ErikTheRed
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think you are getting hung up on wording/semantics. I know you have to ‘struggle’/work before socialism can happen – that is obvious – but that is not the sense in which I am using the word ‘struggle’.
I don’t think everybody must have an opinion on everything. I’m not sure why you think I do or why you had to make that point at all or what you’re trying to tell me.
Sorry, I assumed prior knowledge on the part of readers and just thought you would be tuned in to what I am saying.
I am a fan of Kautsky, as it happens, and (perhaps under his subconscious influence), I have developed some Kautskian semantics of my own.
@MovimientoSocialista:
In this case forced means that they have to accept the decision of the majority. It is just semantic. That is what Kautsky said: Democracy will be the power of the majority and the respect of the minority
Does this mean that, in socialism, if a majority make a decision against your interests, you must still obey?
@Thomas More
Socialism, unlike capitalism, will leave people alone. Only if people commit violence and harm others will restraint be necessary. I stress, NOT punishment, simply restraint.
Socialism will revel in diversity and celebrate difference.
I can take it then that socialism will allow ethnic and racial differences to continue, if people choose this? Do you also accept that new ethnic groups will arise, as some will choose to mix, and where this follows social patterns, groups will emerge and develop distinctive cultures and identities that they may want to preserve?
@MovimientoSocialista:
“I have seen large sections of empty lands, therefore overpopulation is just another illusion”
Were these lands you refer to truly ’empty’ or were they being utilised, just not for accommodating all these extra people you want?
Won’t human populations in socialism require space for agriculture, infrastructure and so on?
@Thomas More:
“The nationalist, holding his mother’s hand, and she holding her mother’s hand, and so on in a line of only 500 miles, the one at the end of the line would be a nonhuman.”
If we accept that all human beings have a common origin, how does this preclude nationalism?
