Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004

human garbage bag posted:

Jumping in here, but I think Socialism is supposed to solve the problem of gross inequality, like there shouldn't be a janitor who works 80 hours a week in horrible conditions only to go back and watch TV in their hovel while their boss answers emails for 3 hours a week and spends the rest of their time on vacation.

So for the doctor/janitor analogy, I think an equitable scenario that can be achieved under Socialism is that the doctor and janitor both enjoy life the same amount. This can be quantified by the percentage of their time that each spend working and their salary. Those two values can be adjusted so over their lifetimes both the doctor and janitor enjoy life the same amount. For instance the doctor would have to spend years in medical school, and to compensate for that lost time they are paid more or work less hours than the janitor once they start working as doctors.

I'm not sure why the doctor can't enjoy their life during medical school that they need extra compensation later. The logic is not immediately obvious here. The doctors will surely reward themselves with smuggery anyway, and they deserve a lot of it.

Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 06:01 on Nov 5, 2020

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004

human garbage bag posted:

I think we can both agree that it takes more training to be a doctor than to be a janitor. So the doctor needs to be compensated for the extra time they spend training compared to the janitor. Or the doctor could be paid for training as if they were actually working. And if the doctor has to work more hours than the janitor because there is a shortage of doctors then they should be compensated for the time they are working.

I think the bolded is more logical, and is less prone to breaking down completely when we switch from talking about petit boug administrators or professionals and start talking about the CEOs and shareholders.

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004

Purple Prince posted:

Where is the space for individual agency in socialist ideas? I consider myself a socialist but I’ve also been going through therapy.

One major predictor of mental illnesses like depression or anxiety is identifying external conditions as more important to your sense of control than internal conditions - ie feeling that you have no or little control over your material situation. But this is exactly what Marxism is about - identifying the external, systematic causes of problems we face in our lives. One consequence of this is that right wingers suffer from depression and anxiety at a lower rate than the left.

How do we create ourselves as socialists without succumbing to anxiety or depression in the face of what - at the moment - is a pretty poor situation for the left?

Volunteerism is praxis. Go hand out sandwiches and try to radicalize some church folk. Go hang out with old people at a nursing home It feels good to help others! Wear a mask!

Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 06:01 on Nov 6, 2020

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004

Beefeater1980 posted:

The regression of China, Russia and Vietnam to capitalism are all examples of why I don’t think we should all go out and join a vanguard party with a view to overthrowing the decadent bourgeois state.

Post-colonial Asia gives us a lot of evidence that there are no easy answers I think: Malaysia, Taiwan, S Korea and Singapore (although that’s a special case) all stayed capitalist and managed to achieve a higher standard of living than Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos until those countries began experimenting with opening up their economies to capital again

I have questions about how standard of living is measured and concerns about the sustainability not underlying related practices.
Given the dominance of Capitalism and the general abuse by it of those that reject it, I question whether this is a meaningful measure at all.

Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Nov 12, 2020

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004
You need to read actual anarchist literature because you keep randomly falling back to your incorrect understanding, demonstrated by repeatedly forgetting that anarchism != disorganization.

If all the anarchists voted to do something that looks like modern liberalism then ideally yes, the results would look like modern liberalism.

Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Nov 13, 2020

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004

Acerbatus posted:

So what exactly is the difference between communism and anarchism if both seek to eliminate the idea of a ruling class and create a horizontal power structure with everyone being equal? Am I misunderstanding something?

Either way I fail to see how it would ever actually scale to work for an entire country.

Yet somehow the zapatistas and cuba are both fine aside from the constant fuckery from Capital

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004
It seems likely that they are more energy intensive than just regular milling but maybe for all our dumb little plastic bullshit it's betterer than shipping from china.

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004

Aruan posted:

Now, lets see if you can answer my question: do you know what historiography is? Do you see why it might be problematic to utilize a single historiographical approach - Marxism - to the exclusion of all others?

I don't. Please make your point.

Why do you keep insisting on 'modern economic classes,' if not to thrust wrongness onto your interlocutors? They seem to understand perfectly well that old timey peasants weren't operating in exactly the same systems that we have today. But everyone, even the lowliest serf had to eat, and the king had a nice big forest full of deer or whatever.

Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Dec 8, 2020

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004

Defenestrategy posted:

Why did Marx think that there needed to be an intermediary step of Cash->Coupons->People are provided for?

Wouldn't it be far easier to just continue to use Cash and just tax peoples wealth at near 100% which would prevent hoarding except by the government themselves?

I think the idea is to move away from a system where some jerks could come by and lower taxes again and we're back to square 1.

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004
The Wealthy are fighting about who gets to exploit particular persons and materials.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Harold Fjord
Jan 3, 2004
Small time capitalists underpaying their car salesmen are still capitalists. But yes I was generally referring to broader global capitalists vs Russian capitalists and who gets to profit from the extraction of minerals. Either way it's not gonna be the Ukrainians who do the extracting that profit

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply