Marxists in the house

[Westside Steve]

I have noticed that the term Marxist is being used guite often here.

I don't think that Marxism is an inherently evil form of society. To each according to his need from each according to his ability sounds perfectly fair when in the context of actual need. Unfortunately one of the reasons I don't think this system works very well is that soon it goes well beyond the point of need and into the realm of want and resentment.

And I mean resentment from both sides of the argument. Poor people are naturally going to be resentful of those with million dollar mansions driving automobiles that cost more then they make in a year. Rich people resent paying higher and higher taxes, not to help those in need but to provide transportation housing food cell phones cable television et cetera et cetera for extended families who have been on the dole for generations.

 

We naturally bristle, Chris, if someone from another culture, say Great Britain, seems to be sneering at us because we don't champion equality.

 

I understand, of course, that that was not your intent. But I don't think equality does, can, or should necessarily exist in any culture. There I have always been alpha and beta human beings as well.

 

I'm personally distrustful of the President as he preaches endlessly for equality and the end of financial disparity promising to give more and more benefits to those at the bottom rung to curry cynical favor for his family and his party who apparently have no intention of living a life style less than kings.

 

I don't begrudge him his wealth I'm just annoyed when I hear him pretending he's looking out for me.

(I wonder, Cal, if Chairman Mao lived in such a grand fashion)

And since you mentioned the perception of incompetence among the Bush administration it is annoying to see Obama get what seems to be a free pass, except in a few decidedly right leaning venues.

 

WSS

[gftChris]

I have noticed that the term Marxist is being used guite often here.

I don't think that Marxism is an inherently evil form of society. To each according to his need from each according to his ability sounds perfectly fair when in the context of actual need. Unfortunately one of the reasons I don't think this system works very well is that soon it goes well beyond the point of need and into the realm of want and resentment.

And I mean resentment from both sides of the argument. Poor people are naturally going to be resentful of those with million dollar mansions driving automobiles that cost more then they make in a year. Rich people resent paying higher and higher taxes, not to help those in need but to provide transportation housing food cell phones cable television et cetera et cetera for extended families who have been on the dole for generations.

Communism is a great system, except for human nature. It'd be great for robots, but people are ambitious, and most won't settle for their 'fair share' of whatever. And that leads to the resentment you're talking about.

We naturally bristle, Chris, if someone from another culture, say Great Britain, seems to be sneering at us because we don't champion equality.

I understand, of course, that that was not your intent. But I don't think equality does, can, or should necessarily exist in any culture. There I have always been alpha and beta human beings as well.

I'm quite shocked at that, to be honest, unless I've misinterpreted. There are two types of equality, for me - the first says that everyone should do the same thing; the second says everyone should have the right to do the same thing. Clearly, there's zero point in putting a black, immigrant, lesbian amputee in congress just in the name of equality. But, she should have the right and opportunity to be able to get there if she is deemed qualified. That's why I mean by equality. Whether there is or can be, maybe not. But there damn well should be. How many smart people have not made it to the top, and been able to influence things positively, because of where they come from I wonder? We'll never know, of course.

I'm personally distrustful of the President as he preaches endlessly for equality and the end of financial disparity promising to give more and more benefits to those at the bottom rung to curry cynical favor for his family and his party who apparently have no intention of living a life style less than kings.

I think most people are distrustful of any politician - Obama was the first one that came along in a while that felt different. Evidently he wasn't very. I don't really keep too up to date with American politics, only the things that affect me, so international relations, so I can't really comment too much on Obama's administration. But even I get the general feeling is 'disappointing' from over here.

[Westside Steve]

Maybe oh I missed your point in one of your discussions with die hard in which you seemed to take issue with him for referring to people who don't agree with his political views, guns, God, equality etcetera as un American.

 

Anyway I don't imagine that anyone disagrees with common sense equality in most fields.

As we've discussed before even though I wouldn't have an objection I can understand how some parents might not want a gay man supervising their male children anymore then a straight man supervising adolescent girls. I think you can probably understand that. Or insisting that girls play in the NBA or something ridiculous like that guy who sued hooters because he wanted to be a waitress. Hey blow me buddy. (him, not you.) But sure that kind of the quality is a given at least I think so. I'm talking about this ridiculous Occupy Wall Street movement that Obama seemed to exploit. Sorry boys and girls there is a disparity of wealth but there's also not only equal opportunity but an extra boost for the, self-styled, downtrodden.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood you.

WSS

[calfoxwc]

"Equality" is just one more term with twisted meanings.

Equal Opportunity towards pursuit of happiness? Yes.

But Karl Marx himself said, that socialism is just a necessary

step towards communism.

 

Right now, we see that Obamao himself, and his regime, selectively favor

certain social groups over others, lashing out at those who are happy with

their life's work and success, etc, and using class warfare/envy, racial strife,

economic interference in several industries, deliberate targeting of conservative groups

by the IRS, scandal after scandal, failure after failure, attempting to disarm

Americans, manipulate them out of their private insurance, and into gov insurance,

and the NSA is spying on...everybody..

 

That sound like a great system to anybody? I think we are in serious trouble,

just like the ex secret service agent I heard speak tonight has said.

 

I value freedom over any other "great system" by twenty nine million lightyears.

What kind of gov system is "great", when it isn't, since humans have a human nature?

That's just misquided.....stuff. Human beings have a nature to be FREE of marxist/communist

oppression.

 

Great system of gov... = "IT WORKS". To me, "equality", means we have no caste system,

as in India, and no government interference and preference towards people having

the opportunity/freedom to work toward goals... or not. If you don't work toward goals,

you won't achieve them. Fall through the cracks, can't help it, you get help.

 

Refuse to work, you can get help. But the marxist spreading of wealth? When the Soviets

completely disintegrated, that should tell the tale of oppression of gov.

 

Marxist bs starts, when governments appeal to the part of a society that doesn't work,

or didn't succeed, and/or are envious of others who worked very hard to achieve, and did.

 

Freedom requires fairness in opportunity, regardless of race, color or creed. The marxism

idea floundered even in the Soviet Union. Stalin pillaged food from the breadbasket of

Europe, the Ukraine, and starved millions to death, to try to prop up the Soviet Empire.

Mao and the rest, in China, murdered tens of millions of people. The poverty and oppression

in East Germany (no more, it lost it's existence like the entire Soviet Union did), was hideous.

 

N. Koreans could tell quite a tale of poverty and oppression.

 

Human beings do not thrive under marxist/communist govs. Ever. Historically, never.

The alcoholism in the Soviet Union was profound.

 

Goodness.

[MLD Woody]

Say true equality for a social group is being a level 10. The social group you are in though has a long standing history and a rooted power structure in the social and political scene, your group gets its way more often than not, correct or not, so your group is a level 11. Another social group isn't so lucky, in fact, they may have faced some discrimination at some point. They're a level 7.

 

To reach a more equal state, where no one is favored or not favored because of irrational biases and prejudices, some policies and laws are passed, or just the social climate shifts. Now group 2 is a level 8 and group 1 is where they should be at a level 10.

 

Now is group one being discriminated against in anyway? No. They just aren't irrationally and unfairly calling the shots like they once were. To those on the outside, these changes are fair and just and make perfect sense. Those IN the group though, they feel like they are being discriminated against, being unfairly treated. They aren't though, everything just doesn't go exactly like they want it to as much anymore.

 

I think it is pretty damn important to make these distinctions when looking at any social group that is being "persecuted". You can fill in the groups in my example is you want, it shouldn't be hard to come up with relevant examples if you aren't completely biased (those of you on here that are going to post completely Retarded examples, have at it)

[gftChris]

I think we're all largely agreed then, on what equality means, with some minor, though probably important, differences. Being able to pursue your dreams - equality, the good type. Suing Hooters for not giving you a job because you're a man - ridiculous, politically correct equality. Reminds me of:

 

http://youtu.be/NrDVsprWRCQ?t=40s

 

I think where we disagree is on the extent to which the government should be involved. Which is fair enough, people have different views, of course, that's natural. Cal - my line about communism being great except for human nature was meant to imply exactly what you said - that because of that human nature it's not a great system. I am in NO WAY an advocate for communism. I am a capitalist, I work in finance, on a high floor in canary wharf I'm just saying that, objectively, when you set out to make an 'equal' system, where everybody is given an equal chance, you end up with something looking like communism. So people say "well it must work, because it makes sense, everybody gets the same chance in life" without actually stopping to consider the massive problems with implementation.

 

Steve - my point about the immigrant hating, gun toting whatever definition of being American is that there is probably a very large part of the nation that would shun that definition of themselves, and yet still count themselves as Americans. You may disagree, that to be a true american you need to have these virtues. It's just a different version of patriotism. We have the same thing here - look at the EDL.

 

Woody - I see what you're saying, but why not try to make everyone an 11? Instead of trying to force equality by bringing the standard down for some people, why not bring it up for everyone else?

 

It seems like it boils down to how much the government should be involved in creating equality. For example, should they make education free to those who qualify but can't afford it? Should they make it free for everyone?

[calfoxwc]

Okay, Chris, I goofed on that one, GGG.

 

Back in my high school and college days, I had a friend who

would seriously pose that argument to me.

He was a free thinking liberal, no overstatement.

Of course, later on, he was in intel in Irag, and said that

we HAD to go into Iraq.

Surprised the heck out of me. But he was very serious, but wouldn't tell me why.

He told me when he went overseas, he ended up changing his mind about

a lot things. Became the opposite politically what he was in school.

 

Oops, I knee jerked.

[MLD Woody]

Woody - I see what you're saying, but why not try to make everyone an 11? Instead of trying to force equality by bringing the standard down for some people, why not bring it up for everyone else?

 

In my example being above a 10 meant having an unfair amount of power and say in the political and social landscape. Idk, maybe numbers weren't the best way to describe it. Making everyone an 11 just wouldn't mathematically be possible, there is only so much influence to go around lol