On Covert Greed, and Master, Slave Relations.
November 2024 › Forums › General discussion › On Covert Greed, and Master, Slave Relations.
- This topic has 29 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 1 month ago by robbo203.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 24, 2019 at 4:05 pm #190567David_DavidParticipant
Hello Comrades,
I have another question for you all.
While we believe in a no leader, completely democratic form organisation, I know that we do not live in a perfect world. And so I have a reservation.
What if there is a passive desire in some people to be servants, and a servile attitude dominates their unconscious, and also there are others who have a passive desire to be masters, while all of them consciously agree with the aforesaid principles of leaderless democracy and yet all of them at once have a greed which works only passively, and covertly.
Hence:
- Group A are passively servile,
- Group B are passive leaders,
- Group A and B both have passive greed,
- Group A and B consciously agree with leaderless democracy.
- There is:
- Scenario 1, Group A and B form majority of the population,
- Scenario 2, Group A and B form minority of the population.
How will we deal with this issue of covert practical rejection of ideals of leaderless, democratic organisation in each scenario?
Regards,
David
September 24, 2019 at 4:34 pm #190570Bijou DrainsParticipantI think such an approach to human personality is fatally flawed by it’s reductive simplicity. It is similar to the way in which the snake oil salesmen of “Psychometric Testing” put forward the introvert extrovert spectrum as a particular trait, without taking into account a whole host of issues. For instance if I was at the opera with a whole bunch of opera buffs, I’d be fairly introvert (or more probably in the bar), whereas at a football match with my mates I’d probably be far more extrovert.
Similarly the idea that we would all fall into a servile or masterly personality type in all aspects of our interactions and behaviour is so unlikely as to be impossible. Some of us might be more servile in some situations and others more masterly in others (I’m using your descriptors at this point to keep to the original argument, not because I see them as valid personality descriptors), but people vary across a number of different settings. not only that your original question suggests there are only two approaches to human interaction, servile or master, what about people who are assertive, what about people who are passive aggressive, what about people who are openly aggressive, what about people who are sarcastic, etc. etc.
Without going too much into the theory of personality (which in itself has large holes in it) & essentially in answer to your what if, which states “What if there is a passive desire in some people to be servants, and a servile attitude dominates their unconscious, and also there are others who have a passive desire to be masters,” I don’t think it is worth worrying about because human personality doesn’t work like that, we are not two dimensional people and we don’t live two dimensional lives.
September 24, 2019 at 5:01 pm #190571WezParticipantThis subject was, of course, the great obsession with the Frankfurt School who produced a massive tome on the subject called: The Authoritarian Personality. It was co-written by Theodore Adorno and I recommend it to you David.
- This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Wez.
September 24, 2019 at 5:49 pm #190573AnonymousInactiveAll those ideas have been created by the bourgeois ideology, they serve to their own purposes similar to the idea that the slave wanted to be a slave, the poor wanted to be poor, women like to be beaten by men, we have to be dominated all the time, and that we can not live without leaders, and many more. If you understand the principles of socialism, you will understand that all those concepts are in total opposition to the materialist conception of history. Franz Fanon have written about the subject matter
September 24, 2019 at 7:26 pm #190577AnonymousInactiveThe best way to clarify our mind is by reading the articles published by the Socialist Party in its website. Search by topics, it is like a library
September 24, 2019 at 8:24 pm #190579alanjjohnstoneKeymasterI always liked Fear of Freedom by Erich Fromm
and
Listen Little Man by Wilhelm Reich
Wilhelm Reich in Sex-Pol describes class consciousness and explains:
“Everything that contradicts the bourgeois order, everything that contains a germ of rebellion, can be regarded as an element of class – consciousness; everything that creates or maintains a bond with the bourgeois order, that supports and reinforces it , is an impediment to class consciousness.”and again
“Against the principle of self-denial preached by political reaction, we must set the principle of happiness and abundance …Any socialist political economist can prove that sufficient wealth exists in the world to provide a happy life for all workers. But we must prove this more thoroughly , more consistently, in greater detail than we generally do”
and again
“Question: If two human beings , A and B , are starving, one of them may accept his fate, refuse to steal, and take to begging or die from hunger, while the other may take the law into his own hands in order to obtain food. A large part of the proletariat, often called the lumpenproletariat, live according to the principles of B. Which of the two types has more elements of class consciousness in him? Stealing is not yet a sign of class consciousness but a brief moment of reflection shows, despite our inner moral resistance, that the man who refuses to submit to law and steals when he is hungry, that’s to say, the man who manifests a will to live , has more energy and fight in him than the one who lies down unprotesting on the butchers slab …we have said that stealing is not yet class consciousness. A brick is not yet a house, but you use bricks to build a house.”
September 24, 2019 at 9:18 pm #190581AnonymousInactiveThe biggest theft takes place at the point of production and it is legalized by the so called legal, or judicial system, they are legalized thieves. A small group of human beings steal all the works and wealth produced by a great majority of the human beings and that robbery is deposited in big commercial banks. Anybody who question that robbery would be taken to jail. The general idea is that they work hard and the rest of the peoples do not work hard or they are lazy and many times the workers themselves propagate the same ideas against their own class brothers. Political economy has proven that it is the opposite way, therefore we must educate ourselves and stop repeating the ideological propaganda of the ruling elite, or the bourgeoisie. Some workers might also say that they deserve it because they work hard, but millions of peoples have worked hard all the life and they have been living in poverty all the time
CRIME – LEGAL AND ILLEGAL
Crime, according to the Collins Dictionary, is “an act or omission punishable by law”. This definition is more or less what you would expect to find but nevertheless it’s somewhat chilling. Nowhere is there any requirement for this “act or omission” to be either benevolent or malevolent; pro-human or anti-human. It simply has to be “prohibited by law”.
So what actually is “law”? When it comes down to basics, law is what any dominant authority actually deems to be law. Putting it crudely, if a yob wielding a screwdriver accosts you in an alleyway demanding possession of your wallet, he is effectively defining the law, albeit an extremely localised and fleeting version of it, and failure to comply, a “crime” punishable in the obvious manner.
Naturally the law undergoes a process of considerable tarting up as it rises through the scale until at national level, recorded in masses of leather-bound volumes, endorsed by an array of pompous blokes in wigs, ermine, mitres and crowns, and further supported by a compliant media, the whole idea of law and crime, or rather, statutory crime, can be readily presented to the population at large as somehow legitimate, permanent and operating in everyone’s best interests.
Since the dawn of civilisation humans have lived in a variety of types of society – slave, feudal and, of course, currently capitalist. These societies have however had one thing in common; they have all featured minority ownership of the prevailing wealth of that society. Naturally, they have also featured minority control, via the law and the machinery of government. Needless to say, our metaphorical yob, suitably tooled-up, is lurking constantly in the background to concentrate the mind of the non-owning majority on compliance.<b>Legalised robbery</b>
In modern capitalist society, ownership of the land, factories, transport, etc. is concentrated in the hands of a tiny minority, the capitalist class, comprising around 5 percent of the population. In essence this minority employs the other 95 percent, the working class, to produce wealth and otherwise run society in its entirety. By paying them a monetary wage which represents only part of the wealth they produce, and creaming off the surplus for themselves, the capitalists maintain a privileged lifestyle whilst the working class endures varying degrees of poverty, both relative and absolute.You may think that this situation is a bit unfair. But scrutinise the statute books until you’re blue in the face and you’ll find that it’s all perfectly legal. But try, if you dare, to redress the balance a little; pinch a few paperclips or whatever from your workplace or life a couple of designer garments from a boutique, and you’ll have those selfsame statute books flung in your face. Shock, horror, you will have committed a crime.
So there we have it. On the one hand, the everyday ongoing, but legal theft perpetrated by the capitalist class on the working class, and statutory crime, which likewise is the everyday ongoing reaction from the working class to try to claw back some of its losses; to make up its wages, so to speak. Unfortunately at present there is no class consciousness informing this, and the victims will all too frequently be fellow members of the working class.
Numerically speaking, big heists such as the Great Train Robbery and the Millennium Dome Diamond Raid are rare. In reality, petty larceny is very much the norm.
According to crime figures, around 95 percent of all statutory crime is property-related. This breaks down very roughly as follows: 25 percent theft from or of motor vehicles, 25 percent burglary, 30 percent other forms of theft – fraud, forgery, shoplifting etc., and 15 percent criminal damage to property. The remaining five percent comprises four percent violence against the person and one percent sexual offences.
The capitalist class in Britain numbers around 3 million people, only a small proportion of whom are in the public eye. Via the media, we peasants are entreated to revere and adulate our titled aristocracy and royalty for the fine example they set us, and to respect and emulate the new-wealth, self-made brigade – the “entrepreneurs”, the “innovators”, the “wealth-creators”, the “providers of jobs”.
What incredible effrontery. What appalling self-congratulatory arrogance. These philanthropists are after one thing and one thing only – a fast buck. Bear this in mind at all times.
Aside from all this, the overwhelming bulk of the capitalist class are unsung and anonymous. They are the inheritors of old wealth; the descendants of medieval merchants, New World traders, eighteenth and nineteenth century industrial capitalists, etc. – the swindlers, slave-dealers and tyrants of a bygone age. They may well, for the most part, be perfectly decent people; they can hardly, after all, be condemned for the particular environment into whey they happen to have been born. One thing however, is certain. If they, along with the other members of their class, collectively disappeared tomorrow from the fact of the Earth, the buses would still run, the factories and farms still produce, the hospitals still function. All as normal. These people are non-productive, surplus to requirement, useless. They are economic parasites.
The capitalist system is legalised theft; real crime, through and through. The working class is employed solely to facilitate the profit process. Where profits cannot be realised because of the prevailing phase of the economic cycle, workers are thrown on the scrap heap, goods stockpiled, food destroyed, houses left unbuilt and land uncultivated. As a result, we have massive and ongoing worldwide deprivation, starvation, disease, premature death.
Again, when rival groupings of capitalists find themselves in conflict over colonies or raw materials, the working class is mustered to resolve the situation. Murdering or being murdered in your country’s cause is perfectly lawful. Unleash a missile or bomb on some defenceless city slaughtering countless thousands of innocents and you’ll have a nice shiny medal pinned on your chest. Kill one person, back on Civvy Street, in a momentary act of anger or desperation and they’ll lock you up for life.
Ninety-five percent of statutory crime, as already indicated, is property-related. The great bulk of the residual five percent (violence against the person and sexual, offences), can be attributed to the everyday stresses and alienations that are part and parcel of our existence in capitalist society. We are conditioned into seeing our fellow workers, with whom, economically, we have everything in common, as rivals; as competitors for jobs and houses.
Where those fellow workers also happen to possess characteristics that proclaim the greater diversity of our species, be it skin pigmentation, accent, age, gender, sexual proclivity, disability; whatever then they are all the more readily identifiable as potential targets for abuse or violence. The real enemy, capitalism itself, sits unchallenged, safely clear of the firing line.
<b>Social behaviour</b>
The system is almost entirely responsible for statutory crime. In socialist society, common ownership and production solely for use would prevail. There would be no legalised theft; there could not be legalised theft. Likewise, almost all statutory crime would fade away. Theft would not exist. What would there be to steal? Your own property?People will, naturally, retain their capacity to discuss, disagree and quarrel. Likewise, romantic creatures that we are, situations will periodically arise where two persons desire the same person or partner; the Eternal Triangle as it’s rather prosaically known. Consequently, tempers may flare; fists (and handbags) may be brandished. Inevitably therefore, there will be occasional, recourse to acts of violence and accordingly there will, be a need for procedures to restrain the protagonists and address the causes.
Others, too, will suffer from mental illness, brain damage, simply draw an unlucky ticket in the genetic lottery and behave, not criminally, but non-socially.
So within socialist society there will, we suggest, be regulation of sorts and maybe even places of detention. But will the inmates find themselves banged up and slopping out? Surely not. We would think that their very inability to participate appropriately in society would be sufficient reason to extend to them the finest care, compassion and support that we can muster.
Henri Charrière’s book Papillon is a very moving true-life account of life in the penal colonies of French Guyana. During one of his several escapes Charrière lived with a Venezuelan Indian tribe, the Goajira, and he recounted with great warmth, their uncomplicated communistic lifestyle, describing how they lived with a commonality of purpose, without money, without judges, without laws. The barbaric punishments meted out by “civilised” Europeans to their miscreant fellows would have been totally beyond their comprehension.
We suggest that it will be pretty much like this in socialist society. Although it will be global as opposed to tribal, people will still live in small localised communities and, freed from capitalism’s physical and mental shackles, will spontaneously look out for one another. It is after all our nature to do so. What need will there be for a mass of laws to oversee this process?
Capitalism’s politicians are a contemptible and shameless bunch; none more so than our current messenger-boy-in-chief, Tony Blair. Nevertheless, we are indebted to the dear chap for providing the grand finale for this article. During the last general election, he chuntered endlessly on about being “Tough on crime; tough on the causes of crime”.
Socialists would readily endorse these sentiments but would take things just a little bit further than his own wishy-washy, and by no means original, list of measures. If you really want to be “Tough on crime; tough on the causes of crime”, the solution is very simple – abolish capitalism and establish socialism.
September 24, 2019 at 11:05 pm #190584Bijou DrainsParticipantAlan – I’m glad your an admirer of Reich, I have a second hand Orgone Accumulator I can let you have at a very good price, for cash I could let you have it for maybe £1,500. I could have a few more available if I can get down to Office World and convert a few more large metal filing cabinets.
September 24, 2019 at 11:13 pm #190585alanjjohnstoneKeymasterMy power has always been in my right hand and the wrist action, Bijou 😉
Assisted by listening to Hawkwind
September 25, 2019 at 7:39 am #190590David_DavidParticipantI am beginning to like SPGB discussion forums.
September 25, 2019 at 7:46 am #190591Bijou DrainsParticipantThere’s a lot to be said for Madame Palm and her five sister, Alan
September 25, 2019 at 12:29 pm #190593PartisanZParticipantComrades! Remember the purpose of this Forum and keep your laddish humour for other social networks.
September 25, 2019 at 5:59 pm #190594AnonymousInactiveThis forum is becoming a joke
September 25, 2019 at 11:12 pm #190597alanjjohnstoneKeymasterNot so much a joke but as an irrelevance since even SPGB members, not to mention others in the WSM, do not even bother to visit this site and we receive no contributions from them. David-David’s posts are most welcome as they produce replies.
At times it is only you and me, Marquito, who appear to believe that it can be used to share information and news items. Occasionally there are worthy posts by others when specific questions are asked and these are greatly appreciated. I find them informative.
I have, in my small way, tried to maintain and and to return to update topics so as to provide ammunition for socialists to use as speaking points in their day-to-day interactions. I have tried to provoke discussions on subjects of interest which should be debated.
I have previously highlighted that the forum is no longer fit for purpose. That our Yahoo groups are equally inadequate mediums to express socialist thought.
Without visitors, without participation and with woeful traffic statistics, we must ask if this forum is performing as it should and perhaps something else must be designed.
But it is not so much the forum itself, but the lack of interest by those who very much should be caring about the transmission of socialist ideas and exchanges of views and opinions, even if at times it is only among ourselves. Internal self-criticism, itself, is commendable
J’Accuse my Party comrades for their prevailing political ennui
And no more excuses for this apathy, please. Lets have suggestions instead of how to kick start members out of their malaise. Robbo’s suggestion of 10 minutes a month for action on the internet, has fallen on stony ground.
Either re-animate and resuscitate the SPGB back into meaningful activity or put a stake through the heart of this walking-dead in an act of mercy-killing.
September 25, 2019 at 11:40 pm #190598robbo203ParticipantAnd no more excuses for this apathy, please. Lets have suggestions instead of how to kick start members out of their malaise. Robbo’s suggestion of 10 minutes a month for action on the internet, has fallen on stony ground.
With absolutely minimal effort it is starting to yield decent results. In the case of the American Party, for example we are starting to get a flow of publicity contacts asking for free literature in response to publicity concerning the new pamphlet they have just brought out. It really doesn’t take a lot of effort. If even just 50 members got involved in this scheme on a regular basis – maybe 3 or 4 hours a month rather than just 10 minutes – it could transform the prospects of the Party. This is within our grasp but members dont seem to realise this. There is little or no sense of self belief in themselves and in what they can achieve. So we continue to achieve little. A vicious circle. Sad but true….
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.