04-04-2012, 08:37 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-04-2012, 08:21 PM by FireIceTalon.)
Yea. Once there is a ruling class, the state will become an instrument whose ultimate purpose is to protect the interests of said class. All wrapped in a pretty package with grand words like "freedom", "liberty", and "democracy", "the constitution", and whatever else they are saying in 10 second sound-bytes these days, written all over it. Yea, right...freedom my arse. Freedom to vote for your new ruler every 4 years - the reactionary of your choice (but under a different label than the previous guy), hehe. And of course, the sheeple fall for it - every time. America doesn't have a budget deficit, it has a CRITICAL THINKING deficit.
The ironic thing is, people are afraid that Socialism will produce a state of laziness in society, this has been one of the common criticisms of it, and of Marxism in general. But if this was really the truth, Capitalism would have failed long ago, because it does the very things, including this, that people criticize Socialism or Communism for. In a Capitalist society, in general, those who work for a living have nothing, and those who do not work have, well, everything. Disparities in wealth would likely result under Socialism as well, but the difference is this - under Capitalism, income and wealth disparities are COERCED, while under Socialism, resulting disparities would be do to that some will voluntarily have less than others, and products would be allocated based on need rather than greed. Some people, such as myself, will choose to have less than others. Socialism (nor Communism) isn't concerned with making everyone have an equal amount of wealth anyway - this is a common misconception. It is concerned with eliminating exploitation, alienation, Capital (bourgeois property) being converted to PUBLIC ownership, eliminating commodities (both material and human) and emancipating people from the class system that fuels the oppression of women, racism, hyper-nationalism, war, and other reactionary ideals. People here become content when they have a house and a car and make just enough to put food on the table, but then wonder why they have to work such long hours, with little benefits, in a system with increasing austerity to important social programs like education (in conjunction with increased military spending and corporate tax breaks) where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and it becomes increasingly difficult to make ends meet. The simple reason of course is, they do not control the means to production, and have only their labor to sell. You can have a house, a car, and clothes or other petty personal items, but that doesn't mean shit when the person you have to sell your labor to, to survive, owns a part of THE ECONOMY and you do not. As I've said plenty of times before also, those who control society economically, also control it politically and socially as well. OFC, most of the right-wingers will disagree, but I don't see how its even up for debate, when the material conditions of our society and Capitalism's history show it to be fact. It would be like cops beating someone, someone else films it, and the cops STILL deny it even though it was caught on tape.
BTW, 480 days parental leave is just NUTS, lol. Must be friggin wonderful. Working parents here, and especially single mothers, can only dream of being afforded such circumstances^^
The ironic thing is, people are afraid that Socialism will produce a state of laziness in society, this has been one of the common criticisms of it, and of Marxism in general. But if this was really the truth, Capitalism would have failed long ago, because it does the very things, including this, that people criticize Socialism or Communism for. In a Capitalist society, in general, those who work for a living have nothing, and those who do not work have, well, everything. Disparities in wealth would likely result under Socialism as well, but the difference is this - under Capitalism, income and wealth disparities are COERCED, while under Socialism, resulting disparities would be do to that some will voluntarily have less than others, and products would be allocated based on need rather than greed. Some people, such as myself, will choose to have less than others. Socialism (nor Communism) isn't concerned with making everyone have an equal amount of wealth anyway - this is a common misconception. It is concerned with eliminating exploitation, alienation, Capital (bourgeois property) being converted to PUBLIC ownership, eliminating commodities (both material and human) and emancipating people from the class system that fuels the oppression of women, racism, hyper-nationalism, war, and other reactionary ideals. People here become content when they have a house and a car and make just enough to put food on the table, but then wonder why they have to work such long hours, with little benefits, in a system with increasing austerity to important social programs like education (in conjunction with increased military spending and corporate tax breaks) where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and it becomes increasingly difficult to make ends meet. The simple reason of course is, they do not control the means to production, and have only their labor to sell. You can have a house, a car, and clothes or other petty personal items, but that doesn't mean shit when the person you have to sell your labor to, to survive, owns a part of THE ECONOMY and you do not. As I've said plenty of times before also, those who control society economically, also control it politically and socially as well. OFC, most of the right-wingers will disagree, but I don't see how its even up for debate, when the material conditions of our society and Capitalism's history show it to be fact. It would be like cops beating someone, someone else films it, and the cops STILL deny it even though it was caught on tape.
BTW, 480 days parental leave is just NUTS, lol. Must be friggin wonderful. Working parents here, and especially single mothers, can only dream of being afforded such circumstances^^
https://www.youtube.com/user/FireIceTalon
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)