robbo203
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
This might be of interest. Genetically modified human beings
Hannah, By all means, feel free to use what I’ve written. Better still invite the person you are debating with to join this forum so we can deal with the arguments directly…
Hi Hannah
One of the things I find very strange about (some) of our critics of socialism is that they should feel it necessary to impute “perfection” to human beings in order for socialism to work. Behind this is the (unquestioned) assumption that human beings need to be 100% altruistic in order for socialism to work. That is to say, it should entail the complete negation of any kind of self-interested motive.
Its complete nonsense of course. Every conceivable kind of society is predicated on a mixture of both altruistic and egoistic motives – including both capitalism and socialism, Socialism does not require people to be “perfect” in the above sense. On the contrary it is very much in the self-interest of workers as a class and individually to establish socialism. If anything is indicative of excessive altruism it is the willingness of said workers to allow themselves to be exploited and abused by a tiny parasite class under our present system of capitalism. Talk about masochism…
Concerning the comment you posted perhaps you might ask the author how it is that for well over 95% of our time on this planet our species lived under a social arrangement completely at variance with the kind of society we live under today: “immediate return”, food sharing, communistic, hunter-gatherer bands (not to be confused with “tribes”). If anything defines human nature it is our Paleolithic and Mesolithic past – since our genetic make up has not changed significantly since then – not the kind of society we live under today. However, having said that, personally I think the only thing one can confidently say about human nature is that we are 1) social animals and 2) highly adaptable. Anything else tends to veer towards speculation
As for greed and jealousy bringing about the collapse of socialism how exactly is this supposed to work in a society in which goods and services are freely accessible to everyone without any quid pro quo exchange? If you want to gain the respect and esteem of your fellows in a socialist society the only course of action available to you is what you contribute to society, not what you take out of it. That’s no bad thing either.
The problem with so many critics of socialism is that they don’t really understand what it is they purport to be criticising and I think this is true of the person you quote….
Hannah
What aspect of the human nature argument interests you? There are several sub-arguments and it is worth focussing one them one at a time
The Lazy person argument
The Greedy Person argument
The Violent person argumentetc etc
I could list anthropologists and others who have made contributions under these headings. On violence and war, for example, Brian Ferguson of Rutgers University would be an excellent person to start with. He is reputedly the world’s leading authority on prehistoric violence and a stern critic of the likes of Stephen Pinker
You need to access a full list of his writings but here is just a random piece by him with an interesting list of links if you scroll down to the bottom
It looks like there is gonna be a Catalonia-style independence bid from Scotland in its quest to “take back our sovereignty” etc etc. Brexit has truly opened up a Pandora’s box
Just a thought but if what the article below says is the case would this not make the need for a vaccine – at least for those who have had the virus – somewhat redundant? I have a strong feeling that my partner and I have both had the virus way back in February last year but a proper test for antibodies is a bit pricey as I understand it
Mind you, there is also this
Few socialists actually intensely study the conditions and “life on the ground” during the time of the Soviet Union or indeed other socialist states.
Hi Mustapha.
We would characterise the system that existed in the Soviet Union as a kind of state-administered capitalism. Lenin himself redefined socialism as a form of “state capitalist monopoly” and so broke with the Marxian understanding of this term as a synonym for communism. He also urged that Russia copy the state capitalism of war time Germany which he greatly admired.
In any event, state capitalism has proven to be a tragic diversion and a complete dead end as far as achieving socialism is concerned. As a model of capitalist development it might arguably be more suited to immature forms of capitalism intent upon catching up but the built-in rigidities of this model – at least the Soviet version of it – make it unsuitable for developed capitalisms. Hence its discontinuation.
Contemporary Chinese state capitalism is a quite different variant to that operating in the Soviet Union but demonstrably this too is a dead end as far as socialism is concerned. China is a major source of new entrants to the club of billionaire parasites and is on course to overtake the US as the number one global capitalist-cum-imperialist economic power (some indicators suggest this is already the case)
There are two books I would heartily recommend on the subject both of which can be downloaded
https://libcom.org/library/state-capitalism-wages-system-under-new-management-adam-buick-john-crump
https://libcom.org/library/paresh-chattopadhyay-marxian-concept-capital-soviet-experience
Now that Biden is President, all those people – like our friend Leon Trotsky on this forum – who urged us to vote for him on the grounds that he was the so called lesser evil, have made things very difficult for themselves to start criticising Biden with any kind of moral authority. They got the President they wanted and campaigned for. Shit sticks as the saying goes.
“Lesser evil-ism” is a very very bad argument and puts you in a very weak and invidious position afterwards. In one year’s time those people who urged us to vote Biden will be whinging about what an obnoxious bastard he is as he predictably carries out what capitalism (inevitably) bids him to. Soon enough he will metamorphize into a greater evil himself and his disappointed voters will search around for some other saviour to take up the reins of the “lesser evil”. Its either that or the attraction of another Trump like figure will grow as people get tired of and disenchanted with Biden. Lesser evil-ism almost always tends to pave the way for greater evil-ism
At least socialists can hold their heads up high having stuck to our guns and refusing to support any of the spokespeople of capitalism. In the long run being principled on this point is the only thing that makes any sense.
Said liberal democracy is a process of gradual reform, not revolution.
Mustapha
True but the the SPGB’s approach or attitude to the ballot box is totally different to that of liberal democracy or labour reformism. We don’t stand on a ticket of reforms, however well meaning. Our sole platform is the maximum programme of social revolution and nothing but.
Keep in mind that we envisage that as the movement grows socialists will be active and organising in many other aspects of life apart from just electoralism . This would include for example trade unionism. I have a soft spot for the IWW and I would like to think the growth of our movement would also spill over and assist the growth of the IWW as well
There are many other advantages to using the ballot box aside from those already mentioned It gives a reasonably accurate picture of the extent of support for socialism (which information the movement will certainly need). It also sends a clear message to those who are not in agreement with socialism that the writing is on the wall and as such is probably the most effective way of securing their compliance albeit grudgingly to the will of a socialist majority and thereby smoothing the passage to the new society, Also, for a large scale change over of this kind you need some mechanism to coordinate the changeover. I cannot really think of any else that could be as effective as the electoral approach in providing the signal to trigger that changeover on a mass socially coordinated basis
might there never be a majority wishing capitalism to end because it is easier to imagine the end of the world rather than the end of capitalism?
Mustapha
Ideas tend to grow in exponential rather than linear fashion. Tiny though the socialist movement is at present, once it reaches a certain critical threshold I firmly believe its growth will start to accelerate or snowball. As it grows it modifies the general social climate of opinion in ways that would favour its further growth. So if 10% of the population were fully committed socialists that would imply a much larger fraction of the population would be on the way to becoming socialists themselves.
The great challenge today is to reach that critical point of take-off. Historically we have never been even close to it. But there is no telling what the future holds
Hi Mustapha
If you type in “syndicalism” in the search facility (top right hand side of this page) there are quite a lot of links to articles published by the SPGB over the years on the subject. Generally speaking we tend to be a bit critical of anarcho=syndicalism as an approach to achieving socialism but I will have a look at your article nonetheless
Welcome to the forum anyway!
Hannah
I agree with your arguments although some of the points raised by Alan are valid too. There may be a middle ground position in this debate which acknowledges that there is validity on both sides
My main concern is that we should not feel ashamed of keeping pets. Pets are a source of immense pleasure to human beings even if there are aspects of what might be called the pet industry that are questionable – like the example Alan gave – of Ben & Jerry developing a pet ice-cream product in two flavors: pumpkin with cookies and peanut butter with pretzels. I mean that is a bit OTT, isn’t it?
Of course there are opportunity costs involved in everything we do and keeping pets is no exception. But I would be inclined to be more relaxed about this. When it comes to diverting resources etc there are far pressing things to be worry about under capitalism – like the diversion of resources for military purposes
In a post scarcity socialist society will the diversion of some our resources to keeping pets matter that much? Even to frame the question in this way – is slightly misleading. For what are these resources being diverted from? What is the purpose of life if not human happiness which is precisely what pets give to their owners in such abundance, I would sooner have a dog than a Daimler but also, Alan, I would sooner have a dog than a budgie. I personally don’t like the idea of caged birds
Pets give enormous happiness to their keepers and surely in a socialist society it is the happiness of individuals (and their animal companions) that should count. My partner and I have a little dog and like Zusammenhang with his/her cats, would not part with it for the world.
I think this is an unhelpful line of argument to pursue, to be honest.
and talking about consciousness how about this
“I find the professional atheists as unattractive as the evangelical fundamentalists”
Thomas
I’m inclined to agree. And I cant help but notice that some of the most hard-line atheists I’ve come across are also some of the most ardent supporters of capitalism. I don’t think this is entirely coincidental. Just dip a toe in the various “anarcho-capitalist” forums around on the internet and you will soon enough discover this to be the case
Atheism is no guarantee that people wont drift away from – or for that matter, be drawn to – socialism
