No Man Will Stand For Another. Only A System Can.

April 2024 Forums General discussion No Man Will Stand For Another. Only A System Can.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #83165
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    No Man Will Stand For Another. Only A System Can.

    Author: Paramjeet Singh

    Published by: Socialist Center

     

    A man will never stand for another man. Only a system can stand for its men.

     

     You expect a man to stand for another man! It is a fallacy. It is a fiction. It is impossible. Why would a man stand for another man? Some of you or, may be, most of you (perhaps, all of you!) will outrightly discard the statement and argue against it. I will ask you to pause for a moment and think deeply before you discard the idea (in fact, the reality) put forth here. To be honest, you would not even need to think if you observed the world around you and noticed what has been happening in it. This world comprises us- the human beings. If one man stood up for another, this world would not have had any problem at all. Rather, it would have been the perfect place to live. Because then, all men, at least the majority, would have been doing what is expected of them. But this is not so. Men stand against men. In essence, a man will always stand as an individual unless there is a fear or a threat. In fear or threat, men come together against a common threat or enemy but not for the purpose of standing with each other and helping each other. In pursuit of greed or in the wake of ‘mirage of hope’, men tend to stand as individuals. Even in class struggle, a comrade is not standing with another comrade, he is standing against capitalism and its onslaught onto the mankind.  So I repeat, a man will always stand against man. Exceptions are there. But remember! They are exceptions. And my dear friends, those exceptions are not of or because of characters; those exceptions are of or because of circumstances. You cannot make the mistake of perceiving the whole mankind from the lenses of exceptions. Let us delve further into this. We, men, live on the earth. As we have often acknowledged that resources on this earth are limited but the wants of the mankind are unlimited. Every human being ‘needs’ certain things to survive. The most basic material things needed for ‘self preservation’ are: food, clothing, shelter. This doesn’t stop here in reality. Anything beyond this is “wants”. Wants are crucial for the human survival too. However, the extent to which these ‘wants’ should go and guide the behavior of a human being deserves to be closely looked at. If the wants are such that they reflect the incentive for the human being to progress and move ahead in life to acquire material things, they may be called ‘wants’ or ‘reasonable wants’. But if the ‘wants’ go beyond the point of incentive that is sufficient to keep the life going at socially progressive pace, they start translating into ‘greed’. The movement from needs to wants and from wants to greed is natural. It reflects the three stages in the movement from one basic instinct of ‘self-preservation’ to another basic instinct of ‘greed’. In fact, self preservation is the initial stage of the basic instinct called ‘greed’. Self preservation is not a human instinct in reality for it is a reaction of human beings in a hostile environment comprising, among other things, other human beings. On the other hand, greed is the true human instinct for it is in relation to an environment that comprises other human beings. Self preservation is ‘reactionary’ and greed is ‘relative’ concept. We should not forget that needs, wants and greed – all have to be satisfied from the same available limited resources. Let us club them together under ‘wants’ for the time being for the purpose of this discussion here. As the resources are limited, so are the opportunities to exploit them. The exploitation of resources is a process. We, men, participate in this process. The participation should be inclusive of all but, in reality, it is sought to be made an exclusive process. The reason for this endeavor on the part of each individual or man is scarcity of resources. It doesn’t matter on what stage of want you are- whether needs or wants or greed, all men try to exclude others from the exploitation of the resources. In this way a man will always stand against another man. Some of you will argue that resources are limited but they are sufficient for all the human beings to survive on earth. But dear friends, think again! Is it only about survival? If it was only about survival according to the needs and wants or only about ‘self preservation’ according to the basic attributes of the human instinct, we all would have been ‘okay’ if not ‘well off’ as per the neoliberal definition of success. But, unfortunately, it is not only about ‘survival’. Mahatma Gandhi often used to say that the earth produces enough for everyone’s need but not enough for everyone’s greed. He was right. Damn right he was!

    So, if a man will never stand for another man, who will? State. System. A system should. Neoliberalism is a system that exists today and has made the state stand for a few neoliberalists and crony capitalism. Instead of neoliberal system there should be system that should make the state stand for its all men. Why should the State stand for its men? Because state controls and allocates the resources for us, our needs, wants and, unfortunately, greed too. These resources belong to the mankind and not to a few neoliberal men. A system should not allow the state to become an instrument in the hands of neoliberalists and crony capitalists. A system should make the state stand for all its men in an unbiased and equal manner. A system should not allow the state to discriminate among its people. A system should make the state ensure that welfare of all is achieved and not only of a few. A system should fulfill every need and want and control the greed of its men.   

    A man can stand for another man but never will. A system is capable of standing for its men but cannot. This is because of neoliberalism- a system in which a small group of men wants the system to deliver only for that group ignoring the rest of the mankind. Only a democratic socialist system can save the mankind from the greed of men and satisfy their needs and wants. Only a democratic system will stand for its men; yes! For all its men.  

    #104975
    rodshaw
    Participant

    I certainly agree that only a democratic socialist system can satisfy mankind's needs. We in the WSM say that world socialism will bring to an end class-divided society (capitalist v worker). There will therefore be no role for the state, as there will be nobody to rule and nobody to be ruled. Needs and wants will be decided and satisfied democratically by the community, without money changing hands (there will be no money).But there again, if you've perused our website carefully, I'm sure you realise all this.As to greed – in a socialist world where everybody knows they can take what they need, not just to survive but to live a comfortable, fulfilling life – why should anyone want to take more than they need? What would they do with it? It's only because capitalist society effectively rations things, by ensuring only those who can afford can have, that people become envious of others and 'greedy' for more.

    #104976
    SocialistPunk
    Participant

    I'm not really sure what is meant by "No man will stand for another"?Perhaps it refers to the practice of men giving others, usually women and the elderly, your seat on a full bus?

    #104977
    rodshaw
    Participant
    SocialistPunk wrote:
    I'm not really sure what is meant by "No man will stand for another"?Perhaps it refers to the practice of men giving others, usually women and the elderly, your seat on a full bus?

    Hmmm…I don't think it can mean that, because how can a system, as opposed to a man, give up its seat on a bus?I may be wrong but I think Paramjeet means that as individuals we are weak and divided and liable to be greedy, and so we need a benevolent state to look after us all and keep us in line. But maybe he will enlighten us with another essay.

    #104978
    SocialistPunk
    Participant

    You could be right Rodshaw, but I guess we will only know for sure if Paramjeet bothers to engage with us.What I don't get, is if we are weak and greedy human beings and need the protection and guidance of a benevolent state, who is in control of such a benevolent system? Perhaps there are some humans who are not as weak and greedy as the rest? Perhaps there are a few good people (usually meant as men) out there who are strong enough of character to take on the task of guiding us for our benefit.It would be good if Paramjeet could engage in discussion instead of just posting long soliloquies.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.