Quote of the Day: Typical Liberals

A quote from Hal Draper (a socialist) on Liberalism

Quote Hal Draper

But the typical liberal, who cannot break with the ’system, has to settle for something else: protesting the best of intentions (sincerely) while being dragged along by the system he supports, or busying him­self with filing off the sharp corners or rough edges on the towing chain which drags him; and meanwhile congratulating himself on doing an indispensable smoothing job which the callous powers-that-be are too heartless to attend to.

I sincerely start to believe that Hal Draper was one of the best socialist thinkers of the last century. Read the whole thing, quite enlightening.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Quote of the day: Rise to the Top

A Quote from Julian Edney on greed.

Quoth Julian Edney

But the chances of a person born poor climbing all five classes into the top (“making it”)[…]are too small to constitute a real freedom.[…], one sociologist puts the upper class at roughly 3 percent of the population. About 7.7% of that has moved in from below – a minute, and historically persistent, figure.[…]But the trick of flaunting possibility to mask actual probability is not a casual device.

(h/t to the Barefoot Bum)

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Quote of the day: Knowledge before Expertise

Quoth Isaac Puente

We are asked from the outset to come up with a flawless system, to guarantee that things will work this way and not that, without mishap or error. If learning to live had to be done this way, then our apprenticeship would never end. Nor would the child ever learn to walk, nor the youngster to ride a bicycle.

This is a classic gripe I have with people inquiring or criticizing communism with me. They ask me to provide a perfect answer for every question they have, and when they can think of holes in my replies, they ask more. If I refuse to keep playing this game, they point this out as proof of an obviously poor-thought system.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Quote of the Day: Herd Instinct of the Markets

Quoth the International Marxist Tendency

Just as the wildebeest can scent a lion, the markets can scent the imminence of a recession. The prospect of a recession is the real cause of the panic. Once this happens, nothing can stop it. All the speeches, all the interest rate cuts, and all the handouts to the banks, will have no effect on the financial markets. They will see that the governments and central banks are afraid, and they will draw the necessary conclusions.

The rest of the article is interesting to see the Marxist perspective albeit a bit too propagandistic for my tastes. Still this quote was quite insightful.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

OMG! Another epic internet moment.

In response to a news article about a family that named young son Adolf Hitler (!)

This happened to me: my parents, old-time lefties, named me “Karl Marx” — they apparently thought it would not be a problem, as society seemed to be moving into a groovy, understanding time (late 60s). They, uh, thought small-mindedness was a transient cultural trait, as opposed to an enduring human characteristic, particularly among junior-high kids.

Boy, were they ever wrong! It took a few years, particularly because we — duh! — moved to rural Idaho in the interim, but around 5th grade the other kids figured it out, and I was cooked. History class was always brutal, and there are probably hundreds of school yearbooks with a hand-drawn bushy beard obscuring my face.

It got easier in high school, as it was kind of an edgy name, but at age 17 I rushed over to the county court and changed my name. I made my father pay the court fees, for obvious reasons.

The younger Karl Marx
Image via Wikipedia

In response to a news article about a family that named their young son Adolf Hitler (!) a redditor leaves the following comment of his own tragic experience:

This happened to me: my parents, old-time lefties, named me “Karl Marx” — they apparently thought it would not be a problem, as society seemed to be moving into a groovy, understanding time (late 60s). They, uh, thought small-mindedness was a transient cultural trait, as opposed to an enduring human characteristic, particularly among junior-high kids.

Boy, were they ever wrong! It took a few years, particularly because we — duh! — moved to rural Idaho in the interim, but around 5th grade the other kids figured it out, and I was cooked. History class was always brutal, and there are probably hundreds of school yearbooks with a hand-drawn bushy beard obscuring my face.

It got easier in high school, as it was kind of an edgy name, but at age 17 I rushed over to the county court and changed my name. I made my father pay the court fees, for obvious reasons.

On every tax form, university application, and — most humiliating — job or credit application, I am required to put “Karl Marx” as a previous name, for background checks. Thanks Mom & Dad!

Other than that, it’s just a family joke these days, and even my high-school classmates have tired of it at reunions.

–Joseph Stalin

You sir, win 1 – nay – a 1000 internets!

I LoLed.

Yet another reason why I hang out at Reddit.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

What's the best compliment you can give to a freethinker?

I was given a surprising compliment, by an “Anarcho”-Capitalist no less. This is the kind of stuff I like to hear now and then.

Quoth Eric Evans

The great thing about db0 is that he made me really strive to refute what he was saying. Always reading material by people who agree with you is easy. Reading disagreeing opinion is difficult. db0 has made me think about the solidity of my position for a day now. Every road I’ve gone down has its problems.[…]

Personally, as a blogger, this is one of the best comments anyone can make about what I write. I do not write to simply reinforce your own preconception and solidify what you already believe. I criticize in order to create discussion. I write what I think in order to make others think as well.

I’ve been brutally assaulted in discussions by the vocal minority of both Marxists and Misians because I challenged their core beliefs and opinions, but as long as some people in the silent majority get to thinking (even if they dismiss what I say eventually), then I consider my work as a job well done.

So thank you Eric for the kind words. Opinions like these is what keeps me going and makes it all worthwhile at the end of the day. Even if in the end you can refute my arguments, you will know that your ideas more solid than before. I hope that in the 3000 people that visited the Division by Zer0 from mises.org these days, there are a few more “Erics”.

Quote of the day: All Economists must die

A quote from Satoshi Kanazawa on how Economics ignore the evolved psychology of humans.

Quoth Satoshi Kanazawa

Microeconomic theory, or any other theory of human behavior which assumes that human behavior is rational and based on carefully calculated cost-benefit analysis, cannot explain van Beest and Williams’ remarkable findings that humans are happy to lose money and sad to make money.

And if you’re wondering about the title of this QotD, read the full article 😉

This goes very nicely with my recent post on human nature and how, not only is it not suitable for Capitalism, but on the contrary, the truest expression of it can only be found in Communism.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Why feminism is simply fighting the symptoms, not the cause

No socialism without feminism
Image by Labour Youth via Flickr

Quoth the Barefoot Bum

I say that feminism and anti-racism are absolutely necessary and central to communism and socialism. But I also say that communism and socialism are also absolutely necessary and central to feminism and anti-racism.

I couldn’t agree more.

However I can expect the reaction of feminists or people targetted by racism when they hear this. Moral indignation that someone might propose that the problem is not what it appears to be. That somehow everything will be alright if we manage to convince enough people to treat women and non-whites equally.

But this is simply treating the symptoms of the disease, not the cause.

Women started becoming a second class citizen as soon as farming came around. Before that time, there was no sexism against women for their house duties were equaly important as the man’s. The man simply owned the tools and skills of the food production while the woman owned the tools and skills of the household.

The problems started occuring when private property came about through the increased production of farming and subsequently slavery. The man thus started owning more and more property (the tools of his trade) while the woman kept owning the same. And because mostly the tools of the man could be used in trade, he started owning the wealth. Thus the role of the woman was marginalized as she was not creating any wealth, and after enough generations, she ended up being treated as inferior.

This is all simplified but it is a historic fact that male sexism and the mistreating of women appeared as soon as private property became the norm. The only reason why women have now started to reclaim some of their equality is because Capitalism has forced them to enter the workforce, and like all exploited people, this exploitation is what is raising the awareness of their inequality.

This inequality is not because of some innate feeling of men to be sexist. It is because men have been the only ones until now who have been creating wealth. And the ones with the wealth wield the power. Thus the women, who were not wielding any power, ended up being considered inferior organically, just because it looked that way. Now that this is changing with more women becoming workers, feminism is becoming more powerful.

But Feminism is not going to remove the strain of sexism from the world, for the Capitalist system demands it. Women will always need to give birth and many of them still give up their careers once they get married. This means that there are more men working, creating wealth and thus wielding the power. And as long as the manhood wields on average more power than womanhood, sexism will exist.

Communism however takes this distinction. There is no wealth, and thus there is no power. The duties of the man, of creating products and bringing food, once again become equal to the woman childbearing. Women staying home to raise their children (or men doing likewise) are not weakened because this kind of work, is still work, even if it does not create wealth.

That is not to say that Feminism cannot achieve victories as it is. This is a given since Capitalism will eventually equalize men and women in its exploitation. But as the Barefoot Bum says, you will only have replaced being exploited for being a woman, to being exploited for being poor. Same shit, different name.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]