To the Defenders of George Bush and the War in Iraq

by Greenpalmtreestillmine 208 Replies latest social current

  • Yerusalyim
    Yerusalyim

    Firstline,

    I like the way you think.

    Surealist,

    yeru,

    i find communism very appealing. i realize however that it most likely does not work due to our egoism. Sure, it sounds great on paper, but humans aren't designed that way. NO ONE has EVER made it work. This explains a lot about you. The end to "poverty and desperation" won't come with communism in any form, but with creating opportunities for capitalists. Each worker is a capitalist at heart.

    Actually, yes, hatred does quite often come from nowhere...find someone to blame for your life not being perfect and hate them. Believe me, I know we need to try to bring up the standard of living of those around the world, but many simply don't want it...and it's not the US or even Israel causing this status, but the Arab world itself...it's leaders...who deflect all this as if it's the fault of the US or Israel.

    are you saying that it would be as easy to find suicide bombers if the arabs would have the same lifestyle as the jews? Yes, it would be, most of these bombers aren't deserately poor...nor is the poverty caused by the Israelis. The Arabs live better in Israel than anywhere else, and the camps in the West Bank and Gaza have a higher standard of living than camps outside these areas. They've been given money to build permenant settlements, but Arafat and company keep siphoning off the dough. if they would not live in refugee camps? that without any jews or westerners being in the region the arabs would have the same hate for us? i seriously doubt that. I don't. So, we should clear out all the Jews? Jews have been there for thousands of years, and the persecution of Jews under Islam began with Muhammed himself.

    hatred that wants you to kill someone is rarely caused by pure imagination. something has to be very wrong to cause a whole population to feel like this. A whole population DOESN'T feel like that...that's the point. Most just want to get on with their lives. They are fed a constant stream of anti-Jewish and Anti American rhetoric from birth...it's a control mechanism.

    Realist,

    I recognize that there are real issues in the Holy Land that need to be settled. I am for a two state solution. Two principles must be recognized for this though...first, that Israel has the right to exist. If you, or the Arabs, can't deal with that there will be no peace in the middle east until one group or the other is completely dead.

    Second...Israel must remain a Jewish state...for the obvious reasons.

    I keep saying this and no one listens...if the Palestinians would have denounced terrorism and adopted Peaceful Non-Compliance ala Martin Luther King and Ghandi, Palestine would be well on it's way to a larger country than they can hope to get now.

  • Realist
    Realist

    firstinline,

    thanks for your posts! i apprechiate a sincere discussion!

    the following is from http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm

    its a summary of two chapters from engels book the principles of communism. i think you should read it...its a really nice fantasy.

    now i call myself realist...and as such i cannot say i beliefe this would work. it most likely would not. but as i said it is a nice dream. maybe with new vastly advanced technologies and with a matured humanity such a perfect society will be created at one point. there were (as you probably know) societies in the past that did not know the concept of possession. therefore it seems that with proper education this might work.

    regarding creativity. what limits the production of a variety of products is as you said the waste of energy and resources to do so. but people would still be creative even if they don't get anything for it. people interested in design would come up with a new SUV, chair, teddy bear etc. Given a perfect communist society the ability to produce surpluses could be used to produce a variety of goods instead. some more some less popular. the better developed the technology the easier this would be.

    - 14 -
    What will this new social order have to be like?

    Above all, it will have to take the control of industry and of all branches of production out of the hands of mutually competing individuals, and instead institute a system in which all these branches of production are operated by society as a whole -- that is, for the common account, according to a common plan, and with the participation of all members of society.

    It will, in other words, abolish competition and replace it with association.

    Moreover, since the management of industry by individuals necessarily implies private property, and since competition is in reality merely the manner and form in which the control of industry by private property owners expresses itself, it follows that private property cannot be separated from competition and the individual management of industry. Private property must, therefore, be abolished and in its place must come the common utilization of all instruments of production and the distribution of all products according to common agreement -- in a word, what is called the communal ownership of goods.

    In fact, the abolition of private property is, doubtless, the shortest and most significant way to characterize the revolution in the whole social order which has been made necessary by the development of industry -- and for this reason it is rightly advanced by communists as their main demand.

    - 20 - What will be the consequences of the ultimate disappearance of private property?

    Society will take all forces of production and means of commerce, as well as the exchange and distribution of products, out of the hands of private capitalists and will manage them in accordance with a plan based on the availability of resources and the needs of the whole society. In this way, most important of all, the evil consequences which are now associated with the conduct of big industry will be abolished.

    There will be no more crises; the expanded production, which for the present order of society is overproduction and hence a prevailing cause of misery, will then be insufficient and in need of being expanded much further. Instead of generating misery, overproduction will reach beyond the elementary requirements of society to assure the satisfaction of the needs of all; it will create new needs and, at the same time, the means of satisfying them. It will become the condition of, and the stimulus to, new progress, which will no longer throw the whole social order into confusion, as progress has always done in the past. Big industry, freed from the pressure of private property, will undergo such an expansion that what we now see will seem as petty in comparison as manufacture seems when put beside the big industry of our own day. This development of industry will make available to society a sufficient mass of products to satisfy the needs of everyone.

    The same will be true of agriculture, which also suffers from the pressure of private property and is held back by the division of privately owned land into small parcels. Here, existing improvements and scientific procedures will be put into practice, with a resulting leap forward which will assure to society all the products it needs.

    In this way, such an abundance of goods will be able to satisfy the needs of all its members.

    The division of society into different, mutually hostile classes will then become unnecessary. Indeed, it will be not only unnecessary but intolerable in the new social order. The existence of classes originated in the division of labor, and the division of labor, as it has been known up to the present, will completely disappear. For mechanical and chemical processes are not enough to bring industrial and agricultural production up to the level we have described; the capacities of the men who make use of these processes must undergo a corresponding development.

    Just as the peasants and manufacturing workers of the last century changed their whole way of life and became quite different people when they were impressed into big industry, in the same way, communal control over production by society as a whole, and the resulting new development, will both require an entirely different kind of human material.

    People will no longer be, as they are today, subordinated to a single branch of production, bound to it, exploited by it; they will no longer develop one of their faculties at the expense of all others; they will no longer know only one branch, or one branch of a single branch, of production as a whole. Even industry as it is today is finding such people less and less useful.

    Industry controlled by society as a whole, and operated according to a plan, presupposes well-rounded human beings, their faculties developed in balanced fashion, able to see the system of production in its entirety.

    The form of the division of labor which makes one a peasant, another a cobbler, a third a factory worker, a fourth a stock-market operator, has already been underminded by machinery and will completely disappear. Education will enable young people quickly to familiarize themselves with the whole system of production and to pass from one branch of production to another in response to the needs of society or their own inclinations. It will, therefore, free them from the one-sided character which the present-day division of labor impresses upon every individual. Communist society will, in this way, make it possible for its members to put their comprehensively developed faculties to full use. But, when this happens, classes will necessarily disappear. It follows that society organized on a communist basis is incompatible with the existence of classes on the one hand, and that the very building of such a society provides the means of abolishing class differences on the other.

    A corollary of this is that the difference between city and country is destined to disappear. The management of agriculture and industry by the same people rather than by two different classes of people is, if only for purely material reasons, a necessary condition of communist association. The dispersal of the agricultural population on the land, alongside the crowding of the industrial population into the great cities, is a condition which corresponds to an undeveloped state of both agriculture and industry and can already be felt as an obstacle to further development.

    The general co-operation of all members of society for the purpose of planned exploitation of the forces of production, the expansion of production to the point where it will satisfy the needs of all, the abolition of a situation in which the needs of some are satisfied at the expense of the needs of others, the complete liquidation of classes and their conflicts, the rounded development of the capacities of all members of society through the elimination of the present division of labor, through industrial education, through engaging in varying activities, through the participation by all in the enjoyments produced by all, through the combination of city and country -- these are the main consequences of the abolition of private property.

    PS:

    The next time Germany, Austria and Japan team up and conquer Europe and the Pacific.

    the chance of austria conquering europe seems remote .

    seriosly...lennon sings of a society where all people give peace a chance...bush as well as bin laden.

  • Realist
    Realist

    yeru,

    i know communism would and will PROBABLY not work.

    but there were societies were it worked pretty well. indians, tahiti, aborigines etc. it seems we as europeans are trained to need possessions. this is not necessarily the a principle of nature though.

    The end to "poverty and desperation" won't come with communism in any form, but with creating opportunities for capitalists. Each worker is a capitalist at heart.

    yes i know...but that is perhaps only because we are raised in capitalist societies. alternatives MIGHT work better.

    he Arabs live better in Israel than anywhere else

    and as far as i know (correct me on this if i am wrong) those arabs are not responsible for the terrorist attacks but the arabs in teh rfugee camps in the west bank and gaza are.

    don't. So, we should clear out all the Jews? Jews have been there for thousands of years, and the persecution of Jews under Islam began with Muhammed himself.

    the problem is that the foundation of israel - whether you like it or not - was very problematic to say the least and constituted with the factual deportation of a million arabs and the annexation of large amounts of land a huge injustice to the arab population.

    as far as i know israel did never apologize for this and never gave appropriate compensation for the stolen land and goods. it would be necessary - probably with the help of the US - to first apologize to the palestinians and then to really prep up their territory which would have to made their own state. that would be the reasonable and just thing to do.

    and by the way i am not a fan of the arab leaders! i realize they are working in their own interest. so if you want to take them out fine.

    A whole population DOESN'T feel like that.

    i hope you are right. i however have the impression that most palestinians (and i might add not completely unjustified) hate israel and the jews and with them the USA.

  • blacksheep
    blacksheep

    seriosly...lennon sings of a society where all people give peace a chance...bush as well as bin laden.

    Just curious: I've heard the song many times. Please explicate how Lennon outlines a specific strategy and tactic to achieve whatever you think the goal is. As memory serves, he says, no religion, no hell,...everybody's living in harmony. Don't recall any particular specfic references to communism or how to get their.

    Guess I need to drop some acid to understand it.

  • blacksheep
    blacksheep

    i know communism would and will PROBABLY not work.

    Well, based on it's track record, it HASN'T worked, so trying to resurrect it seems pretty futile. Castro's pretty much the last communist stronghold...and I hardly think you'd call the poverty stricken nation led by a brutal dictator, a success.

    but there were societies were it worked pretty well. indians, tahiti, aborigines etc. it seems we as europeans are trained to need possessions. this is not necessarily the a principle of nature though.

    Yes, society does evolve, doesn't it. The naked facts are that in industrialized, western nations people have a much higher quality of life, have a much higher life expectancy, mortality and morbidity among infants is astronomically lower than that of other more primitive cultures, healthcare vastly superior, the list goes on.

    Posessions have ALWAYS been important to people. As you yourself claimed, most worse are fought over "econmics," translated: posessions. Over land (i.e., look at Israeli/Palistine conflict). What's that about? LAND.

    Like it or no, communism doesn't work in modern day society, if it ever worked. The cultures you reference are based on a highly religious, structured model, where the Shaman, the spiritual leader, is the driving force. Communism, which is generally premised on the non-existence of religion and God, is devoid of this spiritual drive. For true communism to exist, in the form you suggest it, there must be a SPIRITUAL/RELIGIOUS driving force--a COMMUNITY force that glues all members. Just distributing all the "wealth" devoid of any spiritual or religious reason for doing so, is bound to fail.

    Having lived in Europe and studied a bit about other cultures, the best life is one where we can achieve whereever our dreams drive us. Provide for our family, and hopefully, reach out to make other's lives better as well. That is why industrialized nations have longer life expectancy, better health, lower mortality, and can look beyond just bear subsistance to something higher.

    I guarantee you that people in non-industrialized, western cultures are not sitting here discussing this. They are just trying to survive.

  • FirstInLine
    FirstInLine
    i know communism would and will PROBABLY not work.

    The communists and the capitalists were instantly at odds with one another. Both firmly believed that their own side was right. Over the course of the 20th century both sides rose to great power militarily speaking at least. The capitalists enjoyed decade after decade of prosperity though, and the communists never achieved any measure of success with respect to the standard of living promised by Karl Marx.

    Now at the dawn of the 21st century communists are no longer feared or hated. They are pitied and laughed at. The communists are the laughing stock of the world community. Im not certain but I believe their are only 4 nations that still practice communism: China, North Korea, Vietnam and Cuba.

    The most powerful of the 4 is China. Proud, large, most populated nation on earth. Well maybe not so proud. The Chinese have become so desparate that they have reduced themselves to the exact primal fear that inspires communism. That fear is being a slave to "robber barrons" that get rich and live well off the toil of slave type workers.

    They are the lowest paid workers on the planet worth investing money for the equipment on. They are a joke. Foriegn investors seeking cheap labor to cushion their receding profit margins have set up shop in China. They have a MASSIVE labor pool willing to work for practically nothing. Had they simply gone along with social labor practices such as unionization and democracy they would live in a prosperous, comfortable economy. Instead they work as slaves for western capitalists that knew long ago capitalism works.

    Chinese Farmers who after taxes make $7 a year (48$ before the 80+% tax rate to pay for chinese weapons), leave the rural areas and move to the city seeking work in factories (that is also where SARS came from). But they only drive down their wages further in doing so. We have a vast labor pool from which we can satisfy our western consumer desire of more and more widgets for decades to come without losing anything in the process. The arrangements made with the Chinese government send most of the profits to the foriegn investors. Sad, pathetic and laughable. Let that be a lesson to anyone who thinks communism can defeat the radical ambition that capitalism breeds. Capitalism has made desparate slaves out of communists.

    If you want to practice communism, live in a free market democracy, buy a farm, and make some good friends. Other than that, forget about it.

  • Realist
    Realist

    yes yes i know it doesn't work. but i if i may quote jules verne's captain nemo :

    There is hope for the future.
    And when the world is ready for a new and better life
    all this will someday come to pass.
    In God's good time.

    blacky,

    do we really have to debate even john lennons song???

    Don't recall any particular specfic references to communism or how to get their.

    he sings imagine there are no possessions, no religion, no countries ... mea culpa mea maxima culpa if i mistakenly assumed this refers to communism.

    Yes, society does evolve, doesn't it. The naked facts are that in industrialized, western nations people have a much higher quality of life

    yes but they are not happier. believe it or not the happiest people live in poor societies.

    firstinline,

    did you read engels paper that i posted? its a nice fantasy isn'T it?

  • FirstInLine
    FirstInLine

    Realist,

    I read what you posted and skimmed the entire Engels paper. It is just like every other visionary communist. Promises, promises and assertions. They leave out so many factors that exist in reality that you have to wonder if these so called visionaries have any education or real world experience in economics what so ever. Its like Rodney Dangerfield's business professor in back to School.

    "Whats the product?"

    "The product at this point in our model is irrelevant."

    objections

    "Ok then lets just say we are making tape recorders."

    "Oh no the Japsanese will kill us on labor."

    "Ok then we are making widgets."

    "What's a widget?"

    "It's a fictional product. It doest matter."

    mumbles "Doesnt matter, doesnt matter... tell that to the zoning commissioner."

    The communist visionaries leave out so many details and negative forces it is incredible that they expect to be taken seriously.

    I dont see where the nice part of your fantasy is either. If it is ever to happen it will not be through revolution it will be through economic darwinism. But if that is the case there is no need to even think about it.

  • DanTheMan
    DanTheMan
    I think I am going to write a Song Called "Pipe Dream" based on John Lennon's Imagination. I have been a John Lennon critic for years. He is anything but realistic.

    And I thought I was the only person who considered him to be a flaming doofus.

  • talesin
    talesin

    FIL

    Here's a thought,,,,

    Chinese American Farmers who after taxes make $7 a year (48$ before the 80+% tax rate to pay for chinese american weapons), leave the rural areas heartland and move to the city seeking work in factories

    Yes, we have a great system here. (gentle sarcasm)

    I hope you give your dollars to FARM AID, so that you support your ideals.

    and, yes if I have to be labelled, I guess you would say I'm a 'socialist', BUT how do you justify this?

    talesin

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit