Anarchism vs. Communism: Ramo's Opportunity

[Ramo]

Lots of good debate. Will try to respond in a couple days (9 hours till my Topology and 13 till my Relativity test ).

[Az]

Good luck.

Yes, and even the Constitution can be changed.

The same will be true with our constitution.

[Pax]

Originally posted by Kucinich

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
This cannot explain why an excutive makes several magnitudes more than an engineer.

The executives labor - his abilities with management and stuff - is more valuable than the engineer's labor. If it isn't, the company is wasting money, so it is less competitive.

Not necessarily true. What is true is that the Exec can decide has far more control in deciding how much he should be paid for his services due to his closeness to the decision making body if he is not the decision making body.

That's the reason we have unions in the U.S., so the worker bees can have some say with the queen bees.

[Pax]

What kind of society/ecopoltical system was being advocated in fight club?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
You have not shown that his abilities is more valuable, you are merely asserting it. Without the engineers, the company will not be able to design and build new products, so it will go kaput in no time at all. Thus, engineers are more valuable than executives.

There are multiple engineers. There are (usually) fewer executives. The executives charge more, because the company is willing to pay them more, because they significantly magnify the output of the engineers (or at least the company thinks they do - that's the important bit). If the company is wrong, and the executives don't, then the company is less efficient (thus less competitive) than a company that follows a different practice, so it will succeed less and may even go out of business eventually.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Pax Africanus
Not necessarily true. What is true is that the Exec can decide has far more control in deciding how much he should be paid for his services due to his closeness to the decision making body if he is not the decision making body.

That's the reason we have unions in the U.S., so the worker bees can have some say with the queen bees.

And unions are an integral part of capitalism (true capitalism, not the crappy over-general definition che talks about). Freedom to contract and freedom to own property are the basis of capitalism.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kidicious
This is what makes capitalism unethical, and we plan to make necessary changes.

Capitalism is unethical because I'm not FORCED to share? I thought sharing was just a nice thing to do. You are just as bad as the fundies who want to legislate their morality - you are legislating that everyone has to be a GOOD person, not just a "not bad" one.

[Ramo]

Everyone legislates morality. That's why we have murder laws.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kucinich
(true capitalism, not the crappy over-general definition che talks about).

True capitalism is existing capitalism. False capitalism is the capitalism of your dreams.

Kidiciious, by working within the system I mean helping to build trade unions, putting political pressure on governments, competing in elections, etc., not joining the government. Anarchists (except syndicalists) eschew these sorts of activities. "Fighting for a better wage is just fighting for a better leash," is a typical anarchist phrase.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kucinich
Capitalism is unethical because I'm not FORCED to share? I thought sharing was just a nice thing to do. You are just as bad as the fundies who want to legislate their morality - you are legislating that everyone has to be a GOOD person, not just a "not bad" one.

Wrong. Sharing as a "good" thing to do is a religious concept. Our political consept is that sharing is a "normal" and "productive" thing to do, that is not related with individual choice, exactly the same way taxes in current capitalist countries are not related with individual choice.

[chequita guevara]

Well put, Spiffy!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ramo
Everyone legislates morality. That's why we have murder laws.

I mean legislating what people have to do, not just what they can't do. There is a difference between "you can't kill people" and "you must share".

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Wrong. Sharing as a "good" thing to do is a religious concept. Our political consept is that sharing is a "normal" and "productive" thing to do, that is not related with individual choice, exactly the same way taxes in current capitalist countries are not related with individual choice.

Ah, so you want to deny an entire set of liberties because you think it will be "productive"?

OBVIOUSLY a system where people are nice and friendly and everything is all well and good, but it doesn't mean the government should ENFORCE niceness.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kucinich
Ah, so you want to deny an entire set of liberties because you think it will be "productive"?

About as much as taxes deny an entire set of liberties. Just listen to Floyd.

OBVIOUSLY a system where people are nice and friendly and everything is all well and good, but it doesn't mean the government should ENFORCE niceness.

I don't want a system where everybody is nice and friendly, nor do I believe in it. The system I'm talking about is not a system where you are forced to give money to each beggar you encounter, or somesuch.
The system I'm talking about is a system where you have no choice but to pay a part of your income for the rest of society. Exactly the same way you currently have to pay for Social Security in the US.
Many people may rant about how they're giving money to geezers who shoulda worked harder, but it doesn't mean they can miraculously stop to pay their welfare taxes.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Capitalism is unethical. I compare it to greasing, because you have to pay someone for the right to work just like you have to pay officials to get things done in places where that act is considered acceptable. Lukily greasing is not considered ethical in the US. If you try it someone will probably report you, you will lose the respect of respectable people, and your future will not be so good.

In a properly funtioning communist society capitalism will be illegal and considered unethical. There will be no motivation for people to try to become capitalists, because they wont find anyone to work for them and they wont be able to sell their produce. If ( and this isn't likely) they find a way to profit they will face the law and the disrespect of society, and their future will be crap.

Kid, I think my point was that elimination of capitalists is not a one-time proposition. Anarchy implies no authority to "execute" the elimination and thus will not work. Communism works because it can ruthlessly eliminate the rise of new capitalists.