DJP
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The criticisms based around the 'subjective' theory of value came about after Marx's death, as did the rise of marginalist economics. Marx definitely frames his argument around a critique of other theories, but only those that preceded him.After all the subtitle of Capital is 'a critique of political economy'. But it should be noted that 'Political economy' deals with different subject matter to 'economics'. Political economy proper is no longer taught in the universities.These videos will be of interest:http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/2011/11/15/law-of-value-8-subjectobject/
The first link seems the most interesting, but haven't given it a proper reading yet. But in some places they seem to be confusing Marx with Ricardo.The authors of the second link don't seem to have read any Marx.I guess a general rule should be if you want to critique someone, don't rely on secondary sources.What do you think about it then Jon D? Or where you just looking for feedback from other people?
ALB wrote:we could offer to chair the debate between the MDI and EDL on our premises.Not sure about the sensibleness of holding such an event at HO though. We would need to have serious security arrangements, to think otherwise would be a touch naive
As I said in another thread
DJP wrote:I don't think there is anything wrong with any activities we are doing at the minute, only that we need to do more of it. I think an area where the party has not been so strong has been in embracing the Web 2.0 era, social media and online video etc.But myself and comrades have put many hours of sweat and tears into learning to how to do these things, hence the (not so) new website. And as we read there is a group working on making short films.So in short I think our problems lie not in a shortage of ideas but in a shortage of people to put in the hard work necessary to see them put real.Noticed this book on the website from that link abovehttp://astore.amazon.com/climaandcapit-20/detail/1608461408Anyone read it?
northern light wrote:Can any member give me the scientific proof of why there can not be a CreatorNo theoretical reasoning, just pure scientific fact..It depends on what you mean by 'a Creator' and where and how you see it interacting in the universe.But this is such a lame question. Absence of proof of something not existing does not mean that it does exist.Can you give me any scientific proof that disproves the existence of the flying spaghetti monster?If not I suggest you should bow down to the truth faith.All hail to the lord pastafari!BTW. You'll be hard pressed to find a 'pure scientific fact' that doesn't rest on theoretical reasoning.
gnome wrote:jondwhite wrote:With regard to "Something wrong with the party's case and/or its methods", contrary to the attitude of some determinists there absolutely is room for improvement by dispensing with traditional approaches but not in a non-materialist direction for liquidationist reasons.OK, fine; put some meat on dem barebones. Entice us.
I don't think there is anything wrong with any activities we are doing at the minute, only that we need to do more of it. I think an area where the party has not been so strong has been in embracing the Web 2.0 era, social media and online video etc.But myself and comrades have put many hours of sweat and tears into learning to how to do these things, hence the (not so) new website. And as we read there is a group working on making short films.So in short I think our problems lie not in a shortage of ideas but in a shortage of people to put in the hard work necessary to see them put real.Also I don't see what this question has to do with the determinist / libertarian debate and I don't know what 'liquididationist reasons' are!?I was going to say some stuff about ethics but I think everyone's probably sick of that one. But there's some good stuff in the book 'Language, Truth and Logic'
I’m no expert but for a start the SPC was not formed until 1931.There’s some histories on this page:http://www.worldsocialism.org/canada/about.htmGeneral Strike is not an ‘Impossibilist’ tactic anyhow is it.
Incidentally, Hic Rhodas seemed to have raised a similar topic a few months ago but never got a reply.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/decadence-cap%C3%ACtalism
jondwhite wrote:Are the evolution of trade unions linked in any way to indicating capitalist production being ripe for its replacement by a socialist society?No.
Quote:When does the party say capitalist production became outdated?If you want a precise date you’re probably better off asking the ICC! They may be able to give you a time as well I guess there may be some kind of consensus at around the end of the first world war. But in all probability it’s probably a question with no hard or fast answers.
Quote:Wasn’t it during Marx’s lifetime – after the Communist Manifesto?No.
Fabian wrote:All action is motivated by something being valued. Some consequentialist, deontological or virtue ethical view motivates all actions of every mentally able human, the point is identifying it, and them seeing if it’s soundly argumented and if the rest of the views of the same person (or organisation) is consistent with it it. That’s what justifying your views means.All action? A bold claim!Sorry to bust your bubble but there’s plenty of evidence from neuro-science and experimental psychology that would strongly go against such a suggestion.But then we are back to the question “where do our values come from?” I believe I know what the answer is, but I’m leaving you to work it out for yourself for now.
robbo203 wrote:Why can’t it be both? Why does it have to be one or the other?Maybe it could be both ways, but the question “where do values come from?” still remains.
Do people act a certain way because of their ‘moral principles’? Or do ‘moral principles’ arise because people act a certain way?In other words “Where do my values come?” (incidentally some people I met through Zeitgeist have just released an ebook with this title) Once we can answer this question we are probably well on the way to knowing how we can go about changing them.
Quote:12 noon – 1.30pmLIFE WITHOUT CAPITALISM 2 speakers: David Graeber and Chris KnightPoliticians repeatedly tell us that we must suffer years of austerity just to revive the capitalist economy. Yet, for 95% of our time on Earth humans have lived without capitalism – and for most of that time without states, classes or money. What can we learn from our non-capitalist past and how can we live a non-capitalist future? The discussion will be initiated by two radical anthropologists: DAVID GRAEBER (anarchist and author of ‘Debt, The First 5,000 Years’) and CHRIS KNIGHT (marxist and author of ‘Blood Relations’ and (online) ‘2017 – the anthropology of the future’).
