gurgen Posted November 30, 2003 Report Share Posted November 30, 2003 Isn't abolishing slavery one of way of making the best of it?I never said we should let everything be, I said we should do what we can. But some people believe we can change human nature, which we cannot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted November 30, 2003 Report Share Posted November 30, 2003 Shahumian, Artsax war was a struggle for liberation. You are talking about a revolution - its an entirely different thing. So what are you suggesting, should there be revolutions in all capitalistic countries? Should the capitalists be killed and their property plundered, like what happened in 1917? I don't think so. You can have whatever idea you wish to have, but your ideas should in not way affect other's lives. So when I say let them live their lives, I mean don't have any practical ideas of killing capitalists. That is the best alternative - remember, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE ANYBODY'S LIFE (unless for self defence). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahumyan Posted November 30, 2003 Report Share Posted November 30, 2003 Sasun, by your argument no German had a right to kill Hitler, are you suggesting no German should have attempted to kill him? Look, last time i went to Armenia i saw a complete family on the streets playing instrumnets to scrape some money together, and i dont believe the people who madee these people come to such a situation have a right to be in power. What alternative do we have if these "politicians" of ours dont listen to us, and continue to make armenia a more impoverished nation? Look, i have relatives who are capitalists in Armenia, i dont want them to be killed do i? However i dont think they are doing the right thing in not paying their workers proportional to the amount of labour they put into production.This is an injustice, and surely its our duty to fight injustice? Gurgen you are correct, and in that way we should abolish Capitalism too, for the principle is still the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted November 30, 2003 Report Share Posted November 30, 2003 Shahumian, fighting against injustice shouldn't involve killing because taking somebody's life is the biggest injustice. As to Hitler, again I disagree in your comparison. It has nothing to do with revolution. There are many peaceful ways to fight againts injustice.As to capitalistm, have you read Adam Smith? So tell me, is entrepreneurship and risk taking to be rewarded or not? A worker just works without any risks, he knows that in the end of the week (or month) he will get his salary. However, the entreprenure has to take many risks to put together and continue any production or service. You say it is unfair that he gets the margin? Well, I don't think so. He puts a lot of energy, innovation, time, businessman talent - a lot more than the worker, so he should be rewarded and that is fair. I am not talking about monopolies and abuses and such... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahumyan Posted November 30, 2003 Report Share Posted November 30, 2003 As a marxist yes i would have had to have read Adam Smith. The entrepreneur is taking a risk of course, but for what? For his/her backpocket. A worker would not get payed if he didnt work, this happened in the USSR due to the corruption bought on by a divorcedd beurocracy from the state. You say taking the margin is fair. How is it so? Of course the manager should be repayed for all the hard work, time, sacrifices he puts in, but nothing more than equal to that. Once he gets his just reward for the work, why should he get more? Does he still deserve the margin when he squeezes workers from their wages to maintain his "well deserved" margin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted November 30, 2003 Report Share Posted November 30, 2003 As a marxist yes i would have had to have read Adam Smith. The entrepreneur is taking a risk of course, but for what? For his/her backpocket. A worker would not get payed if he didnt work, this happened in the USSR due to the corruption bought on by a divorcedd beurocracy from the state. You say taking the margin is fair. How is it so? Of course the manager should be repayed for all the hard work, time, sacrifices he puts in, but nothing more than equal to that. Once he gets his just reward for the work, why should he get more? Does he still deserve the margin when he squeezes workers from their wages to maintain his "well deserved" margin?Well, if you understand A. Smith well then everyone gets exactly their fair share because of fair competition. Well we know that pure liberal economy doesn't work exactly the way it was laid out by him, but there has not been anything more fair than that. If you look a lot of competitive industries this margin is so ridiculously small that there can not be viable production without huge capital investments and economies of scale, and many other things. And who has the huge capital ready to be invested? the capitalist. Shahumian, when you say the capitalist is working for his pocket that is very correct. But for whose pocket are the workers working? Of course, for their own pocket again. There maybe a few altruists among the whole of humanity, for whome the communist/socialist (whatever you may call it) ideology would work. However, realistically, there is no chance for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gurgen Posted November 30, 2003 Report Share Posted November 30, 2003 I agree with Sasun, for Marxism to work everybody must think the same way and that will never happen. There will always be people who think for themselves. It's just not realistic to say that all men should be equal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahumyan Posted November 30, 2003 Report Share Posted November 30, 2003 in a marxist society the life of the individual would become better, therefore if a person thinks for themselves they will go towards marxism, its not an issue of putting others before you. By working in marxist society i get what i put in, not what the boss decides is just enuf to keep me living and maximise his profits... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 1, 2003 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2003 http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/russian/Pioner_w.jpg Do zdrastvuet Tovarish Marx! How did this innocent thread about poor children in Armenia, turn into a debate about the mythology of Marxism anyway? Now that is what I call true works of communism, turn everything into a Communist Manifesto, Ura! I don't know about you, but I like this evil capitalism, I like to enjoy my freedom to disagree with the government and be able to wake up alive the next day, and I like to read something other than the Biography on Papa Lenin and how he was such an avid reader. I like having free access to bananas and pineapples and having the ability to excel at what I do and have a private business where I can be the boss. Then again it's jus little me against the large population of romantic believers in equality and human decency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted December 1, 2003 Report Share Posted December 1, 2003 Here here Anileve...for all its vices (literally in some cases0 Capitalism has its virtues...and MArxisim and all its version (even if not Totallitarian imposed - if it is concievably possible that it be enacted without being imposed)...is just so contrary to human nature in so many ways. Yes i think we need to leanr to share the wealth more - and to take care of those who can't seem to manage themselves (etc)...but when you take away the incentives for performing well - beyond the norm, and for inovating and such (and those motivations are by and large greed..or some varient...thoguh not always of course..) - well - then you have just resigned yourself to something that is far less then ideal - and things are bad enough already - with slackers of various sorts and such... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted December 1, 2003 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2003 You say greed, I say ambition. Without ambition we don’t live, with ambition we are easily distracted from rationally observing the line that we should not cross. I am really not in much favoritism of an –ISMS, but I must say that Communism, or Marxism (same thing to me) are my most disliked political theories. Anything that brings more damage to the humanity rather than benefit, anything that interferes with choice of leading the life you chose to lead (and God knows none of us have a “normal” life) is not welcome in my system of critical thinking. I think that Marxism interferes with it’s hidden intention of conditioning and suppressing human ambition, where as it is argued that people would become the beneficiaries of the equally distributed wealth, it is the government which will constantly interfere and decide how it would be distributed. Marxism is the ultimate murderer of freedom, individuality and intellect, and I don’t support none of the ideas associated with that form of ideology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.