|
Post by heathen on Jan 1, 2016 7:35:32 GMT 1
cal - I would say that capitalist government redistributes wealth from the poor to the rich which is what happens in the US where the gap between poor and rich ever widens. Communist government is a redistribution from rich to poor. Lenin disinherited the Russian nobles taking their lands and private property from them redistributing it. As to a capitalist class in the USSR, it did not exist in Stalin's time. The accumulation that occurred under the czarist government was alien to the USSR until the Five Year Plans were abandoned in all but name by Brezhnev's economic plan of the early 1960's which remade the USSR into a capitalist system and established the possibilities for accumulation by greedy persons which culminated in the robber barons of the Yeltsin era. The Marxist state owns the means of production. Marxism takes ownership of the nation via the state. They still have a ruling class that controls the means of production.
|
|
|
Post by dionysios on Jan 1, 2016 7:43:09 GMT 1
The proletarians and peasants are the ruling class in Marxist countries. This was how it was in the USSR until the mid-1950's.
|
|
|
Post by heathen on Jan 1, 2016 7:48:50 GMT 1
The proletarians and peasants are the ruling class in Marxist countries. This was how it was in the USSR until the mid-1950's. That is not reality, the Marxists are commonly made up of the managerial and intellectual classes. Some of those become party bosses, and they are essentially the ruling class, and that state is called a worker's state. Anyway, to clarify, I think anarchism is also a utopian dream at best, as I believe humans are hierarchical.
|
|
|
Post by heathen on Jan 1, 2016 7:54:06 GMT 1
I do agree with more worker control of the means of production but I still support private property. I believe social and economic systems should also be based around the family and tribal/group systems as I believe humans a group oriented and need/desire social support, and then expansion into further laws and hierarchy from there to the size of a nation. So, I also don't believe this individualistic society is sustainable.
|
|
|
Post by dionysios on Jan 1, 2016 8:24:53 GMT 1
cal - Thanks for the Conversation. We do not agree on several things, but the exchange of ideas and information can be beneficial. Thanks for the book you linked. It's significance for me is probably very different than for you. I recently became interested in the Protocols of Zion as an antisemitic myth and selected reading material accordingly. A major aspect of the Jewish holocaust of World War II was this myth of a Jewish world conspiracy in the minds of Hitler and others who persecuted and slaughtered them. The Protocols of Zion was the basis of the myth that underscored the holocaust. The difference between atheists like Lenin and Christopher Hitchens is not lost on me. Atheists of Hitchens ilk are decidedly more dogmatic and less tolerant. The Protocols of Zion were part of an anti-Jewish movement that culminated in the holocaust mass murder. It's just an observation, but the anti-Christian fanaticism seems parallel to nineteenth century European attitudes towards Jews. That's just an observation of a trend. Christians as of now of course still have their freedom. Not controlling the dominant culture is not the same as being persecuted as some religious right Protestants babble, but the loss of Cheistian freedom is a possibility for the future. The book you linked struck me as having parallels to the Protocols of Zion.
|
|
|
Post by dionysios on Jan 1, 2016 8:27:49 GMT 1
heathen - As far as I'm concerned, I agree to disagree. I don't think you have a clue about Marxism and I'm not interested in your opinions, and you likely think the same thing about me.
|
|
cal
Freethinker
Concave & Flat
Posts: 145
|
Post by cal on Jan 1, 2016 22:58:19 GMT 1
heathen and dionysios, Thank you both for your thoughts on these subjects. I am way behind you both when it comes to political theory, and even philosophy. I am somewhat envious. Thanks heathen for the video about Heraclitus. I guess he was right about us needing strife/stress in our lives to make progress. It certainly doesn't seem fun at the time, but I guess it is necessary. In that sense he is giving advice to the troops in the trenches and that is appreciated. dionysios thanks to you as well for helping me to understand a little better about anarchism and its proponents. Plus your interaction with heathen shows me that we do need to put our thinking caps on when we delve into these issues. Perhaps I am too idealistic and/or simplistic in my philosophical and political outlook? But we all need to start learning somewhere. Thanks again to you both.
|
|
cal
Freethinker
Concave & Flat
Posts: 145
|
Post by cal on Jan 16, 2016 22:38:07 GMT 1
dionysios and heathenFurther to our conversation on 'Natural Law,' listen to what Ammon Bundy says in this video from about 1:38-2:08 Militia leader Ammon Bundy’s big goals from occupation
|
|