Commodore said:
@ JerichoHill- After much thought on the matter, I find that I cannot answer your questions in a manner that would be satisfying to both you and myself. In light of this, I must concede defeat. I cannot continue work on an ideology that is doomed to failure, and have discontinued and destroyed all traces of my work.
Thanks for nothing.
Now, some might call me a quitter and a coward for admitting defeat so easily,
Brave Sir Robin ran away.
Bravely ran away, away.
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!
He is packing it in,
And packing it up,
And sneaking away,
And buggering off,
And chickening out,
And pissing off home,
Yes, bravely he is throwing in the sponge.
but think of this: what if I completed my work and people actually took it seriously? Because of its flaws, it would create a society overwhelmed by poverty and tyranny, while never achieving the freedom that it was created to attain. Then, after it was soundly defeated like the previous form of Marxism, my work would be condemned as one of the greatest sources of human suffering, and I just can't live with that kind of guilt on my mind.
First of all, even the most affluent and free societies has their fair share of misery, inequality and tyranny. How can we know that you would have done worse?
Secondly, the reasons for "the previous form of Marxism" being "soundly defeated" are complex.
Thirdly, I think you are overestimating your importance.
Gelion said:
Luceafarul shall we pick up where others have failed?
We might. But even if I am bloody smart, I can't really see how I can argue in favour of a political and economical system which basic tenets are pretty obscure to me, and what more, which has been abandonned by its rightful father.
I might post some of my thoughts regarding those issues brought forth, but nobody should hold their breath - it is not going to be my main activity in the nearest future.
But you are free to go on, if you should get really stuck, just call in the old guard.
Commodore said:
I'm sure there is a lot more to be said, but I am not the one to say it. I simply lack the knowledge to create a coherent, sensible ideology. Not being able to effectively answer questions presented made me realize that I have overestimated my own ability. With that said, I now leave it to other, more able people to improve the world in which we live.
Here are some good advice. And feel free to thank me some years from now.
First of all, you have your heart on the right place. You understand that there is something basically wrong with the world we live in. You want to change that. That is good.
However, we don't change much by inventing new fancy ideologies. We change thing if we can:
- Adress the problems.
- Recognize the enemy.
- Work out a strategy for
action.
- Do this
together with other people who share our ideals, dreams and visions, or who has the same objective interest as ourselves.
Most of the political, economical and social rights little people like you and me are lucky enough to have, are results of collective struggles (and not mild gifts from corporate overlords). they are results of people who had visions and ideals, and who were willing to struggle for those. We ought to do no less.
Positive, recent example: In 1994 Norway voted no to join the European Union. This was a result of mass organization of common people - the political and economical elite as well as dominant media was for joining. To a certain extend the refusal of France and Holland to ratify the EU constitution is also illustrations of this.
Politics is not a question about the chosen few, who know more about us, and who shall lead us to the new Jerusalem. It is about collective wisdom - and action.
JerichoHill said:
JerichoHill 1
Communism 0
Permission to gloat granted, but I suppose you mean:
JerichoHill 1
Commodore 0
I think most communists will have to freely quote Villon about him; "He might be a bishop, but he will never be my bishop".
@@Commodore and other Commies
I guess I too am included here, so I am all ears.
There is nothing more admirable than trying to create a better system. Capitalism is not without its great flaws to go along with its great strengths. I too would like a system that would yield a lesser concentration of wealth in the upper echelong. However, I feel the best way to bring this about is to engage in a campaign of education and long-term cultural transformation, to interpose the values that just recently, Gates and Buffett professed. However, such a choice must be given voluntarily if it is to work.
Few things scares me more than being thrown at the mercy of the Gates and the Buffets of this world.
As a matter of fact I opened a thread about this some time ago; based on an article by Slavoj Zizek. An updated version of that article can be found here:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n07/print/zize01_.html
Hopefully I will get back to this later, but for me self-management is imperative for real democracy. that is, if one wants such a thing, of course.
Commodore said:
Don't feel bad, you guys actually helped me. You all made me realize that I was trying to play a game I have no business playing. All my life people always told me I had potential to be a "leader of men," and I took it seriously. They all made me out to be some great intellectual just because I had a slightly better vocabulary than most of my peers. Because of that, I got it in my head that I really did have it in me to change things, and that because I was so intelligent, it was my responsibility to "save the people" from the corrupt society.
See above.
Now of course, I am not an intellectual myself, so I should perhaps have stayed out of this, but for all your professed communism you sound very - bourgeois!
Commodore said:
Don't feel bad, you guys actually helped me. You all made me realize that I was trying to play a game I have no business playing. All my life people always told me I had potential to be a "leader of men," and I took it seriously. They all made me out to be some great intellectual just because I had a slightly better vocabulary than most of my peers. Because of that, I got it in my head that I really did have it in me to change things, and that because I was so intelligent, it was my responsibility to "save the people" from the corrupt society.
Now of course, I am not an intellectual myself, so I should perhaps have stayed out of this, but for all your professed communism you sound very - bourgeois!
This experience (and I mean my whole time here at CFC, not just this thread) has made me realize that I may be slightly more intelligent than the average person, but not nearly enough to try and shape the course of human society. That may sound negative, but it really is a positive; as now I know my limitations as a person and I am no longer blinded by an overinflated ego.
I don't think neither you nor I or anybody on CFC for that matter have any valid claim to being smarter than the average person.Whatever that means.
What I see though, is that
most (some honourable exceptions can be found, even on this thread) people here are book-smart, that they have lived rather a sheltered life and that they would benefit from getting a bit more respect for those who live and toil outside the university and the office.
I remember somebody here once suggested compulsory shop classes in college. I am inclined to think that was a good idea.
Finally, to ice the cake, here is a link I posted in another thread following a gentleman requesting alternatives to capitalism. I gave him PaeEcon.
Since it deals quite extensively with issues brought forth on this very thread, some of you might want to have a look at it:
http://www.zmag.org/parecon/indexnew.htm
EDIT:
MamboJoel said:
First time I see such a thing happend. I mean, the whole thing was a joke ?
Good question. If I wasn't such a nice, trusting fellow I would have been inclined to some conspiracy theories.
