Skip to main content

View Diary: Anti-Capitalist Meetup: Capitalism - Is It Fair and Just? (108 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Basic necessities should be considered a basic (3+ / 0-)

    human right. And yes, we do have certain obligations to one another, just as members of a tribe do.

    Hopefully we will get to point when we look on each other as all members of the human tribe.

    We now have a minimum wage that cannot even support basic necessities of life: food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, education. One or more of those necessities the worker will have to do without while The Corporation accumulates more and more wealth.

    And not just more, but a greater share of the wealth, leading to greater control over every facet of life and culture, and public discourse, etc.

    Clearly, something is wrong. The question is: how great can the ruling class share grow before something has to give?

    Perhaps when the top 1% owns 99% of the wealth?

    WE NEVER FORGET Our Labor Martyrs: a project to honor the men, women and children who lost their lives in Freedom's Cause. For Dec: Life so cheap; property so sacred.

    by JayRaye on Sun Jan 13, 2013 at 12:33:46 PM PST

    •  And suppose we really step outside the box (3+ / 0-)

      and throw out half of Marx's statement. Suppose we as a society decide that we are obligated to give everyone around us the basics of life, just for the pleasure of their company on this earth.

      Without demanding anything back at all! Yes! we will demand nothing in return.

      People are free to work for more, if they want to but are not obligated to.

      We give them The Right To Be Lazy (http://www.marxists.org/...)!

      For anyone to want to work for more income, jobs would have to be interesting, and, yes, fun.

      Obviously this plan would not work in a society like ours where the "job creators" want the most work for the least pay making the biggest pile of crap to sell at the highest price possible.

      WE NEVER FORGET Our Labor Martyrs: a project to honor the men, women and children who lost their lives in Freedom's Cause. For Dec: Life so cheap; property so sacred.

      by JayRaye on Sun Jan 13, 2013 at 01:24:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  when i finally post (6+ / 0-)

        what i want to write about Eisenstein's "Sacred Economics," you will see that this is essentially what he proposes because we live in a state of grace he calls the gift society.

        we all accept the gift of life from the planet without realizing it.

        free air, free sunshine, free water and free food from the earth to us for thousands and thousands of years.  we have commodified damn near everything and now believe there is scarcity.  

        we are on the verge of creating the first real scarcity of water on this planet through the global climate crisis.

        capitalism destroyed this equation and in the process is destroying the planet.

        Donate to Occupy Wall Street here: http://nycga.cc/donate/

        by BlueDragon on Sun Jan 13, 2013 at 01:34:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I very much look forward to this. (4+ / 0-)

          Never heard of Eisentein before, sounds intriguing.

          Capitalism teaches us to not trust each other. That "lazy welfare queen over there" might be getting to much for too little effort!

          And meanwhile, as our attention is on the "welfare queen", the Capitalist robs us all blind, and destroys our earth in the process.

          But Marx, while being correct about everyone getting what they need, sets us up to oppress each other by demanding work in return for necessities.

          Suppose we simply give incentives for work, instead of demanding work? A few might be content to live very simply and don't care to work for more. Perhaps they make a contribution without work. Perhaps they play music on a street corner, or fly kites in the park. Suppose I'm on my work and I see them, life for me is a little bit more interesting. Sure nicer then what I see now. Hungry people in the park begging for food.

          WE NEVER FORGET Our Labor Martyrs: a project to honor the men, women and children who lost their lives in Freedom's Cause. For Dec: Life so cheap; property so sacred.

          by JayRaye on Sun Jan 13, 2013 at 01:52:25 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  that "job creators" argument was (3+ / 0-)

        recently employed by Cameron. How do these people actually think that wealth can be created without human labour to produce it or w/o human beings consuming the goods they produce. This is a real inversion of reality. That is a piece I will be writing soon, that meme really pisses me off!

        "Hegel noticed somewhere that all great world history facts and people so to speak twice occur. He forgot to add: the one time as tragedy, the other time as farce" Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte .

        by NY brit expat on Sun Jan 13, 2013 at 01:39:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  this is where I would like to see us shift (5+ / 0-)

        our entire worldview of how societies "should" be structured is based on this fear-based, pre-resentment of all THOSE people out there who will cheat us out of whatever it is we think we've so hard to earn.

        Because there are so many historical examples of societies which have collapsed because of rampant laziness.

        People are naturally drawn to participate in life. If we leave them be and let them follow their own callings, we will have beautiful relations and live in peace. When we start off treating each person, each baby that comes into the world with this presumption that if we don't force them to follow a certain path, they will just end up being moochers we are really demonstrating self-hate. That we have no faith in human nature. That we don't trust ourselves, much less anyone else.

        Any being which is born deserves a right to thrive regardless of what that  being does for anyone else.

        What if, that person who sits around just thinking for 40 years, suddenly stands up and announces that she has figured out how to have a perpetual, zero-waste, zero-harm energy system? And, what if, that person could never have gifted us with that had she been forced to go to school, get a job, raise children, be "productive"?

        You can't presume that what you see as laziness is necessarily bad or deems that person unworthy of thriving.

        You can't presume to know the meaning of life or why each of us is here.

        What if that "lazy" person is actually a conduit to some metaphysical being which is sending healing energy into the earth? But, if that "lazy" person dies or gets too sick, that metaphysical being can't send that healing energy?

        Do I think that's a real possibility? No. But, I also don't know everything. I don't possess the answer to life, the universe and everything. Ok. 42. Still, I don't even know what the answer means! So, who am I to sit in judgement of others? My imagination probably can't even conjure up all the possibilities of what this whole life on Earth business is about.

        Why do we base the way we start thinking about structuring our societies on a presumption of negative judgement? Why do we assume that "bad" acts occur just because a person is "bad" rather than that the person is a product of everything all of us are building together?

        I really want to smash this whole idea that everyone has to "contribute" or "be productive."

        •  This is a beautiful statement. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NY brit expat, UnaSpenser

          I can't even reply, it just makes me want to think for awhile.

          WE NEVER FORGET Our Labor Martyrs: a project to honor the men, women and children who lost their lives in Freedom's Cause. For Dec: Life so cheap; property so sacred.

          by JayRaye on Sun Jan 13, 2013 at 01:59:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Contribution does not mean (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JayRaye

          working in factories, it means contributing to the well-being of the community in whatever way you can or want to, there is no prescribed definition of contribution. We do what we can and how we want to do it. Teaching, reading, learning, creating art and music, cataloging reality is a contribution, we as human beings are more than inputs, we can go beyond the limits imposed by a system that requires those w/o property to work like dogs for those that have wealth. I have no problem with the idea of contribution as I know that we do it every day on a very basic level, we need to move away from what the capitalist system deems as contribution to the idea of contributing to each other and humanity ... I think you are trapped in what the system deems as a contribution which is why it is rubbing you the wrong way.

          I may be wrong, but that is what I am seeing.

          "Hegel noticed somewhere that all great world history facts and people so to speak twice occur. He forgot to add: the one time as tragedy, the other time as farce" Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte .

          by NY brit expat on Sun Jan 13, 2013 at 02:01:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  no matter how you define it, it is a (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JayRaye, jarbyus

            contingency. that is, we have something which we use to determine if a person is worthy of thriving.

            To my mind, everyone is worthy of thriving regardless of anything.

            If that person is causing harm, they are not thriving and we all need to help address that.

            But, this notion that they must be contributing, however you define it, still makes their right to thrive contingent.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site