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

71–80 of 124 posts

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

#71

Post by VictorPath »

refurb wrote: post #62
VictorPath wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the labor force participation rate for men in the US from 1948 to now from the US bureau of labor statistics https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS11300001 Was 86% or above before 1950, never above 70% over the past 5 years. The trend has been downward the whole time.

You realize the labor participation rate accounts for the retired? A stat that might change with the aging workforce?

According to the department of labor's bureau of labor statistics, it is the opposite of what you said.

From 2000 to 2020, the labor participation for men from 20 to 44 has fallen. Labor participation for men 45 to 54 varies from flat to down. The labor participation rate for men 55 and older has risen. Working age men are less employed than they were, retirement age men are more employed than they were.

https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/civilian-labor-force-particip...

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

#72

Post by assbuttbuttass »

l-_l-_l-_lo_ol wrote: post #55

"Stalin : There is no, nor should there be, irreconcilable contrast between the individual and the collective, between the interests of the individual person and the interests of the collective. There should be no such contrast, because collectivism, socialism, does not deny, but combines individual interests with the interests of the collective." Horrifying.

This is standard Marxism. For example, from the Communist Manifesto:

> From the moment when labour can no longer be converted into capital, money, or rent, into a social power capable of being monopolised, i.e., from the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed into bourgeois property, into capital, from that moment, you say, individuality vanishes.

> You must, therefore, confess that by “individual” you mean no other person than the bourgeois, than the middle-class owner of property. This person must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.

> Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.

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

#73

Post by thodin »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #53
Jensson wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Absolutely, but Cuba’s democracy is very localized and bottom up in order to prevent a wealthy ruling class from controlling dominant narratives, i.e. oligarchy like in the US. And they don’t hold ridiculous election performances every 4 years to wrangle consent from the public. Democracy is very sensitive and the liberal democracies in Western capitalist countries are brutally anti-democratic. Most Americans realize…

It's very easy to love your leader when the only alternative is the labor camp.

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

#74

Post by GoodJokes »

assbuttbuttass wrote: post #72
l-_l-_l-_lo_ol wrote: post #55

"Stalin : There is no, nor should there be, irreconcilable contrast between the individual and the collective, between the interests of the individual person and the interests of the collective. There should be no such contrast, because collectivism, socialism, does not deny, but combines individual interests with the interests of the collective." Horrifying.

This is standard Marxism. For example, from the Communist Manifesto: > From the moment when labour can no longer be converted into capital, money, or rent, into a social power capable of being monopolised, i.e., from the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed into bourgeois property, into capital, from that moment, you say, individuality vanishes. > You must, therefore, confess that by “individu…

[dead]

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

#75

Post by aybarshazar »

marcodiego wrote: post #6

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

I don't think countries that are ruled with communism ended up as a dictatorship because of the ruling class. Maybe it was inevitable.

What makes me say that? Because the concept of complex systems (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_system) gave me a new approach to think about different economic and social organizations.

Economy (and society) is a complex system and it is impossible to model perfectly (at least for now). So any approach that attempts to have everything under control will (eventually) fail. Or you may need to use force to mold the reality to your hypothetical system.

Capitalism may not be the best system there is, but it certainly aligns with a complex systems point of view.

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

#76

Post by yucky »

Shin-- wrote: post #26
mantas wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and it was illegal to not work in USSR.... The modern socialists who expect to have plenty of time for themselves in their dream regime would be so disappointed.

A collectivistic society expects everyone to do their part to reach a good standard of living for everyone. 8 hours/day, as was common, to rebuild destroyed countries and economy is less than countless people in capitalist nations have to work today. The biggest difference is, is that this amount of labour is necessary for their own survival, that there is no collective sense, without authorities trying to reward the…

>a revolution is a lot of hard work, but the work is done for the collective good, not to make a few even richer.

Does this ever happen in reality though?

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

#77

Post by nopenopenopeno »

thodin wrote: post #73
nopenopenopeno wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely, but Cuba’s democracy is very localized and bottom up in order to prevent a wealthy ruling class from controlling dominant narratives, i.e. oligarchy like in the US. And they don’t hold ridiculous election performances every 4 years to wrangle consent from the public. Democracy is very sensitive and the liberal democracies in Western capitalist countries are brutally anti-democratic. Most Americans realize…

It's very easy to love your leader when the only alternative is the labor camp.

??? Do you even have the first idea what you’re talking about? The other “option” was Batista. And Cuba is more democratic than the US, but it doesn’t allow oligarchs to astroturf consent like in liberal democracies.

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

#78

Post by GoodJokes »

fsloth wrote: post #15
marcodiego wrote: post #6

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

The only implementations are basically run by dominant elites, who emerge as the ruling class, resulting in exclusive political economic systems. Daron Acemoglu's "Why nations fail" offers a great framework to discuss this, I think. Appropriation of capital basically means that the government decides to eradicate right to private ownership, thus reducing the will for economic creative destruction. The lack of this cr…

No post body was provided.

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

#79

Post by VictorPath »

l-_l-_l-_lo_ol wrote: post #55

"Stalin : There is no, nor should there be, irreconcilable contrast between the individual and the collective, between the interests of the individual person and the interests of the collective. There should be no such contrast, because collectivism, socialism, does not deny, but combines individual interests with the interests of the collective." Horrifying.

There is no, nor should there be, irreconcilable contrast between the individual and the family, between the interests of the individual person and the interests of the family. There should be no such contrast, because family, does not deny, but combines individual interests with the interests of the family."

Horrifying.

Not really. In a well-functioning family individual and family interests are in tune (of course there are not well functioning families where, say, step-parents and stepchildren get into physical altercations.

Contrast to Georgia in 1860, where an individual slave had interests contrast to that of the plantation.

Odd a worker in tune with his fellow workers is horrifying. What then is a wage slave grinding it out in some Amazon warehouse to enrich Bezos and his investors?

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

#80

Post by nopenopenopeno »

seneca wrote: post #67
nopenopenopeno wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you explain the astronomical numbers of homeless people in the US, for example, compared with so many other wealthy nations? Are you seriously suggesting that so many millions of Americans just happen to love being homeless? Is this a joke?

> Are you seriously suggesting that so many millions of Americans just happen to love being homeless? Is this a joke? The person you're replying to didn't say any such things. Your replies on this post have followed a pattern of lazy swipes, and degrade the quality of discussion here.

My replies have followed a pattern of logical deduction and clarifying inquiry. Can you answer my questions?
Post reply on HN