Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

what kind of society ...

135

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by slade
    don't think so

    Your anarchism is doomed to its irelevance . Failed, unwanted by society at large apart from by squatters, gap-year(decade?) muppetswho want cheap digs

    and of course on BB's

    Whereas capitalism provides us with the comforts we in the West have enjoyed and shows absolutely no sign of being replaced

    You're only making yourself look like an idiot by refusing to engage properly with the argument.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    'Read some history.'

    'Read some politics.'

    is that what you mean by 'engage properly with the argument.'



    :D

    if you intrduce technical terms into a discussion like 'means of production'you should be prepared to define them in relation but you can't so you carry on bluffing hoping no-one notices:lol:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by slade
    'Read some history.'

    'Read some politics.'

    is that what you mean by 'engage properly with the argument.'

    When did you join the BNP?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by freethepeeps
    When did you join the BNP?

    Cos, after all we're dealing in crude stereotypes here aren't we ?
    Your anarchism is doomed to its irelevance . Failed, unwanted by society at large apart from by squatters, gap-year(decade?) muppetswho want cheap digs
    again (sigh)what would you, Blagsta, with your anarchist mates, .....

    What would Anarkids do about Boots PLC, say,

    and clearly, if everyone on the left is an anrkid or anarchist then everyone on the right is a member of the BNP!

    Anyways - enough of that......

    The topic, I believe is "what kind of society could replace the one we have at present?"

    and we already know your view on it, thankyou caller....
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Re: Re: what kind of society ...
    Originally posted by freethepeeps
    Have you read that link yet?

    ;)
    oops ...forgot ...will do after i've stuffed my face with this luvverly chicken that was still clucking yesterday!
    seriously ...i'll go have a look now.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    how much is enough ...whats in it for me.
    just read those two ...
    what did i learn?
    that i actualy have a label.
    unknown to me i'm in the anti consumerist group!
    i left the city ...grow chickens and veg and cannabis ...not for money but for me family and freinds.
    i recycle ...i buy second hand ...i turn off all the stanby lights at bedtime.
    i donate to the third world.
    i have a wood burning stove ...(as well as gas) using wood from sustainable welsh forrests.
    i throw little away ...would rather pass it on.
    can't drive passed a skip without stopping to see if theres 'owt in it i can use ...usualy timber and metal.
    i can't stand fashion and labels.

    interesting site ...i'll read more.
    nothing i disagree with so far.
    ...and a real plus ...a serious issue being dealt with, with a little humour.
    i reccomend everyone go have a look ...NOW.
    http://www.enough.org.uk/index.html#cont
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by slade
    'Read some history.'

    'Read some politics.'

    is that what you mean by 'engage properly with the argument.'



    :D

    if you intrduce technical terms into a discussion like 'means of production'you should be prepared to define them in relation but you can't so you carry on bluffing hoping no-one notices:lol:

    Why should I waste my time rewriting what has already been written about hundreds of times? If you want to know what these things are and how they are relevant then there are plenty of resources already on the net explaining concepts like means of production, class and surplus value.
    And why should I explain about the relevance of the Spanish Revolution when there are lots of history resources online that explain about the collectivisation of farms and industry by anarchist trade unions? If you can't be bothered to do a little research, to have an intelligent discussion, then that ain't my problem.

    If you actually came up with an intelligent analysis and critique of socialist and anarchist ideas and the Spanish Revolution etc, then I might be inclined to take you more seriously. As it is, I think you're a bit of a fool.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It might be an idea slade, to read the thread properly as well...
    Originally posted by Blagsta
    The older I get, the less I have any answers. I don't think capitalism is sustainable and my politics are idealogically libertarian socialist. But relations between people are not reducible to purely economic materialist Marxist terms - people are complex beings, with all sorts of motivations, both conscious and subconscious. People are capable of horrible abuses of power and it is not as simple as saying that this is down to our capitalist society (something which I have argued with ftp about on another board).
    IMO there needs to be some synthesis between a psychoanalytic understanding of human behaviour and a Marxist materialist understaning - about which I have just had a very interesting discussion with my g/f about, who is doing an MA in psychoanalytic psychotherapy, but who also comes from a Maxist perspective.

    ...so you can see that I'm well aware of the limitations of a purely Marxist analysis.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by slade
    if you intrduce technical terms into a discussion like 'means of production'...
    Come on slade, this is fucking basic stuff that's being discussed here. There's nothing 'technical' about the term.

    Don't you understand :confused:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by J
    They could at least make an effort to reduce waste etc, that would help us all out.
    Is it within their nature to do so J. This is the question.

    I don't think it is
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Blagsta
    I agree with you - but that's not what they're saying is it?
    But under capitalism, it is true.

    "The continued wealth and visibility of middle Britain is entirely dependent on the continued impoverishment of working class children in particular."

    Sounds a lot like they are suggesting one has to go without if the other wants wealth, which just isnt true.

    Things being fair is a nice idea, but legaly enforcing it is troublesome and more often than not causes more hurt than gain.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So how do you explain the widening gap between the rich and the poor?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Come on slade, this is fucking basic stuff that's being discussed here. There's nothing 'technical' about the term


    'means of production' is a phrase trotted out by ppl who quote marx but it is technical as it must be defined in the context of the debate about present-day society

    production of what exactly in an era of post-nationalisation more economically diverse than ever before?

    any ideas, Vimto?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Blagsta
    So how do you explain the widening gap between the rich and the poor?
    What a gap are you talking about?
    If you mean the gap between developed and developing countries it definitely doesn’t widen. Compare crawling European 1-2% economic growth with 7-10% typical for many developing countries. If you think it is ’widening gap’ something is bad with your arithmetic.
    If you mean the gap inside developed countries it’s cause is simple- the state’s intervention into economy, central planning, welfare state. The state’s efforts regardless of good intentions of politicians always push Lorenz’s curve right from its natural market shape.
    Originally posted by Blagsta
    ...so you can see that I'm well aware of the limitations of a purely Marxist analysis.
    Oh no, Marxist analysis has no limitations! As Einstein said there are only two infinite things, the Universe and human stupidity. Since Marxism is the most stupid social theory it is limited neither by logics nor by practice nor by science nor by common sense.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LabRat
    What a gap are you talking about?
    If you mean the gap between developed and developing countries it definitely doesn’t widen. Compare crawling European 1-2% economic growth with 7-10% typical for many developing countries. If you think it is ’widening gap’ something is bad with your arithmetic.
    If you mean the gap inside developed countries it’s cause is simple- the state’s intervention into economy, central planning, welfare state. The state’s efforts regardless of good intentions of politicians always push Lorenz’s curve right from its natural market shape.
    For someone who claims to be interested in economic issues you sometimes display breathtaking naivety.

    Do a bit of research and see how the gap between the rich and the poor was affected in every instance where free market capitalism was exercised.

    :rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Please Aladdin do you seriously think I never heard about this kind of data? Your opinions on this stuff are so widespread that may be named the cornerstone of the modern secular quasi religion of statism. Not only liberals but conservatives as well believe in this false god of a wise benevolent state that fits market failures and brings law and order to its stupid subjects…
    Hmm… I think we are too away from Morrocan’s initial question so I’m starting a new discussion about Welfare State.
    Returning to the topic I must say we ( ‘we’ here means humankind) are not absolutely free to choose a kind of society we would prefer to live in. There are laws of economics and laws of ethics which are as objective as laws of physics, so our choice is limited. ( plus there is so called ‘human nature’ but I think it is not too important)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LabRat
    What a gap are you talking about?
    If you mean the gap between developed and developing countries it definitely doesn’t widen. Compare crawling European 1-2% economic growth with 7-10% typical for many developing countries. If you think it is ’widening gap’ something is bad with your arithmetic.
    If you mean the gap inside developed countries it’s cause is simple- the state’s intervention into economy, central planning, welfare state. The state’s efforts regardless of good intentions of politicians always push Lorenz’s curve right from its natural market shape.

    :confused:

    Your already tenous grasp on reality seems to be getting weaker by the day.

    So the concentration of global wealth into the hands of fewer and fewer people doesn't bother you?
    Originally posted by LabRat
    Oh no, Marxist analysis has no limitations! As Einstein said there are only two infinite things, the Universe and human stupidity. Since Marxism is the most stupid social theory it is limited neither by logics nor by practice nor by science nor by common sense.

    Good analysis and critique of Marxist class theory there. Well done. :rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LabRat
    There are laws of economics and laws of ethics which are as objective as laws of physics, so our choice is limited. ( plus there is so called ‘human nature’ but I think it is not too important)

    You're on drugs, you must be! LOL! :D
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Blagsta
    So how do you explain the widening gap between the rich and the poor?

    Its not the gap we should really worry about though, it is the increasing riches of everyone we should be pleased about.

    Yes of course there are problems, and yes, the fact some some people have billions while others have none is depressing. But just sharing between us isnt the best solution, its unworkable and will do more harm than good.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Please explain.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Things being fair is a nice ideal, but any serious effort to enforce it has never worked.

    I'm not suggesting that we never make any efforts towards this, we should, those less fortunate should be helped. But their poverty isnt directly linked to others wealth.

    It certainly is depressing how many people survive on less than a dollar a day. But on average us as the human race are getting richer, living longer and child mortality is decreasing. So rather than harp on about people getting really rich we should be pleased that things are improving.

    There is more the western world could do, an end to any export subsidies would be a good start. But we shouldnt feel guilty for being wealthy and we should vilify those with wealth as being evil and exploiting the poor and pushing them down.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    UK is meritocratic enough, all have access to State education, ppl mostly like the statuus quo and vote for the best neo-con party around who at this time is nulab

    there are ceo's making big bucks but they are exceptional clever hi-energy ppl so who should begrudge them apart from whinging failures?

    Watch Blair get in again
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by slade
    UK is meritocratic enough, all have access to State education, ppl mostly like the statuus quo and vote for the best neo-con party around who at this time is nulab

    Except its not, well not completely anyway.

    Schools in lower income areas are normally worse, and of course if you can afford it then you can send your kid to private school.

    Then leading onto university, those who can afford it dont have to take a job when there and therefore have more time to study.

    Its certainly closer than the US, but its still not all that close.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by slade
    UK is meritocratic enough, all have access to State education, ppl mostly like the statuus quo and vote for the best neo-con party around who at this time is nulab

    So all state schools are the same are they? And they are all as ood as the top private schools?
    Originally posted by slade
    there are ceo's making big bucks but they are exceptional clever hi-energy ppl so who should begrudge them apart from whinging failures?

    You really think that all ceo's are "clever hi-energy ppl" and none of them have had a helping hand up due to class and privilege?

    Originally posted by slade
    Watch Blair get in again

    Probably. But they're all a shower of shites.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by slade
    Watch Blair get in again

    He wont win the next election, the others will loose it, there is a difference.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    Things being fair is a nice ideal, but any serious effort to enforce it has never worked.

    I agree it can't be enforced, which is why I'm not a communist.
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    I'm not suggesting that we never make any efforts towards this, we should, those less fortunate should be helped. But their poverty isnt directly linked to others wealth.

    It is under capitalism. Capital is created by exploitation of workers.
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    It certainly is depressing how many people survive on less than a dollar a day. But on average us as the human race are getting richer, living longer and child mortality is decreasing. So rather than harp on about people getting really rich we should be pleased that things are improving

    Things are improving in the West. Not really any where else.
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    There is more the western world could do, an end to any export subsidies would be a good start. But we shouldnt feel guilty for being wealthy and we should vilify those with wealth as being evil and exploiting the poor and pushing them down.

    I don't feel particularly guilty, but I don't work for a multinational business or bank.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Blagsta
    Things are improving in the West. Not really any where else.

    Things are definately improving for workers in China, yes many still live in desperate poverty but the average worker there has seen an improvement over the last 10 years.

    What sort of alternative to Capitalism are you suggesting?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    As I've said elsewhere- I don't have any answers anymore. I just think that a system based on exploitation of people and the environment, one that is inherently unfair and based on profit is unsustainable.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Capital is created by exploitation of workers.

    Simplistic in the extreme. do you have any notions of business?
    You really think that all ceo's are "clever hi-energy ppl" and none of them have had a helping hand up due to class and privilege?

    Yes, having read CVs of many in the Saturday papers many are Grammar school boys who made good through diligence and hard work

    There's not that much to moan about in UK
Sign In or Register to comment.