> Please give us your reasoned and critical analysis of why we should > embrace and > not fear communism. > > Platt
Dealing in black an white again I see. There is no use in discussing with someone who deals in absolutes, but I hope that you will not turn out to be such a person. I am not really a Marxist myself, but I will try to line out some of the main principles for you. Communism is a philosophy, moreover, it is a product of the SOM and as such it is a materialist philosophy. The general principle is that there is always a conflict between those who onw the means of production and those who don't. Marxists see history as a linear development with more and more effective economical systems. A slave based economy is succeed by a feudal one, and this is succeed by a capitalist one. This is then to be followed by a socialistic economy and then a communist economy. It is very much based on egoism, and contrary to many light headed hippy type younglings running around with Che Guevara T-shirts it has nothing to do with altruism. Marxism states that sooner or later the working class, the proletariat will realise that they can take controll of the productive means so that the produced surplus will not go to the capitalist but to them, the workers who makes that profit possible. >From wiki: The means of production are a combination of the means of labor and the subject of labor used by workers to make products. The means of labor include machines, tools, equipment, infrastructure, and "all those things with the aid of which man acts upon the subject of labor, and transforms it". The subject of labor includes raw materials and materials directly taken from nature. Means of production by themselves produce nothing -- labor power is needed for production to take place. Marx and Engels use the "base-structure" metaphor to explain the idea that the totality of relations among people with regard to "the social production of their existence" forms the economic basis, on which arises a superstructure of political and legal institutions. To the base corresponds the social consciousness which includes religious, philosophical, and other main ideas. The base conditions both, the superstructure and the social consciousness. A conflict between the development of material productive forces and the relations of production causes social revolutions, and the resulting change in the economic basis will sooner or later lead to the transformation of the superstructure. For Marx, though, this relationship is not a one way process - it is reflexive; the base determines the superstructure in the first instance and remains the foundation of a form of social organization which then can act again upon both parts of the base-structure metaphor. The relationship between superstructure and base is considered to be a dialectical one, not a distinction between actual entities "in the world" You could read up on this more if you wish - and if you can find a somewhat objective source. Regards Chris Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
