Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

marxists.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 124 posts

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#41

Post by nopenopenopeno »

onenukecourse wrote: post #34
nopenopenopeno wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really think that’s a useful description of Gorbeschev, where are you getting your history from? Is Cuba a “tyrannical dictatorship”? How did Pinochet fall?

Gorby appears to be the sole exception. Might have something to do with having close family killed in the famines, and tortured in the Gulags. Every European other regime fell under pressure from the streets. Cuba is a tyranny. They've soften up to get European investment and tourists, but they're brutal in their indoctrination, imprisonment of dissidents, etc. They're also an important (and beloved) backstop prevent…

You do realize Pinochet was a capitalist dictator and the people he murdered were socialists, no?

And you have to be absolutely brainwashed to believe Cuba is a “tyrannical dictatorship.”

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#42

Post by mensetmanusman »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #2

>No capitalist would ever agree to the complete abolition of unemployment, to the abolition of the reserve army of unemployed, the purpose of which is to bring pressure on the labour market, to ensure a supply of cheap labour. Marx and Adam Smith both highlighted this fundamental characteristic of capitalism, but it still rarely fails to blow Americans’ minds when I explain it to them.

Unemployment may bring to mind an image of someone banging on a door crying for a job to support their children, but these are the minority of cases.

Ideally, we would have a bigger safety net so that this would never happen.

There will sprays be a certain percentage of people where work is not a good option due to physical or mental disabilities. It is society’s role to help these people, and the wealthier society becomes, the easier this should be.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#43

Post by nopenopenopeno »

Jensson wrote: post #40
nopenopenopeno wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really think that’s a useful description of Gorbeschev, where are you getting your history from? Is Cuba a “tyrannical dictatorship”? How did Pinochet fall?

> Is Cuba a “tyrannical dictatorship”? Yes, looks like it works just like any other communist state. Communism needs to be maintained through tyranny, people wouldn't vote for it if they could which is why communist states must constantly supress dissent and never allow people to vote for other parties. When people can vote they quickly vote out communism in favor of more liberal parties, communism is very short live…

Do you know anything about Cuba besides what the children of ex-Cuban plantation owners say?

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#44

Post by mensetmanusman »

yazantapuz wrote: post #39
ARandumGuy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, Stalin is not the be all end all of socialist thought. In fact a lot (most?) people who call themselves socialist these days don't even like Stalin. Even if he was well liked, one can support someone's broader ideas without supporting every single individual position. It's not a contradiction to say "I like [person]'s ideas, except [specific idea], which is dumb." Secondly, tying unemployment benefits to c…

> Work should not be a requirement to live a comfortable life. _Someone else_ will we working to give you a comfortable life.

This will be true for all of us at some point in our lives (usually at the extremities). We should embrace the notion of paying it forward.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#45

Post by VictorPath »

marcodiego wrote: post #6

It is a shame Marxsim/communism/socialism is so much associated with tyranny and dictatorships.

Up until 10,000 years ago, the entire world was communist. The remaining hunter gatherer bands in the Amazon and elsewhere are communist.

Marx said "I am not a Marxist" and "I do not write recipes for cookshops of the future", so there is no Marxist society other than the one he envisioned in the far future (certainly not a nearer term socialist future) which had the banner "From each according to ability, to each according to need".

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#46

Post by mensetmanusman »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #25
refurb wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism_(social_offense) In the Soviet Union, which declared itself a workers' state, every adult able-bodied person was expected to work until official retirement. Thus unemployment was officially and theoretically eliminated. Those who refused to work, study or serve in another way risked being criminally charged with social parasitism

In other words, rent-seekers in the USSR were called what they are (parasites) and they received the same treatment that the US gives to it’s unemployed and homeless, except the US maintains an economic system that guarantees an unemployed and homeless population. If you think you’re making the USSR appear less reasonable than the US, maybe think again.

As strange as it may seem, the us also has a system that respects the rights of people who want to be homeless nomads.

If people want to be homeless due to mental health issues, there is no easy way out if the government is allowed to overrule someone who says ‘No! Don’t help me!’

Very difficult ethical issues all around.

In our area, we have shelter beds open and people sleeping in the cold outside of the building…

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#47

Post by Jensson »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #43
Jensson wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is Cuba a “tyrannical dictatorship”? Yes, looks like it works just like any other communist state. Communism needs to be maintained through tyranny, people wouldn't vote for it if they could which is why communist states must constantly supress dissent and never allow people to vote for other parties. When people can vote they quickly vote out communism in favor of more liberal parties, communism is very short live…

Do you know anything about Cuba besides what the children of ex-Cuban plantation owners say?

Could Cubans vote away communism if they wanted? If not then it isn't free. People could vote away capitalism in USA and become communist if they wanted. Every democracy could.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#48

Post by onenukecourse »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #41
onenukecourse wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gorby appears to be the sole exception. Might have something to do with having close family killed in the famines, and tortured in the Gulags. Every European other regime fell under pressure from the streets. Cuba is a tyranny. They've soften up to get European investment and tourists, but they're brutal in their indoctrination, imprisonment of dissidents, etc. They're also an important (and beloved) backstop prevent…

You do realize Pinochet was a capitalist dictator and the people he murdered were socialists, no? And you have to be absolutely brainwashed to believe Cuba is a “tyrannical dictatorship.”

"Pinochet was a capitalist dictator"

If you read my comment carefully I clearly state:

- Pinochet slaughtered (tens) thousands of innocents

- Cuba is a backstop to American imperialism in the region which I clearly eluded as a good thing for those L. Americans outside of Cuba (at least until Americans drop their Monroe BS).

My parents are from Argentina and lost many friends, students and professors (luckily no family) to capitalist dictators. The battles of L. America literally run through my blood. I think I am very well aware who the Chilean equivalent of Videla is. Pinochet, however, must be recognized for having relinquished power unlike his Argentine capitalist counter parts and Cuban socialist counterparts.

Anyway, I think I have demonstrated a little more nuance in this very complicated topic than trite single line slogans. I am not a "capitalist", whatever that means. I reject the destructive "socialism" vs "capitalism" false dichotomy.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#49

Post by nopenopenopeno »

yazantapuz wrote: post #37
nopenopenopeno wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In other words, rent-seekers in the USSR were called what they are (parasites) and they received the same treatment that the US gives to it’s unemployed and homeless, except the US maintains an economic system that guarantees an unemployed and homeless population. If you think you’re making the USSR appear less reasonable than the US, maybe think again.

> rent-seekers in the USSR were called what they are (parasites) So, if I plan to live from rents that i earn from my past work i am a parasite?

Rent is attained by controlling access to capital that you own, according to the state.

Wages are attained by selling your labor to someone else.

Which is it?

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#50

Post by lordnacho »

This bit makes me think of HN people and UBI:

> Wells : I remember the situation with regard to the technical intelligentsia several decades ago. At that time the technical intelligentsia was numerically small, but there was much to do and every engineer, technician and intellectual found his opportunity. That is why the technical intelligentsia was the least revolutionary class. Now, however, there is a superabundance of technical intellectuals, and their mentality has changed very sharply. The skilled man, who would formerly never listen to revolutionary talk, is now greatly interested in it. Recently I was dining with the Royal Society, our great English scientific society. The President's speech was a speech for social planning and scientific control. Thirty years ago, they would not have listened to what I say to them now. Today, the man at the head of the Royal Society holds revolutionary views and insists on the scientific reorganisation of human society. Mentality changes. Your class-war propaganda has not kept pace with these facts.

Seems to me that technical dev type people are indeed becoming abundant, and many are entertaining the notion of UBI, myself included. Not long ago, I would have thought it silly to even consider.

Post reply on HN