Marx and Automation
- This topic has 650 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Marcos wrote:The world is falling apart and we are trying to prove that 'Engels was wrong, the people in Texas, in Miami, and Puerto Rico are floating in the water and we are not saying anything. What is happening to the Socialist Party? Are we losing our perspective?
Yes, afraid so. WE can't ignore trolls making silly accusations against us. It is up to Moderation to remove trolls and spammers. That is what TROLLS do: They fish for respnses. I have tried to ignore them while at the same time hoping that moderation would get rid of them.They are wasting our time on BULLSHIT. If we appear incapable of identifying a TROLL we will become a laughing stock.
@Tim KilgallonIs there no need for the people to choose one way or the other?Do you mean that the people 1) dither 2) dither till they can’t dither any longer and 3) dither some more?
@MarcosWhy not simply try to answer the question? #386I thank The SPGB for welcoming questions here.
Alan Kerr wrote:@MarcosWhy not simply try to answer the question? #386I thank The SPGB for welcoming questions here.How many answers to one question do you need ? The question has already been answered.
If we want to send invitation to peoples involved in the class struggle and in the working class movement. Send invitation to Andrew Killman, to Kevin Anderson, Eugene Gogol, to Peter Hudis, maybe we can compare his books with Adam Buick book. Try to post on the WSM forum, at the present time Matt is trying to organize the forum, he is the new moderator.
Vin wrote:Alan Kerr wrote:@MarcosWhy not simply try to answer the question? #386I thank The SPGB for welcoming questions here.How many answers to one question do you need ? The question has already been answered.
We do not need intellectualism, what we need is to turn this forum into a school of socialism, we have the theoretical resources to do that, we have 100 years of writing and researchers. The WSM/SPGB is the best university for socialism-communism
LBird wrote:Brian wrote:I suspect that when you admit that "you are not sure how the situation itself will obviate the need for conscious human activity" you are not being entirely honest and simply trolling. Because this admitance is in all honesty simply saying you don't understand the situation. Pull the other one!Indeed by understanding the situation you would be fully aware that the outcome is a conscious human activity where the voluntary associated producers have decided that given all the relevant factors involved they have to determine what is appropriate and acceptable to arrive at a given outcome.The 'we' that do 'decide' is everything and everybody involved in drying the boards. And that involves the facts of the situation which includes how the boards are dried and the urgency on drying the boards. Indeed all they will be doing is applying the basic principles of Project Management (look it up). Which may or may not require a vote to be taken for it depends on the "situation".Anything else you are not sure about?[my bold]Yeah, I'm not sure why you can't read what you write."the situation itself" is not "understanding the situation".'itself' excludes 'understanding', whereas 'understanding' includes 'understanding'.Anything else you are not sure about, including you own thoughts?And I note that your chosen political method is the well-known (and despised) bourgeois "basic principles of Project Management", which conspicuously don't include 'democracy' as a 'basic principle'.Isn't there anyone in your party prepared to defend the 'basic principles of Democratic Socialism', rather than serve as cheerleaders for bourgeois ideology, like PM? (look it up, as ideology)
Again I suspect you are trolling otherwise you would admit that the basic principles of Project Management under Democratic Socialism will be conducted with [and carry] no ideolgical bias, or baggage. If I recollect you are a big fan of deduction and not so for induction. Pity, because under socialism both will prevail and find their expression of harmonisation within Project Management. Deduction: An amount that is deducted. Induction: A method of reasoning that proceeds from particular premises to reach a general conclusion.In a nutshell PM is about deducting was is'nt and reasoning what is.If you are so sure that your hypothesis on the basic principles of Democratic Socialism is the correct one surely you would take the opportunity of responding to the question by Alan Kerr? But then you are not sure about anything are you for you are afraid to admit that Democratic Socialism has its limitations.
Alan Kerr wrote:Project Management also calls for choosing.The new society must still choose.How will they choose? Question #386This is really the same question as #289Crusoe also had to choose.For help see this month’s Socialist Standard.But don’t be slow.On the amount of dithering here, average worker will decide that the new society must descend into famine, dictatorship and Lenin’s New Economic Policy.I take it the article in the Socialist Standard is the 'A World Without Commodities'. In actual fact Project Management is not about choosing but about assessing what is and what is'nt and reasoning on the disconnects and why they occur and what is necessary to iron them out or replace them with connections which have a positive purpose/outcome.And like Tim confirms its not a matter of choosing but the application of deduction and reasoning on what particular materials are required in a given situation.Or like the article mentions, "If we expand the case of Robinson or the family to a social scale, we have in essence the production relations in a new socialist world. This is what Marx sketches in his next example, where he describes an ‘association of free men’ who are ‘carrying on their work with the means of production in common’ so that the ‘labour-power of all the different individuals is consciously applied as the combined labour-power of the community’."
@VinHow do you know others may not wish to say their say?To inform their choice the people need to know and to compare human labour hour cost.Only then, is choice clear. The Socialist Preamble says that capitalist ownership is a hindrance to production.The boards cost the new society a lot of human labour hours.People choose to work in the easiest way.Any new society, if it is to be a step forwards, must save on rather than waste human labour hours.And any society needs a way shift total labour around in a way which keeps producer alive.With Crusoe’s way to organize production, (small or full scale) producer needs to know labour time cost. See the answer to the question here.http://www.econlib.org/library/YPDBooks/Marx/mrxCpA1.html#I.I.133There “we have in essence the production relations in a new socialist world.”See this month’s Socialist Standard.
At the moment wealth is produced only when it is profitable to the capitalists. As a socialist I am in favour of transfering ownership and control of production to the community. We will then have no need to produce for the market. We cannot possibly discuss the specifics, save the fact that production will be based on human needs rather than profit. I think that would be a bloody good start, dont you? If you do then why not join us to bring it about. When we have democratic control of the means of production we will be able to deal with specifics. In the meantime it is pointless while the capitalists hold control
Thank you,It’s difficult.The SPGB is so small.Workers still need a big Party of their own.I was pleased to find this forum.It’s not pointless to deal with the essence.
Quote:Try to post on the WSM forum, at the present time Matt is trying to organize the forum, he is the new moderator.To be clear, I am not moderating this SPGB forum, I am just admin of the website. (in the background) Life is too brutal and short.Marcos is referring to the WSM_Forum on Yahoo.https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/WSM_Forum/
MBellemare wrote:Read # 369 Marcos. We, North Americans, have a different idea of "stateless", state = administration, semantics, dear Comrade Marcos, nothing but semantics! As I ascribe to a federation of municipalities, cooperatives and autonomous-collectives. Clearly, I am for having an administration. I think the Brit-Forum can give me a little leeway. Famous? What does that mean, famous? (Lol)Actually, I think Robbo is more famous, don't you Marcos?I am merely entertaining, a Grunge/Punk Curiousity for Brit-Doggers.Didn't the spanish anarchists of 1936, have some success? As I currently sit across from the Canadian monument to the spanish revolution.North America is an island compared to the whole world which is composed of several more continents, and hundreds of countries. This is not a British forum, in this forum, we have people from different parts of the world, and the WSM is an organization who have members in different parts of the world. We can conclude that your book was written for North Americans but Capital was written for the whole world working class. I forgot to mention the Alaska is part of the North America continents and it is composed of several type of peoples including Asian. In the South of North America, there was another emerging nation known as the Second Mexican Republic and both combines was going to be bigger than the USA
@LBirdIn Marx and in fact automation for the capitalist comes earlier. Automation for the worker comes later.See The Socialist Preamble.In Marx and in fact this order of steps is not what we wish but rather what must be.So in Marx and in fact we get matter-over-mind.It is not, as you claim, mind-over-matter.
Alan Kerr wrote:It’s not pointless to deal with the essence.Fair point. Have you seen this? https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pamphlets/capitalism-socialism-how-we-live-and-how-we-could-live
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.