Free for all

[ACE]

Let's talk about how everyone can have a FAIR share of the worlds resources.  Let's say we are in a nation that can produce far more grain then it's people would ever be able to eat, it's not at all conceivable that in such a country bread should be free right?  Well Capitalist would HATE for you to have ANYTHING free no matter if it's something that's abundant or something that's scarce.  But Communist DO want you to have the things you NEED cost NOTHING.  Now Need is the key element here, not to say that communist don't want you to have your WANTS fulfilled the same as you need, it's only that your WANTS shouldn't take priority over the NEEDS over everyone else.  You shouldn't be eating that 5th or 6th cheeze burger when others are starving and dieing, besides that double cheeze burger won't be of benifit it will make you obese.  So back to the Free bred scenario the Communist government measured the amount of bread the land can produced compared that to the amount of bread people can eat and found it can be distributed with a nice surplus left over so long as people eat a quantity of bread that is healthy to consume.  End of story?  Not hardly because GREEDY capitalist living in society wish to Destroy for the sake of WANT rather then hold any concern for the well being of the nation or it's people.  What do these unscupulous people do?  Well that take FAR more then they could possible eat themselves, far more then they could eat in a life time, depriving the land of it's suplus and causing others to begin to starve.  Why did these cruel people do this?  Well because they didn't want people to have bread for FREE they wanted to Sell it, and make the poorer naboring countries POORER by indebting them to Themselves.  Capitalist and Communist Can't get along on account of this behavior as ALL Capitalist want to do is cause SUFFERING and starvation.  In the mind of the Capitalist people having their needs met their hunger fed is a BAD thing to a Capitalist as well fed people only have More babies and need more food, Depriving them of the Beloved MONEY!  So what the capitalist wants is for the people of the world to get LESS food and have to pay MORE money for it!  Makes no difference that there are FAR more firtile land then the would be needed to feed EVERYONE enough to make the WHOLE world obese, that's irrelavant to the Capitalist scum.  Oh and it's not just Grane this is done with it's EVERYTHING, people of the world could have a fair share of EVERYTHING that a factory or farm could produce, yet  they starve and lead lives of deprivation.  This is what Communism must combat, combat this and the world will be with us, and Capitalism WILL FALL!  The lambs will overcome the lions!

[Daymare17]

Use paragraphs.

Let's talk about how everyone can have a FAIR share of the worlds resources. Let's say we are in a nation that can produce far more grain then it's people would ever be able to eat, it's not at all conceivable that in such a country bread should be free right? Well Capitalist would HATE for you to have ANYTHING free no matter if it's something that's abundant or something that's scarce.

But Communist DO want you to have the things you NEED cost NOTHING. Now Need is the key element here, not to say that communist don't want you to have your WANTS fulfilled the same as you need, it's only that your WANTS shouldn't take priority over the NEEDS over everyone else. You shouldn't be eating that 5th or 6th cheeze burger when others are starving and dieing, besides that double cheeze burger won't be of benifit it will make you obese.

So back to the Free bred scenario the Communist government measured the amount of bread the land can produced compared that to the amount of bread people can eat and found it can be distributed with a nice surplus left over so long as people eat a quantity of bread that is healthy to consume. End of story? Not hardly because GREEDY capitalist living in society wish to Destroy for the sake of WANT rather then hold any concern for the well being of the nation or it's people.

What do these unscupulous people do? Well that take FAR more then they could possible eat themselves, far more then they could eat in a life time, depriving the land of it's suplus and causing others to begin to starve. Why did these cruel people do this? Well because they didn't want people to have bread for FREE they wanted to Sell it, and make the poorer naboring countries POORER by indebting them to Themselves. Capitalist and Communist Can't get along on account of this behavior as ALL Capitalist want to do is cause SUFFERING and starvation.

In the mind of the Capitalist people having their needs met their hunger fed is a BAD thing to a Capitalist as well fed people only have More babies and need more food, Depriving them of the Beloved MONEY! So what the capitalist wants is for the people of the world to get LESS food and have to pay MORE money for it! Makes no difference that there are FAR more firtile land then the would be needed to feed EVERYONE enough to make the WHOLE world obese, that's irrelavant to the Capitalist scum.

Oh and it's not just Grane this is done with it's EVERYTHING, people of the world could have a fair share of EVERYTHING that a factory or farm could produce, yet they starve and lead lives of deprivation. This is what Communism must combat, combat this and the world will be with us, and Capitalism WILL FALL! The lambs will overcome the lions!


See how much better?

[ACE]

Thanks Comrad, I understand that there are plenty of people who might be on this forum for whom english is not their first language, Thank you for the assist.  See when I get on a roll, the typing gets runnins and it sort of runs together into a blurr of thoughts, I expect people might find they edit you made a bit easier to make out, Thanks.

[Iskra]

I think it's a nice way of putting it, that's easy for all to understand.

[ACE]

My question is, do people out here beleave that a world free from the bonds and imprissionment of money could be established, a world were productivity and the means to produce goods and services are so abundant that they price of such services is for all intends and purposes drive to zero?  Will this happen I need to get people's input on this question.

[Dasher]

Yes this will happen when their is an abundance of the necessities of life.  No need to steal, no need for check-out staff or security staff ad infintum.

[anomaly]

Originally posted by ACE
My question is, do people out here beleave that a world free from the bonds and imprissionment of money could be established, a world were productivity and the means to produce goods and services are so abundant that they price of such services is for all intends and purposes drive to zero?  Will this happen I need to get people's input on this question.

Interestingly enough, right now we see capitalism producing enough food to feed the world a few times over, yet starvation still exists. This is the nature of capitalism, to favor a minority over a majority. Communism would entail no prices, for what I think is a good description of what communism might look like, go to http://www.worldsocialistmovement.org .

[sean1980be]

Originally posted by ACE
My question is, do people out here beleave that a world free from the bonds and imprissionment of money could be established, a world were productivity and the means to produce goods and services are so abundant that they price of such services is for all intends and purposes drive to zero?  Will this happen I need to get people's input on this question.

Interestingly enough, right now we see capitalism producing enough food to feed the world a few times over, yet starvation still exists. This is the nature of capitalism, to favor a minority over a majority. Communism would entail no prices, for what I think is a good description of what communism might look like, go to www.worldsocialistmovement.org .

I wouldn't be too sure if that's the place to look; If you read 'Why we are different' it says that socialism will just manifest itself and that workers don't need any kind of 'vanguard' such as a party. They can un-leadership anything they want, but a group without a democratically chosen cadre is going nowhere and everywhere at the same time.

[ckaihatsu]

I wouldn't be too sure if that's the place to look; If you read 'Why we are different' it says that socialism will just manifest itself and that workers don't need any kind of 'vanguard' such as a party. They can un-leadership anything they want, but a group without a democratically chosen cadre is going nowhere and everywhere at the same time.

sean1980be, all,

I couldn't find any active websites at www.worldsocialistmovement.org or www.worldsocialistmovement.com, but I did find one at www.worldsocialistmovement.org.uk.

Here are two items that are relevant to this thread of discussion:

> opposes any vanguardist approach, minority-led movements, and leadership, as inherently undemocratic (among other negative things).


So the issue it raises is whether proletarian leadership is actually representative of the best interests of the working class. We don't simply want a different type of elite leadership to replace the current elite capitalist (bourgeois) leadership. I don't think a proletarian party -- or general global vanguard, if you will -- is necessarily precluded.

My own thoughts on the topic are that not everyone will want to be intently focused on providing leadership over day-to-day issues on working-class / revolutionary developments. Certainly there should be a porous membrane between the leadership and the people it purports to lead, so that input and discussion can take place, for transparency and accountability purposes.

One can certainly argue that the emergence of a truly global revolutionary socialism would come about automatically -- especially if not confined to just one country, as the horrors of Stalinism has proven -- but that's only if mass class consciousness and mass struggle are also taken as givens.

I've wrestled with the issue of vanguardism myself, as I've been through bouts of activism in formal organizations and out of them -- I tend to conclude that a vanguard movement can be more diffuse than many would think, especially with mass access to Internet-mediated communications.

I would argue that the vanguard function is fulfilled by several websites covering current events from a revolutionary perspective. I think the flattening of communications opens up a much more transparent political environment than what was previously possible -- I would say that revolutionary politics can now be more issue- and policy-oriented, and not as dammed-up into countries, regions, and personalities, as before.

On the subject of money, we know that it's merely a measure of economic and political value -- these days we're seeing more regionalization of currency realms, away from the historically hegemonic US dollar, as with the newcomer Euro, the rise of the Iranian bourse, the hardening of the Russian ruble, and the always-saturating Chinese renminbi.

Regardless of what type of economics is in place, the value equation for goods and services will always reduce to human labor, even if it's as "effortless" as participating in a collective brainstorm, or discussion. I'd imagine that, extrapolating from the current trajectory, the production of goods and services could become more and more automated, less labor intensive, less resource intensive, and more responsive to actual human need (and desire).

The best example comes from the area of digitally mediated, cultural goods, wherein the very definition of goods / commodity comes into fiery controversy. Certainly labor is involved, from the talent who contribute to the project, and certainly there are tangible goods that are produced from that labor, and certainly there are consumers who derive value from those goods, but the actual valuation of those goods between 'point A' and 'point B' remains absolutely baffling for anyone who attempts to define it. As Marxists we would rather dispense with the parasitic layer of media producers altogether, but even if that were immediately possible it doesn't mean that the talent wouldn't still be exploited, by the consumers.

I take the notional position that consumers can always send "royalty" payments directly to artists, via PayPal (or whatever). However, I can't say that that's a final answer to the question, either.


> promotes a peaceful democratic revolution, achieved through force of numbers and understanding.

Of course we don't want to see any loss of life, if at all possible, since life is unrecoverable -- basically revolutionaries put the onus on the current bourgeois elites to either stand down in the face of mass militancy, or to *be* put down, by whatever means necessary.

Hope this helps -- take care, all...!


Chris



--
___


YFIS Discussion Board
http://discussion.newyouth.com

Favorite web sites: chicago.indymedia.org, wsws.org, marxist.com, rwor.org, labourstart.org, fightbacknews.org, laboraction.org, ifamericansknew.org, substancenews.com, socialismandliberation.org, whatreallyhappened.com, plenglish.com, moneyfiles.org/temp.html, informationclearinghouse.info, blackcommentator.com, narconews.com, truthout.org, raven1.net

Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
http://community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/

MySpace:
www.myspace.com/ckaihatsu

CouchSurfing:
http://tinyurl.com/yoh74u