Quoting Christoffer Ivarsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > 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.
Thanks, but I don't think you answered by question. Can you tell us why you are not a Marxist? Regards, Platt ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ 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/
