Liberal Revolution Liberal Revolution
6
days ago
Capitalism
or Capitalisms, is described by profits for investors as private property. Most
economic system democratic or autocratic is justified by an essential set of
social ethics. Honor for the patrician despot or comradeship for the egalitarian
community.
The
investor invests in things that return more money than invested.
This
includes producing things to sell. He buys the technology such as tools, raw
materials, lands, buildings means of transport, power sources and etc. But,
none of this makes sense unless inputs are changed into changed into something
that will sell at a higher price than invested. This requires labor power. The
capitalist has the money to set the whole thin into motion. Without this money
nothing will ever happen. But, this is meaningless prattle without labor power.
Production requires money of the investor and needs labor power of living
individuals. Even robots require someone to run them.
The
worker sells her labor for a wage. The investor has the money, and in his role
as capitalist buys materials and labor. This forms a highly dysfunctional
marriage. As her secret lover I side with labor.
Through
production the worker changes the material into something new called a
commodity. But what is important is a social relation between people is what is
real in this economic relation. Because the capitalist owns the original
materials and in turn buys labor used up he owns the final product put on the
market to sell. This goal is to end up more money than was initially advanced.
Thus the
“Capital”
claims his right.
The
owner of the money put up will only need enough input in means of production
and labor power sufficient to show a profit on his investment. If the cost of
either side of the equation can be lowered the he is properly compelled to get
most for his buck. If makes a profit this is good if not, not so then the
gambler feels his a righteous claim. The worker sees herself as central.
Everything the capitalist owns and all his money is the product of past labor.
With his new money he has nothing without new labor. This creates an extremely
cruel affair.
Capitalism
or Capitalisms, is described by profits for investors as private property. Most
economic system democratic or autocratic is justified by an essential set of
social ethics. Honor for the patrician despot or comradeship for the
egalitarian community.
The
investor invests in things that return more money than invested.
This
includes producing things to sell. He buys the technology such as tools, raw
materials, lands, buildings means of transport, power sources and etc. But,
none of this makes sense unless inputs are changed into changed into something
that will sell at a higher price than invested. This requires labor power. The
capitalist has the money to set the whole thin into motion. Without this money
nothing will ever happen. But, this is meaningless prattle without labor power.
Production requires money of the investor and needs labor power of living
individuals. Even robots require someone to run them.
The
worker sells her labor for a wage. The investor has the money, and in his role
as capitalist buys materials and labor. This forms a highly dysfunctional
marriage. As her secret lover I side with labor.
Through
production the worker changes the material into something new called a
commodity. But what is important is a social relation between people is what is
real in this economic relation. Because the capitalist owns the original
materials and in turn buys labor used up he owns the final product put on the
market to sell. This goal is to end up more money than was initially advanced.
Thus the
“Capital”
claims his right.
The owner of the money put
up will only need enough input in means of production and labor power
sufficient to show a profit on his investment. If the cost of either side of
the equation can be lowered the he is properly compelled to get most for his
buck. If makes a profit this is good if not, not so then the gambler feels his
a righteous claim. The worker sees herself as central. Everything the
capitalist owns and all his money is the product of past labor. With his new
money he has nothing without new labor. This creates an extremely cruel affair.
Culture often reflects the
dominant justification for current power relations. Then to challenge the
established power relations we need to add another way of seeing things. This
different view open up for discussion things often missed by mainstream social
science, conventional news sources, typical art and philosophy, and of course
ordinary skilled dialogue and ways of life.
Capital in General Part 1
Marx
A
commodity is both useful and has a price. Price in part reflects the labor time
on average used in making it. Real time is averaged out, some workers work
faster than others. When sold the commodity will not sold exclusively at the
cost of labor time congealed in making it. It is but small factor in shaping
the price. But it is a long-term trend in determining that price and better
reflects the sociological relations between worker and owner.
In
every historical economic system people interact within nature and socially
with each other to produce what they want and need to live. From this we can say that people in order to
eat must set up culturally specific labor relations.
Under
the system of wage labor, then there is a separation between tools and
materials on one side and labor. The Capitalist owns and controls the former,
and the worker the second. Wages becomes to the capitalist the cost of getting
the work done. To the worker it means survival.
The
more a set of workers create in a hour the cheaper the over all cost of labor,
assuming of course everything made sells at the desired price. If not then
there arises economic problems.
In
this way only by comparing prices can we compare two different
commodities. Prices are defined in terms
of universal money. Money remains independent of things bought with money.
In
traditional society cattle are used as a bride price, brass rods spiritual
items and cowry shells can be spent only in the market place outside of town
and only on market day. These three types of monies are not equivalent.
In
our economic system money has no other meaning than as a means of exchange.
Labor time in making a specific commodity remains secondary. It can have
meaning only when it can be compared to the labor time needed making a
different commodity. We can by contrasting two opposing commodities quantify
labor time. But, remember we are comparing average labor time necessary at that
particular time and place.
Direct
exchange would become much too difficult. Prices become a simplified code for
exchange. But, labor time changes radically over time given a certain set of
external circumstances. Any Producer who gets an advantage gains extra profit
in the short run, but loses it because of competition. This is further
complicated by the twin crisis of over production or glutting the market and
falling rates of profit or more and more expensive technical innovations in
order to stay in the game. It only is fair to say these are tendencies not
truths, there are always counter balancing trends that change the facts.
This
constant disruption is the engine of further progress. Both causing unnecessary
suffering and much needed technological innovation. Driven by contradictions,
revolution both technological and social becomes a way of life under
capitalism. In doing so we need to look at how much the economic structure
forms the world of ideas, and in turn the world of ideas shapes the economics.
In this setting class struggle is always there. Sometimes hidden quietly
beneath the surface, sometimes out in the open.
Commodities:
Commodity is something produced for
sell for money. All commodities must
have use value, i.e. used for something specific. Non-commodities will also
have use value. Thing that are to given away or traded directly one item for
another are also contains use vales
Commodities produced for sale also
have exchange value. The exchange rates are related to the labor time on
average that goes into producing that commodity. Price and exchange value never
perfectly match, however over the long term exchange value is one factor in determining
price and consistently reflects the social relationships embedded in the
exchange rates.
Supply and demand will in the short
run be more important than labor time inserted in the manufacture the item
being sold. Over the long haul the economy moves in the direction of
balance. But the movement toward
equilibrium is constantly being undermined by the quest for profit. Exchange
value then is both a tendency and the map of social relations under capitalism.
For example the cost of a product
also reflects the tools, raw materials and other in puts that the go into
making that product all of which are the result of earlier labor times. Also
wages in part reflect the relative bargaining strength of the labor force. Given this wages reflect the price of labor
time. Profits being the main reason for employment, means wages are constantly
being negotiated.
Consumer is very interested in the
use value, i.e. the use of the product. The worker cares mostly about wages,
the capitalist is interested in profits. Thus, the cost of the product reflects
the cost of raw materials and tools, wages for the workers, and the profits
going to the employer.
Every economic system must have away to replace the
resources used up in making the items necessary for life. The basic
prerequisites needed for production must be available before production can
take place.
we
worry to much about the lazy person which justifies us felling good about
ourselves without really doing what is necessary to make a social contribution.
In traditional societies social obligation and not compensation was the
main motive to wrk. Social movement toward fairness is not about getting paid
to do nothing but social justice or treated fairly. The work ethic is not about
working harder to get richer, but to give a helping hand to others. Economies
embedded social ethics as Polanyi pointed out as I said he actually did his
research.
Profit
squeeze means lowering wag costs to increase profits. We need a social ethic
founded upon social responsibility, taught to our children. Any other economic
system is short term progressing from crisis to crisis.
Labor requires these materials before it can ever set
into motion on the creation of the goods and services. Then once the labor
process begins the relationship between a community of people and the natural
environment is set into motion. Through the interaction are defined.
From the mid-1700 to the present certain
tendencies undermined the capitalist movement toward equilibrium. These include
failing rates of posits, i.e. more expensive technologies leading to short term
advantage becoming the new normal, over production and glutting the market,
speculative investments, and profit squeeze or increasing wages cutting into
profits. This has led to counter tendencies like globalization including labor
markets, advertisements, government intervention to save the day, deficit
spending, wilder speculative investments and so on. Periodically the entire
capitalist system fails leading to radical restructuring this is called the
long wave theory.
What both economic history cultural settings of
economics studied by Weber, Marx and Polanyi have to offer is a detailed study
of pre-capitalist economies, social economics or the interaction between the
economy and the rest of the social institutions, the economy being embedded
into an over riding social and cultural ideology that can be radically
different in different cultures and different historical epics. Articulation of
modes of production or the survival of non-capitalist and pre capitalist
economies within modern capitalism altogether offer a different view of
economics. Both sociology and materialist anthropology were born from the
marriage of social history and economics. Most modern economics in economic
departments study the economy abstracted out of its social, cultural and
historical setting. It is scientifically precise and even mathematically
corrects, but becomes false when examined by sociologists or anthropologists.
In this class we will be able to examine not alternative
economic theories, but how local economies are related to environment,
politics, culture, social relations and how all of these change historically
over time. The theories themselves are set in a specific historical setting that
can be examine.
I have a question,
I do not have an answer.
As of April 1,
2010, the date of the 2010 United States Census, the nine most populous U.S.
states contain slightly more than half of the total population. The 25 least
populous states contain less than one-sixth of the total population.
California, the most populous state, contains more people than the 21 least
populous states combined.
Each State has two
Senators and thus 26 of the least populous state could, in theory, control the
Senate.
The role of the
Senate was conceived by the original Constitution as a check on the popularly
elected House of Representatives. Further, until the Seventeenth Amendment of
the Constitution (1913), election to the Senate was indirect, by the state
legislatures.
When the country
was founded, in most states, only white men with real property (land) or
sufficient wealth for taxation were permitted to vote. White women could not
vote, slaves and non-taxed Indians could not vote more than half of the white
males could not vote, and in Virginia, three fourth could not vote.
African Americans
are further deprived of the right to citizenship and, by extension, the right
to vote. 1866: The first Civil Rights Act grants citizenship, but not the right
to vote, to all persons born in the USA. 1869-70: The Fifteenth Amendment is
passed by Congress and ratified by the states.
The Voting Rights
Act, signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on August 6, 1965, aimed to
overcome legal barriers at the state and local levels that prevented African
Americans from exercising their right to vote under the 15th Amendment (1870)
to the Constitution of the United States.
Because the Senate
was created to keep power out of the hands of the people, do we still need a
Senate?
Part of the
problem is the issue of faith. As Søren Kierkegaard demonstrated that faith is
a belief and trust in the "strength of the absurd." That what we
believe not only contradicts reason and science, but the more impossible the
more profound the belief if we truly have faith. I am a Marxists, but I don’t
even have to rely on Marx. Karl Polanyi successfully demonstrated the free
market capitalism was not only a recent and a true revolution that broke with
the past in which all economic systems up till then were embedded in social
responsibility to varying degrees. But, he also demonstrated that a free market
cannibalizes itself from its inception on. Thus, the double movement free trade
and regulation of the economy. Often even the same individual holds both conflicting
views. One is a matter of faith and the other of necessity. The history of
America is a history of this double movement. Even the so-called Keynesians
often pay lip service to the absurdity of a free market. Trump will bring us
jobs because he is a successful businessman, never mind his relationship with
his own workers is very poor, he made a fortune by declaring bankruptcy,
profits and low wages are a marriage that works, capital intensive industry
drives wages down in other industries, unemployment, overproduction and risky
speculation and not employment is the result of a pro-business political
agenda. I hear small town Montanans express this faith in the absurd, how do we
fight that?
Marxism for beginners
Classical Marxism refers to
the economic, philosophical, and sociological theories expounded by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, as
contrasted with later developments in Marxism,
especially Leninism and Marxism–Leninism.
Marxism-Leninism
A noun
1.
The modification of Marxism by Lenin stressing that
imperialism is the highest form of capitalism.
2.
With Karl Marx, Lenin called for a classless society in which all means
of production would be commonly owned ( communism )(withering of the state, direct
participation of workers in all decisions affecting their lives through
councils).
3.
Lenin stressed bold, revolutionary action.
4.
Democratic centralism or discussions representing all
positions within the party and then tight discipline once an action is agreed
upon.
Orthodox Marxism is the
body of Marxist thought that
emerged following the death of Karl Marx which became the official philosophy
of the socialist movement as represented in the Second International until the
First World War. Two wings one representing revolution through reforms building
on stages leading to the final goal vs. the above followed by a spontaneous
insurrection leading to revolution.
Marxist Humanists usually base themselves on the early,
humanist writings of Karl Marx, especially the Economic and Philosophical
Manuscripts of 1844. Marxist-Humanism defines itself
in opposition to objective predispositions in social theory, reflected in
orthodox interpretations of “historical materialism”, in which the agent of history is
not human beings, but either abstract entities such as “laws of history” or inanimate entities such as “means of production.”
The idea is to take the best of all of the above to
create guide posts for our actions, while leaving the not so good behind.
Issues
and Social Movements
To
begin with socialism was a mass movement, which soon grew beyond the working
class. Only those who are not
self-confident with their own association fear alliances. With an understanding of the contemporary
circumstances, and of the environment surrounding the social movement comes
valiancy and wisdom of the heart. No
one should be afraid of to take part in an informed coalition with other groups
or associates. This is true even with
the people of questionable classes, according to Lenin. The political fact is that no party, weather
it be a vanguard party or a mass party, can exist for long without association
with other such political groups. To work with others on shared issues is
primary to success. A essential
necessity for any of that kind of an federation must be the total feasibility
for the Socialist to bring to light to the working class as a whole and the
radical workers in particular, that we must never lose sight of the long rang
goals while seeking short term objectives.
Reforms in bourgeois society are always temporary and the contradictions
of capitalism undermine the long lasting success of those reforms. It must be
remembered that it is to the advantage of the working class to understand that
they have interests that are diametrically antagonistic to the interests of the
bourgeoisie and even sometimes the petty bourgeoisie. The petty bourgeoisie must choose between
alliances with one of the two major classes.
The petty bourgeoisie has no ideology of their own. In nearly all circumstances, however the
petty bourgeoisie welfare are even more repressed by the large capitalist than
the working class (Lenin 1973: 19).
The significance of the working class for the struggle
for socialism rests completely on the role of its activity being the direct
producer in corporate monopoly capitalism, which is enormously and highly
concentrated in the centralized production on a scale not known before. The capitalist retains its political
superiority, which is attached to its economic supremacy, because it controls
access to the resources necessary in production. Those who control the means of production
control the means of political domination.
Control of the means of production will be kept out of the hands of the
working class at all costs. All reform
will have this as its primary logic. The
means of production control exclusively by the capitalist can be set into
motion producing only by the employment of the working class. The workers must at all costs be reduced to
only a material force of production like the machines used by the workers. The worker is to be seen as input costs, a
simple extension of the tools used in production. The human capital has a will of its own and
can hold up production by refusing to cooperate in its own exploitation. The organized working class in large-scale
industry can stop the entire economy; the central role of theses workers is
critical fort the advancement of socialism.
Small workshops or farms can never have that kind of influence on the
national economy in its activity (Trotsky 1969:
93 - 95).
Actual tangible and essential conditions of a technology
and material resources to support an absence of personal material gain are
required before socialism can advance along its natural path. The precondition is created by monopoly capitalism,
the greediest form of capitalism. Even
though the means of production are privately owned, class consciousness of the
socialized forces of production in large scale industry leads to an expanded
feeling of solidarity once class understanding grows to an international
movement (Trotsky 1969: 82).
At a certain level of economic concentration the working
class can seek to attain more than simple reform over the conditions of
work. Radicals in the revolution in
order to acquire power must set it self the goals that can be achieved contemplate
the strength of the adversary and makes its strategies accordingly. Both the subjectively of the will to fight
for equality, and the resolve to maintain privilege, is a set of objective
factors like support of the other classes, the power in control of military
resources on both sides, international aid to either side and the level of
development of the economy. At some
point only limited options are the issue if direct action is not taken
socialism will not happen by the objective force in capitalism without the
active will of the proletariat.
Socialist psychology grows only when the objective conditions make
socialism possible, and continues to grow as the struggle for socialism
advances, and socialism ultimately become the precondition for the complete
socialist psychology (Trotsky 1969: 96 -99).
Because the workers are the most exploited of the classes
under capitalism, they cannot free themselves without abolishing exploitation
in general. Because the working class is
the most important class in capitalist production they can only grow in
strength once properly organized.
Socialism is the primary mechanism for the freeing of the laboring
classes from oppression. With out an
ever-expanding practical democracy, socialism is inconceivable (Kautsky 1964:
1-2).
The two statements above show that both Lenin and Kautsky
agreed on the necessary leadership of the working class, and the need to form
alliances with other oppressed groups.
Their disagreement was based upon the nature of that leadership, and the
degree of mass participation in the central organs of the party.
Social movements have internal roots, and are a part of a
nations particular history. The social
movement of any country must be understood within the historical context of
that country (Cabral; Luxemburg). Most
social movements begin modestly in its vision, some of them become more
comprehensive, elaborate, and radical. A
radical coalition with bourgeois liberalism, while sometimes necessary, limits
the possibilities of its accomplishments.
Radical social movements must move beyond these narrow limits if it is
to grow and survive. Radicals, on the
other hand, can become isolated if they refuse to work with reformist
coalitions when the need arises. These
coalitions are usually necessary at the beginning of a movement. Many moderate socialists often feel it is a
mistake to go beyond these coalitions.
To work with reformist coalitions merely provide a foundation for
further social change. The strength of
an alliance or popular front is not only cooperation, but also the recognition
of the differences (Luxemburg 1970).
The working class is the only class capable of
emancipating the exploited position of the poor farmer. Only the workers can lead society toward
equality, democracy, end of coercion, end of the domination by the church,
expropriation and redistribution of wealth of the capitalist (Trotsky 1969:
71).
The working class can gain power only through a popular
rising, national devotion, cooperation, and public spirit. The radical worker class will become the
government of the people as the only leader against privilege, totalitarian
government, antiquated, brutality of a market economy and private property
(Trotsky 1969: 75).
Radical workers in the revolution will find support in
the conflict between rich and poor peasant, farm workers and the capitalist
farmers, “progressive villagers”, and
those who access to the lands are being lost (Trotsky 1969: 76).
The main bone of contention between the revolution and
the small farmer, at first at least is collectivism and internationalism
(Trotsky 1969: 77).
The outcome of any revolution is born from internal
contradictions, yet its success or failure depends upon long-term international
trends. A world economy with a market
ideal can overpower a national economy no matter how revolutionary. The revolution either simply democratic or
democratic and socialist cannot escape this logic. Trotsky, Luxemburg, and
Cabral all saw this truth in their respective revolutionary struggles. Each revolution has an important impact on
any and all revolutions that follow.
Socialist of all countries must maintain a deep sense of international
solidarity. If not the forces of a
highly organized market economy can prove more powerful than any socialist
country can cope with, i.e. Cuba in the 1990’s (Luxemburg 1970).
International solidarity and national struggles are a
necessity born out by the fact that capitalism is a highly integrated world
system. Only through this unity can
socialism ever develop and survive. The
collapse of socialist economies around the world in the 1990’s prove the age of
national economies is forever gone. Even
the most sincere struggle of national liberation is doomed before it ever
starts. Luxemburg and Trotsky saw this
following the Bolsheviks coming to power in Russia. Then it seemed to many hopeful
revolutionaries as overly pessimistic, today it cannot be denied.
Uniting all the nations of the world jointly with a
distinct all encompassing mode of production and distribution with its
corresponding commerce, capitalism has transformed the whole world into but one
and only one economic and political organic structure. Without unbroken assistance of the working
class outside of Russia and without the success of establishing Revolutionary
Governments in other lands also aiding the Russian Revolution, the working
class will lose power in Russia its political power is transitory. The unlimited political rule of the toiling
masses cannot be established, economic control of industry by the workers
remains a dream. The collectivist dream
will remain just out of reach (Trotsky 1969: 105 - 107).
The capitalist will without a historical understanding of
its own foundations and the caustic groundwork of its expansion impair its own
totality and the foundation of bourgeois existence. The capitalist gaspingly
hold tight to anything that will save its property no mater how menacing this
is the rest of society and or its allies.
Ultimately the bourgeoisie will protect its property no matter what risk
to bourgeois political power this entails.
Lasciviousness and lewdly the capitalist will go after any and each
reactionary group or social energy that worships with total idolatry private
property (Trotsky 1969: 108). Capitalism
expands beyond what even the world economy can maintain, and only by expanding
human misery can the profit of private property continue to grow.
The less the revolutionary working class wait for the
appearance of bourgeois democracy to give it freedom the less it has to barter
away its essence to capital for the illusion of reform. The clearer that the
workers know what they really need the less will these same workers have to
accommodate to the fanciful sluggishness and mawkish ludicrous drool of the
petty-bourgeoisie and their repugnance of exclusive deliverance and xenophobic
individualism. The battle of the workers
becomes increasingly inapplicable for liberal goals. The more aware the workers are of their
separation from liberalism, the more determined the struggle for collective
stewardship of the all the land and resources and the more intense the fight
for egalitarian distribution becomes.
Socialism breeds the determination to battle for the completion of
socialism or true communism. No whining
and bewailing but open fighting for socialism.
The political leadership can and must fall into the hands of the
workers. It is the only class that can
lead the rest of society to true democracy (Trotsky 1969: 121).
The liberal revolution is a revolution led by the
bourgeoisie. If the working class party
remains the left wing of the democratic front the socialist will have to face
the fact that the bourgeoisie will oppose the workers in any reform that threatens
property. Within the loyal opposition
the issue of property cannot be challenged the threat of the reaction my unite
worker and capitalist in the short run, but the ultimate enemy of the working
class is capitalism. The peasant came to
see that the liberal has much in common with the large land owner, the peasants
only hope for radical land redistribution is with the working class coming to
power (Trotsky 1969: 127).
Industrialization is the generator of cultural evolution
in modern times; the industrial working class is at the front of this
change. The worldview of the workers
becomes the theoretical foundation of socialism. The workers have a collective existence
already. This is a worldwide movement
and socialism can succeed in one nation only by expanding to other
nations. The resources of the advanced
must be shared with the underdeveloped ones for socialism to firmly take root
in the less developed countries (Trotsky
1969: 144 145).
Within the capitalist world economy there is uneven
development between countries, and between industries within a particular
country. National idiosyncrasy is the
most common outcome of this unevenness.
The uneven development of different branches of the local economy, different
economic class within a country, social institutions, this is the expression of
these peculiarities. National culture,
civilization, countrywide prototypes is the consolidation of this unevenness;
encumbrance to social progress is also a result of the unevenness (Trotsky
1969: 148).
Power can be either progressive or reactionary, it all
depends on which class is the ruling class.
State power is always super-structural; meaning the economic core of
world capitalism is always an issue for radical socialist to deal with even in
a workers state. Every country is
integrated into the world market economy, and this dependency maybe lessened by
a socialist revolution, but capitalism still must be struggled against even
after the local revolution wins power (Trotsky 1969: 152). Between the establishment constitutional
government and the socialist formulation of society there is a continuity of
revolutionary progress. Through a process of continuous domestic struggle, all
social relations are reshaped based upon the changes of international trends
(Voyeikov 1994: 7).
Capitalist development must grow and change with the
businesslike growth of its foundation.
Because of its irresolvable incongruity a market economy must enlarge
its total control worldwide. At the core export markets grows in importance. Unmanageable expansion and everlasting
emergency is primary to the underlying basis of capitalism. These flaws are the progress of capitalism
and its ever-present impending doom and expiration. The energy of Soviet economy is the
expropriation of private corporate property and the nationalization of industry
as well as planning of the uses of the means of production. Its weakness is its isolation (Trotsky 1969:
153).
The superstructure and political superstructure in
specific are important, a political revolution is a component of this
superstructure, having an internal logic and dialect that can and does
interrupt unmistakably in the course of the world economy, but does not
exterminate its penetrating laws, ultimate causes and forces (Trotsky 1969:
154).
Peasants because of their isolation, in the middle
arrangement and the diversity of its social organization means the peasants can
only chose between defending the revolutionary working class or reactionary
capitalist class. Who wins the struggle
between workers and capitalist in part determines who wins a separate struggle
between rich farmer and poor peasant in the struggle in the countryside (Trotsky 1969: 194).
The working class creates soviets or workers
self-management collectives. These will
guide the offensive accomplishments of the working masses, which attract into a
confederation with the workers both the poorer peasants and the army. The
absolute democratic sovereignty of all the people is a must and the predominant
position of the working class is central.
Uninterrupted persistent revolution means any and forms of privilege
must be attack one after the other by the working poor (Trotsky 1969: 209).
In the less developed nations foreign is capital
discharged straightway into large capital-intensive industry. This creates a large highly class conscious
proletariat. There is no other candidate
in this history to lead the revolution than the industrial working class, even
the liberal bourgeoisie will side with the old order reactionaries to protect
it property. This means that the
bourgeois revolution proceeds at once into a socialist revolution (Trotsky
1969: 215 - 220).
Finance capital is the ruling faction of capitalist in
all capitalist countries. This is true
notwithstanding of the fact that technique of control differ greatly form
country to country. With this being the
cause the workers socialist government will different in every country it is
established, even though the revolutionary hegemony of the dictatorship of the
proletariat is central (Trotsky 1969: 253).
The oddities of a nation, which has not completed or
built its democratic revolution, are of the sort of consequential importance
that becomes the foundation for any approach of the revolutionary proletarian
vanguard. With the level of capitalist
development leading to a largely revolutionary working class. The solution for the majority leads to
socialist ideology. Colonialism deepens
oppression in the underdeveloped countries leads in the direction of a national
democratic revolution followed immediately by a socialist revolution. The law of uneven development holds sway over
the relations between nations and the forces and classes within the colonial
state. An adjustment of the uneven
processes of economics and politics can be determined only on a world
scale. No country can build socialism
within its own nationwide boundaries because productive forces of capitalism
exist world wide, making socialism within a single country crippled from the
start (Trotsky 1969: 254 -255).
It is likely for workers to come to power in an
economically underdeveloped country before a well-developed nation. Liberal
bourgeoisie becomes a reactionary and counter-revolutionary potential before
they win their own revolution. The
pathfinder situation of the working class in any revolution means it is the
proletariat that pushes the revolution forward to foremost limits. All other classes of the toiling poor can but
follow the proletarian lead. Socialist
revolution is but the logical outcome of a democratic liberal revolution of the
bourgeoisie. Socialist revolution in
this way is permanent, liberal reform cannot solve the problems created by the
liberal revolution. Socialist revolution
is but a necessity that all reforms will lead to. Socialism will lead to collectivization,
communism and the ultimate democratic of all aspects of life. Socialism either opens the door to further
radical revolutions or it collapses in on itself (Trotsky 1969: 180-182).
Either the revolution
will break the narrow national bounds, or it will remain limited in its
possibilities. If the socialist
revolution is overthrown than it will only be a capitalist social
movement. The working class and the
peasant working together must overcome the worldwide counterrevolution if
socialism is to survive. The revolution
must continuously widen its scope at home and its base worldwide. The revolution must remain always
revolutionary. All the resources of the
state and economy within a socialist country must be thrown into the
revolution. If the revolution slows down
than it retreats and dies (Trotsky 1969:
184).
The workers government can only be such a government when
representatives of the working class command and direct the political
institutions of the state. The masses
lead by the working class, in accord with the goal of socialism, must fortify
its power will widen the foundation of the revolution by incorporating allies,
but the industrial proletariat will always stand at the lead of the
revolution (Trotsky 1969: 70).
Once the socialist take power the demarcation between
ultimate and first agenda fail to have any importance for setting up
revolutionary policy, as every thing leads to the final goal of collective
stewardship of the resources of production and equal distribution of life’s
necessities (Trotsky 1969: 78).
National capital can only be understood in its
relationship to a world market economy.
Particular characteristics of the national economy are but an elemental
piece of the world economy; this is why all communist or socialist movements
must be part of an international struggle (Trotsky 1969: 148).
Permanent revolution means an immediate passing from one
to another form the democratic revolution to the socialist revolution. The revolution can give rise to no concession
with any pattern of class rule, no permanent compromise with the liberal
bourgeoisie only temporary hold patterns of reform. Not stopping and political democracy and
civil rights socialism and communism are always in the plan of action. To all revolutionaries all enemies of
socialism on a world scale will be resisted in its turn. Every subsequent step of the revolution is
solidly grounded in the prior ones and only the workers can abolish class rule. Between the democratic revolution and
socialism a condition of continuous revolutionary development (Trotsky 1969:
130 - 132).
Communist collectives run through the democratic
participation of the actual producers becomes the arrangement of the day. This destroys the boundary between maximum
and minimum programs. The main
impediment is the relation of the material and social forces within
society. Once the radical working class
gains control over the revolution, they must keep the revolution within their
grasps at all times driving the revolution forward or lose to some other class
or faction of a class (Trotsky 1969:
80).
Revolution
like the rest of a radical proletarian culture is always cosmopolitan. In the beginning the urban proletariat are
derived from many isolated village cultures.
In this new industrialized setting the dislocated peasants form a new
culture when they move to town to find work.
The philosophy of socialism helps the radicalized working class to
understand the trauma of the industrial environment. Radical proletarian culture is born from both
the lived experience of industrialization and the melding of several eccentric
village cultures into something distinct.
Revolution too feeds upon revolutions in other nations. While both national and international
influences are important, this sharing of ideas between nations and applying
them to unique national circumstances creates a new living culture. Finally, many urbanized radicals move back to
their farm villages, bring with them new radical ideas that are intermingled
with ancient tradition to create a culture of resistance in the
countryside. These new traditionalist
then move to town bringing together of new traditionalist of many distinct
backgrounds to merge with the urban radical culture (Luxemburg 1970).
Social movements are a collective reaction to shared
disappointing conditions of the lived experiences of the participants. Dialectical processes, of antagonism and
adaptation come to pass when major social tendencies produces conflicts and
public opposition based upon the psychological need for a refutation of the
impact of that trend, upon traditional ways of doing things. Movements are born from a history of
traumatic disruption and dissension. Market economies disrupt social protection
over land, labor, and resources that are protected by tradition and social
obligations. Powers beyond the gods
destroy the peasants’ security with the past (Robert and Kloss 1974: 1-32; Wolf
1969: 276-302). Because of the deep perceived sense of injustice, and leads to
the feeling of frustration. The old
world is fallen apart and the new one is not acceptable. People simply lose faith in the established
authority; there is deterioration in legitimacy of the rulers. A new and
confrontational ideology often made up of older traditional and imported
radical ideas that in combination make sense to the oppressed emerges
(Szymanski and Goertzel: 322-327; Heberle 1951: 1-19).
Social movements continue to move toward even more
radical demands, or it stagnates giving the reaction time to mobilize to
regain, what the class of privilege sees as lost ground. The Revolution moves from small reform to
ever more radical demands with each victorious change. Each failure is turned into bases for
mobilization to regain ground lost to the Revolution and to move to even more
radical demands. There can never be a
middle ground of collaboration. With
each issue being defined as revolutionary or reactionary there is never a middle
ground. Revolution or reaction is the
battle cry. The moderate is soon left
behind to join the camp of the reaction, or caught in the crossfire. Power is the issue, with power comes justice,
equality and freedom (Luxemburg 1970: 31-40; Heberle 1951: 23-37).
Without a radical ideology there can be no revolutionary
activity. The role from the very
beginnings of that courageous struggle can be fulfilled only by a coterie that
is directed by the most well developed theory (Lenin 1973: 29). The leadership according to Lenin is founded
upon a sound theory that acts as a practical guide to action. To have a weak theory or no theory at all is
the results of unawareness of the historical sociology of the reality people
have to deal with in their struggle for emancipation. Imperialism is more than an abstract
concept. It is not only a relationship
between nations, but also a lived experience of real people. When an ample number of individual and
collective experiences have been accumulated and analyzed it well provide the
means the revolutionaries need to define a general line of thought and action
with the aim of getting rid of the lack of historical understanding and
following a strategy that has a hope of success (Cabral 1969: 92-93).
Lenin claims workers left to their own devices workers
will never evolve beyond simple trade unionism. The impulsive and spontaneous
resistance of workers to their exploitation on the job is a substance of their
basic nature, according to Lenin. From
this rebellion while it remains undisciplined will exemplify not anything more
or less than the awareness of their exploitation. It is an undeveloped pattern
of social awareness; the workers have at this stage. Even these rudimentary disorders assert the
cause of oppression in the hearts of the workers. This is natural result of the lives and working
conditions of the workers. To the worker
this spontaneous reaction serves as a wake up call for political understanding
of a specific type and amount. The
workers demonstrate the need for the radical leadership in the party to excite
opposition between workers and employers.
Lenin would further state that without a vanguard the workers can never
appreciate the antagonistic and irreconcilable differences between their
working class interests and the sum total current political-economy of the
world market economy. They are not yet
socialists. This must be brought to them
by a small group of people who are educated, and privileged yet strongly
identify with the dispossessed working poor.
The working class by it self cannot go beyond the trade union identity
or simple political democracy (Lenin 1973: 36-37). This is the core philosophy of the vanguard
party. Both syndicalism and the position
held by Rosa Luxemburg that workers learn socialism in the process of struggle
and brought in from the outside (Luxemburg 1971: 289).
Socialism without democracy as a way to liberate the
masses is unimaginable. Socialism is
both the public organization of production, but also an extension of
democracy. Socialism cannot be separated
from democracy. Democracy requires
public control. The working class being
a majority of a highly industrial society can acquire political power by making
use of existing freedoms. The despotism
of capitalism has difficulty regulating the compulsion needed for the
obstruction of democracy (Kautsky 1971: 1 -11).
The more firmly established political democracy is within
a society, the longer democracy has historically been central the politics of
that society the more all minority groups have in protecting their rights. The more power in the hands of the people the
more any minority can oppose the pretensions of any party which tries to retain
control over the government at all costs.
Any socialist party must make the protection of minorities extremely
important. All current doctrine, be they
based upon theory or strategy convictions of principle with assumption that
minorities are important, many times in the foremost standards of that doctrine
minority representation is its nucleus (Kautsky 1971: 33).
Democracy is the key foundation for the making of a
socialist society with its public control of production. Only through democracy does the working class
gain the fully developed skills needed the form socialism and democracy test
the maturity of the workers (Kautsky 1971: 42).
The pure labor unionist and the revolutionary
conspirator, according to Lenin, share the worship of spontaneity. The anarchist-syndicalist, Lenin claims,
surrender to the myth of sudden inspiration of action of the pure working class
struggle, while the terrorists give away to the impetuousness of the burning
moral rage of the isolated intellectual.
The intellectual in their isolation are unable to join up with the
struggle of the working class at the job site and in the working class
communities. The intellectual is not
part of the working class as a whole, unless they take on a working class
identity and world-view (Lenin 1973: 92-95; Cabral 1969: 110).
Union
activity as well as running for office through legitimate elections are
carefully thought about ways to educate and progressively show the path that
the working class can learn to accept control over their lives and for the need
to seize political power to obtain socialism.
This working through the system is only a means of training workers to
take control over the economy and political institutions of society for the
benefit of the workers. The fight for
socialism and total democracy cannot be limited to legal methods as the
capitalist still control the rules of the game for their benefit. Through labor activism and parliamentary
struggles the appreciation of class-consciousness for the proletariat to become
more socialist is established, and the laboring class is organized as a class
of workers. If legitimate political and
union activity is foolishly considered as apparatus for the socialization of
the capitalist economy, the revolutionary working class loses their capability
to establish socialism and no longer prepare all the workers to take over
society as a whole in their conquest of power
(Luxemburg 1971: 85 - 86).
As soon as the short-term practical gains become the
principle aim of the working struggles, class-consciousness is lost, and the
working class party stands in the way of the working class coming to
power. All reforms no matter how it
benefits the workers by improving their lives will still leave the capitalists
in power and the ultimate cause of most societies ills the unequal distribution
of wealth and power. Socialism will be
the result entirely of the ever growing disparity of rich and poor; weak and
strong because of capitalism and the understanding by the workers that
overthrow of these contradictions through social reorganization is inescapable
(Luxemburg 1971: 87 - 88).
The philosophy of Socialism, started growing out of the
vision of those educated individuals who identified with the working poor. The Socialist Movement developed from
historical and economic theories that were refined by the intellectual’s
representatives of the class with property (Lenin 1973: 37). Bakunin held that the freeing from oppression
of the worker must be the responsibility of the workers themselves, and not an
intellectual vanguard (Bakunin 1971: 295).
It would be terrifying for all people if a small group of party
intellectuals had any real authority, beyond persuasion. All experts tend to exaggerate their
importance, and any professional who believe in their own BS is of course a
tyrant. Education is for all the people,
and both the teacher and student continuously change roles, as we all learn
from well thought out experience. Theory
is created out of lived experiences.
Minority rule is minority rule, and is based upon the unfounded faith of
the stupidity of the masses (Bakunin 1971: 295-332). In reality both Lenin and Bakunin are right,
yet socialism cannot be socialism unless it resonates with the lived experience
of the poor and working people.
The goal of the revolution is a collective society;
policy will be chosen that will shorten the path to socialism. The goal of all reforms within the minimum
program is modest improvement in workers lives as soon as possible. Each compromise will be the foundation for
further struggles; each victory and each reform will be used to further the
long-term goals of socialism. Political
democracy remains shallow and incomplete without moving toward economic
democracy and finally political democracy there is no political freedom with
wage slavery. With the ultimate slogan
of expropriation without compensation the long rand goals are kept alive (Trotsky
1969: 100 - 101).
It is the objective conditions that create the class
division of society, the working class is a class in itself, but not yet a
class for itself, only through its awareness does a class become a class for it
self by fighting the interest of the working class as a class (Marx 1963:
173-174). Marx leaves debatable where
the consciousness of as class as a class come from, leaving wide open Lenin’s
theory of socialism coming from the outside.
Marx clearly had in mind over all class interest occurs when one class
confront in an antagonist way another class.
Class struggle if fact when active, conflicts will develop the already
existing discord between two or more classes (Marx 1947: 82-95; Marx 1968: 51;
Bukharin 1969: 292-293, 297). This makes
it seem likely socialism is an indigenous working class phenomenon and not
brought in from the outside like Lenin assumes.
When we speak of the ideas that revolutionize society, we are talking
about within the shell of the older society, the elements of a newer one
develops, the decay of the old ideas is replaced by newer revolutionary ones
(Marx 1968: 51). In this then the
correct revolutionary ideas are important, and the wrong ones dangerous. Thus, the debate becomes important in the
eyes of the participants.
My Reading List for
Leftists:
Karl Marx:
Capital Volume 2 The
Process of Circulation
The Economic &
Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844
The German Ideology –
With Frederick Engels Critique of the Gotha Program
Wages, Price, and
Profits
The Eighteenth Brumaire
of Louis Bonaparte
Fredrick Engels:
Anti-Duhring
The Origins of the
Family, Private Property and the State
Rosa Luxemburg:
The Accumulation of Capital
The Russian Revolution
Leninism or Marxism?
The national Question
Leon Trotsky:
The Permanent Revolution
The Transitional Program
for Socialist Revolution
The Revolution Betrayed
V. I. Lenin:
What is to be Done?
State and Revolution
Left-wing Communism an
Infantile Disorder
Michael Bakunin:
God and the State
Peter Kropotkin:
Mutual Aid
Anarchist Morality
Karl Polanyi:
The Great Transformation
Albert Camus:
Note Books
Epicurus
The Essential Epicurus Letters,
Principal Doctrines,
Marxism is
not a single entity. Marxism schools some but not all
Marxism–Deleonism
(Daniel
De Leon)
Combining f revolutionary
syndicalism with orthodox
Marxism.
Left
communism (Rosa
Luxemburg)
Anti-elitist
party autonomous mass organization of the working class
Marxist
Revisionists
Eduard
Bernstein revolution through force was not necessary to achieve a socialist
society, peacefully through legal means.
Marxism–Leninism
Revolution
led by a vanguard party of professional revolutionaries.
Trotskyism
Is the theory that socialism should be
established throughout the world by continuing revolution is its founding
principle.
Council
Marxist
Revolutions
led by locally independent worker councils worldwide.
Antonio
Gramsci
The domination
of a culturally diverse society by the ruling
class who manipulate the culture of that society, revolution created a
counter culture
The
Frankfurt School
Critical of
both capitalism and Soviet
socialism, their writings pointed to the possibility of an alternative
path to social
development. Led by in depth by scientific analysis based Hegelian
dialectic.
Maoism
Revolution
could be won by the sheer will of a large revolutionary majority.
Anti-revisionism
Opposed to
any reinterpretation of basic Marxism-Leninism
Monthly
Review School of Marxism
Studies the end of the freely competitive stage
of capitalism and the beginning of monopoly capitalism.
Marxist
theology
Liberation
theology is a synthesis of Christian theology and Marxist socio-economic
analyses that emphasizes social concern for the poor and the political
liberation for oppressed peoples.
Marxist
humanism
Workers
are alienated because under capitalism individuals and are alienated from their
productive activity and become a commodity to be bought and sold.
Analytical
Marxism
Workers
exploitation and class were generated not in the sphere of production but of
market exchange completion among workers for a job.
Neo-Marxism or
New Left
Marxism incorporating elements from other
intellectual traditions such as critical theory, psychoanalysis, and
existentialism
Autonomist
Marxism
Autonomous
social movements involve people directly in decisions affecting their everyday
lives.
Structural
Marxism
People's
actions are shaped by society and in particular the economic system. It is the
upper class control all of society, politics, law, religion and culture thus
what the rest of us believe. Alternatives develop when societies begin to fall
apart.
Communist
Party Historians Group of British Marxism
To seek out
a popular revolutionary
traditions that could inspire contemporary activists
Anti-humanism
Marxist (Louis Althusser)
The
reproduction of the conditions of production and the reproduction of the
relations of production happens through the state apparatuses which are
insidious machinations controlled by the capitalist ruling ideology in the
context of a class struggle to repress, exploit, extort and subjugate the ruled
class.
Marxist
Existentialist (Jean-Paul Sartre)
All societies are best
understood as arenas of struggle between powerful and powerless groups, in
which individual decisions play a critical role. We cannot escape freedom of
choice. All choices come down too supporting the oppressor or the oppressed.
Herbert
Marcuse
Mass
culture, serves to reinforce political repression. In advanced industrial
society (capitalism), the development of technical thought including efficiency
by achieving the maximum results with a minimum amount of effort is destroying
the oppositional and autonomous rudiments in advanced society
Euro
communism
National
Parties that emphasis independence from the former Soviet Communist Party and
preservation of many elements of Western liberal democracy.
Marxist
feminism
A system
of thought feminism focused on investigating and explaining the ways in which
women are oppressed through systems of capitalism and private property.
Marxist
instrumentalist
This is a
theory which reasons that policy makers in government and positions of power
tend to "share a common business or class background, and that their
decisions will reflect their business or class interests".
Marxist
Dependency Theory
Starts with
the idea that resources flow from a “periphery” made up of the poor is the underdeveloped
are exploited states providing resources for a "core" of wealthy
states, at below costs enriching these powerful nations at the expense
of the prior colonies and semi-colonies. It is a main theme of dependency
theory that poor states are impoverished and rich ones enriched by the way poor
states are integrated into the "world
system".
Marxist
World Systems theory
World-systems
theory is influenced by dependency theory. The focus on nation states is
their unit
of analysis. Historical the global is a single integrated economy from
the 16th century on. Thus this is the main path of evolutionary
development worldwide, disregarding transnational economic systems that
constrain local and national development.
Marxist
Anthropologist
Is the concept in which separate modes of production (economic
systems) are coexisting within one society. Thus not totaling disagreeing the
two theories just above, but each community has its own historical development
while being integrated into a larger world system.
Marx – Weber
synthesis
Weber used
Marxist analysis but start with the super-structure’s influence on the base.
For example how religion influence the development of Capitalism. Many Marxist
find this useful to re-establish a dialectical relationship between base and
ideology. The arrows go both ways.
Marx Freud
synthesis
Studies the
influence of the economic base on the rest of society and how this relationship
effects the development the personality of the individual.
Environmental
Marxist
Just what it
says how the economy effects the environment, Starting from earliest hominids
to the evolution of modern capitalism.
Anarchist
Marxist
Uses Marxist
analysis in the service of anarchist struggles’
Social
Democrat
It is a
political party that supports the expansion of the public sector and social
services, under democratic control.
Secular Humanism and Philosophical Materialism
How many Gods? Or Why I am a Humanist
Over 2,500 Deities of the World
Michael Jordan
Using only Homo sapiens,
we can estimate of 63,000 religious groups throughout human history. Some give
very rough estimate of an approximately of N = 28,000,000 of possible gods. If
religion range from one to a 1000 gods this would give us 440 deities per
religion. Atheist Web site
As you can see there is no
way to even to know for sure.
Animism
is the capability of having a divine personality to plants, inanimate
objects, and natural phenomena. Everything named or unnamed has its own
spiritual essence.
Deism
is the belief in the existence of a supreme being who does not interfere
in day-to-day operations of the universe.
Pantheism
the universe or nature is god. Richard Dawkins, in his book The God Delusion, has described
Pantheism as “sexed-up atheism,” by adding an all encompassing, rousing, expressive
and respectful affection about our lives on this planet, our place in the
human family, Nature and all its life forms and the wider Universe, as an
expression of reverent awe.
Panentheism
God is the Universe; the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Hegel 'definitions of the Absolute because the existence of an
objective world is absolute making God
far greater than the universe which part of God which interpenetrate and
defines it.
Henotheism
we worship only one god though there are many.
Monotheism
there is only one God.
Atheism
and agnosticism overlap. Atheism need not be, believing in the non-existence of
God or gods, but the divine plays no part in your life. Any and all of the
above may be true or false though many seem mutually exclusive. None seem more
likely than the rest. Then the question for an atheist is the question about
god’s existence is irrelevant to how I live my life. Belief becomes a personal
choice, so there is no reason choose a belief other than it makes you feel good
and no god doctrine of Humanism or Philosophical materialism can be very
pleasing. I do good things because it is
good to do good and bad to do badly. Imagination and empathy leads to
compassion. Not reward or heaven, punishment or hell. No god has a right to
tell me to harm another.
No comments:
Post a Comment