Is the case for socialism, one of morality, cold logic or long term survival of our species?
- This topic has 359 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This question has always bugged me since I first came across real socialism as a young teenager. When socialists point to the obvious horrors of capitalism, poverty, starvation, needless disease and war, it often looks like a moral issue. To put it simply, I think it is wrong to allow people to starve in a world of plenty. That may seem obvious to some, yet the history of our species has never seen any moral absolutes. What one society at one time sees as acceptable, another some other time will find abhorrent. So who are we to lay down our views and expect others to see it the same. Afterall, my time inside and outside the SPGB I have heard, members accusing non socialist views of being wrong. This site is loaded with the same and I am just as guilty as anyone else. Who is right and who is wrong?
As for the idea that the case for socialism is one of logic, I can go along with that as well. The fact that capitalist society is organised in such a way as to enable a minority to own the majority of wealth, that is in no way produced by them is ludicrous. We call it legalised theft. When we see the results of such distorted organisation, in the form of poverty, starvation, war etc, the logical absurdity becomes even more obvious. If an artificial intelligent computer were asked how best to organise society, I would put money on it, that it would not come up with capitalism as its solution. Capitalism does not compute.
Survival of our species. There is merit in this view, that is also part of the logic approach. Capitalism will not prevent a possible third world war, nor will it be able to avert possible environmental destruction to the point were it threatens the survival of our species.
Of course, I could have missed something.
So what is it? What do others think? I ask because I know that most people are not moved by cold logic, nor it seems do many take serious the risks their future offspring may face as a result of their apathy. It would seem that people are more inclined to take notice of moral issues, but as we know they are highly subjective, allowing little room for consensus.
Perhaps if we knew where we stand, we could be more effective with our marketing.
I will think about what you have said but in the meantime this is a great title for a book, pamphlet or public meeting
SocialistPunk wrote:Capitalism does not compute.SocialistPunk wrote:Is the case for socialism, one of morality, cold logic or long term survival of our species?All of the above and for a simple reason: humans beings are multifaceted animals, not robots. 'Nuff said
i have no idea of the answer.Individually, i think we tend to rationalise our reasons for our own particular political positions and forget and ignore all the personal and idiosyncratic reasons for them.. . In specific regard to the SPGB, it is very much by accident that we came across its existence and whether we would have reached our current thought without doing so, who can say? It was the Party that led me to read Kropotkin which led to exploring anarchism…for others it may well be vice versa One AF anarchist mentioned to me that it always surprises him how many ex-members eventually re-join years later. I have often described how we acquire our political consciousness as our search for the Holy Grail…and it is the basis of the many disputes amongst socialists. The workers council debate is an example, but it extends much wider and involves those who describe themselves as revolutionaries and those who do not. Is an explanation lacking the selfish survival of the " individual" and the need to seek out others to achieve it – One of the land-mark publications for me after the Right to be Lazy is the situationist the Right to be Greedy. acknowleding we cannot all be altruistic angels. The class struggle after all is based on ones interests being best protected by our class interests…on the long term…but on the short term…i guess the song the working class can kiss my arse, i got the foreman's job at last, expresses one section of the workers movement's sentiments as representing its best interests. I guess this is where the fight is – between these conflicting views on how best advance oneself and family. Old lit talk about missions, even duty, and the working class historic role in abolitishing capitalism…i think that has gradually disappearedMarx had similar questions and trying to answer spent pages and pages and pages dissecting Stirner's Ego and It Own…until he got his approach sorted.
'logic' has nothing to do with it. Slavery was 'logical' to the owners. 'Morality' has too many definitions. Long term survival of our species? Was it the first thing the nascent capitalist class thought about when it saught political power?The case for socialism is based upon the economic interests of the working class.
robbo203 wrote:SocialistPunk wrote:Is the case for socialism, one of morality, cold logic or long term survival of our species?All of the above and for a simple reason: humans beings are multifaceted animals, not robots. 'Nuff said
I tend to agree on a personal level.Alan has a good point about a lot of the working class thinking their best interests lie in getting a leg up over others. There are a number of very comfortably off workers out there. You're on a hiding to nothing, if you think appealing to working class economic interests will work on that lot.
The case for socialism is based upon the economic interests of the working class Vin, would you say that case for Socialism as presented by the S.P.G.B. is based on selfishness, as in: What is in it for me, my genes, my family.This is not a trick question, Vin.
Hi Northern Light.I can only speak for myself .Short answer would be no, but I can see how my statement could be interpreted that way. I could have said that the case for socialism is based upon the economic interests of the human race. The working class is the vast majority and if we wish to survive and live a decent life then we need to join together and pursue our economic interests. As Socialist Punk has argued human beings are not naturally selfish but nor is it in our interests to allow the planet to be owned and controlled by a tiny minority. The reason socialism is possible today is rooted in history and the material conditions of capitalist production not in a 'morality'.That may be just my opinion
The *case* for socialism is based on morality and logic, and concerns the long-term survival prospects of our species. But socialism itself is not the case for it. Socialism, as Marx put it, is "the real movement that abolishes the present state of things". So once we've heard the case for socialism and accepted it, it's what we *do* that should most concern us.
stuartw2112 wrote:The *case* for socialism is based on morality and logic,But both have been around for thousands of years. Slavery was 'logical' and 'morally right' in it's day. Why has it become illogical and immoral today?
What is understood by "socialism" is also historically and culturally relative, as is its valuation. Why is this relevant to the argument?
My statement #10 is badly written. What I should have said is: But both morality and logic have been around for thousands of years. Slavery was 'logical' and 'morally right' in it's day. Why has it become illogical and immoral today?
It's as if someone asked whether socialism were possible and we were to reply that fish have been around for millions of years. Vin's point, even if true (has logic changed over the past few thousand years?), is irrelevant to the question.
stuartw2112 wrote:It's as if someone asked whether socialism were possible and we were to reply that fish have been around for millions of years. Vin's point, even if true (has logic changed over the past few thousand years?), is irrelevant to the question.Not sure what fish has to do with it
Well worth a read and very relevant to the topic: http://theoryandpractice.org.uk/library/materialist-conception-history-edgar-hardcastle-socialist-studies-1995
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.