Marxist thought

[zlemflolia]

45 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

Your last sentence is the perfect example of why others think you arrogant: I understand the Marxist lens well enough, but I was interested to hear your thoughts and interpretation. Instead you merely parrot back Marx, and rehash the same material over and over. When confronted with data and evidence about your claims, you ignore it (see my refutation of your interpretation of Chinese "democracy", discussion on the mix of private/public enterprise and its efficacy in providing good mass public transit, your claims on North Korea, etc.), so as such, I am no longer interested in hearing your interpretation.

I would apply this statement likewise to you, you repeat bourgeois propaganda constantly and defend the owning class unceasingly.  it exposes your class preference.  those who "take risk" by taking loans, i.e. receiving free money which will be paid back through profits extracted from the workers.  it's excellent that you aren't interested because I'm not interested in responding to the same tired capitalist tropes over and over again.  you can pretend like you're merely requesting my thoughts and no longer want to, but in reality you are putting forward your own, and cannot deal with people disagreeing with them

your position is merely the status quo, with some minor tweaks which you have no systemic concept of how to implement, apart from hoping each country in the world can achieve social democracy somehow, despite it requiring brutal capitalists dictatorships to exist in the global south to prop them up.

the US, the primary agent of capitalist global hegemony, has just prevented its own proletariat from achieving petty social democratic reform, and yet you parrot your ineffective ideology when its track record is one of absolute and utter failure, to the detriment of all the struggling proletariat in that country.  not only is this an indicator of the depraved depths of bourgeois desire to exploit the proletariat, but surely the deeper exploitation they impose abroad where they are not even democratically accountable to their workers. 

you may think i seem arrogant, on the contrary i aim in all of my words to be an unceasing advocate at the very least of the wellbeing of the global proletariat.  you however are more concerned with small business owners being rewarded for the "risk" they supposedly take on, despite their countless loopholes and abilities to entirely get out of this risk if their business fails, or push it off entirely onto the workers who shoulder the financial burden of the failure business and the material burden of the failing capitalist economy during downturns.  you cannot admit to being wrong, so you pretend i am arrogant and rehashing marx.  it's not my fault marx is right

Edited May 11, 2021 by cyanobacteria

[Alcofribas]

1 hour ago, chenGOD said:

@cyanobacteriahas been pretty explicit that private property would still be allowed in his Marxist wunderland, which I believe included running small stores.

 

So if I read you right, you're saying they're already capitalist. I can't speak about your personal experiences, but in my own experience I know and have worked for owners who do work in the trenches. Considering the above statistic of 99% of firms in American being small businesses, with the majority of those firms having fewer than 100 employees, it is not implausible for owners to be doing a lot of that. My uncle owns (actually owned he's sold it since) a small hotel/pub/restaurant in Cornwall, UK, which had a staff of about 20 in the peak season (tourist place). I worked there for a summer (well a bit more than a summer) and while I definitely didn't make enough to buy a Rolls, I was able to work, live, bought a small motor, and traveled across England. My uncle did quite well out of it, but he also worked long hours doing so, as well as taking on all the risk by putting up the initial investment etc.

I use the example of a bakery because I knew some people who worked for a local bakery in Vancouver that did fantastically, and have opened up two other locations. The people I knew who worked there never (rarely may be a better choice of words) had to do anything outside of their job description, and certainly not for free. My wife also worked for a small business in Vancouver, and since she was essentially the office manager her work was quite varied but she was well compensated for it. The owner, while not doing much of the managerial work, did ironically do work which was the main thrust of the company.

Ultimately, decision making in small business lies at the feet of the owner, and so they are risking quite a lot for incorrect decisions. I have yet to see a persuasive argument for why an owner shouldn't be rewarded commensurate to their risk? Bookstores may not necessarily be highly capital intensive but there is still risk involved. And many owners would also feel badly should the business fail and their employees' livelihoods suffer (maybe not in the wacky cut-throat world of American small business?).

If those businesses are so fragile and the under-paid person knows it, that is significant leverage. Now, of course in the US unions and workers' rights have been eroded significantly, so that leverage is harder to wield. In countries where workers rights haven't been eroded as badly, that leverage becomes an important tool.

Sorry for being cringe.

i guess i'm just kind of unmoved by this obsession with the "financial risk." living in our society is a constant state of financial risk for most people. the specific reverence for the risk of the business owner is begging the question, it's already taking the status quo for granted obv. 

i absolutely believe your stories about working for honest business owners but they don't align with my experience at all. having significant leverage, being well compensated, only being asked to perform duties within your job description - yeah man, none of this adds up to me lol. i mean, at the restaurant i currently work at i am basically managing service now every single night, guiding staff and directing the flow with BOH, training new staff, re-ordering bottles and other bullshit, cutting people when it's slow, etc. - doing all manner of things that should fall into the role of the manager but there is no manager on duty on any night of service. none. he currently spends all his time at a different restaurant which makes it literally impossible for him to perform any of those duties. so i do them. for the same wage i made when i did not do them. i do them bc they need to be done and i am a responsible person. but i have no "leverage" here whatsoever. my manager will likely take whatever credit he wants and downplay my role and since he is an intermediary between the workers and the owner he controls that narrative entirely. the owner is some rich guy who has various restaurants. i don't think i've ever once spent a second of my life respecting his "initial investments" and risks and shit, nor does he care about me in any way whatsoever. he might "feel badly" in some general sense if his risk isn't profitable enough to reap the rewards but this means nothing to me whatsoever lol. 

i think it's extremely normal for hard working people to do way more than their job description with no corresponding pay. this too is a kind of risk bc they could be making more money in a different job, or doing something else with their time that would make their lives more meaningful and interesting. i would be willing to bet this is quite in keeping with the experiences of regular working americans. 

i'd also add that it's the employees who pay the price for bad decisions but do not share anywhere near the same onus when it comes to the rewards. this is all quite obvious of course. doing a bunch of work for some other person who can control my life in myriad ways bc they took out a loan or whatever - idk, this just doesn't seem cool to me ngl

this is all "lived experience" bullshit but i think this type of argument is just never going to fly imo. it's like when you were talking about the sushi chef stuff. it sounds nice and all and i'm sure it happens all around but it's not the world i see.

 

[Alcofribas]

20 minutes ago, Alcofribas said:

i guess i'm just kind of unmoved by this obsession with the "financial risk." living in our society is a constant state of financial risk for most people. the specific reverence for the risk of the business owner is begging the question, it's already taking the status quo for granted obv. 

i absolutely believe your stories about working for honest business owners but they don't align with my experience at all. having significant leverage, being well compensated, only being asked to perform duties within your job description - yeah man, none of this adds up to me lol. i mean, at the restaurant i currently work at i am basically managing service now every single night, guiding staff and directing the flow with BOH, training new staff, re-ordering bottles and other bullshit, cutting people when it's slow, etc. - doing all manner of things that should fall into the role of the manager but there is no manager on duty on any night of service. none. he currently spends all his time at a different restaurant which makes it literally impossible for him to perform any of those duties. so i do them. for the same wage i made when i did not do them. i do them bc they need to be done and i am a responsible person. but i have no "leverage" here whatsoever. my manager will likely take whatever credit he wants and downplay my role and since he is an intermediary between the workers and the owner he controls that narrative entirely. the owner is some rich guy who has various restaurants. i don't think i've ever once spent a second of my life respecting his "initial investments" and risks and shit, nor does he care about me in any way whatsoever. he might "feel badly" in some general sense if his risk isn't profitable enough to reap the rewards but this means nothing to me whatsoever lol. 

i think it's extremely normal for hard working people to do way more than their job description with no corresponding pay. this too is a kind of risk bc they could be making more money in a different job, or doing something else with their time that would make their lives more meaningful and interesting. i would be willing to bet this is quite in keeping with the experiences of regular working americans. 

i'd also add that it's the employees who pay the price for bad decisions but do not share anywhere near the same onus when it comes to the rewards. this is all quite obvious of course. doing a bunch of work for some other person who can control my life in myriad ways bc they took out a loan or whatever - idk, this just doesn't seem cool to me ngl

this is all "lived experience" bullshit but i think this type of argument is just never going to fly imo. it's like when you were talking about the sushi chef stuff. it sounds nice and all and i'm sure it happens all around but it's not the world i see.

 

edit:

should also point out in fairness that the restaurant where i work is co-owned by some (now rich) guy who fronted/borrowed all the money, yes. the other owner is a sushi chef who absolutely works his ass off and is "in the trenches" with me every day and beyond. but he's certainly not facilitating any advancement of my career and has no interest in improving my wage afaik. in his eyes the manager deals with such things. i'm there to work for him and he's a fine enough person to work for. he is fairly reserved japanese guy who intensely believes in sushi so he just wants me to be like the perfect server and only comments on my performance in this role to criticize me lol. my job is quite decent though, i have it fairly good i think. i only work 4 days a week and make a decent living for the most part. most people have it way worse than me and i would really hate to tell them to have more respect for the risk taking owners or something. 

for those who are curious, i work at a cum factory.

Edited May 11, 2021 by Alcofribas

[chenGOD]

24 minutes ago, Alcofribas said:

intensely believes in sushi

finally something useful from this thread.

[zlemflolia]

https://www.peacelandbread.com/post/anti-imperialism-the-highest-stage-of-class-struggle

[Thu Zaw]

@cyanobacteria

I'm curious to know:

- have you ever left your country of birth, which I presume is America? For holiday, business or other?

- do you personally know anyone (irl) not raised in America? Why did they move to America?

- do you read political pieces that are not Marxist, jargon-laden propaganda?

- do you analyse as critically socialist literature as you do non-socialist literature?

- do you mediate?

- have you ever been to psychotherapy?

 

 

[zlemflolia]

13 minutes ago, Thu Zaw said:

@cyanobacteria

I'm curious to know:

- have you ever left your country of birth, which I presume is America? For holiday, business or other?

- do you personally know anyone (irl) not raised in America? Why did they move to America?

- do you read political pieces that are not Marxist, jargon-laden propaganda?

- do you analyse as critically socialist literature as you do non-socialist literature?

- do you mediate?

- have you ever been to psychotherapy?

• yes i have, what does this have to do with anything?
• yes i have many friends from all over the world and many acquaintances who moved to america
• everything is propaganda
• of course
• what does this have to do with anything
• yes multiple times what does this have to do with anything

[zlemflolia]

i have no patience for fascists, if i see someone repeating bourgeois propaganda upholding the socioeconomic class system as a requirement for modern society ill call it out, some people cant handle the idea of everyone being treated with human dignity and having equal access to material needs regardless of ability or past accomplishments

[Silent Member]

[Thu Zaw]

There's questions you didn't answer.

I pose my questions because I'm interested in why you have such an oversimplified, binary view of humanity. I'm interested to understand your character, and why you seem so ill-at-ease with life and believe that your ideas are the one true path to salvation of humanity. It comes across as dogmatically religious.

[zlemflolia]

1 minute ago, Thu Zaw said:

There's questions you didn't answer.

I pose my questions because I'm interested in why you have such an oversimplified, binary view of humanity. I'm interested to understand your character, and why you seem so ill-at-ease with life and believe that your ideas are the one true path to salvation of humanity. It comes across as dogmatically religious.

i dont have an overly simplified binary view of humanity, im very happy to provide elaborations on any positions you think i have that are binary and overly simplified

[Thu Zaw]

You seem to insist that people are either bourgeoisie (wealthy capitalists) or proletariat (worker drone). Do any people exist inside this extreme binary?

You seem to insist that societies are either capitalist or socialist. Are there valid viewpoints that exist inside this binary extreme?

Can you explain your ideas without reliance upon Marxist/Communist jargon?

[zkom]

5 hours ago, chenGOD said:

Why do you insist on erecting this strawman? How many times have I said in this very thread that strong regulation, strong unions, workers rights, pensions that adjust for inflation, universal health care, etc. are all necessary to provide for the dignity of workers.

It's a classic "debate" tactic by communist zealots and other people pushing an ideology, religion or similar. If you don't support their very narrowly defined dogmatic thinking then you are the enemy of the people/God/nation/nature/whatever and that's that. It's meant to make you feel bad unless you subscribe to the exact same agenda they are pushing.

R.A.Wilson said all kinds of stupid things but I think he was correct when he wrote "when dogma enters the brain, all intellectual activity ceases".

[zlemflolia]

32 minutes ago, Thu Zaw said:

You seem to insist that people are either bourgeoisie (wealthy capitalists) or proletariat (worker drone). Do any people exist inside this extreme binary?

You seem to insist that societies are either capitalist or socialist. Are there valid viewpoints that exist inside this binary extreme?

Can you explain your ideas without reliance upon Marxist/Communist jargon?

please point out where i insisted this. i would never make such a black and white claim, reality is much more nuanced with intermingling concepts

[zkom]

26 minutes ago, Thu Zaw said:

Can you explain your ideas without reliance upon Marxist/Communist jargon?

It's funny to see the walls of Marxist babble. I thought this shit died at latest in the 90s. Like @dcom here I was exposed to communist and socialist thinking all through my childhood. We had a portrait of Fidel Castro on the wall, ffs. So I'm so used to it that it's basically meaningless. It's not like I'm going to convert to communism suddenly now because someone is furiously writing about the proletariat and bourgeois and the same things I've read and heard a hundred times starting from the 80s. Might as well be quoting bible or Koran verses.

[chenGOD]

One last thing @cyanobacteria

You asked earlier why I referenced central planning, because of course you have said numerous times in this thread and elsewhere that central planning can work. It can, but it is less efficient than a well-regulated market, and the links I posted that came from a Soviet educated economist which show that central planning doesn't work you conveniently ignored.

 

 

[Thu Zaw]

15 minutes ago, zkom said:

It's a classic "debate" tactic by communist zealots and other people pushing an ideology, religion or similar. If you don't support their very narrowly defined dogmatic thinking then you are the enemy of the people/God/nation/nature/whatever and that's that. It's meant to make you feel bad unless you subscribe to the exact same agenda they are pushing.

R.A.Wilson said all kinds of stupid things but I think he was correct when he wrote "when dogma enters the brain, all intellectual activity ceases".

Completely!

I think @cyanobacteriathinks of himself as a free-thinking, radical, political theorist.

Personally, I think he's a religious fundamentalist. He has chosen and read his Bible. His "ideas" are simply regurgitated, jargon-laden dogma, filled with fantasy and logical fallacies.

People are either believers or ethically corrupt heretics. Resistors to the one true faith must convert, surrender or be "eliminated".

This is religion, dude. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Thu Zaw
Typo

[dcom]

1 minute ago, Thu Zaw said:

This is religion, dude. 

Who was that politically opinionated bearded hipster guy that said "religion is the opium of the people"?

[Satans Little Helper]

[milkface]

18 hours ago, dcom said:

A book, such an erudite yet obtuse suggestion. This would do nicely, wouldn't it? Not very subtle or intellectual, but appropriate for this thread's dramatic arc.

why u taking my posts so seriously? if you can't beat em - send a dismissive message then disappear for a day to waste peoples time

[dcom]

16 minutes ago, milkface said:

why u taking my posts so seriously? if you can't beat em - send a dismissive message then disappear for a day to waste peoples time

It was supposed to be humorous, you know, the book being The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, the dramatic arc of the current conversation being at a point where most participants are out of fucks to give? Referring to a book with the word subtle and fuck in the title as "not very subtle or intellectual"? I almost always need to explain when I'm trying to be funny, so I maintain my position that I'm so bad at it that I should just keep to being serious. Seriously.

Edited May 11, 2021 by dcom

[milkface]

6 minutes ago, dcom said:

It was supposed to be humorous, you know, the book being The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, the dramatic arc of the current conversation being at a point where most participants are out of fucks to give? Referring to a book with the word subtle and fuck in the title as "not very subtle or intellectual"? I almost always need to explain when I'm trying to be funny, so I maintain my position that I'm so bad at it that I should just keep to being serious. Seriously.

well, you see, i tricked you. i have already read the book and it was so helpful that i stopped giving a fuck about reading the book when i read the contents page and didnt even start it.

[zkom]

Funnily enough I have actually read the Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fuck because it was recommended by a person living in Indonesia and she sent me the pirated PDF in email. I wouldn't probably have bothered otherwise.

[Silent Member]

So, I guess we can conclude the book is only relevant if you give a fuck. 

[dcom]

1 hour ago, milkface said:

well, you see, i tricked you. i have already read the book and it was so helpful that i stopped giving a fuck about reading the book when i read the contents page and didnt even start it.