if US system of rule wld be opposed by even 30% of its pop, US system wld , i aver, resort to some kind of oppression of these people.
USSR, Cuban system of rule was opposed by well over 50% of its people.
Possibly even by as much as 90% of the people.
In US, in last election, the US structure of society and governance had been approved by ab 98% of voters.
With such support, it mattered little or not at all to BHO-mccain what the 98% said thereafter.
In fact, the more we bitch, complain, plead, wish, condemn, the happier they are. The system loves it; a beutiful woman wld say, Just don’t touch! Look all u want; just don’t touch me!

Confusion on the difference between “Socialism” and “Communism” stems partly from Lenin’s adoption of “Communist Party” to designate the former Bolsheviki (“majority”) of the Russian Social Democratic Party from the Mensheviks who had deserted Marxism by backing the Tsarist state in it’s war vs Germany, Austria-Hungary et al., at a time when there was no prospect that creation of a society worthy of what Marx had meant by Communism was on the horizon. Most “Western World” discourse understands by “Communism” the social order created by the Bolsheviks and later extended by Mao’s CCP and by others elsewhere. “Socialism” in this discourse refers to the various types of “reformed” or Welfare Capitalist states and schemes to create such, thereby departing entirely from the way Marx used the term.
Originally, Marx and Engels used the two terms to denote two distinct stages in the classless society the workingclass would create once it siezed state power and politically suppressed the the Dictatorship of the Capitalists. Socialism would be stage one, functioning on the basis of “From each according to his ability, To each according to his work”. This stage would eventually be superseded by Communism, based on the principle of “From each according to ability, To each according to his need”.

Marx and Engels, followed by Karl Kautsky, Rosa Luxembourg, G Plekhanov and Jas Connolly, spent much energy and time fiercely combatting the appealing but illusory notion that Capitalism could be “reformed”, “humanized”, showing over and over that the basic logic of the circuit of capital made any such mythological creature impossible.

You ask what actions are being taken? Specifically regarding promoting social change, I have not moved beyond my own sphere. That is, I concentrate on raising my children as an at-home parent, homeschooling, and emphasizing compassion and active communication. It is my hope that I will raise children that know how to contribute to society, rather than be a problem for society (i.e. violence, selfishness, materialism).

As a family, we are very choosy about where a limited dollars are spent, and we support local and organic food producers. We do not shop for clothing as a past time, we get the things we need at thrift stores and clothing swaps. We make as much of our own as we can of other things. This is not a perfect system, there is plenty that we haven’t the means, skills or cleverness to produce ourselves, but our intention is to not support that which is unsustainable. (as I type on my keyboard, at the computer, on the internet -supporting giant corporate Internet Provider)

Beyond my smallest sphere of family, I am connected to my neighbors and their children. I believe in local support networks, especially where so many of my neighbors are working multiple jobs and do not have the resources for safe childcare, or leftover energy to read to them, help with homework, give attention, or cook real food.

I HAD been managing a community garden and distributing the harvests among my neighbors, and teaching kids how to grow, harvest, prepare and store foods, but that has ended since the D.O.T. took away our garden. I am looking for another site, but finding roadblocks every way I turn.

At this point in time, I am looking to gather people who can agree on the fundamentals of We The People. It is time for mass disobedience I think. Dispelling fear, empowering individuals and finding safety in numbers are essential, and clear ideas about what result we wish. I think it is important for U.S. dwellers to get clear about needing to flex our power in numbers, realize that co-operating with every edict handed down from on high is how we continue to live under the status quo. Keeping our heads down and going along to get along is not working.

It’s time for us to gather in physical spaces, and find single and specific issues to withdraw our consent by just not co-operating. Our role models that are now vaunted and taught about in schools of all levels, Ghandi, MLK jr, Harriet Tubman etc, shouldn’t be just chapters and feel-good lesson plans. The gist is disobedience, an assertion that We do not consent to the edicts from on high. We need to TEACH and ENCOURAGE disobedience. “The wildest colts make the best horses” after all.

You are right, and wise, Garrett. It is time for actions, and less philosophizing.

I’m in Minnesota.

As always,
Peace, Resistance, Hope,
Melissa

Please read this very worth but lengthy article by extremely distinguished Marxist theorist David Harvey wrote recently.

http://davidharvey.org/2009/12/organizing-for-the-anti-capitalist-transition/

Some excerpt:

“The difference between socialism and communism is worth noting. Socialism aims to democratically manage and regulate capitalism in ways that calm its excesses and redistribute its benefits for the common good. It is about spreading the wealth around through progressive taxation arrangements while basic needs – such as education, health care and even housing – are provided by the state out of reach of market forces”

“Communism, on the other hand, seeks to displace capitalism by creating an entirely different mode of both production and distribution of goods and services…… Contemporary technologies of communication make such a system seem feasible. All manner of small-scale experiments around the world can be found in which such economic and political forms are being constructed.”

“Compound growth for ever is not possible and the troubles that have beset the world these last thirty years signal that a limit is looming to continuous capital accumulation that cannot be transcended except by creating fictions that cannot last. Add to this the facts that so many people in the world live in conditions of abject poverty, that environmental degradations are spiraling out of control, that human dignities are everywhere being offended even as the rich are piling up more and more wealth”

Social change arises through the dialectical unfolding of relations between seven moments within the body politic of capitalism viewed as an ensemble or assemblage of activities and practices:

a) technological and organizational forms of production, exchange and consumption

b) relations to nature

c) social relations between people

d) mental conceptions of the world, embracing knowledges and cultural understandings and beliefs

e) labor processes and production of specific goods, geographies, services or affects

f ) institutional, legal and governmental arrangements

g) the conduct of daily life that underpins social reproduction.

———————-
Please read the whole article. I hope you find it useful.

BO’s speech teems with tacit and explicit promises and thus lies! Can one get wiser than knowing anything else but just this one fact? Ok, we’ll find out in a moment.
A priestly or political [btw, media also] talk teems with generalizations to which true or false answers do not pertain; now we have two legs of wisdom to stand on.
And it feels a lot better to walk on both legs. Maybe walking on all fours wld be even better.
Now instead of promising explicitly or in a sneaky way, i’ve decided to make a suggestion: Pay ‘hard working and dilligently serving’ pols at least $10 mn a yr.
This way americans wld do away with those [in]famous cheques and balances that always balance just right.

U wld see then the changes u desire: right to be informed-educated wld finally be legalized. After that the door leading to other riches such as healthcare, no more wars wld surely fly off its hinges.
And finally, former terrorists wld now live in terror instead of us.And at our hands! As we know, wars might cost $2 tns. Paying pols decent wages of anywhere from $10mn-100 mn wld be very cheap in comparison to what wars, army, cia, etc., cost.
So why don’t americans start a collection for pols which wld buy them owns agents instead of Them buying the same poor hard working public servanst! tnx

Thank you for your request. I don’t have much time right now to fully respond however since you are on the Internet there is much information available to you. I think you have an excellent understanding of how Capitalism works you have to take the next step and go beyond Liberalism. Unlike what Max Sheilds say, understanding the various ideologies is important so that you can make comparasion and understand the condictions that arises in them.

Here’s a link to Marxism.org.

I have also found this site useful as well World Socialism Movement . This site helped me comprehend how a moneyless society could be constructed.

There are plenty more and I’ll refer other links in a future post.

Let me say that I’ve found comprehending Marxism to be extremely challenging. It’s not easy especially as it challenged my “liberal” assumptions. But had it not been for the Internet I would have never been able to understand any of it. I don’t have time to share with you my journey. I’ll save that for another post.

I have been thinking quite a lot about what you’ve said, and demonstrated, regarding positing and interpreting arguments, etc. I haven’t had the benefit of an education, and no exposure to the Trivium -indeed I didn’t even know the term until a few months ago.

What would you recommend to autodidacts who want to “re-wire” their thinking/critical analysis before taking on studying anything further, whether economics, ideology, or literature? I am reluctant to embark upon studies of these subjects because it is painfully apparent that I (and many of my peers) are in a vulnerable, dependent position without those skills. It’s crippling.

So . . . books, web resources, anything?

As always,
Peace, Resistance, Hope,
Melissa

P.S. Apologies to Ron Jacobs for dragging the thread beyond the scope of your article. Apologies as well to others in the midst of conversations to which this post has nothing to add.

By the way Ms. YFF worte:

[war is not human nature – human nature is unchanging and violence has grown for 3000 years – no correlation, therefore no causality. And so-called religious and racial wars are pay-injustice wars along religious or racial lines; where there are religious or racial differences without pay injustice, there are no wars – again, no correlation, so no causality
————————

Sorry but I highly doubt that you’ve heard the evolutionary theory when you claim “human nature is unchanging”. In fact, Human nature is very flexible. The malleability of human nature is beyond the question. If your can prove “human nature is unchanging”,the you already invalidate the Darwin theory of evolution.!!! A great feat indeed!!!!!!!!!!!!

- Capitalism works well, it just needs some minor tweaks (taxing, pay just…)

Basically Ms. YFF called for sort of demand management Keynesian capitalism with minor patches aka “justice capitalism” in her own word. In her master plan, the government plays a active role on income distribution through taxing capital gain and socialize inheritance properties for public utilizations. But the free market and the capitalists in commanding the height of economy are remained intact. This premise reflects the Keynesian theory of crisis is the lack of effective demand.

In Marxist perspective, it is correct but not enough. The deeper cause of crisis is the unreconcilable contradiction within the capitalist system. It is insatiable appetite for capital accumulation in on hand and the necessary to maintain the effective demand on other hand. If there is the over accumulation of capital, it will dry out the effective demand and lead to crisis. If the effective demand is maintained in a considerable period of time, it will compromise the rate of accumulation, on other words the rate of profit shall fall thus lead capitalists cease new investments and may halt productions, layoff worker then the economy stagnates. Ms. YFF’s suggestion on the increment of money supply only make the situation worser (cause inflation). The capitalist has no choice but to reduce wages and deregulation of financial market…. to restore the rate of profit. Ms. YFF has to understand this matter of “must” not “choice”. In highly competitive environment, if capitalists don’t follow the iron law of capital, they will be terminated. That’s exactly what had gone so wrong with Keynesian demand management then eventually the rise of neoliberalism (now shove us to verge of global economic collapse).

I don’t see how Ms. YFF scheme can work at all.

beside, Ms. YFF relentlessly make argument on “justice pay”…. rely on much oratory rather than substance. Over using value judgement (justice…) instead of concrete analysis. Moral, emotional appraisals tend to be very relative which your justice may be different my justice or for instance Obama’s justice. Obama just proclaimed on Nobel prize recipient speech that his criminal wars are just war cause he kill millions to protect the freedom and democracy of the world???? then who decide it is just or not just ???? For most of american liberal, it is a just war, for me it is not!!!

That’s different between Marxist critique of capitalism and other rival schools is Marxists don’t judge the capitalist system is just or unjust. What we are criticizing capitalism is unable to deliver optimum result for a great part of people. And the capitalism already fulfilled the historical mission to eradicate feudalism. Now the task of socialists are push forward the democratic agenda to transcend the capitalism to socialism and eventually communism (very long time) or we let capitalism to roll back to neo-feudalism (aka barbarianism) cause capitalism already reach the tipping point.

“Adam Smith said that once a small elite had monopolized ownership of land and materials, they would drive wages down to the level of subsistence. It is the “appropriation of land and stock” — Smith’s terminology — that creates the “market force” that reduces the market value of labor.
Now, that doesn’t mean that certain derivative functions — management, distribution, and even investment — don’t exist, and that labor cannot contract for the delivery of those derivative functions. If you are the labor producing automobiles, or any other good or service, a sales force selling those goods and services is probably necessary. Likewise, certain organizational functions — we call it “management” — might be useful. Even “investment” has a place, since the goods and services needed to build and equip a shop must be paid for.

But notice that those derivative functions serve the labor that produces the value. It is distribution, management and investment that are “costs of doing business.” Productive labor is the business that has these costs. Our contemporary business model has stood this on its head. The “cost” is productive labor in an arrangement where “ownership” trumps “production,” and where the owner of materials and facilities is seen as the central player. Owners have a “natural right” to reduce their “costs” and maximize their profits. Productive labor is not perceived as having any such right.

I say that productive labor has the same, and indeed a superior right to maximize its profit, and that the laws and government have an entirely legitimate function in protecting these fundamental rights of labor — fundamental rights that have not hitherto been recognized.

As a final observation, notice that recognition and protection of the fundamental rights of labor is entirely consistent with a “market economy,” where “market forces” are understood to be shaped by certain legal and governmental constructs. The government has an absolute right, if not an obligation, to shape the fundamental rules of the market in such as way as to guarantee labor its fundamental rights.”

Quiztime: who said this? “Land Monopoly is not the only monopoly, but it is by far the greatest of monopolies – it is perpetual monopoly, and it is the mother of all other forms of monopoly.” bobo, do you know who said that?

I don’t wish to have the power to decide for the people whether or not they want to elect their manager by voting. I only seek to make it possible for them to do so, if that is their wish. Fairpay Justice equalizes power, therefore removes the barriers now making attainment of the people’s goals impossible.

Ms. Your friend Fairpay worte:
———————————–
“We constitute governments as a necessary evil for the benefits we wouldn’t have without them. …………………..?

…………… Government will only die when the second to the last person dies – because people are always going to organize themselves and their affairs so as to increase their security, comfort, happiness, prosperity, etc.”
——————————–

The primary role of government in capitalistic society is to protect private properties. Without government enforces the social contracts, the capitalist can not thrive. That’s why it’s called ” necessary evil” for capitalist. If government is too big (has many regulations) or vulnerable to popular demands (too democratic), it may ruin the capitalist’s opportunities to despoil others. However it’s a mysterious to me when Ms. YFF erected the straw man of “no government fantasy” which usually associates with classical liberalism (libertarian) to beat it to dead in front of socialists.

Then Ms. YFF cited the racist, imperialist and murderous Winston Churchill “Democracy is the worst form of government…except for all the rest” as authority. But Socialists are all for democracy but not type of fake democracy that repugnant Churchill had in mind. Lenin nailed that hypocritical democracy “To decide once every few years which member of the ruling class is to repress and oppress the people through parliament–this is the real essence of bourgeois parliamentarism”. We want direct democracy (participatory democracy), democracy should be in anywhere in socialist society. How about the workers can elect the manager by voting? Is that too radical for yor? Ms YFF.

Alan Greenspan presented a excellent definition of ideology during his “confession” before Congress. An ideology is a set of beliefs used to guide one’s perception of the world. Greenspan finally admitted that his Ayn Rand belief were flawed. What Max decribes is EXTREMISM and that is the typical tactic of anti-Marxist like Max. Not rational arguments.

Americans are being squeezed out of health care not only by the loss of job benefits, but also by corporate takeover of medical practice from physicians. Today medical doctors are wage slaves of corporate health providers that leverage doctors by turning them into supervisors of physician assistants, lower paid people without medical degrees who perform the services that doctors once provided. As neither doctor nor physician assistant has any independence, there is no one to represent the patient’s care against the profits of the corporation.

An idea which might have merit is stopped cold, scrutinized to see if its an idea that passes the test or is it tainted by something less than the ideologues notion of what fits in the box? It makes for a truly boring discussion. So, if anyone knows boring, it’s Deadbeat. His posts exemplify it.

Ok so Marxism, Marxists and Marx are not related. Perhaps you have the Marx Bros. in mind, Deadbeat.

And thus the breadth of the dialogue here. Bartering is inconceivable in a Capitalist system. However bartering typically is an individualist endeavor rather than collective and democratic planning, sharing the surplus and meeting soceity’s collective needs. Thus the extent of your ridicule is grounded in your LACK of understanding and misrepresentation of Socialism in order to preserve an authoritarian system.

As for Max, we’ve been here before. Good luck diverting people with your revival of Henry George’s land tax perscription.