Karl Marx for next US president
- This topic has 19 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0azojPPRhw
I wonder what the people signing are thinking?
rodshaw wrote:I wonder what the people signing are thinking?Thinking would be a new experience for them
"Thinking would be a new experience for them". Couldn't have put it better myself. Stupid bastards. Honestly what chance do we have? This "civilisation" is fucked.
They are just a bunch of idiots and imbeciles who do not even read comics books, and will follow anybody like sheep.Obama is one of the best puppet and lackey of the US capitalist class.If Noam Chomsky wrote that there is not difference between Ronald Reagan and John K Kennedy, we can also say that there is not difference between Obama and all the presidents of the USA.They are just a bunch of war criminals, imperialists, and defenders of the interest of the capitalist class, even more, a man or a woman of serious principles would never have the desires to become president of the US, or any capitalist stateThe most illiterate person from another country would know that Obama is just a representative of the US ruling class, and that he is just George Bush part 2, and the continuation of the same imperialist aim of the US ruling classWell, my grandfather never had any formal education and he was aware that the Soviet Union was not a socialist country, and he was always saying that there was not difference between the US, and the Soviet Union, and that WWII was a confrontation between thieves.If Obama is a communist, the same thing can be said about Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George Bush. The thing is how more than 70% of the peoples vote for a so called communist president ? Is any idiot able to think that we can have a communist super-structure and a capitalist economical base ? .They can not say that Obama is a black man because it would be illegal to say that, but they can accuse him of being a communist, I wonder if the right wingers behind this, do really know what communism really is, and it is also a reflection of how distorted the concept of socialism and communism is, and how deeply confused the American workers are.In my younger years, any young person with that type of politically conceptions would be considered as a ridicule, and peoples would ask them to see a psychiatrist.Anybody that votes for Obama could have also voted for George Bush, or viceversa. They should have read these articles written by the WSPUS before propagating stupid ideas on the streets http://wspus.org/2008/09/is-obama-a-socialist/http://wspus.org/2012/07/barack-hussein-obama-is-a-secret-muslim-stealth-socialist-born-in-kenya-and-other-frightening-tales/
Obviously the guy making the video is just inviting us to laugh along with him at how utterly stupid the majority of US workers are. I actually think the Internet is making workers more and more dense. Not the other way round. This along with online porn, football, gadgets, daily rags, shit on telly, faecesbook, celebrity twitter tattle, mind numbing movies, religion and video games. Dished up to appeal to the addictive side of human behaviour. Workers minds are dormant. They are now more stupid than they've ever been in history. I believe this.Its cool to be stupid now especially among young workers. They are trying to "out-stupid" each other. Just look at any docu-soap on telly about young proles on holiday or at the workplace. Total cretins. It's all a product of the concerted effort by our masters to radically dumb down the whole of society in the past 30 years. The proles are lapping it up. The dullard donkeys love being slaves. I detest them. Shoot me down if you like. I don't give a fuck.A Socialist Revolution? Never in a million years. It's about as likely as the 2nd coming. The masters will be in power forever…or at least until they blow the planet up to fuck or let it roast in an irriversable environmental catastrophe. "Humanity" is just a horrible virus polluting this Earth and Capitalism is its face. The planet will eventually get rid of us in its own way.
If only being intelligent turned people into socialists. You can have an IQ of 170, be well-read, cultured, and still not get the point.
Ozymandias wrote:A Socialist Revolution? Never in a million years. It's about as likely as the 2nd coming. The masters will be in power forever…or at least until they blow the planet up to fuck or let it roast in an irriversable environmental catastrophe. "Humanity" is just a horrible virus polluting this Earth and Capitalism is its face. The planet will eventually get rid of us in its own way.Well, if you really think that why bother to post on here? This kind of semi-concealed self loathing does no favours to anyone including yourself.
People, by nature, want to please other people and if you interupt someone in there daily to-ings and fro-ings they're not going to be paying full attention. I don't think you can really pull any super deep conclusions from this type of thing.See this one:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi3erdgVVTw
Ozymandias wrote:Obviously the guy making the video is just inviting us to laugh along with him at how utterly stupid the majority of US workers are. I actually think the Internet is making workers more and more dense. Not the other way round. This along with online porn, football, gadgets, daily rags, shit on telly, faecesbook, celebrity twitter tattle, mind numbing movies, religion and video games. Dished up to appeal to the addictive side of human behaviour. Workers minds are dormant. They are now more stupid than they've ever been in history. I believe this.Its cool to be stupid now especially among young workers. They are trying to "out-stupid" each other. Just look at any docu-soap on telly about young proles on holiday or at the workplace. Total cretins. It's all a product of the concerted effort by our masters to radically dumb down the whole of society in the past 30 years. The proles are lapping it up. The dullard donkeys love being slaves. I detest them. Shoot me down if you like. I don't give a fuck.A Socialist Revolution? Never in a million years. It's about as likely as the 2nd coming. The masters will be in power forever…or at least until they blow the planet up to fuck or let it roast in an irriversable environmental catastrophe. "Humanity" is just a horrible virus polluting this Earth and Capitalism is its face. The planet will eventually get rid of us in its own way.Personally, I think this whole line of argument is fundamentally flawed and smacks not a little of "Great Man" conspiracy theory – the super-intelligent Übermensch that is our master class have cunningly ensured the relentless dumbing down of the proles and their slavish adherence to the status quo. As if. Our masters don't strike me as being any more – or less- intelligent than us and most of them have only got to where they are by virtue of having chosen the right parents I think the fact that the majority of workers continue to basically accept capitalism and all that it entails has got sod all to do with intelligence – or, rather, the lack of it . Dissing your fellow workers as cretinous buffoons, apart from being incredibly insulting, is plainly false. You mention the internet, Ozy. But if you have the cognitive capacity to surf the web or accomplish any of the myriad of other technical tasks that goes with living a life of a modern wage slave then you sure as hell have the raw ability to grasp the simple case for socialism. Unfortunately your use of the term "stupid" implies that they lack that ability. This points to what i have long thought is a basic weakness in the SPGB´s approach – its over emphasis on rationality. The basic assumption is that the case for socialism is pretty much self evident and mere exposure to that case, given our basic rationality, will compel individual workers to accept it. When they fail to accept it, this can seem utterly incomprehensible and at times can lead to a quite opposite response – a complete repudiation of the assumption of rationality to which the individual had previously appealed in putting forward the socialist case. Some would argue that it is a characteristic of black-or-white thinking that you can switch so easily from one extreme to the other. I would suggest it would be helpful to turn our attention elsewhere if we are to discover why it is that workers are not currently coming round in their droves to accept the case for socialism, I'm not a great fan of the French sociologist/anthropologist, Pierre Bourdieu, but I do think something like his key concept of habitus goes quite a long way to explaining why this is the case: There is a succinct explanation of ´"habitus" in Wikipedia as followsBourdieu thus sees habitus as an important factor contributing to social reproduction because it is central to generating and regulating the practices that make up social life. Individuals learn to want what conditions make possible for them, and not to aspire to what is not available to them. The conditions in which the individual lives generate dispositions compatible with these conditions (including tastes in art, literature, food, and music), and in a sense pre-adapted to their demands. The most improbable practices are therefore excluded, as unthinkable, by a kind of immediate submission to order that inclines agents to make a virtue of necessity, that is, to refuse what is categorically denied and to will the inevitable And also here Habitus is one of Bourdieu’s most influential yet ambiguous concepts. It refers to the physical embodiment of cultural capital, to the deeply ingrained habits, skills, and dispositions that we possess due to our life experiences. Bourdieu often used sports metaphors when talking about the habitus, often referring to it as a “feel for the game.” Just like a skilled baseball player “just knows” when to swing at a 95-miles-per-hour fastball without consciously thinking about it, each of us has an embodied type of “feel” for the social situations or “games” we regularly find ourselves in. In the right situations, our habitus allows us to successfully navigate social environments. For example, if you grew up in a rough, crime ridden neighborhood in Baltimore, you would likely have the type of street smarts needed to successfully survive or steer clear of violent confrontations, “hustle” for jobs and money in a neighborhood with extremely low employment, and avoid police surveillance or harassment. However, if you were one of the lucky few in your neighborhood to make it to college, you would probably find that this same set of skills and dispositions was not useful—and maybe even detrimental—to your success in your new social scenario.http://routledgesoc.com/category/profile-tags/habitus This chimes quite a lot with how I see things. Workers don't reject socialism because they are "stupid", they reject it because they cannot see the immediate relevance of socialism to their lives and the structures of everyday living. If we can break through that particular impasse we stand a chance of gaining ground and social influence. Habitus reminds me a little of the ideas of George Walford and his Systematic Ideology (Walford, for people, who may not have heard of him, was a trenchant and long standing critic of the SPGB). Accept that Bourdieu´s concept of habitus is not a static one – like Walford´s hierarchy of ideological types – but dynamic. I would like to think that as the socialist movement grows it will reach a critical threshold where factors that once worked against us – including habitus – will start to work in our favour Looking at the question of socialist consciousness from the perspective of "habitus", seems to me to be a much more rewarding approach than simply appealing to workers´ rationality – or indeed discounting the ability of workers to think rationally for themselves as you seemingly do, Ozy. In fact I would go so far as to say that part of the reason why workers fail to be drawn to socialism is because of attitudes such as you express here. If you have such low expectations of workers then to be quite blunt you can hardly expect them to join you, can you? All you are doing is reproducing or reinforcing a ruling class ideology that keeps them in their place
The task of the Socialist Party is to show workers that it is a practical proposition which calls for their urgent attention in order to transform a picture of how we could live into a movement for how we shall live. To transform this desire into an immediancy for the working class. Democratic decisions will need to be made, not by leaders but by all interested people. That people are capable of organising their own affairs in common is one of the things that has clearly demonstrated. The socialist movement must be "the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interests of the immense majority"(Communist Manifesto). SOYMB blog has a useful post discussing this topic which i recommend.http://www.socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2013/07/who-we-are-socialist-party-of-great.html#morehttp://www.socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2013/07/who-we-are-part-2.html And my own http://mailstrom.blogspot.com/2012/02/socialism-and-socialists.html
robbo203 wrote:Personally, I think this whole line of argument is fundamentally flawed and smacks not a little of "Great Man" conspiracy theory – the super-intelligent Übermensch that is our master class have cunningly ensured the relentless dumbing down of the proles and their slavish adherence to the status quo. As if. Our masters don't strike me as being any more – or less- intelligent than us and most of them have only got to where they are by virtue of having chosen the right parents I think the fact that the majority of workers continue to basically accept capitalism and all that it entails has got sod all to do with intelligence – or, rather, the lack of it . Dissing your fellow workers as cretinous buffoons, apart from being incredibly insulting, is plainly false. You mention the internet, Ozy. But if you have the cognitive capacity to surf the web or accomplish any of the myriad of other technical tasks that goes with living a life of a modern wage slave then you sure as hell have the raw ability to grasp the simple case for socialism. Unfortunately your use of the term "stupid" implies that they lack that ability. This points to what i have long thought is a basic weakness in the SPGB´s approach – its over emphasis on rationality. The basic assumption is that the case for socialism is pretty much self evident and mere exposure to that case, given our basic rationality, will compel individual workers to accept it. When they fail to accept it, this can seem utterly incomprehensible and at times can lead to a quite opposite response – a complete repudiation of the assumption of rationality to which the individual had previously appealed in putting forward the socialist case. Some would argue that it is a characteristic of black-or-white thinking that you can switch so easily from one extreme to the other. I would suggest it would be helpful to turn our attention elsewhere if we are to discover why it is that workers are not currently coming round in their droves to accept the case for socialism, I'm not a great fan of the French sociologist/anthropologist, Pierre Bourdieu, but I do think something like his key concept of habitus goes quite a long way to explaining why this is the case: There is a succinct explanation of ´"habitus" in Wikipedia as followsBourdieu thus sees habitus as an important factor contributing to social reproduction because it is central to generating and regulating the practices that make up social life. Individuals learn to want what conditions make possible for them, and not to aspire to what is not available to them. The conditions in which the individual lives generate dispositions compatible with these conditions (including tastes in art, literature, food, and music), and in a sense pre-adapted to their demands. The most improbable practices are therefore excluded, as unthinkable, by a kind of immediate submission to order that inclines agents to make a virtue of necessity, that is, to refuse what is categorically denied and to will the inevitable And also here Habitus is one of Bourdieu’s most influential yet ambiguous concepts. It refers to the physical embodiment of cultural capital, to the deeply ingrained habits, skills, and dispositions that we possess due to our life experiences. Bourdieu often used sports metaphors when talking about the habitus, often referring to it as a “feel for the game.” Just like a skilled baseball player “just knows” when to swing at a 95-miles-per-hour fastball without consciously thinking about it, each of us has an embodied type of “feel” for the social situations or “games” we regularly find ourselves in. In the right situations, our habitus allows us to successfully navigate social environments. For example, if you grew up in a rough, crime ridden neighborhood in Baltimore, you would likely have the type of street smarts needed to successfully survive or steer clear of violent confrontations, “hustle” for jobs and money in a neighborhood with extremely low employment, and avoid police surveillance or harassment. However, if you were one of the lucky few in your neighborhood to make it to college, you would probably find that this same set of skills and dispositions was not useful—and maybe even detrimental—to your success in your new social scenario.http://routledgesoc.com/category/profile-tags/habitus This chimes quite a lot with how I see things. Workers don't reject socialism because they are "stupid", they reject it because they cannot see the immediate relevance of socialism to their lives and the structures of everyday living. If we can break through that particular impasse we stand a chance of gaining ground and social influence. Habitus reminds me a little of the ideas of George Walford and his Systematic Ideology (Walford, for people, who may not have heard of him, was a trenchant and long standing critic of the SPGB). Accept that Bourdieu´s concept of habitus is not a static one – like Walford´s hierarchy of ideological types – but dynamic. I would like to think that as the socialist movement grows it will reach a critical threshold where factors that once worked against us – including habitus – will start to work in our favour Looking at the question of socialist consciousness from the perspective of "habitus", seems to me to be a much more rewarding approach than simply appealing to workers´ rationality – or indeed discounting the ability of workers to think rationally for themselves as you seemingly do, Ozy. In fact I would go so far as to say that part of the reason why workers fail to be drawn to socialism is because of attitudes such as you express here. If you have such low expectations of workers then to be quite blunt you can hardly expect them to join you, can you? All you are doing is reproducing or reinforcing a ruling class ideology that keeps them in their placeI think there's a lot to be said for this way of looking at it. This idea of 'habitus' is reinforced by the fact that people mostly just want to get their heads down and get through the next working day. Any idea which is too wacky, doesn't conform to their normal view of life or is in some way seen as threatening is quickly pushed aside. At the same time it's part of the reason why those with a super-high IQ or all the leisure time in the world to think about things don't automatically arrive at a socialist view – it's not rocket science but it's a million miles from what they know of the world and how they think it should work.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.