Ask a red

[plarq]

＠luceafarul
how do you think about Monthly Review?

 

[Richard Cribb]

It is a magazine of high quality which I can recommend.
I offer a small prize to the one who can tell me who was the author of its first ever lead article.

 

[RedRalph]

Einstein (I cheated)

 

[Richard Cribb]

Einstein (I cheated)

No prize for you then.
Cheating is for capitalists.

 

[RedRalph]

No prize for you then.
Cheating is for capitalists.

Oh yeah?

 

[plarq]

No prize for you then.
Cheating is for capitalists.

Well, being a capitalist pig is something rewarding.

 

[Richard Cribb]

Oh yeah?

While I perfectly understand that an Irishman wants to gloat over any humiliation of the English, I also feel the need to point out that there are a few years between those two photos.
It seems to me that Diego Maradona saw the light after '86, or in other words he grew up...

Well, being a capitalist pig is something rewarding.

Is it?

 

[Yeekim]

Cheating is for capitalists.

Indeed?

A cookie for anyone who can guess which one is formerly famous female athlete of DDR.

 

[Munch]

I suppose my question about automation really answered itself, but nevertheless thanks for your input. Assuming that further large scale automation were to take place in a capitalist system, how would the liberated workers survive?

A second question that I don't think has been asked here before, about British politics: would a lib-dem leadership be preferable to a continuation of new labour? My assumption is that old labour would be even more preferable too ...

As for your question on CivGold CTDs, a quick google search found nothing - I suggest posting in the bugs section along with a save. However, if the crash occurs before you can even begin a game, that may be a sign of insufficient RAM (an observation taken from the bugs section for civgold: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=255076).

 

[Richard Cribb]

Indeed?

A cookie for anyone who can guess which one is formerly famous female athlete of DDR.

Sorry chief, but that doesn't count. That is sport. Sport is war. And in war, everything is allowed.
As for the image, yes I know who both those people are. But I guess I am disqualified from paricipation in your quiz. And strange pastry is a big no-no anyway.

I suppose my question about automation really answered itself, but nevertheless thanks for your input. Assuming that further large scale automation were to take place in a capitalist system, how would the liberated workers survive?

That's a difficult question about which I can only speculate. I can only guess that at least the most enlightened capitalist societies will try to impose some sort of tittytainment system to prolong the existence of their doomed societal system. It will not be politically possible to let a great part of the population starve.

A second question that I don't think has been asked here before, about British politics: would a lib-dem leadership be preferable to a continuation of new labour? My assumption is that old labour would be even more preferable too ...

Despite all Blairism, I would still prefer "New" "Labour", since it at least stil has a connection with the British working class and can be directed back to its roots. That can't be said about the slick bourgeoise lib-dems, and I fail to see them as ever represent a serious radical alternative given their social base. A labour party gone astray should always be preferred to any "progressive" bourgeois one except when it comes to ad-hoc situations.

As for your question on CivGold CTDs, a quick google search found nothing - I suggest posting in the bugs section along with a save. However, if the crash occurs before you can even begin a game, that may be a sign of insufficient RAM (an observation taken from the bugs section for civgold: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=255076).

Thanks a lot. In the past it would crash on random stages, now I seem not to be able to start it at all. My knowledge about computers is patheticaly limited, but i will check out your link. Perhaps a reinstallment is called for.

 

[Godwynn]

Excuse me if this has already been asked before, and if it has you can just link me to the post where you have explained it, but how would the political system work in your utopia?

A one-party democracy?
A dictatorship?
Would organized protests be allowed?
What about labor strikes?
Freedom of speech and religion?
Would certain books and websites be banned?

Thanks ahead of time!

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Excuse me if this has already been asked before, and if it has you can just link me to the post where you have explained it, but how would the political system work in your utopia?

I assume that this question 1) is directed at all the participants on "our" side of this thread and 2) that by "utopia" you mean simply our expressed political goals, since not all of us are communists (me, for example), and socialism is not a utopian ideal.

As I am in the library between classes, I may not be able to answer all of these immediately, but I promise I will return to them, most likely tomorrow night or Thursday afternoon at the latest.

A one-party democracy?

There are two ways to answer this question. The first is to remind you (all) that political parties are not the only way that fair and functional democracy can manifest itself; indeed, the American Founding Fathers hoped our republic would stay clear of that development, and that politicians would run on individual plaforms or band together into temporary factions, with no official "party" structure (and thus no bandwagon for people to hop onto, and no "us vs them" absolutist mentality as you can see has developed in the US today). The second is that political parties represent collective interests by certain people who have banded together in the interest of greater power of expression, and thus, greater influence in their government. This is not expressedly a bad thing, but more often than not it is, especially when it defends the interests of an opressive group; one example would be the Democratic Party of late 19th-early 20th Century and its unifying position against social integration.

It is perfectly possible, and indeed has been the case before, that multiple candidates can sprout from a single party. I would in fact encourage such an event, as it challenges voters to evaluate the issues, the candidates, and their stances on things, rather than to simply "hop on the bandwagon" and back their party almost without question.

Since I believe your question was whether only one party would be allowed, no, I don't see the need to bar parties from participation, mostly because I don't think they are a danger to the existence of socialism. Indeed, all parties (lowercase p) can have at least one good idea to bring to the table, and all voices should be heard. However, if such an evolution in society took place that would create a popular socialist system, then the people are by that point aware of the folly of the conservative and liberal positions, and the dispersion of votes would reflect that.

This is, of course, assuming something extraordinary does not happen at the outset of this "revolution," so to speakl namely, extreme danger to the state itself by way of foreign interventionists or large numbers of partizans within the nation, i.e. it has broken into civil war.

A dictatorship?

I will return to this, as it is worthy of more comment than I can give right now.

Would organized protests be allowed?

What about labor strikes?

I doubt they would occur, but yes, they would of course be legal. It would be quite hypocritical of us to betray the very principles and means that brought us to power, wouldn't it? The right of the worker to dissent and have his concerns addressed is fundamental to the existence and functioning of the socialist system. On this, all leftists agree.

Freedom of speech and religion?

I will return to this as well.

Would certain books and websites be banned?

Negative, Ghostrider, the pattern is full.

Thanks ahead of time!

No problem.

 

[Agent327]

My apologies, English is not my first language. I meant some of the neocons and Orwell and Hitchens. Orwell was quite despicable in some ways, but certainly no neocon ( He didn't live long enough, but i reluctantly give him the benefit of doubt) .
But since we are discussing Orwell, here is quite an interesting essay about him by somebody with whom i don't entirely agree but who seemingly knows his toic:
http://links.org.au/node/379
I especially want to draw your attention to this paragraph:


I can post some more material on Orwell, if anybody wishes.
Let me also issue a warning about using the term "totalitarian". This is a rhetoric word which can be used effictively to mystify politics by hiding socio-economic realities and gives the power of definition to the political right. Besides, what is really totalitarian?

Interesting that the author calls Orwell despicable and a worse writer than Marx; it's obvious he's never tried to read Marx. Das Kapital is quite unreadable; the Communist Manifesto is much better written (Engels being co-author).

I'm also not sure what your confusion about totalitarianism is; the Soviet Union under Stalin and Nazi Germany are the most obvious examples of totalitarian regimes in the 20st century.

 

[Bigfoot3814]

I don't know if this is a stupid question or not but what do you think of the Hamiltonian economic program?

 

[holy king]

Excuse me if this has already been asked before, and if it has you can just link me to the post where you have explained it, but how would the political system work in your utopia?


A dictatorship?

that's where they tend to fail historically.

i have yet to be convinced that a communist revolution can be a democratic one.

especially when they critizise bukhanin for being sectarian and elitary. (not that i am a fan of bukhanin.)

 

[holy king]

oh. a real question by the way: how do you excuse the leninist (english seems to give me no other chance but call it so) intervention in st. petersburg/kronstadt in 1921?

 

[plarq]

oh. a real question by the way: how do you excuse the leninist (english seems to give me no other chance but call it so) intervention in st. petersburg/kronstadt in 1921?

These guys betrayed communist defined socialism thus being punished by people's iron will.

What's wrong?

 

[holy king]

These guys betrayed communist defined socialism thus being punished by people's iron will.

What's wrong?

i hope for a more sophisticated answer.

 

[Gustave5436]

oh. a real question by the way: how do you excuse the leninist (english seems to give me no other chance but call it so) intervention in st. petersburg/kronstadt in 1921?

And, for that matter, the repression of the left in general from 1919-ish onwards?

i have yet to be convinced that a communist revolution can be a democratic one.

Vanguardist revolution. "Authoritarian socialism," that is, Marxism-Leninism and related ideologies, is vanguardist. However, vanguardism is not universal to all socialism. In fact, some communists (such as anarchists) are of the opinion that vanguardism is inherently authoritarian and therefore logically inconsistent with communism.

I can completely understand your objection to vanguardism, but don't confuse authoritarian socialism with socialism in general.

 

[holy king]

bla bla, i just want to hear his theory.

not lead this discussion once again.