Marx the bourgeois.
- This topic has 36 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Who are the Money Free Party?
Ex-SPGB?
Here’s Marx on capitalism’s role in preparing the material basis for socialism by imposing a transitory historical period of “production for production’s sake” (from section 3 of chapter 24 of Capital):
“Except as personified capital, the capitalist has no historical value, and no right to that historical existence, which, to use an expression of the witty Lichnowsky, “hasn’t got no date.” And so far only is the necessity for his own transitory existence implied in the transitory necessity for the capitalist mode of production. But, so far as he is personified capital, it is not values in use and the enjoyment of them, but exchange-value and its augmentation, that spur him into action. Fanatically bent on making value expand itself, he ruthlessly forces the human race to produce for production’s sake; he thus forces the development of the productive powers of society, and creates those material conditions, which alone can form the real basis of a higher form of society, a society in which the full and free development of every individual forms the ruling principle.”
Fortunately capitalism has already done this and there is no more need for “production for production’s sake.” Unfortunately it continues, causing all sorts of unnecessary problems.
Socialists say that it’s been long overdue to stop this and for the humans race to enjoy the benefits of the sacrifices imposed on them by capitalism, by going over to a “higher form of society” where there can be “production for consumption’s sake,” which is only possible on the basis of the common ownership of the Earth’s natural and industrial resources.
“Who are the Money Free Party?”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_Free_Party
“Ex-SPGB?”
Absolutely not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_Free_Party
Emerged from The Zeitgeist Movement. JO
The two MFP candidates, without the extensive resources that we possessed, performed very slightly better than ourselves. (on vote count …I never worked out the %)
But i agree it is confirmation that the way we express ourselves and our limited propaganda efforts are not suffice to make a breakthrough. But nor does it mean neither of those cannot be improved upon.
How are the reply rate going? Is the newspaper ad still the better response than the election leaflet?
In what way would the MFP be against us?
Thanks.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.