robbo203
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
56,000 people own three times more wealth than half of humanity
56,000 people own three times more wealth than half of humanity
There may be a hint of what the MHI thinks on the subject of the lower phase in this piece
Yes, that is a very good summary of a vision of a post-capitalist world…
Personally, though, I don’t mind the word “enterprise” being used rather than the more technical-sounding expression, work units or production units. I always remember Ron Cook´s description of socialism as being a “genuine free enterprise” society (if I remember correctly). I thought it was a very innovative example of a sort of “cultural appropriation” (if I could put it like that), which might make supporters of the capitalist free market think twice.
At any rate, it conveys the idea of such qualities as initiative, imagination and human agency that lies at the heart of the concept of “freely associated labour”
It looks like the government of Milei has increased the popularity of the Trotskyists in Argentina; there are predictions that they might win the next election
That’s very interesting. Do you have the source for this prediction that I could cite?
I am constantly coming across FB sites that seem to have a large fan base for Milei, although the people concerned tend to be MAGA types based in the US. British right-wingers have a more ambivalent attitude towards Milei because of the Falklands/Malvinas issue
If the far right are against the EU’s obsession with war with Russia, are they not then preferable, as Orban was in Hungary?
Interesting article on the views of VOX and the Spanish Far Right, which does not seem to be opposed to supporting Ukraine in the Ukraine-Russia war
The Spanish Radical Right under the shadow of the invasion of Ukraine
With Spain back in the news, falling foul of the Orange Blob over NATO, it is worth noting that things are not looking good for the ruling PSOE government. Probably, there will be a new PP government in alliance with the ultra-right VOX party in 2027
It looks like this idea that Trump’s stop-go approach to war/peace with Iran, being linked to insider trading on the stock market, is gaining currency…
I read somewhere that his sprog, Barron, has been in on the act as well (maybe tipped off by his daddy), but that might just be conspiracy theory
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/18/iran-war-bets-ethics-concerns
Not too sure about this, but there is some suggestion that Trump´s stop-go approach to the so-called peace process may be linked to the phenomenon of insider trading in that glorified casino called the stock exchange:
BREAKING: Just 20 minutes before Trump’s announcement that the Strait of Hormuz was open, massive trades hit the market.
Investors sold a combined 7,990 lots of Brent crude futures, a $760 million bet that oil would go down.
These orders were much larger than anything else at the time.
The traders made huge gains.
Unusual.
– Post on X by unusual_whales@unusual_whalesFor context, there is also this – the phenomenon of “dark pools” on the stock market geared to profiteering:
“In 2009, Alexandra Zendrian, writing for Forbes, said, “Dark pools are venues where trading is done off of an exchange to obtain price improvement and not move the price if a large block of stocks is being traded,” — theoretically, a dark pool is just any sort of exchange in financial markets between parties that happens invisibly to the public or ‘retail investor’ eye.
Arguably, the most interesting fact about dark pools right now is its immensely uneven growth vector statistic — dark pools make up, according to more recent reports detailed below, an estimated 65%+ (As of December 2018) of the stock markets daily volume. However, an estimated 7% of all investors even know what they are.”https://medium.com/banz-capital/the-basics-of-a-dark-pool-in-investing-35dd37119ea5
I never heard of the Mayflower gang being called communists!
Oh, you will be surprised by the number of times this is done by “free market” libertarians, imagining in that fertile imagination of theirs that this constitutes decisive proof that “communism does not work”. LOL
Just a quick Google comes up with a long list. Just this one example will suffice:
https://www.heritage.org/markets-and-finance/commentary/pilgrims-beat-communism-free-market
Interesting thread this. Should be turned into an article for the SS, I think
Relevant to this is the myth of the Puritan Separatists, called the Pilgrims, setting up a communist colony in North America, and failing woefully – thereby demonstrating in the uncritical minds of free marketeers that communism does not work and that we need a free market instead.
This article demolishes that argument comprehensively, though it is surprising how frequently one still comes across the argument on the internet
“How China Forgot Karl Marx
The Chinese Economy Runs on Labor Exploitation”https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/how-china-forgot-karl-marx
Wez
Yes, I think that’s a fair point you make about Hitler (the same could be said of Trump in the current situation).
I guess the important thing is not to deny that particular individuals can make a particular impact on the course of history, but rather to focus on the social context that allows them to do so. It is in this sense that “great men” are a product of the times they live in.
It is when you separate the individual from the social context that you succumb to the basic error of the Great Man theory, or what Plekhanov called an “optical illusion”. This is the belief that these individuals were almost, as it were, parachuted into society and that the accomplishments associated with them are primarily (or even entirely) a manifestation or product of their own personal qualities.
I’ve always had a liking for Plekhanov´s great essay
https://www.marxists.org/archive/plekhanov/1898/xx/individual.html
I know we should have no truck with the Great Man theory of history, but this piece offers some fascinating insights into the Man-child (spoilt brat) that is Mr D Trump
Without the slightest degree of self awareness this is what that feckless Orange Blob said: ““I’m not worried about it,” the US president said. “You know what’s a war crime? Having a nuclear weapon.”. Indeed, Mr President….now tell us who in the world possesses such weapons, eh???
This bit in the article ZJW linked to caught my eye:
By contrast, the work of Neurath is explicit in its criticism of a technocratic politics. Thus he opposed ‘what is called the ‘‘technocratic’’ movement’ which assumes there exists ‘one best solution with its ‘‘optimum happiness’’, with its ‘‘optimum population’’, with its ‘‘optimum health’’, with its ‘‘optimum working
week’’, with its ‘‘optimum productivity’’ or something else of this kind’ and
which asks ‘for a particular authority which should be exercised by technicians
and other experts in selecting ‘‘big plans’’ ’ (1942 [1973, 426–7]). The basis for Neurath’s scepticism about the technocratic movement can also be found in both of the key papers in Neurath’s engagement with the Frankfurt school, in
‘Inventory’ and in his unpublished reply to Horkheimer. In the first Neurath
develops a theme that was central to his contributions to the socialist calculation
debate, the rejection of any single measure, monetary or non-monetary, through
which one could arrive at a technically optimal social outcome.44 No such single
measure could adequately capture the multidimensional nature of welfare
concepts, such as standard of living: ‘The attempts to characterize the standard of
living are like those which try to characterize the ‘‘state of health’’. Both are multidimensional structures’I’m currently debating the question of democracy with some people on FB who are clearly sympathetic towards the ideals of technocracy (the Technocracy movement, which reached its peak in the 1930s, is still around, apparently, but contributed to the rise of other bodies like the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist movement). For such people, democracy is clearly an anathema, and the assumption seems to be that for any given problem, there is one universally agreeable solution that can best be left to the technocrats to arrive at, thus rendering democratic discourse redundant.
This, of course, presupposes a perfect world in which there are no conflicting views or interests to concern ourselves with – something that strikes me as completely implausible even in a socialist society (despite the elimination of class conflict and national rivalries).
There are still going to be issues to contend with, likely to generate disagreement (“should we build a hydroelectric dam and what is to become of the people living in the valley that will be flooded”, for example). Democratic decision-making provides the framework most conducive to conflict resolution and compromise. Technocratic top-down decision-making, though quicker, is likely to lead to the exact opposite outcome
