main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Senate This thread is publicly owned (marxism, socialism, and left-wing ideologies)

Discussion in 'Community' started by 3sm1r, Aug 31, 2020.

  1. 3sm1r

    3sm1r Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Dec 27, 2017
    I have a good feeling about this :p

    The cold war has been over for a while, so perhaps it's time to have a nuanced discussion about communism and other left-wing political and economic theories without ending up in useless partisan clashes.

    First of all, I immediately give up my ownership over this thread, and I invite everyone to contribute in improving this original post with all the premises and definitions they deem appropriate, and any update of the title and this post will be more than welcome.

    Second, as it's usually recommended by the etiquette, I will make some considerations to initiate the conversation. Under spoiler, I try to explain some concepts the best I can.

    Anyway, what I think is not particularly relevant and at the end of the day you can basically talk about any topic that is commonly associated to the Left, according to your will and your taste.

    There is an economics professor called Richard Wolff who has an interesting definition of capitalism, which doesn't start directly from the concept of capital (= very roughly, an amount of goods that are used to expand themselves rather than being directly consumed), but starts from a different premise. Capitalism is a model of production that is based in the employer/employee relationship. It is different from slavery, which is rather based on the slave/slave owner relationship, and to feudalism, which is based on the lords/peasants relationship.

    A crucial characteristic of capitalism is that the employer is the owner of the means of production, as well as of what is produced, whereas the employee is not, and in exchange for their work they rather receive a salary.
    Marx bases a good portion of his ideas on these premises. It's obviously impossible to be exhaustive, but I think that some very important aspects that stimulated his philosophy are the following

    1) the workers (or employees) do not own what they produce. They are, in this sense, alienated with respect to the result of their work.

    2) they also do not participate to the decisions concerning what is produced, leading to an additional form of alienation.

    3) the employer uses their capital to pay for commodities, machines and employees, something is produced, and then, if the whole operation is successful, there is a net profit, meaning that the capital at the end is larger than the capital at the beginning. Marx elaborated on this mechanism, wondering, from a somehow abstract framework, where this increment comes from. The conclusion is that this is, at the end of the day, what results from unpaid work by the employees. In other words, to put it in a very simplistic form, the production process under capitalism is based on a sort of intrinsically unfair dynamics.

    The natural next step in the way production is structured is, according to Wolff, to arrive to a democratization of the workforce, meaning that the workers will have a say in the decision making process for what they produce, and they will also have ownership over it.

    This seems to me a rather convincing point of view. I recommend to watch some of his videos on YouTube. They are generally called Democracy At Work. He has an extremely clear way of explaining rather complicated concepts and they are generally very pleasant lectures.

    Of course, how this next step will be possible in practice, and whether it would be desirable, is open to debate, and I'm surely curious to hear some opinions on the subject.
     
  2. Harpua

    Harpua Chosen One star 9

    Registered:
    Mar 12, 2005
    ****ing fabulous.
     
    3sm1r likes this.
  3. CairnsTony

    CairnsTony Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    May 7, 2014
    This could be a thread worthy of the very best this community has to offer.
     
  4. Alpha-Red

    Alpha-Red Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Where is Ender_Sai when you need him? Need someone to smack people around and yell about how the American idea of what's "left-wing" isn't left-wing at all.
     
  5. Thena

    Thena Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    May 10, 2001
    This is a fascinating subject, when I was growing up I always dreamed of some day living in the most egalitarian world possible, which is of course where you should end up if you embrace some kind of "left-wing" paradigm and take it to its logical extreme.
    But I'm much more jaded these days and I don't think we'll see this during our lifetimes.
    China and Russia have transitioned towards a market economy, while smaller countries like Cuba and North Korea are boldly continuing their experiments of a closed economy with a totalitarian or authoritarian regime that doesn't give much freedom to the people. I know I'm painting in very broad strokes here, but it would be pointless to aim for a more detailed analysis, imho.
    All the major countries in the world are in it for the money, not for ideological purity, and the closest we've come to truly egalitarian societies has been the few countries that have prospered with social democracy.
    Sure a lot of us would like to live in an utopian egalitarian paradise, but history shows that the odds of getting there seem to be diminishing by the day, at least in the time frame that could make a difference to us personally, and the economic elites have grown too entrenched and independent from the power of the state to be brought down even a notch or two.
    If conditions on the ground change, then let's reevaluate at that point in time, but discussing abstract concepts that aren't changing any time soon imho has reached a point of diminishing intellectual results.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
    Emperor Ferus and Iron_lord like this.
  6. Lord Vivec

    Lord Vivec Chosen One star 9

    Registered:
    Apr 17, 2006
    I think one of the important things to consider is what is it that that you want society to look like? I want a society with no exploitation and no oppression. I want a society where you do not need to labor under an employer in order to have enough to eat, get medical treatment, a place to stay, some modicum of a life in a western country. I want a society where my country doesn't interfere in the affairs of other countries solely for the economic benefit of a few rich people. I want a society without hierarchy. Capitalism is inherently a hierarchy (so is fascism, feudalism, etc). In capitalism, your place in society is determined by how much money you have. Even in a purely meritocratic society, this would be problematic. But it's even worse than that, because how much money you have is determined by how much your parents earned, your race and other identifying factors, your opportunities, your connections, etc. The richest people don't "earn" money. They don't go out and toil in labor. Their money earns money. The rest of us, we toil in labor if we can, working through untreated physical and mental illnesses as we bring in income for our employers and get paid a fraction of that as salary.

    This is a dystopia. Capitalism is a dystopia. Modern western society is a dystopia. If you don't feel that way, that's because either you're well off enough or your eyes are closed. Data collection companies create a "credit score" that determines whether or not you can get a loan for a car, be eligible to rent an apartment, and a whole host of other necessities. Most families are one medical emergency away from bankruptcy. If you're not rich enough to have a car, you have to spend two extra hours each day going and coming to work. Funnily enough, a lot of jobs that couldn't be worked from home are all of a sudden able to be worked from home thanks to this pandemic. And if you're rich enough to have a car, but not much richer, you need to keep that car working, spending thousands of dollars in order to make sure you have it. If you are not rich in a capitalist society, every system put in place is out to break your legs. You're walking a thin plank above shark infested waters.

    Fascism breeds in this environment. People aren't born Hitlers (except Adolf, he was born Hitler). Liberals and Progressives are quick to throw the "alienated white male" who becomes a fascist under the bus because they think that white privilege means that these people are guaranteed to have good lives so it must be because they're bad people. What Liberals and Progressives don't get is that capitalism is extremely alienating, that there's is a lot of untreated mental illness, and that being a cishet white male doesn't actually get you far enough to make it. Remember, at the start of this country, it wasn't any white male who could vote. It was landowning white males. There was always a class aspect to it. And liberals are not willing to fight against it because liberals benefit from the same class aspect. It's always in the failures of liberalism (and there are a lot) that fascism breeds. It's an easy answer to a tough situation. But as a leftist, it's not the right answer.

    I'm going to stop now before this gets too long.
     
  7. 3sm1r

    3sm1r Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Yeah, my big epiphany arrived when I started familiarizing with this big idea. The core principle of capitalism is that the more money you have, the easier it gets to accumulate even more. Such a simple concept, yet so profound.

    Anyway, with really no reason whatsoever I'm going to offer you all this iconic video of the young female soldier of the Red Army directing traffic at the Brandenburg Gate in 1945, in case you never watched it. She has then become one of the most famous symbols of the victory over Nazi Germany. Just to set the mood.


     
    Darth Guy and Lord Vivec like this.
  8. CairnsTony

    CairnsTony Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    May 7, 2014
    I would also argue that capitalism is unsustainable in the long-term because it is all about growth and exploitation of natural resources. Capitalist economic models cannot readily demonstrate that they are neutral to, or beneficial to, the environment. IMHO, even the most optimistic exponents of technical innovation cannot demonstrate this.

    Capitalism in its purest sense equates price to value. If a tree has no economic 'value' because it does not yield useful timber, firewood, fibre, or food say, then it is worthless. If it provides shade or aesthetic value, then it is viewed as an externality, and plenty of capitalists see no value in that. Still worse, many trees don't even provide that, and so have no value in and of themselves. The same applies to any aspect of the natural world that cannot be readily exploited for material gain.

    I want to live in a world where we view all aspects of the natural world as having intrinsic value.
     
  9. Thena

    Thena Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    May 10, 2001
    Well, this is generally true, but not always. Many rich people have squandered away a fortune and been left penniless. Some have pointed out that Trump would have been better off taking the money his father left him and just let professional investors handle it, he wouldn't have gone into so many things where he ended up in bankruptcy,
    Having said that, yes, generally easier to accumulate more if you start out with some and you know how to move strategically.
     
  10. 3sm1r

    3sm1r Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Dec 27, 2017
    @Princess_Tina
    I'm not saying that it's impossible to screw up if someone is dumb,
    The core principle I had in mind is that if you live paycheck to paycheck it's going to be difficult to accumulate wealth.
    If you're rich, on the other hand, you can invest what you don't need to survive and use it to generate additional wealth. And the richer you are, the easier it will be to have a diversified portfolio to reduce the risks and hopefully maximize the gains. And frankly, you don't really need to be a genius to invest in an index fund. Moreover, your kids will usually have a better education and it will be easier for them to get a fruitful job, and thus a corresponding higher salary, etc etc.
    There is this misconception that rich people somehow deserve their wealth, but it's all a big lie. Once you get rich things tend to get much easier, and accumulating additional wealth is not such an incredible feat.
     
  11. blackmyron

    blackmyron Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Oct 29, 2005
    Lord Vivec will be back at Uncle Joe's Revolutionary Laff Shack on Tuesday at 8 and 10 pm
     
  12. a star war

    a star war Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    May 4, 2016
    Yeah, like I'm gonna listen to the guy who subscribes to the Economist and wears a $5,000 wrist watch.
     
  13. Thena

    Thena Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    May 10, 2001
    He wore a $5000 watch? How nouveau riche! :p
     
  14. a star war

    a star war Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    May 4, 2016
    dude thought he was James Bond.
     
    darthcaedus1138 likes this.
  15. Lord Vivec

    Lord Vivec Chosen One star 9

    Registered:
    Apr 17, 2006
    No thread is safe from being about Ender. It's like a new Godwin's Law: As more posts are made in a thread, the probability that the discussion will become about Ender approaches 1.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
  16. Lordban

    Lordban Isildur's Bane star 7

    Registered:
    Nov 9, 2000
    This bears underlining. The worker who struggles to make ends meet tends to want two things: something (or somebody) to blame for their struggles, and someone listening to their demands and giving them hope their lives will get better.

    When Liberals and Progressives tell them to check their privilege, their struggles are minimized, they're the ones made to bear the blame, and they're told their desire to have better lives are unimportant. Voting for them becomes self-defeating and self-demeaning for the worker. And a self-sacrificial approach to politics is not something politicians have any right to demand of the worker. Nor do they have any right to demand from the worker to "vote against evil"; not after defining them as privileged and their aspirations as worthless.

    This is the ground the traditional lefts of the world consistently kept abandoning over the past century, and the ground totalitarians have exploited to their own advantage time and again over the same past century. Throw in a few pinches of nepotism, privilege and corruption as are invariably manifest at the upper levels in politics, and you've got people who are overtly told by the leaders of the current system themselves they've got no interest in upholding that system, and a lot of reasons to want to see it explode.

    Not that all Progressive or Liberal politicians fail to understand that, mind you. But it's not in their own best interest to actually do something about it, so they don't.
     
  17. poor yorick

    poor yorick Ex-Mod star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Thank you to @3sm1r, @Lord Vivec, and @CairnsTony for providing very lucid, bite-size descriptions of what Marxist economic theory is about. It’s been many years since I studied that sort of thing, and to be honest, I’m not sure I understood it that well at the time.

    FWIW, at age 18 or 19 or so I read the graphic novel version of Marx’s “Capital” (no, really,) illustrated by Rius. I believe it’s called “Marx For Beginners,” and it looks like it’s downloadable for free these days, illustrations included. If you google the book title and Rius’ byline, you can find the book in lots of formats.
     
    CairnsTony and 3sm1r like this.
  18. Thena

    Thena Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    May 10, 2001
    OMG I read that one too! He was always a great artist.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
    poor yorick likes this.
  19. CairnsTony

    CairnsTony Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    May 7, 2014
    I must confess I wasn't really trying to provide a body of evidence on environmental issues with regards to Marxist theory, primarily because Marx himself didn't really understand scarcity that well, even if he did pay lip service to utilising nature as a resource.

    It's pretty clear to me that a less utilitarian approach to nature has come to prominence in much of the world since the time of Marx. Concerns about the natural environment extend to even the poorest countries; more than many in the West appreciate I think. I remember, for example, chatting to several Kenyans last year about trophy hunting in their country by rich Americans. All of them were appalled by it, and wanted their wildlife to be left alone. They knew the issues perfectly well, and it always astounds me how often people in the West, -even well-meaning Westerners- view sub-Saharan Africans as a little dim, or in need of 'education' on how to utilise their own resources. There can be a dialogue there for sure, but it should absolutely be two-way. We in the West often have the means to make a difference, but seem remarkably bad at listening. We in the West cause far more damage to the environment per head than the average Sub-Saharan African, and we are rarely in a position to tell them what's what on that front. Typically, where the most damage is being done, it is due to strong Western influences. Good old capitalism again...

    My point really is that if we want to create a better world, I'd sooner this be a global dialogue with equal voices everywhere. Everyone on the political left needs to get on board with this. Many are, but not all. The betterment of people cannot take place in the long term if we do not take a holistic world view with regards to resources and scarcity. Even the most egalitarian society is flawed until it acknowledges this. If many sub-Saharan Africans understand this, and they do, then so should we.
     
  20. Jedi Merkurian

    Jedi Merkurian Future Films Rumor Naysayer star 7 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    May 25, 2000
    [​IMG]

    The sooner we recognize that wisdom can be found in the myriad of peoples and cultures, the sooner we realize that "civilization" is not the sole property of a single root culture and its offshoots, the better.
     
  21. Alpha-Red

    Alpha-Red Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Socialism Is as American as Apple Pie

     
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2020
    Rew, CairnsTony, Vaderize03 and 4 others like this.
  22. 3sm1r

    3sm1r Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Dec 27, 2017
    ^ Before the second half of last century there wasn't the same stigma against socialism. Take Jack London. He casually mentions his socialist positions several times in his books, without making many excuses for it.
    During FDR the socialists and the communists were an actual political force.
     
    Emperor Ferus and Princess_Tina like this.
  23. dp4m

    dp4m Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Not really any substantive comment, but of interest to some of you, one of my Russian friends was cleaning out their parents' apartment and stumbled across the 1953 Russian version, plus then an American version her parents bought...

    [​IMG]
     
  24. SateleNovelist11

    SateleNovelist11 Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jan 10, 2015
    Democratic socialism can work with enlightened leaders in the judiciary, executive, and legislative branches. The key world is enlightened. At best, they should care about the populace as a whole. Now, are ya gonna find people like that? In some places more than others is the easy answer.

    Anyhow, that's cool. You gotta give Marx props for believing in what he said. However, some have critiqued him for being like the old aristocratic philosophers insofar as Engles made the money and supported him. Engles doesn't get enough credit for his own contributions to the ideology.
     
  25. Alpha-Red

    Alpha-Red Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Having enlightened leaders doesn't mean a thing if they can't defend themselves against demagogues.