May 19, 2014 at 5:02 am #42515boansParticipant
Marx was looking at the relations between workers who produced commodities for sale in a market, and the capitalists who owned the means of production, and how profit could only be extracted from labour power.
This of course does not consider the massive growth in the service industries, which have no means of production, and do not produce commodities for sale in the market. The proletariat bogieoise division largely ignores the “intellectual” class. Doctors, teachers, lawyers etc do not produce commodities.
The relations become much more complex. Certainly where a society has a socialist type health care system, a large pot of taxpayer money becomes available to the intellectual class. How that money is distributed is important. Mental health services has allowed snake oil salesmen access to that pot of money, and personally i believe we should be having a good look at how they have been defrauding the taxpayers of large sums.
Fabricated illnesses, that can be applied to anyone gives access to the money. Combined with the drug companies, who do have commodities to sell, it’s a match made in heaven for organised fraud.September 24, 2014 at 3:35 pm #47844
The verse you are referring to is one of the most commonly mis-quoted passages in the bible.
You said, “Money is the root of all evil.”
The verse is, “The LOVE of money is the root of all evil.”
It comes from St. Paul’s first letter to Timothy (1 Timothy 6:10).
IMO, there is quite a distinction.
Money is neither good nor evil….
How it is used; whether it is hoarded, used for power; or whether spent wisely, given for charity, freely, lovingly, etc…
This is what matters.
DuaneSeptember 24, 2014 at 6:48 pm #47856uprisingParticipant
It seems to me that humanbeing included the most important part of the quote.
I actually agree that money – as an abstraction, a portable and easily transferable form of wealth – is not necessarily evil. I think, however, that money as we know it – as a god that decides who lives and who dies – is definitely evil.
p.s. off-topic, but: Hey Duane! Good to see you. WB! 🙂September 24, 2014 at 9:04 pm #47860
Good to see you too.
DuaneSeptember 29, 2014 at 2:23 pm #48055
I would like to point out that Karl Marx is not the only anti or non-capitalist around. After the fall of the Soviet block it is very permissible to circumvent Marxist revisionism entirely. The dictatorship of the proletariat (intelligentsia with Lenin) has been called the opiate of the intellectuals, and for good reason. What did we get out of the Russian experiment? Bureaucracy like the world had never seen before. Bureaucracy is not particularly revolutionary. There is also, at this time, reason to look with hope towards anarcho-communist or anarcho-syndical answers. Marxism has been a 19th anachronism for some time yet, and it may be awhile yet before we treat it as such.
People talk about the human condition, and usually they mean mans inhumanity to man, or bestiality. As an example of the human condition, people say their will always be poor people. Yes, as long as we have poverty there will be poor people. Hmm. Why don’t we eliminate poverty? Oh, I know…the trickle down theory. Yeah, that must be it.September 29, 2014 at 8:17 pm #48077
“Bureaucracy is not particularly revolutionary.”
I would say, “Neither is Communism!”
The attempt to “equalize” people by redistributing wealth has NEVER worked, and it never will.
It requires massive force.
This demoralizes people; takes away creativity, ingenuity; reduces life to survival; takes away dreams; kills the spirit.
It also takes away the two most important things in life: freedom and personal responsibility.
The state is the nanny.
A very cruel nanny when necessary.
Communism at its best: a long line for government cheese.
And at its worst: a hill of skulls.
DuaneSeptember 29, 2014 at 8:31 pm #48078
I think many of us are deeply concerned about poverty.
What do you think are some ways we could help reduce poverty?
DuaneOctober 5, 2014 at 10:27 am #48341
MLK Jr., in his day, launched a poor peoples’ movement. I think that’s one way people can work to reduce poverty. I’ve seen campaigns for a living wage recently, too. I think those part and parcel of the same effort. I don’t see reducing poverty as the mission though, I would eliminate poverty. Poverty. Who needs it? Some corporate CEO who is making loads of cash at the expense of the rest of humanity? Some corrupt third world head of state? The problem today is that people want to treat poverty like a fact of nature. It simply isn’t a fact of nature. Nature is abundant, and knows no poverty.October 5, 2014 at 10:43 am #48342
I beg to differ about communism. The Eastern European model is not the only model we’ve got. There was also that of the Spanish resistance fighters battling Franco. When one thinks of barter, going beyond the gold reserve, and coming up with new sorts of human economic relationships, one is also transcending the old capitalist framework. We’ve got intentional communities, and each after a fashion, represents a rejection of the old capitalist arrangement. Also, it’s not so simple as capitalism versus communism, particularly when what we actually got today is the corporate imperialism of multi-nationals who pull the strings of government. Our old anti-trust laws have been trashed, and competition has gone under, given the Starbuckification, McDonaldization, Microsoftification of practically everything. Advertizing is the propaganda of capitalism. You get every 15 minutes (or more) if you watch non-public TV. Often a very difficult feat to perform. I think, personally, we can do better than sport a logo.
- The forum ‘All Things Political’ is closed to new topics and replies.