11-04-2005 12:28									#91
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

From what little I learnt of Aristotle I didn't really like him.
His conceptual separation of oligarchy & aristocracy, tyranny & monarchy, and democracy & polity into a bad/good binaries doesn't stike me as contibuting much at all to the study of politics. There really is no objective difference between oligarchy and aristocracy, or tyranny and monarchy apart from the latter two in the binaries being more well established with a stable system of domination.
His justifications of slavery and the limitation of the franchise are also quite vulgar and anachronistic. Funny also that Locke justified slavery as nothing more than the just compensation of victory in war... it contradicts his entire theory of inherent rights and reinstates a might makes right ethos... the very thing that he (presumably) wanted to dispel.

Ayn Rand.... wasn't it "atlas shrugged" that convinced Officer Barbrady (south park) that reading was "gay" and just not worth it? I've put off reading any Rand for fear that I might come to the same conclusion... besides I don't think she's a big thing at all in Australia... I've certainly only heard of her through Americans. I guess other countries are still a bit nervous about celebrating and defending greed.

quote: the idea of machines eliminating the need for human labour is now more credible than ever.

I was just reading some articles about the Technocratic movement that talk about exactly the same thing. They argue that the monetary and price system fundamentally flawed, and that income denominated in man hours worked is inefficient in a society where machines do most of the work. Their solution is little too utopian though... they advocate replacing money with "energy credits"... the sum representation of everything produced... which would then be distributed equally amond all the citizens.

	11-04-2005 16:47									#92
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Agathon I think that Marx is more relevant now than ever.

What Marx failed to predict is that the millions of man-hours spent by the bourgeois reading and arguing his works would sap the energy and intellectual vitality from that class, making revolution impossible.

	11-04-2005 18:05									#93
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Sikander What Marx failed to predict is that the millions of man-hours spent by the bourgeois reading and arguing his works would sap the energy and intellectual vitality from that class, making revolution impossible.

Reading and arguing doesn't change anything. The reason why revolution is 'impossible' is material. Most people in the west have houses, cars, hair dryers and stocked fridges. The things you own end up owning you. Consumer capitalism has become everybody's mode of reproduction.

Another block on revolutions is the sheer concentration of physical power backing states nowadays. If the state hits protestors with batons for flying a kite (as happened in Australia recently)... imagine what it would do if there was a revolution. You'd certainly know what your patriot act is all about, anyway.
Part of my course last year was about the debates between Kautsky and Lenin. Kautsky is what you might call a Fabian; he believed that socialism could be achieved by peaceful, parliamentary means... whereas Lenin saw such means and such institutions as inherently bourgeois and hence a recipe for failure. One of the readings for that week was by Engels who (I think it was the introduction to the history of class struggle in england) wrote about how advances in firearm and artillery technology, and the new, rectangular grid type city planning made armed insurrection against the Government nearly impossible, and thus other roads to socialism must be found.
I would say that most discontents would weigh the opportunity cost of an insurrection today and probably deduce that quietism is the more expedient course....

	11-04-2005 19:12									#94
	Remove this text

Engels was right in his analysis but wrong in his conclusions. No modern revolution will succeed without the support of the military. Even a professional military such as ours can switch sides, though the circumstances under which it might do so would be dire and catastrophic.

	11-04-2005 19:14									#95
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I think I could slaughter a good 1-2 hundred commie instigators myself.

And there is alot of me around

	11-04-2005 19:16									#96
	Support Apolyton

quote: Even a professional military such as ours can switch sides, though the circumstances under which it might do so would be dire and catastrophic.

Correct, a military is nothing more than a cross section of the populous.

However with todays volunteer militaries getting it to switch sides is much harder. Conscripts get resentful alot faster. But since military members are now salaried workers, they are not only invested in the system ideology wise, but very much so economically.

	11-04-2005 19:17									#97
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse Marx was a very good sociologist but a terrible economist and dreadful political theorist.

Given that Marx wrote about capitalism, and his analysis of it is still spot on, even if capitalism has continued to evolve, I'd have to say you are incorrect. Furthermore, his insight into looking into the material reasons for politics are better than a lot of what passes for political science these days. Your problem is you think that Marx made some kind of prescription for the future society, when he explicitely refused to do so.

quote: There's no escaping the fact that the political and economic movements his writings helped spawn were all a dismal failure.

At one time, 1/3rd of all humanity were living under governments which claimed some allegience to his writings. The countries which made those claims had much faster economic growth than most capitalist countries, with few exceptions. The problem wasn't Marxism. The problem was the Stalinist parasite on Marxism.

	11-04-2005 19:27									#98
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos Correct, a military is nothing more than a cross section of the populous. However with todays volunteer militaries getting it to switch sides is much harder. Conscripts get resentful alot faster. But since military members are now salaried workers, they are not only invested in the system ideology wise, but very much so economically.

Exactly.

	11-04-2005 19:28									#99
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos I think I could slaughter a good 1-2 hundred commie instigators myself.

I'd prefer you didn't.

	11-04-2005 20:55									#100
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara At one time, 1/3rd of all humanity were living under governments which claimed some allegience to his writings. The countries which made those claims had much faster economic growth than most capitalist countries, with few exceptions. The problem wasn't Marxism. The problem was the Stalinist parasite on Marxism.

Even if one accepts teh above statement at face value, the problem manifiests itself in sustainability, as the faithful fanatics of communism die off only to be replaced by the slothful ignorant and corrupt. No real world mechanism has yet been employed that allowed the momentum of the first generation's revolution to be translated into an ongoing multigenerational juggernaut.

Or in other words, it takes a fever of enthusiasm/passion to affect change, and given that enthusiams wanes as generations pass what built in mechanism, if any exists, to promote change at the pace required?

Finally, the historical examples of communism are by and large capable of taking advantage of the hockey stick growth one normally expects from moving from nonidustrialized to industrialzed societies. Now you may argue that because of communism and moreso the fervor of the faithful this was more likely to happen, but that is unproven IMO.

	11-04-2005 21:02									#101
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: The countries which made those claims had much faster economic growth than most capitalist countries, with few exceptions. The problem wasn't Marxism. The problem was the Stalinist parasite on Marxism.

The economic growth was unsustainable, unless those countries ended up liberalizing, like China has.

Marx's economics are nothing pretty. His politics and sociological theories were important in history and some changes in capitalism. However, like DanS said, one thing Marx missed by a good margin was capitalism's ability to transform itself to adapt to the times.

Oh, and to some people Marxism is definetly a religion.

	11-04-2005 21:50									#102
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui The economic growth was unsustainable, unless those countries ended up liberalizing, like China has.

Economic growth in capitalist systems is ever sustainable?

	11-04-2005 21:54									#103
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Finally, the historical examples of communism are by and large capable of taking advantage of the hockey stick growth one normally expects from moving from nonidustrialized to industrialzed societies.

There's no 'hockey stick' growth in capitalist economies?

	11-04-2005 21:58									#104
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

No, Hockey stick gorwht has accompanied most every nations move from nonindustrial to industrial. To say then that the effect seen by communist nations during this time period is purely a function of communism and not industrialization is fallacy.

	11-04-2005 22:01									#105
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe No, Hockey stick gorwht has accompanied most every nations move from nonindustrial to industrial. To say then that the effect seen by communist nations during this time period is purely a function of communism and not industrialization is fallacy.

Maybe the point is that industrialization doesn't just always happen. Sometimes it happens in certain places because of the conditions that exist there, and sometimes it happens because it's planned.

	11-04-2005 22:31									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I think Marx's major shortcoming was that he didn't expect the rise of the modern welfare state and a large middle class . I don't think Marxism can work in modern industrialized countries. The best thing we socialists can do now is to work to change how companies are run. Nationalize only the vital industries (like healthcare and pharmacuticals, air travel, etc.) and leave the rest to worker-run enterprises, with capital coming from specialized investment banks instead of shareholders.

	11-04-2005 22:34									#107
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

But the middle class has been shrinking since the 80s.

	11-04-2005 22:39									#108
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious But the middle class has been shrinking since the 80s.

That was because of the dismantling of the welfare state since Reagan, sooner or later, people will get POed enough and will elect someone to put the Welfare state back in. Social Democracy is quite stable, just replace the corporations with co-ops and we'll be set.

	11-04-2005 22:41									#109
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Odin That was because of the dismantling of the welfare state since Reagan, sooner or later, people will get POed enough and will elect someone to put the Welfare state back in. Social Democracy is quite stable, just replace the corporations with co-ops and we'll be set.

People on welfare were never middle class. How would dismantling the welfare state (which actually never happened) affect the middle class?

	11-04-2005 22:52									#110
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious People on welfare were never middle class. How would dismantling the welfare state (which actually never happened) affect the middle class?

No saftey net for you if your job gets outsourced?

	11-04-2005 22:56									#111
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Odin No saftey net for you if your job gets outsourced?

Of course Odin. But I mean how does the welfare system, I assume you are talking about AFDC and that sort of thing, increase the size of the middle class relative to the poor and the rich classes? You don't actually think that people get off welfare and ever make more than say $25k a year do you?

	11-04-2005 22:59									#112
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe the problem manifiests itself in sustainability

Consider that the first bourgeois governments in England and France (not to mention the Italian city states) both fell and in both cases it was a long time before capitalism was able to assert itself again. Only the Dutch managed to hold on, and they were built on the backs of a slave empire and Indonesian genocide.

In other words, we may have lost this round, but there will be another, and another. Eventually, we will win and stay victorious.

	11-04-2005 23:00									#113
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Maybe the point is that industrialization doesn't just always happen. Sometimes it happens in certain places because of the conditions that exist there, and sometimes it happens because it's planned.

Yes and that was the last sentence/point of my original post on this particular subject.

Regardless it is my point that in order for change to occurr there has to be a will for change whether that will is because of the revolutionary spirit or entrepenurial spirit. My point being that the revolutionary spirit cannot be maintained.

You OTOH seem skeptical of the entrepenurial spirit being a long term engine of change.

	11-04-2005 23:01									#114
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe No, Hockey stick gorwht has accompanied most every nations move from nonindustrial to industrial. To say then that the effect seen by communist nations during this time period is purely a function of communism and not industrialization is fallacy.

But lots of capitalist countries haven't seen that curve. Most, in fact, have not. Most are stuggling just to keep their head above water.

	11-04-2005 23:04									#115
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Odin That was because of the dismantling of the welfare state since Reagan, sooner or later, people will get POed enough and will elect someone to put the Welfare state back in. Social Democracy is quite stable, just replace the corporations with co-ops and we'll be set.

Social democracy could only be successful when the workers had the threat of revolution to frighten the capitalists with. Without the USSR, there will be no social democracy.

The middle class didn't take a hit because of the dismantling of welfare. It took a hit because of the decline in militancy in the American working class. They were too willing to make deals and not ready to fight. So when push came to shove, when the capitalists declared war with General Reagan, labor was lead by quislings who gave away the store without a fight.

	11-04-2005 23:06									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Consider that the first bourgeois governments in England and France (not to mention the Italian city states) both fell and in both cases it was a long time before capitalism was able to assert itself again. Only the Dutch managed to hold on, and they were built on the backs of a slave empire and Indonesian genocide. In other words, we may have lost this round, but there will be another, and another. Eventually, we will win and stay victorious.

Perhaps but perhaps not. The long term viability is determined primarily by the systems ability to adapt and change. As many here have noted the capitialistic systems have adapted incorporating societal safety nets. Communism 'cepting China's adoption of free Market concepts has been by and large too rigid to adapt.

The question you may wish to pose is which system has longer term flexibility and capacity for change?

	11-04-2005 23:06									#117
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Regardless it is my point that in order for change to occurr there has to be a will for change whether that will is because of the revolutionary spirit or entrepenurial spirit. My point being that the revolutionary spirit cannot be maintained. You OTOH seem skeptical of the entrepenurial spirit being a long term engine of change.

I'm not skeptical about entrepreneurial spirit, just that there may not be other fundamental changes in the way goods are produced such as machines, computers and robots. I doubt if there will be replicators on line anytime soon. Maybe there will, but eventually society will reach a stage where capitalism can not progress any further, or at least not significantly.

	11-04-2005 23:10									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Of course Odin. But I mean how does the welfare system, I assume you are talking about AFDC and that sort of thing, increase the size of the middle class relative to the poor and the rich classes? You don't actually think that people get off welfare and ever make more than say $25k a year do you?

DOH! I was meaning ALL the social programs, not just for the poor, my bad.

	11-04-2005 23:11									#119
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe The question you may wish to pose is which system has longer term flexibility and capacity for change?

I'd argue that capitalism isn't as flexible as you'd like to believe. I'd also argue that once Stalinism gripped the throat of communism, we lost what flexibility we had. Pre-Stalin, the USSR was exceedingly flexible. Castro's Cuba is extremely flexible. The Sandanistas were among the most flexible.

Some things to consider, flexibility isn't necessarily a good thing when you are under seige, and all communist states have been under seige from birth to death. This hasn't been true of capitalist states. When you have to circle the wagons, dissention = death to the whole group.

	11-04-2005 23:14									#120
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara But lots of capitalist countries haven't seen that curve. Most, in fact, have not. Most are stuggling just to keep their head above water.

If you speak to 3rd world nations there are many other factors as you well know that impede their growth. Lack of rule of law, corruption,lack of observance of property rights including human rights, imperialist tampering, political instability in the form of military juntas etc.