Bash The Rich Demonstration

[jackalope]

It's strange that in the face of global economic turmoil, the destruction of the environment, global exploitation and the commodification of nearly all aspects of life, the anarchist has to justify his system...We all have to think 'beyond capitalism' cos whether we like it or not, the system is broke.

Well, he is the one proposing we all live like 1930s Spanish anarchists so it's only natural that his audience are somewhat curious about what this entails. Fudge does argue his position with patience and a lack of ad hominem attacks so you have to respect him for that.

[Lone_Twin]

how you are brought up has a far bigger determination of who you are rather than your biology. if you took 4 identical children and had 1 brought up in france, 1 in japan, 1 in africa and 1 in south america, they would all be assimilated into their respective country.

their personalities, their attitudes, they way they talk, they way they think, and they way they do things would be completely different, and would be reflective of their native country/parents who brought them up.

I don't recall mentioning attitudes or dialect.

.

Of course superficial differences in behavior; fears and phobias, language, political leanings, interests etc... can all be influenced (heavily) by environment and in some cases totaly defined by them. However the baseline fundamentals on which these sit are all largely geneticaly based.

.

You need the brain of Shakespeare to write Shakespeare not his language.

.

I would like for everyone to reach their potential, but I also think that we need to realise that not everyone has the same level of potential, even in a different field. The same may be true of larger populations, I see no reason why a group as large as a nation or bigger could not have certain genetic characteristics which for example made them less able to operate in large collective societies.

.

Whatever the reason it's not going to get fixed this century.

.

ST

Edited November 5, 2007 by Super Ted

[Fudge]

What if his car works fine and his kids have gills? How am I going to get my Dhansak? Let's have some praxis, comrade.

Also, will we be allowed to own houses in Fudgistan? Surely, Libertarian Socialism would preclude any economically significant private property rights?

He no doubt at present doesnt do everything himself, no man is an island as they say, we are all interdependant.

Yes personal property is allowed.

[Fudge]

Did you know the founding communities of what was to become the USA were very much based on your model?

The Puritans and Quakers in particular. A hugely dissproportionate number of major 'economic engine' firms and patents were established by the origibal pilgrims and thier direct descentants, but thier 'socialist' enterprises became corrupted in recent times.

I'm reading abook called 'The Puritan Gift' about how these idlystic communities and in particular thier business's many of which went onto be the global 'engine' companies, became corrupted over time.

THE AUTHORS SUGGEST THIS IS DUE TO THE NEEDS OF SHAREHOLDERS, FORMELY LAST IN THE QUEUE, OVERNIGHT BECOMMING FIRST IN THE QUEUE. The great American co's used to place shareholders after Salaries, Taxes, Loans, supplies.

The authors are calling for a return to these Puritan ideals where a company was a means to an end, where the core purpose of these great companies was to provide for the community and to create 'heaven on earth'.

It goes on to argue that the corruption of these great engines and thier communities was in large part due to the rise of the business school, where all the old virtues of thrift, working for the good of others, equality where the bosses earned not much more than workers, and promoting from within those who knew the firm inside out were tossed asside by academics who thought management was ALL ABOUT THE BOTTOM LINE (this corruption began in about 1910).

Seriously I think you would find many answers in this book.

The authors are dismayed that the great companies such as GE once run by people who had worked there since leaving school, were suddenly being run by people with an MBA certificate that apparantly meant they could run any busines as long as they concentrated solely on shareholder value!

I will seek it out.

This reminds me of another book I never did get round to reading.

The Death of Gentlemanly Capitalism: The Decline and Fall of UK Investment Banking

[RichB]

Yes personal property is allowed.

So what happens when he needs something that only a few people can supply, and we know it.

Do we get to take more of his property than he gets of ours? Or is there a fixed exchange rate according to manhours (I know I can program reaaaallly slowly if I have to...)?

Have you tried bartercard?

[ukdaasfan]

Your take on it suprisingly fits with your aim of discrediting it.

The Communists and Anarchists were obviously also fighting each other as well as Franco due to their differing ideologies. The anarcho-syndicalists CNT FAI. Not only were the anarchists a very effective fighting force

despite their scarce resources. But it is not the war but how they were organised, with farming, schools, workplaces, hospitals and factories by workers self management, federalism and mutual aid.

CNT also had an impressive espoinage network.... I think your ascertain of being an effective fighting force was mainly based Durruti Column, which had as much to do with it's well I would say leader for want of a better word Buenaventura Durruti.

But it never numbered more than 9000 men.

And after Durruti died they were absorbed into the general army.

My point is that if this is such a good system, why did it eventaually collapse or not have overwhelming support.

You made it sound like this system RAN spain during the Civil War, when in fact it only controlled a small part, there strong hold being Catalonia, where they still only managed to collectivise 70% odd of the Business and Farms. They were generally more successful in there collectivisation than were then Communist. But the increase in production was not particalarly impressive from an economic standpoint. Also, it's along way from running a provincial war economy, than running a entire country.

Just think you may be over playing there hand a little. They did some good social reforms I'll grant you, but most of these apply to our society and were also prevelant in other areas in spain during the civil war not under there control.

It wasn't supported even it's strongholds and the alienation it caused could even said to have aided the Franco regime. A feeling that better franco than the anarchists. They failed to compramise and work with other grousp (as they also failed to compromise) to fight a common enemy. Were as Franco spent most of the war compromising. Even eventually bringin back a partimentary Democracy with a Figure head monarch as he knew his system would collapse without him at it's head and that this was the only other solution.

I just don't see how you can say it was an 'effetive' government. It was in existence for no more than a year... they began collectivasation around the middle/end of 1936 and the Republican government (of which they had been members ) began to dismantle the collectivisation in the autumn of 1937. 12 months tops ? They couldn't even control heart land, catalonia, where the voilence between May3-8th 1937 was pretty much the nail in the coffin. Any body can change a few rule and make some schools, but to be an effective govenment you need to take the majority with you. and of course survive.

As for discrediting it. I have no need to discredit it, it collasped after a year.

Edited November 5, 2007 by ukdaasfan

[Lone_Twin]

I'm sorry I can't get my head around the phrase "Libertarian Socialism".

.

Do you have some kind of manifesto so I can make sense of what the combined

offspring of these seemingly opposing systems would look like.

.

Or is this a case of TB's "Third Way" or Double Think as I prefer to call it.

.

ST

[ukdaasfan]

What if his car works fine and his kids have gills? How am I going to get my Dhansak? Let's have some praxis, comrade.

Also, will we be allowed to own houses in Fudgistan? Surely, Libertarian Socialism would preclude any economically significant private property rights?

Also, there is no discrete unit for a curry. Also, if he is the only currey house in town he can still charge what he likes. Capitalists rules still apply.

Problem is how do you barter for on a governmental and international level. at that level barter breaks down. THe energy uses to move all this stuff about leads to huge intermiadiray steps. Of course you could jsut ring up the supplier and transfer the cash in seconds whihc costs nowt.

All money is essentially barter anyway. it is only worth what a person will give you for it. just allows for discrete units to be used and the transfer of 'value' in a quick and efficient way.

[mfp123]

I don't recall mentioning attitudes or dialect.

.

Of course superficial differences in behavior; fears and phobias, language, political leanings, interests etc... can all be influenced (heavily) by environment and in some cases totaly defined by them. However the baseline fundamentals on which these sit are all largely geneticaly based.

.

You need the brain of Shakespeare to write Shakespeare not his language.

.

I would like for everyone to reach their potential, but I also think that we need to realise that not everyone has the same level of potential, even in a different field. The same may be true of larger populations, I see no reason why a group as large as a nation or bigger could not have certain genetic characteristics which for example made them less able to operate in large collective societies.

.

Whatever the reason it's not going to get fixed this century.

.

ST

however, ever so subtle differences can change the way you are, things like your attitude and even your language, determine how you are, behave and think.

i dont know if you can speak another language or but even when you do something as simple as this, your personallity and demeanor can change in an instant to reflect the culture of the language, just due to the way you express yourself.

also would shakespeare have written what he did if there were no theatres around at the time.

what if shakespeare was brought up in japan and wrote the plays in japanese, would they have still worked or would you lose something in the translation?

the point is something so subtle as language can determine how you are and how you think and this is just 1 variable. intelligence is something that you learn and is really an individual reacting to the things around them rather than something that is predispositioned.

[ukdaasfan]

Well, he is the one proposing we all live like 1930s Spanish anarchists so it's only natural that his audience are somewhat curious about what this entails. Fudge does argue his position with patience and a lack of ad hominem attacks so you have to respect him for that.

True.

Still falls down as it always does on the free rider/no participent problem.

There are always people who will want more than there share, or people who will wnat a 'free ride'.

Sooner or later a sod like me will come along and find a way too play the system to get more, a non participent.

I think the problem, is that fudge thinks that under the service we are all like him.

unfortunately we aren't, alot of use quite like the capitalist system.

It's been jolly popular generally over the 2,000 years. Most attempts to move too far from the model have all pretty muched collpased or failed.

What is they say, if you not a socialist when young you are heartless and if you are not a conservative when old you are brainless. :-)

[Lone_Twin]

however, ever so subtle differences can change the way you are, things like your attitude and even your language, determine how you are, behave and think.

i dont know if you can speak another language or but even when you do something as simple as this, your personallity and demeanor can change in an instant to reflect the culture of the language, just due to the way you express yourself.

also would shakespeare have written what he did if there were no theatres around at the time.

what if shakespeare was brought up in japan and wrote the plays in japanese, would they have still worked or would you lose something in the translation?

the point is something so subtle as language can determine how you are and how you think and this is just 1 variable. intelligence is something that you learn and is really an individual reacting to the things around them rather than something that is predispositioned.

Certain genetics give you the potential to achieve more or less. I conceed whether you reach that potential or not is heavily influenced by environment but we all have a "genetic ceiling".

If I trained everyday, all day, ate the right things etc... I would never beat Linford Christy at the 100m, his genetic potential for running at speed over short distances Massively excedes mine. I don't understand how we can readily accept this for the body but not the "mind", IQ, ambition, aggresiveness, empathy, co-operative tendancies are all responses to the environment ingrained in our genetics by natural selection.

To suggest that these factors are the same in everyone or in even distribution across populations across the world seems illogical to me.

.

True Shakespeare may not have written his plays without a theatrical environment in which to learn his craft and show his talent but likewise you can fill a country with theatres but without the people with the talent to fill them you have nothing. What else could he have done with his skill for language and drama, for example if he was alive today.

Politics, Advertising, Speech Writing, Stand up Comedian?

.

But without his Genetic Potentiality his options would be limited.

.

I do not believe intelligence is learned, I went to uni with many people who thought this way, parroted the answers, filled in the course work, made good grades. Thick as two short planks and now in the open market of jobs are finding their true potential.

.

ST

[Fudge]

CNT also had an impressive espoinage network.... I think your ascertain of being an effective fighting force was mainly based Durruti Column, which had as much to do with it's well I would say leader for want of a better word Buenaventura Durruti.

But it never numbered more than 9000 men.

And after Durruti died they were absorbed into the general army.

My point is that if this is such a good system, why did it eventaually collapse or not have overwhelming support.

You made it sound like this system RAN spain during the Civil War, when in fact it only controlled a small part, there strong hold being Catalonia, where they still only managed to collectivise 70% odd of the Business and Farms. They were generally more successful in there collectivisation than were then Communist. But the increase in production was not particalarly impressive from an economic standpoint. Also, it's along way from running a provincial war economy, than running a entire country.

Just think you may be over playing there hand a little. They did some good social reforms I'll grant you, but most of these apply to our society and were also prevelant in other areas in spain during the civil war not under there control.

It wasn't supported even it's strongholds and the alienation it caused could even said to have aided the Franco regime. A feeling that better franco than the anarchists. They failed to compramise and work with other grousp (as they also failed to compromise) to fight a common enemy. Were as Franco spent most of the war compromising. Even eventually bringin back a partimentary Democracy with a Figure head monarch as he knew his system would collapse without him at it's head and that this was the only other solution.

I just don't see how you can say it was an 'effetive' government. It was in existence for no more than a year... they began collectivasation around the middle/end of 1936 and the Republican government (of which they had been members ) began to dismantle the collectivisation in the autumn of 1937. 12 months tops ? They couldn't even control heart land, catalonia, where the voilence between May3-8th 1937 was pretty much the nail in the coffin. Any body can change a few rule and make some schools, but to be an effective govenment you need to take the majority with you. and of course survive.

As for discrediting it. I have no need to discredit it, it collasped after a year.

It was a social revolution. It was not a goverment but an alternative to Capitalism and it worked.

It was a very significant event much overlooked which serves as an example of what is possible.

[Fudge]

I'm sorry I can't get my head around the phrase "Libertarian Socialism".

.

Do you have some kind of manifesto so I can make sense of what the combined

offspring of these seemingly opposing systems would look like.

.

Or is this a case of TB's "Third Way" or Double Think as I prefer to call it.

.

ST

Libertarian socialism

[gordonbrown]

A country cannot steal it's way to wealth.

Envy is the worst reaction. The so called "working classes" should get a proper education, a proper job, and get off the backs of the other classes you benefit parasites.

It's not envy. It's just being bright enough to realize when you are being screwed and who by.

[mfp123]

Certain genetics give you the potential to achieve more or less. I conceed whether you reach that potential or not is heavily influenced by environment but we all have a "genetic ceiling".

If I trained everyday, all day, ate the right things etc... I would never beat Linford Christy at the 100m, his genetic potential for running at speed over short distances Massively excedes mine. I don't understand how we can readily accept this for the body but not the "mind", IQ, ambition, aggresiveness, empathy, co-operative tendancies are all responses to the environment ingrained in our genetics by natural selection.

To suggest that these factors are the same in everyone or in even distribution across populations across the world seems illogical to me.

.

True Shakespeare may not have written his plays without a theatrical environment in which to learn his craft and show his talent but likewise you can fill a country with theatres but without the people with the talent to fill them you have nothing. What else could he have done with his skill for language and drama, for example if he was alive today.

Politics, Advertising, Speech Writing, Stand up Comedian?

.

But without his Genetic Potentiality his options would be limited.

.

I do not believe intelligence is learned, I went to uni with many people who thought this way, parroted the answers, filled in the course work, made good grades. Thick as two short planks and now in the open market of jobs are finding their true potential.

.

ST

twins often have different iq levels and genetically you cant really argue against twins. if one twin left school at the age of 16 whilst the other was educated privately all the way through to university at the age of 21 which one would you think would be more intelligent?

you cant run before you can walk and you cant walk before you can crawl.

intelligence is normally based on what you know and understand, very rarely will anyone come up with a spark of genius. in fact genius moments tend to occur serendipitously.

scientists are arguably intelligent people, however they are intelligent because they apply the knowledge that has come before them.

einstein spent decades coming up with his theories and it was based more on hard work and applying his exsiting knowledge rather than a eureka moment.

Edited November 5, 2007 by mfp123

[Lone_Twin]

twins often have different iq levels and genetically you cant really argue against twins. if one twin left school at the age of 16 whilst the other was educated privately all the way through to university at the age of 21 which one would you think would be more intelligent?

you cant run before you can walk and you cant walk before you can crawl.

intelligence is normally based on what you know and understand, very rarely will anyone come up with a spark of genius. in fact genius moments tend to occur serendipitously.

scientists are arguably intelligent people, however they are intelligent because they apply the knowledge that has come before them.

einstein spent decades coming up with his theories and it was based more on hard work and applying his exsiting knowledge rather than a eureka moment.

You need to understand the difference between education, knowledge and intelligence.

.

I am not going to continue fencing with an armless man.

.

ST out

[ianb78]

Is this still droning on?!

Look go and live in Soviet Russia if you don't like it here! I'm sure you'd love queuing for bread all day and living in a grey concrete block somewhere.

People are different, bottom line!

Capitalism may not be perfect but it's the best system and has stood the test of time. You should appreciate that living in your comfortable house with your plasma TV, Ipod etc.

Socialism has never worked. There is no incentive for people to strive and economies stagnate pushing down living standards. Is that what you really want?!

You should read this book to dispell the myths surrounding capitalism:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Politically-Incorr...8977&sr=8-1

Get out of the 1980s...socialism is dead thank God!

[roadtoruin]

You need to understand the difference between education, knowledge and intelligence.

.

I am not going to continue fencing with an armless man.

.

ST out

An armless man that's won the argument and got you on the run it seems.

mfp123 asked for an example to support your thesis and all you came back with was bar-room philosophy.

You should go and read around the subject where it's been studied objectively. Nature will definitely show it's hand, but nurture is still the determining factor. The Oxbridge intakes are the ultimate paradigm for supremacy of nurture.

[Ethel]

An armless man that's won the argument and got you on the run it seems.

mfp123 asked for an example to support your thesis and all you came back with was bar-room philosophy.

You should go and read around the subject where it's been studied objectively. Nature will definitely show it's hand, but nurture is still the determining factor. The Oxbridge intakes are the ultimate paradigm for supremacy of nurture.

I disagree.

When it comes to Oxbridge, yes they are looking for students that can offer what a good private school provides.... a good education.

But those who obtain it are not necessarily inately more intelligent than the bloke who unblocks your drains, they have just been taught how to think and perform in the required way, whilst he hasn't.

[dogbox]

Libertarian socialism

Had a read. The danger is such a system would lead to ZOMBIFICATION devoid of private property, where public 'municipalities and unions' are charged with making the big decisions and the means of production.

Example; The noted libertarian socialist Noam Chomsky, I noticed wears specs.

Lets imagine the specs are'nt up to the job and the 'comittee' cannot justify expending resources on improving specs. Mt Chomsky's quality of life deteriorates due to failing site, yet innthe next town rumour spreads of a craftsman that makes a new type of eyeware that would give Naom his site and his life back.

Now what are we to do here? The specs maker might want a reward for his efforts, afterall he worked on his invention 20 years and it cost him his marriage and demand would set up a 'queue'. Demand would grow for Naoms output, but he cannot benefit nor claim ownership of anything. He must remain 'equal' in reward to his neighbour who lies in bed watching tv all day.

Our glasses maker might think - why bother? All sacrifice, no reward.

The direct opposite of 'freedom' would result. Look back at nearly all the great inventions and innovations. They came from blokes slaving away in a shed for years, not from committees or unions. Such bodies would become the new state and crush any descent. Furthermore no one would take responsibility, so when your child is suddenly needing life saving treatment you might find yourself dealing with a cumbersome committee which simply is not equipped to make quick decisions, so your child dies. Then you would want to blame someone, but would find no mechanism as 'everyone' is to blame as everyone was represented by the committee.

Edited November 6, 2007 by dogbox

[roadtoruin]

I disagree.

When it comes to Oxbridge, yes they are looking for students that can offer what a good private school provides.... a good education.

But those who obtain it are not necessarily inately more intelligent than the bloke who unblocks your drains, they have just been taught how to think and perform in the required way, whilst he hasn't.

Actually that was exactly the point I was making Ethel. I probably made it too convoluted. I think it's nurture because its fawning parents and the privileged secondary education that has given them the opportunity, not their innate intelligence. Equally, the eleven-plus was regularly 'taught' at primary schools (assume it still is) and in areas where you find 'top' selective state schools you will always find tutors to perform 'cramming' to ensure the best chance of success. Basically its a scandal, another scam for the well-off.

[Ethel]

Actually that was exactly the point I was making Ethel. I probably made it too convoluted. I think it's nurture because its fawning parents and the privileged secondary education that has given them the opportunity, not their innate intelligence. Equally, the eleven-plus was regularly 'taught' at primary schools (assume it still is) and in areas where you find 'top' selective state schools you will always find tutors to perform 'cramming' to ensure the best chance of success. Basically its a scandal, another scam for the well-off.

OK we agree then.

My state comprehensive school did IQ testing in the 1st year (that's Year 7 for all you youngsters). We weren't supposed to know the answers but as my best mate's mum was a teacher there, we found out.

The kid who came 3rd highest in the year was a lad from an abusive broken home who had a Mohecan haircut, tattoos and piercings (remember, we were 12 at the time!!). I don't know whatever happened to that kid, but I doubt he went to Oxbridge!

Neither did the kid who came top of the year with an IQ of 142. She now works in a small rural business paying £20k a year for 50 hours a week including weekends and evenings. She is currently typing on an internet forum about house prices.

[RichB]

Basically its a scandal, another scam for the well-off.

So you think oxbridge should accept students incapable of reading, writing, basic math, logic or constructing a viable sentance?

[Fudge]

Had a read. The danger is such a system would lead to ZOMBIFICATION devoid of private property, where public 'municipalities and unions' are charged with making the big decisions and the means of production.

Example; The noted libertarian socialist Noam Chomsky, I noticed wears specs.

Lets imagine the specs are'nt up to the job and the 'comittee' cannot justify expending resources on improving specs. Mt Chomsky's quality of life deteriorates due to failing site, yet innthe next town rumour spreads of a craftsman that makes a new type of eyeware that would give Naom his site and his life back.

Now what are we to do here? The specs maker might want a reward for his efforts, afterall he worked on his invention 20 years and it cost him his marriage and demand would set up a 'queue'. Demand would grow for Naoms output, but he cannot benefit nor claim ownership of anything. He must remain 'equal' in reward to his neighbour who lies in bed watching tv all day.

Our glasses maker might think - why bother? All sacrifice, no reward.

The direct opposite of 'freedom' would result. Look back at nearly all the great inventions and innovations. They came from blokes slaving away in a shed for years, not from committees or unions. Such bodies would become the new state and crush any descent. Furthermore no one would take responsibility, so when your child is suddenly needing life saving treatment you might find yourself dealing with a cumbersome committee which simply is not equipped to make quick decisions, so your child dies. Then you would want to blame someone, but would find no mechanism as 'everyone' is to blame as everyone was represented by the committee.

I would argue that Zombification is what we have now due to the alienation in the labour process that is a result of capitalism. Marx's theory of alienation

In a libertarian socialist society a person may decide that some type of work he would like to indulge in

would be say glass lenses and would be able to focus on improving lenses and producing them according to needs. With capitalism a great many fantastic ideas and inventions which would improve people lives signinficantly

get bought up by competitors and buried because thet are a threat. Take oil companies buying up alternative

energy inventions just to shelve them because they dont want them on the market.

There is a great explaination on this in book The ragged trousered philanthrospists I will try and find it.

[kingsgate]

The nurse sowing your face up, the barman serving you your drink, the brewery worker making your beer. All of these are 'working class'. It's an insult to equate WC with violence just as it's an insult to equate black men with mugging...

The last point you mention is pretty often true, whether insulting or not....