Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-09-2012, 02:11 PM #169
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
That means that, like communism, you could argue that it only hasn't worked because it has never been done fully (not a great argument but one could make a case).

And people say I never stand for the right...
Or that it hasn't been done fully because it doesn't work? Or that it is incompatable with industrial society.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sponsored Links Remove Advertisement
Advertisement
Old 11-09-2012, 02:37 PM #170
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
Or that it hasn't been done fully because it doesn't work? Or that it is incompatable with industrial society.
Communism in full it hasn't been attempted and neither has trickle-down economics (atleast as far as I'm aware).

And are you saying communism or trickledown is incompatible with society? And this falls back on the first question. How can you know if either is compatible or incompatible if they have never been done in full.
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:14 PM #171
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
Communism in full it hasn't been attempted and neither has trickle-down economics (atleast as far as I'm aware).

And are you saying communism or trickledown is incompatible with society? And this falls back on the first question. How can you know if either is compatible or incompatible if they have never been done in full.
I'm saying that a possible reason it hasn't been tested in full is because of some inherent flaw in the theory that, somewhere down the line of transition, causes the whole thing to hit a snag.

I think that the marxist experiments are a good indication of the limits of applying theory to nature. In other words, rationalism has its limits.

Actually I was saying that communism is probably incompatible with industrial society. I believe somewhere down the line in forming the theory, assumptions were made and misunderstandings of source cultures occured making it incompatible with industrial society. Spengler wrote a book on it that's worth reading.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:15 PM #172
drgonzo
Half-cocked
 
drgonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
Communism in full it hasn't been attempted and neither has trickle-down economics (atleast as far as I'm aware).

And are you saying communism or trickledown is incompatible with society? And this falls back on the first question. How can you know if either is compatible or incompatible if they have never been done in full.
Trickle down has been tried, it's Reaganomics basically. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics
__________________
PUMPPB.COM - Pump paintball forums
HawaiiPB.com - Paintball forums for the state of Hawaii
HawaiiPB/PumpPB - Our videos | Droidtiles.com - NFC Tags for Android and mobile devices
drgonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:36 PM #173
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
I'm saying that a possible reason it hasn't been tested in full is because of some inherent flaw in the theory that, somewhere down the line of transition, causes the whole thing to hit a snag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
Communism in full it hasn't been attempted.
I'm not quite sure how you aren't getting this. True communism or true capitalism have never been tried. In the case of communism, what was tried was not a communism that never fully developed because of a snag. It was an entirely different form of government that failed.

You are essentially saying that government "g" won't work because government "h" was attempted and got snagged before it could progress.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
Actually I was saying that communism is probably incompatible with industrial society. I believe somewhere down the line in forming the theory, assumptions were made and misunderstandings of source cultures occured making it incompatible with industrial society. Spengler wrote a book on it that's worth reading.
I am not saying Marxism is good, possible, or functional. I am saying that we have a theory of marxism that can be critiqued but has never been practiced and therefore cannot be evaluated. I can critique laissez faire capitalism even though it has never been seen before. But it hasn't been attempted and therefore cannot be evaluated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drgonzo View Post
Trickle down has been tried, it's Reaganomics basically. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics
Trickle-down is part of Reaganomics, but I have largely been talking about Reagonomics because that was what was implied by the original poster and to be honest they are getting to be interchangeable.

Reagonomics policy was to reduce the growth of government spending, reduce income tax and capital gains tax, reduce government regulation of economy, and control money supply to reduce inflation. We have never seen that done IN FULL. Essentially it is laissez faire which has never existed. Even during reagan, we could have reduced taxes more. We could have reduced regulation more. We could have reduced government spending more. Because of that, we cannot evaluate with certainty the PRACTICE of trickledown economics (although we can evaluate the theory).
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads

Last edited by TheSilentAssassin : 11-09-2012 at 04:00 PM.
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:43 PM #174
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
I'm not quite sure how you aren't getting this. True communism or true capitalism have never been tried. In the case of communism, what was tried was not a communism that never fully developed because of a snag. It was an entirely different form of government that failed.

You are essentially saying that government "g" won't work because government "h" was attempted and got snagged before it could progress.
I said transition. As in the transition from 'h' to 'g'

I also chose the word possible intently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
I am not saying Marxism is good, possible, or functional. I am saying that we have a theory of marxism that can be critiqued but has never been practiced and therefore cannot be evaluated. I can critique laissez faire capitalism even though it has never been seen before. But it hasn't been attempted and therefore cannot be evaluated.
I'm not insinuating you are. I thought we were just talking about it?
I think you can test it, especially when attempts to get there have gone repeatedly awry. Which takes me back to my first point.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:43 PM #175
Blake360
 
 
Blake360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Socal
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post

I am not saying Marxism is good, possible, or functional. I am saying that we have a theory of marxism that can be critiqued but has never been practiced and therefore cannot be evaluated.
That's like saying because we haven't blown up the world yet, the idea can't be critiqued because it hasn't been practiced.
Blake360 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 03:54 PM #176
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
I said transition. As in the transition from 'h' to 'g'
The funny thing is that marx talks explicitly about how communism will become (how we will transition into it). Yet, no "communist" country has even been transitioned into itself in that way. That's kind of the point, isn't it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
I think you can test it, especially when attempts to get there have gone repeatedly awry.
We have never had a real attempt to get there, as seen above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake360 View Post
That's like saying because we haven't blown up the world yet, the idea can't be critiqued because it hasn't been practiced.
Quote:
I am saying that we have a theory of marxism that can be critiqued but has never been practiced and therefore cannot be evaluated."
I JUST SAID that the theories CAN BE CRITIQUED. Just not the practice...

You are insinuating that it won't work. That is a judgement on the theory and not the practice. Which is fine. I love judgement on theories (or at least good ones). But let's not pretend they are something that they aren't. I can say with great certainty that a turning america into a rastafari theocracy is a bad idea. I can judge that idea based on plenty of different types of mertis; categorical, deontological, etc. However, what I can't do is judge it in practice.
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads

Last edited by TheSilentAssassin : 11-09-2012 at 04:01 PM.
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 04:19 PM #177
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
The funny thing is that marx talks explicitly about how communism will become (how we will transition into it). Yet, no "communist" country has even been transitioned into itself in that way. That's kind of the point, isn't it.
Here's the problem, we can draw multiple conclusions from the data we have that are all plausible. I'll illustrate two, just to make my point.

1)Attempts at communist societies never went through the proper transitions, as per marx, thus, they never resulted in true communistic societies.

2) The trajectory outlined by marx was unworkable in practical application due to unidentified variables that forced the attempting society to make compromises, thus, the proper transitions as per marx, are incorrect.

and here we are standing at the limits of human knowledge trying to fit an idea to facts. Or facts to an idea. It doesn't matter much either way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
We have never had a real attempt to get there, as seen above.
I think we've made honest tries. The consequences have been so dire that it is hardly a thing worth further pursuing.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 04:33 PM #178
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
You view it as societies taking steps towards something and then mis-stepping. I view it as societies taking the wrong first step to begin with.
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 04:36 PM #179
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
You view it as societies taking steps towards something and then mis-stepping. I view it as societies taking the wrong first step to begin with.
I wouldn't consider having to change course because of an iceberg a "mistep"

It could have been that, in every case, that first step would have led to disaster? Maybe you have something on that. I don't.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 04:40 PM #180
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
I believe that Marx has a first step but I don't believe it has ever been seen. People have been taking steps, but they aren't marx's.
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 04:49 PM #181
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
I believe that Marx has a first step but I don't believe it has ever been seen. People have been taking steps, but they aren't marx's.
Well, if we are going to move forward in this, now is a good time to identify that first step.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 05:16 PM #182
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
To be really simple, Marx predicted that ever-growing disparities between the wealth of capitalists and the impoverishment of labor would generate class conflict and the triumph of a workers' revolution. The successful revolution would being the transition. I am not intimate with modern history, but what country do you believe fits this? Lenin was probably the closest.

Ironically, a good marxist should be the biggest supporter of extreme laissez faire capitalistic policies. Isn't life funny?
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads

Last edited by TheSilentAssassin : 11-09-2012 at 05:19 PM.
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 01:02 PM #183
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
To be really simple, Marx predicted that ever-growing disparities between the wealth of capitalists and the impoverishment of labor would generate class conflict and the triumph of a workers' revolution. The successful revolution would being the transition. I am not intimate with modern history, but what country do you believe fits this?

Ironically, a good marxist should be the biggest supporter of extreme laissez faire capitalistic policies. Isn't life funny?
Well this changes everything. This life-cycle is reactionary, contingent on a relatively specific set of circumstances. The Russian tsar, who already controlled wealth, was deposed. The marxist transition could never have occured, as outlined, for Russia.

I'm going to go ahead and get this over with now. If the ends are communism, do the means matter at all?
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 01:36 PM #184
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
I'm going to go ahead and get this over with now. If the ends are communism, do the means matter at all?
Matter to who? For communists, they probably don't. But the entire point of this conversation is the ability to evaluate the practice of communism. For someone wanting to do that, they very much do. From the beginning, I have said that true communism has not been done and therefore cannot be evaluated. I still hold that it hasn't and therefore can't.
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 01:46 PM #185
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
Matter to who? For communists, they probably don't. But the entire point of this conversation is the ability to evaluate the practice of communism. For someone wanting to do that, they very much do. From the beginning, I have said that true communism has not been done and therefore cannot be evaluated. I still hold that it hasn't and therefore can't.
The question is in line with the point because you brought up the "steps" or whatever that are to be taken in order to reach communism. The first step is very specific and severely limits what can rightfully be communistic. This now begs the question, if the ends resemble communism, do the means matter in the labeling?

If yes, I'll need the list of stages so I can see if anything matches.

If no, we can move on to see how attempts to get there have failed, maybe find out why they failed, and extract something about communism from those experiments.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 02:01 PM #186
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
The question is in line with the point because you brought up the "steps" or whatever that are to be taken in order to reach communism. The first step is very specific and severely limits what can rightfully be communistic. This now begs the question, if the ends resemble communism, do the means matter in the labeling?

If yes, I'll need the list of stages so I can see if anything matches.

If no, we can move on to see how attempts to get there have failed, maybe find out why they failed, and extract something about communism from those experiments.
Communism was descriptive not prescriptive. Marx made a prediction, not a plan. The means very much do matter.

As for what the prediction looks like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx's_theory_of_history
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 02:17 PM #187
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
Communism was descriptive not prescriptive. Marx made a prediction, not a plan. The means very much do matter.

As for what the prediction looks like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx's_theory_of_history
By this account, he seems to be stating that communism is an inevitability.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 02:34 PM #188
TheSilentAssassin
Words and Stuff
 
TheSilentAssassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch View Post
By this account, he seems to be stating that communism is an inevitability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
Communism was descriptive not prescriptive. Marx made a prediction, not a plan. The means very much do matter.
Ya, that is Marx's prediction. It may be accurate or it may not be, but Marx believed communism was the inevitable progression of human society.
__________________
“There are only two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don’t know it.” – G. K. Chesterton - The Mercy of Mr. Arnold Bennett, Fancies vs. Fads
TheSilentAssassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 03:10 PM #189
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
Ya, that is Marx's prediction. It may be accurate or it may not be, but Marx believed communism was the inevitable progression of human society.
Sounds more regressive to me. I think to some degree he is correct in that a communist-esque attitude and structure pops up at the tail-end of civilizations. Certainly not in the sense of some human destiny.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump