Maybe read Marx instead of relying on the caricature US society has made of him? — Benkei
Are they unprofitable or are they forced to price their goods lower than they would because of competition from counties that don't have all sorts of EHS and labour standards and you want to ensure a critical industry continues to exist in your county? — Benkei
The only thing I'm noting is -- it's not that different under capitalism. — Moliere
Principles cost money; if we only pursue economic effectivity we will end up morally bankrupt with injustice the norm. — Benkei
h, it's a sad line of conversation I've already had the displeasure of going down. Wracking up the sins of each nation is a good way to feel sad the rest of the day, and at the end of it you really wonder why you're obsessing over such macabre things. — Moliere
Just like us. — Moliere
And at the end of the day, it doesn't even matter to me -- the analysis makes sense of the patterns between the classes in the United States, and my advice to become organized remains the same. After all, the owners are organized. — Moliere
You can't say "just like us" unless you're willing to engage in the analysis you just said you wouldn't do. You can't refuse to consider the evidence and then answer the question. — Hanover
The past has to matter to you if you're trying to come to a solution for the future to at least know what you're fighting for and to be sure you're not recreating something we know doesn't work.
To the extent you want to organize labor to fight for more rights, that seems appropriate, but that is a far way from communism. That's just being an advocate of labor unions. — Hanover
I'm saying I've considered the evidence, and my conclusion is that both nations are prone to doing all kinds of evil things to the extent that, after looking at it, it's not really a worthy goal to say which somehow eeks out a slightly better score. — Moliere
It's not slight. It just seems like a simple acknowledgment that Stalin has secured a place in history far worse than any US leader would be a simple thing to do, with the understanding that that doesn't mean the US hasn't done bad things as well. — Hanover
So, rather than the importance of democratic participation, I'd say I'd emphasize the importance of class power and organization.
The part you're not liking is when I say the United States has done enough evil shit that it's a sad and stupid game to pick a side on. — Moliere
And at the end of the day I suspect you'd disagree with the things which the United States does, so why is it we're talking about a now defunct state? — Moliere
Marxism is a living, breathing philosophy and tradition of both thought and action. Marx doesn't need to be salvaged -- the concrete conditions of our life are what makes Marx relevant. His critique of political economy fits even if Stalin is a worse leader than any US leader. — Moliere
That's not actually what I said. I'll acknowledge the US has done things it shouldn't have. My point is that there is a way to compare the two, and it does boil in part down to the murder of citizens, but it's also things like gulags, purges of people from the party as a form of ostracism, starvation, and a whole host of other horrible events. These things are not ancient history. It's like saying we can't condemn Nazi Germany (which is closely wrapped up in all of this) as Americans because Americans are also bad. Of course we can. — Hanover
A few reasons we care. The first is that it does serve as an example of what Marxist thought can cause, and that should offer pause when using Marxism as a philosophical basis for social change. The fact that it's not just a theoretical danger but an actually realized one matters. The other is that it's hardly a defunct state, with an actual war taking place right now between a former Soviet state and Russia in an effort to re-establish its former perceived greatness. — Hanover
I didn't say there was no answer, I said there was no moral weight to it. There's no way it ought to be done. There are, of course, multiple ways it can be done. — Isaac
I don’t think distributing 90% of profits to shareholders is fair, and I don’t think the undemocratic decision making process that leads to that distribution is fair either.
— Mikie
So why not? — Isaac
But we can't determine a fair distribution objectively either because it relies on the value of scarcity and risk, and those evaluations are subjective. — Isaac
But notice how it's not a fault of the board, then. It's just what it takes to have a business win the game. — Moliere
Capitalism is the more general structure and environment within which actors -- be they corporations, states, individuals, or groups -- act. — Moliere
I think it depends on whether this is a closed system of 100 people, or 100 people in a much larger populous (market) as well as whether the product is essential (a food source/food/shelter) or a luxury item.
Can you clarify those parameters? — Benj96
Sorry, but I see a very clear moral component between democracy and totalitarianism. — Mikie
Because I’m not in favor of unjustified power, in this case corporate tyranny. — Mikie
If everyone concerned had input into how profits were distributed, I’d have little problem with whatever was decided. — Mikie
(1) Should some of the 100 people get more of the total profit accumulated per year compared to others? If it's not equally distributed, who should get more -- and based on what criteria?
(2) If so, how much more? Should 60% of the pie go to this individual or group of individuals -- say 10 people? Or should it be more like 30%? What about 90%? — Mikie
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.