1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Marxism Still Alive?

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by ethics, Jan 1, 2003.

  1. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    The Economist has an article on <a href="http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=1489165">Marx's intellectual legacy.</a>

    In it, it argues that even though Communism has failed miserably, Marx's ideas still live on. It points to recent books on the matter as evidence that there is still strong interest in his ideas. The fact that <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/461545.stm">respondents to a BBC poll</a> rated him as the greatest thinker further prove this. Although, I tend to consider the source, especially to what BBC caters to.

    All socio-economic models are bound to fail though.

    Capitalism continues to fail, just ask anyone living in poverty.

    Communism fails too, just ask anyone living in a communist state, or someone who's been there. :)

    Capitalism creates a dangerous chasm between the haves and the have-nots, and brings enormous amount of churn and chaos in the society. Communism inevitably and without any doubt, because the variable is human beings, leads to an oppressive, totalitarian state.

    Which is worse?
     
  2. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    I think the respondents in the BBC poll may have been confused and were actually thinking about one of these individuals.
     
  3. Copzilla

    Copzilla dangerous animal Staff Member

    I believe that inevitably, communism leads to poverty also, as the incentive to conduct hard work, the incentive to innovate, is eliminated.

    I believe that capitalism is the very reason we are the most powerful nation on earth. Look at China. Why will they never be more advanced, more powerful than the U.S.? Because their best minds have no incentive to produce.

    In that totalitarian government exists the inability to fail, also. Examine the actions of the totalitarian Japanses naval commanders during WWII. They refused to even send information of stunning defeats up the chain, and simply destroyed the remaining vessels by sending them into battle while reporting phantom strength.

    Given a choice, I would always choose a society in which innovative thought and increased effort is rewarded, and failure is acknowledged and addressed.
     
  4. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    I think that they are both great ideas, and that pure capitalism and pure communism both have great flaws. You need to find a balance between the two...
     
  5. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Which is why the capitalistic system we have in the US is bound to fail.

    While we reward innovative thought and increased effort we are not acknowledging and addressing our failures. Failures in schools with the "dumbing down" of kids instead of increasing competition. Failures at work, where we pay enourmous amount of money for the Human Resources department. So they can let someone go without the dangers of law suits. Failures in society via political correct speech, where we can't criticize rap music, cultures, immigrant pockets, religion, etc...
     
  6. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Socialism, Techie? :haha:

    SM
     
  7. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    There is no grey area with Communism, Techie. While Capitalism breeds private sector, Communism preaches government ownership of all business. If you instill free market economy, it becomes something different than Communism -- since the backbone of Communism is government ownership.

    You know the story of The Time Machine by H.G. Wells? Not the bastardized versions that appear on tv these days but the original work. That's a perfect analogy of what Communism is.
     
  8. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Won't work with a large country like the US. Socialism relies on honor system created and maintained by the individuals. It has a hard time getting over in countries like Sweden, I just can't see it done here.
     
  9. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Agreed.

    SM
     
  10. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    Capitalism can only succeed when the profit is more evenly divided between those who produce and those who own. The system of capitalism we have seen for the last ten years has the greed of the shareholder doing ultimate damage to the long term success of capitalism. The worker is not without a part of the blame. Ultimately the polarilization between unions and management has led to a system where winner takes all. And for capitalism to work all have to share in the profit.
     
  11. jamming

    jamming Banned

    I think we should have a Fuedal Technocracy, where each sector of the Economy has a Ruler based upon direct production of their sector, he in turn has Sub-Rulers all the way down to the lowest level. This is not Geographical and is like a guild system. The lowest person in the Guild and all people are members of one Guild or another, has one vote at each level and Sub-level. Basic Rights are guarenteed to all.
     
  12. Basilio

    Basilio Banned

    Well, Karl Marx has influenced the critique of capitalism as it stands and may have put pressure on the capitalist countries to reform their systems to reduce the support for this very left of the spectrum movement. I think the US and Soviet systems were polar, imbalanced opposites......... Anyway, capitalism or socialism doesn't mean you will be wealthy or not, there are more factors at work. And there are plenty of states that are totalitarian in the capitalist and socialist camps, whether you are talking about Pinochet or Castro. Pinochet was probably worse in terms of the numbers he killed.
    Anyway, the Soviet system never reached the stage of communism. According to Marx's theories it requires a proletariat to overthrow the capitalists, that did not happen. Marx's theories called for the dictatorship of the proletariat, but also the control of the state by them. That did not happen. I frankly favor a mixture of Socialism and Capitalism as both take into consideration the needed balance between the individual and
    the collective and would promote social democracy. I definitely support Marx's opposition to nationalism, using religion in warfare, and the oppression of the worker, and imperialism.
    Lenin talked more about imperialism then Marx. I don't recall reading, though, where he believed the state should be used to suppress religions. I did read the Manifesto, German Ideology,
    and parts of Das Kapital....
     
  13. Copzilla

    Copzilla dangerous animal Staff Member

    But those failures are NOT capitalistic failures, ethics. Those are failures of capitalism due to injection of socialistic principles.

    Dumbing down schools - is that capitalism? No. That's socialistic ideals, "all things equal guaranteed." It's not achievement based.

    The "Politically Correct" movement - These are not achievement based ideals.

    No, we're not recognizing our failures, because the socialists in this country refuse to. It's like every gun bill known to mankind... New York being outrageous in crime but its citizenry being disarmed. Ebonics being the cause of our kids not learning in school, but then when you give an "ebonicized" test to the same kids, the results are the same.

    I believe that for the large part, the failures of our capitalistic society, it's the injection of socialism that is causing it in the first place.
     
  14. -Ken

    -Ken Guest

    Copzilla,

    I am having trouble understanding where you get the idea we are a Capitalistic society. While we endorse free enterprise, we are not solely based on Capitalism.

    If we were...

    Only children from rich families could afford education, medical care and Law Enforcement. Companies would have no other restrictions than a mandate to make money.

    We have been (since our very inception) a Commonwealth. This allows for each citizen to receive equal benefits paid for by all of us based on our ability. Should we lose sight of this, the top 2% of our population might face the other 98% who would no longer support a society where poor people work and get little or no reward.

    While I would admit Ebonics has nothing to do with education, it is another instance where we are trying to find reasons for failure. There are times where failure is just failure.

    If our society was strictly capitalistic, you would be replaced with a less expensive (and probably less capable) person (maybe an immigrant) willing to work for 1/4 of your salary.
     
  15. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member



    It didn't? Where were the capitalists during the Soviet Union?

    Very true on Lenin, although he didn't aspire to go to the lengths Stalin wanted to. Religion was nixed along with the intelligentsia.


    Religion is one of the forms of spiritual oppression which everywhere weighs down heavily upon the masses of the people, over burdened by their perpetual work for others, by want and isolation....



    Rest of Lenin's drivel here.
     
  16. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    Ken, although not 1/4, it is happening daily. And not always physically. The net has made it possible for many jobs to be replaced without importing workers.

    Companies are replacing us with foreign labor as quickly as they can.
     
  17. jamming

    jamming Banned

    I thought the Marx Brothers were very funny and glad to hear they have survived, my favorite is Zeppo......What.....oh. Nevermind ;)
     
  18. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    Nope, Socialism was what happened in the USSR (not communism). No matter what the propoganda machine says, communism is where everybody owns everything, in the USSR the government owned everything, thus the socialist republic...
     
  19. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    I'll have to defer to Mr. Keylin on that. :)

    Actually, correction...then communism is inherently flawed, and not suited for any kind of national presence.

    SM
     
  20. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Ahem. :)

    I would say that neither occured in SU but the model was designed from Marxism, then evolved in to Bolshevism which lasted about 2 years or so, until Lenin decided to get rid of the real Bolsheviks.

    Since then, it has been pseudo-Communism and closer to the model of one rather than Socialism.
     

Share This Page