Ask a Red, Second Edition

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I invented a saying?

Truisms are true.

 

[Traitorfish]

I don't see the relation between communal ownership of land and workers no longer having to use other people's resources in order to secure their livehoods.

If everyone owns the resources, then they're not "other people's resources". Communism doesn't deny the necessary inter-reliance of human beings, and, in fact, the whole point is to structure that inter-reliance in a more rational and equitable fashion.

Are Capitalistic Social Democrats more dangerous to the Red cause then Libertarians?

That honestly depends on circumstances. Reformism can be an effective vehicle for advancing working class interests, but it can also produce structures which neutralise the working class as an independent political actor. Equally, libertarians (setting aside their actual political potential for a minute) can advocate courses of action that may lead to a heightening of class struggle, but on the other they may also undercut the ability of the working class, material or ideological, to carry out that struggle. There really aren't any simple or universal answers to this sort of question.

Are there any pseudo-leftist or ultra-leftist groups that are sponsored by the CIA is order to divide the Leftist movement?

Occasionally, but state security forces tend to prefer infiltrating existing organisations. The one famous example would be the Marxist–Leninist Party of the Netherlands, a fake Maoist party set up by the Dutch intelligence service to help it establish contacts in China for purposes of espionage. They actually managed to convince Beijing that they were a (relatively) large and active party, when in reality they had a skeleton staff comprised of equal numbers government agents and gullible students. The party paper, De Kommunist, was funded by the CCP but written entirely by government agents, without anyone ever suspecting a thing, which just goes to show how hackneyed and doctrinaire Maoist propagandising actually is.

 

[innonimatu]

Are Capitalistic Social Democrats more dangerous to the Red cause then Libertarians?

I think that this is a really interesting question, because I too cannot make up my mind on it.
I think it could be reframed as: "what caused the evolution of western-european social-democracy to whatever it is we have today?"

Libertarians would like to claim the responsibility, at least partly, I'm sure. The followers of Hayek and all that. But were their ideas, their capture of the minds of political leaders, the mover? Or did social-democracy evolve organically to this "neo-liberal" situation?

 

[Perfection]

Primarily through the socialization of labor. Private property as we know it today would be essentially abolished, and all land would be owned in common(as it was for the majority of human history), the rights of it given to whoever was using it at a particular time. This would result in workers no longer having to rely on producing for other people, using other people's resources in order to secure their livelihoods. This would also eliminate the hierarchical nature of the workplace.

So how do we determine who makes what, or who gets paid to develop what?

Oh I dunno, probably has something to do with the fact that capitalism is completely based on property rights?

The government is literally stealing money from people. They then use this money to support all sorts of atrocious things, the mass slaughter of foreigners for the benefit of the military-industrial complex, billion dollar subsidies to multi-national corporations, the incarceration of millions of its own citizens, the propping up of dictatorial regimes around the globe. What's justifiable about it? I suppose you'll say welfare, and I'd be inclined to agree that's its a necessary evil for the time being for that reason, but that's exactly what it is - a necessary evil.

Note how I qualified strong property rights. Why can't we accept weakened but not absent property rights?

Also you characterize capitalist societies as doing abhorrent things, but why should we say that's an essential part of capitalist society, could not those problems be solved simply by better governance instead of a transfer to a red society? And what is to stop a red society from succumbing to those problems?

Mediocrity sucks.

Why can't the middle is Perfect, not mediocre?

 

[Defiant47]

So how do we determine who makes what, or who gets paid to develop what?

Democracy, as has been the main theme throughout this thread.

Note how I qualified strong property rights. Why can't we accept weakened but not absent property rights?

Also you characterize capitalist societies as doing abhorrent things, but why should we say that's an essential part of capitalist society, could not those problems be solved simply by better governance instead of a transfer to a red society? And what is to stop a red society from succumbing to those problems?

These problems lie at the heart of a capitalist society, and their current remedies are simply "patches". A rework of the system is in order to set it straight from the start.

Better to turn the wolves into sheep rather than keep the wolves on leashes.

 

[Perfection]

Democracy, as has been the main theme throughout this thread.

How can we adapt the democratic process to make so much more decisions then it presently does?

These problems lie at the heart of a capitalist society, and their current remedies are simply "patches". A rework of the system is in order to set it straight from the start.

Why do you believe they are at the heart of a capitalist society?

Better to turn the wolves into sheep rather than keep the wolves on leashes.

how do you turn a wolf into a sheep?

 

[Defiant47]

How can we adapt the democratic process to make so much more decisions then it presently does?

Representation. (again, simply echoing what has been said in this thread)

Why do you believe they are at the heart of a capitalist society?

Because of the underlying relationship between labour (workers) and capital (capitalists/owners/entrepreneurs). Our society's economy is focused on profit, not at all on workers or consumers.

How do you turn a wolf into a sheep?

By making it an herbivore. Don't run with the analogy too far. If the concept of profit at the expense of others is eliminated, then the major issues of our system vanish.

 

[Perfection]

Representation. (again, simply echoing what has been said in this thread)

What sort (if there's a particular post you wish to point me to, I would be much obliged.

Because of the underlying relationship between labour (workers) and capital (capitalists/owners/entrepreneurs). Our society's economy is focused on profit, not at all on workers or consumers.

What does that have to do with excessive incarceration or bad wars?

By making it an herbivore. Don't run with the analogy too far. If the concept of profit at the expense of others is eliminated, then the major issues of our system vanish.

Are you advocating the elimination of self-biases?

 

[civver_764]

So how do we determine who makes what, or who gets paid to develop what?

Well generally people would just decide what they wanted to do. There'd be some sort of committee I'd imagine that would post "ads"(for lack of a better word) for what sort of work the community needed. This would be strictly for informative purposes and of course people would be able to open up other sorts of firms if they wanted.

Note how I qualified strong property rights. Why can't we accept weakened but not absent property rights?

Well the way I see it you either have a right to your property or you don't. What are weak property rights?

Also you characterize capitalist societies as doing abhorrent things, but why should we say that's an essential part of capitalist society, could not those problems be solved simply by better governance instead of a transfer to a red society? And what is to stop a red society from succumbing to those problems?

What kinds of governance could fix the problems I've brought up?

 

[Defiant47]

What sort (if there's a particular post you wish to point me to, I would be much obliged.

Refer to this post. The establishment of committees and such to deal with the appropriate issues.

Naturally, one could cry "OMG bureaucracy!", but I do not believe it is warranted. If it's done right, it can work well.

What does that have to do with excessive incarceration or bad wars?

I'm not sure what's you're trying to say here

I'm saying the pursuit of profit is the foundation of capitalism and our economy. This pursuit of profit is in spite of the well-being of workers and consumers. It is only the fact that we have regulations that stand in front of and against capitalist tendencies, that we have health and safety regulations for consumers and labour laws to protect workers.

Are you advocating the elimination of self-biases?

Again, I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say here...

 

[Perfection]

Well generally people would just decide what they wanted to do. There'd be some sort of committee I'd imagine that would post "ads"(for lack of a better word) for what sort of work the community needed. This would be strictly for informative purposes and of course people would be able to open up other sorts of firms if they wanted.

But is not the world one community now? Who should decide how many cars get made?

Well the way I see it you either have a right to your property or you don't. What are weak property rights?

Weak property rights are property rights with restrictions, for instance you might be able to have a house with the understanding that if a freeway needs to go through the land at some time you must vacate. I don't see how such an arrangement would be necessarily unfair. Likewise you could earn money but a certain portion must go to the state.

What kinds of governance could fix the problems I've brought up?

Well, I don't see why a mostly capitalist society couldn't eventually tackle those issues. That said, I don't think it's unfair for me to ask you to explain how your red society would fix the problems you allege with capitalist society even if I don't have the solutions myself.

Of course, I get to ask the questions. It's ask a red, not ask a red pentagon.

 

[Defiant47]

But is not the world one community now? Who should decide how many cars get made?

Who decides how many cars get made, right now in a capitalist society? Individual firms based on demand projections and estimates. Why can't it be the same, except instead of a profit-hogging corporation, a for-the-people-by-the-people government subcommittee?

Well, I don't see why a mostly capitalist society couldn't eventually tackle those issues.

A capitalist society can even tackle issues of worker and consumer rights... but that doesn't mean the system is any less rotten to the core. There will be loopholes, and there will continue to be capitalist advantages over workers, unless we water down the system with so many individual socialist policies and regulations, that we can hardly call it "capitalism" anymore.

 

[Perfection]

The government is literally stealing money from people. They then use this money to support all sorts of atrocious things, the mass slaughter of foreigners for the benefit of the military-industrial complex, billion dollar subsidies to multi-national corporations, the incarceration of millions of its own citizens, the propping up of dictatorial regimes around the globe. What's justifiable about it?

I'm not sure what's you're trying to say here

I'm saying the pursuit of profit is the foundation of capitalism and our economy. This pursuit of profit is in spite of the well-being of workers and consumers. It is only the fact that we have regulations that stand in front of and against capitalist tendencies, that we have health and safety regulations for consumers and labour laws to protect workers.

The original line I was commenting about is quoted above.

I will look at the quoted link.

 

[civver_764]

But is not the world one community now? Who should decide how many cars get made?

The world is community composed of smaller communities. I'm obviously talking about the smaller communities. Consumer demand and the people operating the car firm would decide most likely.

Weak property rights are property rights with restrictions, for instance you might be able to have a house with the understanding that if a freeway needs to go through the land at some time you must vacate. I don't see how such an arrangement would be necessarily unfair. Likewise you could earn money but a certain portion must go to the state.

Yes but what's the justification for violating the rights in these instances?

Well, I don't see why a mostly capitalist society couldn't eventually tackle those issues. That said, I don't think it's unfair for me to ask you to explain how your red society would fix the problems you allege with capitalist society even if I don't have the solutions myself.

Of course, I get to ask the questions. It's ask a red, not ask a red pentagon.

I think I've already answered why I think capitalism is inherently exploitative though, and why the state is structured to support the capitalist class, as have the other reds in this thread.

If you want me to reiterate I'll do it in the morning. I'm too tired to deal with that boring stuff lol.

 

[Perfection]

The world is community composed of smaller communities. I'm obviously talking about the smaller communities. Consumer demand and the people operating the car firm would decide most likely.

I dunno this seems to just shift capitalism of individualism to capitalism of communities, do we not need a global solution to prevent one community from exploiting others?

Yes but what's the justification for violating the rights in these instances?

There is no violation of rights. You simply do not have the right to your house in the event of a freeway being needed.

I think people get too caught up in strong property rights terms like "ownership" and "property" here, one might parse this more like this: "you are assigned x item to use as you desire provided conditions y is not met." (in our example x is the house, and y is the need for a freeway).

You could easily have a capitalist system where these weak property rights are implemented.

 

[Whiskey_Lord]

What do you guys think of the US debt crisis? Do you think the resourcefulness of greedy people will prevail, and the global market will bounce back? Or is the capitalist system in a noticeably terminal decline?

 

[ParkCungHee]

Truisms are true.

On that topic, I already got your opinion on this, but what do most of you think of Distributism?

 

[fing0lfin]

The bitter experience of the Soviet union and the other communist states clearly indicates that the communism do not function. Why do you support a system which failed ? Let's put theory aside, we have a lot of examples of communist states, and all of them failed to achieve anything but collapse.

I hope i won't be understood wrong. I am not a fascist, facisoid or similar.
The communist regimes in Europe and elswhere conducted lots of attrocites, crimes against humanity, genocide and many many other "bad things". I can give a lot of examples, but i am sure that everyone can think himself at least a few such acts. So i find it rather cynical communist to describe fasicst/nazis/etc. az monsters and vica versa.

 

[Camikaze]

The bitter experience of the Soviet union and the other communist states clearly indicates that the communism do not function. Why do you support a system which failed ? Let's put theory aside, we have a lot of examples of communist states, and all of them failed to achieve anything but collapse.

I hope i won't be understood wrong. I am not a fascist, facisoid or similar.
The communist regimes in Europe and elswhere conducted lots of attrocites, crimes against humanity, genocide and many many other "bad things". I can give a lot of examples, but i am sure that everyone can think himself at least a few such acts. So i find it rather cynical communist to describe fasicst/nazis/etc. az monsters and vica versa.

Moderator Action: fing0lfin, this post isn't going to lead anywhere productive. This thread is about learning what the 'Reds' think, or about various socialist/communist/structuralist/whateverist theories. Not about berating them. You're welcome to your opinion, but please approach your involvement in this thread from the point of view of seeking answers rather than from the point of view of attempting to prove a point, as seems to be the case here. You've only asked one question, and it's a bit of a 'do you still beat your wife?' one at that. Please ensure that further contributions to the thread keep in mind what the purpose of the thread is. If you're more interested in a debate, you're welcome to start a thread on the topic, but here isn't the place.

 

[fing0lfin]

You have a point. Sorry.
I will try to paraphrase my question.

Do you think that that the mistakes which led to the collapse of the Eastern block could be fixed and how ?

Is this fine ?