Declaration of Independence as the blueprint to a socialist community, my statements will stand.

Any yes, I know full well that it is the Constitution, not the Declaration, that forms the legal framwork for the government of the USA, I was speaking of the philosophical framework. Until I see something that establishes the rights of individuals over society as a whole and part of a socialist plan (nearly impossible, as socialism requires that the group is more important than the individual), I repeat, my statements stand.

while its probably against the line of thought of your post...you could probably give marx a bit of a pass about not seeing the strength of the state. The state as a mode of analysis was still pretty new and he probably couldnt have foreseen the way labor management would be set up and welfare systems would be set up to help appease the masses so to speak.

Jenos Ridan wrote:If public control of all resources and by all I do mean all, right down to the basic neccessential commodities and all the institutions of business and manufacture, is socialism, then the Communism Manifesto is, at heart, a socialist document.

Well good thing it isn't then.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:If public control of all resources and by all I do mean all, right down to the basic neccessential commodities and all the institutions of business and manufacture, is socialism, then the Communism Manifesto is, at heart, a socialist document.

Well good thing it isn't then.

That's exactly what it is, though snorri, dictatorship of the proletariat.

Napoleon Ier wrote:That's exactly what it is, though snorri, dictatorship of the proletariat.

Ahhh, the tell-tale mating call of a beast that neither understands Marxism or Socialism.

Nice.

NEEEEEEEEEEP!

that me mating call.
It needs work *shuffles off embarrassed, neeping*

"I'm a good cook.
What do you like for breakfast?"

That was mine, back when I hadn't been domesticated.

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:That's exactly what it is, though snorri, dictatorship of the proletariat.

Ahhh, the tell-tale mating call of a beast that neither understands Marxism or Socialism.

Nice.

What? "Ahhh"? I think I'm right in saying that I can pretty much guarantee you there is no proportionality between people using "Ahhh" as their mating call and those who understand the way Marxist historical materialism works.

No doubt though, the great Mustard can explain to us exactly what he thinks of Marxist historical dialectic, and where "socialism" and "communism" fit into this

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:That's exactly what it is, though snorri, dictatorship of the proletariat.

Ahhh, the tell-tale mating call of a beast that neither understands Marxism or Socialism.

Nice.

What? "Ahhh"? I think I'm right in saying that I can pretty much guarantee you there is no proportionality between people using "Ahhh" as their mating call and those who understand the way Marxist historical materialism works.

No doubt though, the great Mustard can explain to us exactly what he thinks of Marxist historical dialectic, and where "socialism" and "communism" fit into this

psh...one of the first rules in order to get your card as a card carrying understander of marx is to always to use the expression Ahhh when referring to whether or not someone understands historical materialism.

I thought not.

1/Set theory

2/English syntax

3/Marxist dialectics

4/The fact that his own IQ is lower than his shoe size

OK, if any of you want to update this list of "points Mustard doesn't understand" at any point, please do tell me.

comic boy wrote:There is a general concensus I think now that Capitalism is the only realistic form of government, however most people realise that there need to be safeguards in society to protect the elderly,sick and other disadvantaged groups. There is a global backlash already against multinational corporations that rape the environment and exploit third World labour, this opposition will gradualy get stronger. I think overall politics will shift further towards the centre, it may impact slightly on individual choice but hopefully will allow more people worldwide to be able to participate in the freedom many of us already enjoy.

The problem right now is that most businesses are now far removed from a real supply and demand for products. That is, the "product" being sold and "marketed" for profit is the stock.

If you sell widgets, do so without ruining my water supply, making me breath your filth, spoiling the oceans (directly or by polluting streams), etc..... PAY your employees at least what they need to survive (including health care for them and their families) .. then fine.

If you really and truly cannot make a profit this way, then you really and truly are not in a profitable business.

HOWEVER, too often none of those things are happening. Too often, the "widgets" get forgotten in the rush to ensure stockholders get their profits. T

I was vote 69

got tonkaed wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:That's exactly what it is, though snorri, dictatorship of the proletariat.

Ahhh, the tell-tale mating call of a beast that neither understands Marxism or Socialism.

Nice.

What? "Ahhh"? I think I'm right in saying that I can pretty much guarantee you there is no proportionality between people using "Ahhh" as their mating call and those who understand the way Marxist historical materialism works.

No doubt though, the great Mustard can explain to us exactly what he thinks of Marxist historical dialectic, and where "socialism" and "communism" fit into this

psh...one of the first rules in order to get your card as a card carrying understander of marx is to always to use the expression Ahhh when referring to whether or not someone understands historical materialism.

I like to twirl my mustache hairs as well.