mcolome1
Actually, it's a PDF on a google drive. It's not a true "google doc". Google docs include a number of featrues and functionality that make them socialist friendly, such as the ability to vote and collaborate in a classless way without owning the document as property. A PDF in a google drive allows the public fewer freedoms and more restrictions.
Your commentary has nothing to do with the documents that Matt published which is about the European Investment Bank related to the topic that we are discussing which is about the Banking System, the purpose of banking in our society, and why we would not a banking system in a socialist society. It does not make any difference if the documents were written on stone, a piece of carboard, or PDF.Google is not a socialist institution, and it does not advocate for a classless society either, it is own by a corporation, and the user are member of the working class, they belong to a class, and the owners of Google belong to a particular class also. After spending so much time in this forum, you do not have a clue of what socialism is, what is the meaning of property, what is a class society, what is the meaning of classless. You are totally confused
my commentary had nothing to do with the "CONTENT" of the documents that matt published. My commentary had everything to do with the mode of distribution available to the document. It makes a differences because the medium and mode of distribution (either a PDF or a True Google Doc) defines the relationship of the document. A PDF can never fullfull the socialist goal of being not owned by anyone. So PDF format, by it's nature requires an "owner" and that requires the establishment of "property". A google document has more options for setting the "property ownership" (aka permission settings) of a document. If you insist that comunism or socialism will have NO PROPERTY and no one will own anything, then I am arguing a google doc is a better solution than a PDF for practicing socialism today.
I will repeat again: You are totally confused, and you are in the wrong place. Everything in this society is owned by the capitalist including the ideoogy that you have in your brain, and the holes in the cemetery that we are going to be dumped when we dieWe have explained to you hundred of times our concept of property,and you do not get it, and we have explained to you in the same way that there is not any socialist medium in this society, and that we do not want to establish socialism within capitalism which it is also impossible.Socailism will be established within a socailist society., it is a post capitalist society, it is not a pre-society, capitalism has prepared the objective conditions for a new society. We need workers in this capitalist society with socialist consciouness, or workers who have moved away from the capitalsit ideologyA document written in PDF, or Google, or written on a piece of toilet paper will not be turnd into a propertyless socialist format. Socialism is a social-economical-political theory which must be inserted in our brains. We are not computer fanaticss, The wonderful job that Matt is doing in the internet is what we need because it is political food for our brain, I do not care if Matt has copied those ideas from a piece of toilet paper, or from papyrus. Many years ago organizations used mimeograph to print their newspapers.Many years ago we use to read Marx and Engels on paper format, now they are in digital format, and storage in harddrive that we can carry in our property, and some companies have claimed copyright over their works, it is the same intelectual works in different format, but it is no a problem of ownership, the main idea is what we can record on our minds.Peoples used to carry Marx and Engels works inside of a Playboy magazine, or a comic book
Well what you say is true for some definitions of "ownership", and not for others. I'm challenging the definition of ownership and asking how you define ownership. I'm arguing that ownership is not binary or yes or no. there are different degrees of ownership. There are read access. there is editing access, their is voting access. If you have a document that you can vote on vs one you can not vote on that what does that mean for socialism critique of ownership. you're comment about format being unimportant is wrong in some areas. There is a difference between capitalism with barter, capitalism with a gold standard currency, capitalism with digital capital, and multi-currency capitalism. there is a difference between socialism with barter, socalism wth editing privieledges for all digital property vs socialism without editing priviledges for all digital property. you simply can't create a stock market with a barter economy because it's impractical from a behavioral economics calculation. So I'm looking at the behavioral economics costs and benefits for socialism differnt modes of information delivery and exchange. Please understand also this is not an attack on the someones choice of a PDF and I intend no criticizm to the person who owns the pdf. The choice in this case is of no importance except as a didactic exercize to explain to you the implications of modern technology.