Re: Re: damn commie hypocrite leech! (was Re: Re: Re: why worry?)

[Missouri FreeNet Administration]

On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Sunder wrote:
:Missouri FreeNet Administration wrote:
:> 
:> (J.A. Terranson donned his extra heavy asbestos underwear, then appended
:> his thoughts thusly...)
:> 
:> (1) I would argue that there has yet to *be* an actual *Communist* state
:> by which we could gauge the Communist existense.
:
:Erm, what, Russia is not good enough an example for you?

No, it is definitely not.  the USSR (not "Russia" BTW) was no more a
genuine communist state than the US is a genuine capitalist state. 

:If you agree (and I
:don't speak for you) that there is no perfect version of capitalism, but the
:USA is the closest,

Sorry, I do not agree with this statement.  It is mere propaganda. See
above.

:then would not pre-fall Russia be a perfect example of
:Communism/

No.  Prefall USSR was an almost perfect example of Fascism.
 
:> (2) I have a *big* problem with Americans not caring what conditions are
:> like in the rest of the world: it allows us to continue to both tolerate
:> and perpetrate such crimes as we have been committing in Iraq over the
:> last 10 years or so.  And then of course there are the shenanigans in
:> Honduras, Columbia, and let's not forget our dear "friends" the
:> Sandinistas...  American apathy for all things not *directly* (we don't,
:> as a people, seem to understand the concept of indirect events) affecting
:> America^h^h^h^h^h^H The "United" States is our greatest (IMNSHO) fault.
:
:Ok, well, just go and ask the Average Russian(tm) if he gives a rat's ass about
:some Average American(tm) bitching about how his beer and his pack of
:cigarettes are too expensive these days, or about any other topic.  I'd guess
:(remember, I don't speak for the Average Russian either) that he'd say "Fuck
:you" in so many words.


This argument does not address my point.  I have just as much of a problem
with the average Russian not giving a rats ass about my beer and
cigarettes.  I'm fatally flawed in that I believe that a thinking creature
(and I am convinced that at least *some* humans fall into this category)
must use this ability to serve *everybody*.  That may well be best done
through serving ones self, but this is not the question under
consideration here.

:> (3) As for the statement (which I choose to take as a "stand alone", e.g.,
:> not requiring the support of McG's other positions) that most Americans
:> are oblivious to the conditions they themselves live in: I believe it is
:> true only in the sense that we as a people very much *choose* to *fein*
:> this lack of insight.  
:
:Bottom line - it's human nature to not be interested in what doesn't affect you
:directly.

I disagree:  that is animal nature.  If man wants to claim the higher
ground, s/he will have to play the part.

:I honestly couldn't give a rats ass at what went on in Bosnia.  If you asked me
:what I thought of millions of people getting killed, I'd tell you it's a sad
:thing, and I do feel it's sad.  But it doesn't affect me.  It's not "real" to
:me the same way that living my own life is.  Knowledge as an outsider and first
:hander are different.

There is a distinct difference between the concepts of "first hand
knowledge" and "not giving a rats ass".  That you see them as one in the
same is the root of the problem here.

:> Interesting side story here(to prove my assertion that these high-wage,
:> low  physical effort jobs are in fact *forced* on much of the population
:> as a sort of opiate):  Recently (last 6 weeks or so) I have been making
:> the job rounds (boredom has *definitely * set in).  Just for the *fun* of
:> it, I applied to about a dozen "shitbox" jobs: Jack-in-the-box, MickyD,
:> etc.  One of them went so far as to "permit"  me to take their applicant
:> "test" (How many burritos do you need for an order with 2 burritos? <g>).
:> Not a single one of them called me back.  I was *serious* about taking
:> these jobs: the money was unimportant, but not a single one of these
:> places could be convinced of that.  On the other hand, when I finally gave
:> up and went back to applying for jobs more "in my field <g>", I managed 4
:> immediate offers (of which only 2 look interesting).
:
:Interesting experiment... :)

It wasn't done as an experiment though: I was legit in wanting that job.
I just wanted a change of pace, with something *totally* new and different
to learn (how to make 4 million french fries in 1 afternoon *is* a new
skill for me ;-).  I wouldn't have applied if I wasn't serious.

:> No matter how you slice it, we are forced into the peter principle in this
:> country.  Is this a bad thing? I'm not really sure, although I *am* a
:> little bit bitter that I won't get to wear a red baseball cap with pins
:> all over it and ask if you would like that Super-Sized ;-)
:
:Doubtful.  As long as you can make money, what's the difference? 

I don't really give a rats ass about the money: don't you *get it*?  A LOT
of us don't care about he friggin money!!!  I work because I find it
fulfilling.  The day that stops, I look for new work: money has not *once*
been the issue.  I have taken STEEP pay cuts for jobs I found attractive,
as well as big increases.  The money just doesn't matter to me.  What
difference does it make if you have "enough"?  Enough is defined here as
enough to pay the utilities, medical expenses, and car parts for my aging
1986 piece of American S**T (I *love* learning how to fix it's broken
parts!).  Food is noce, etc.  Just how much does that *take*?  Certainly
nowhere *near* what I am used to being paid.  Would I work for free?  Yes.
I've done it.  A lot.  Give away the money I haven't used?  Yep.  That
too.

I think we are seeing here the actual capitalist (actual == native belief)
vs the actual communist/socialist/democratrist (I often wonder where I
should try to pigeonhole myself.  Closest to Libertarianism..).  

:If you really
:truly give a shit, nothing (but money) stops you from opening your own
:franchise, and rather than managing, you could take orders. :)

That's really a specious [non] "argument" you know.

:> Oh yeah, I realize I'm in for a *torching* on this...
:
:Nah, I don't think you're pointing out anything that's untrue here.
: 
:> Sometimes the money doesn't matter though.  Then what?  What about art for
:> art's sake (assuming no complaining about $$)?
:
:Yup, but in the end, you need money to live.

Yes, but *how much*? $20,000? $100,000? 200,000?  Where does the line of
necessity intersect the line of waste?

:Without it, you can't build the
:art.  So, if you're a starving artist, you're still starving.  If you die early
:on before your art work is appreciated, you can't make more of it. 

This assumes that I can't make a living at the income levels of the art I
choose to make.  McD employees worldwide are "making it".  They may not be
having an easy time of it, but it's happening.  And besides, it's a
*choice* that *I* chose to make.  Art for art's sake, when self-financed
(whether through MickyD or Macdonald Douglass) should be nobody's business
except the artists.

:You might
:be very famous, and billions might like your work, but what the fuck, once
:you're dead, you're dead. :)

Personally, I don't care if *anyone* "likes my work" when the art is done
as a form of self gratification.  You are confusing the art with a
profession here: it's that capitalist streak again :-)

:> since we all know that companies will work your ass 39 hours a week to
:> :> keep you from getting benefits, while maximizing their efficiency.
:>
:> That's the JOB of a corporate entity: it *exists* to make money.  The
:> union is no better.  Sam is the same...  You need to rely *on yourself*.
:> If a company isn't offering what you need, *DON'T SETTLE*, look elsewhere.
:> If everyone did that, the "shitbox job[s]" would come up to the minimum
:> standard which the worker required.
:
:Yup - but 39 hours my ass.  I work closer to 60 hours a week. :)

To use your own paradigm, if this is unacceptable, then your market value
will have to change, or you will have to die a starving artiste' :-)

:But I don't
:mind it much, it's not lacking in things to do.  It's better than being at home
:with nothing to do but watching anti-drug TV propaganda.

I would mind it if it was all the time.  I am very happily married, and
like spending time with my shorter half.  As for the tv, we don't even own
one - havent seen one in person since 1990.

:> :> Capitalism, with its emphasis on the profit margin can't always afford
:> :> to give the working poor a decent wage, therefore we need social programs
:> :> to help the honest, working poor.
:> 
:> Read any Ayn Rand lately?  A little bit of enlighted self-interest would
:> go a LONG way towards equalizzing the playing fields...  WITHOUT theft
:> (whether by Sam or Mega-Conglomerate Inc.).
:
:Yup, totally agree with you there.
: 
:> :And communism can give the working poor a decent wage?
:> 
:> I've never been convinced of this, even assuming a "utopian" Communist
:> system such as existed at Oneida.  Remember, under "the real thing", a
:> wage should be equal to it's value, not to the existence of the person
:> "working" for it.  Restated, even Communism acknowledges that a wage
:> should not accrete to a worker who does not provide value.
:
:If a wage is equal to it's value, then we're back to capitalism. 

No, not necessarily.  You are taking this statement to indicate
value==money.  I see a broader value set.

: A thing is
:worth what people are willing to pay for it.

Agreed, but with the stipulation that money is only one of many forms of
payment.

: So how else would you evaluate a
:wage?  At that point, how can it be communism, but rather a worker-owned
:company where each worker owns shares of the company?  What's this if not an
:even more pure grade of capitalism?

The two systems do have a *lot* in common you know.  Nothing is quite so
black and white.  Ideally, communism *is* a worker owned "company".  It's
the "pure" capitalist who would barf at this thought.

:> I'm not sure that's the actual reason for the low wage, although it may be
:> the reason for the lack of action(s) to otherwise raise the standard of
:> living "enjoyed" by these peoples.
:
:It might not even be the "standard of living" making for the disparity, but
:rather the value of the dollar versus the value of the local currency.  Sure,
:these guys make $20 a month, but that $20 a month would buy them as much as our
:$2000 would (sans some things that they don't have in their economy, but I'm
:talking about staple necessities such as food, clothing, housing.)
: 
:> :Juvenal is saying "who watches the elites?".  In any communist system "those
:> :who know best" must be watched.   Of course as soon as you watch them you
:> :start your vacation in beautiful sunny Siberia.  And that is a one-way
:> :ticket.
:> 
:> We have that here as well you know.  We just aren't quite as open about
:> it.
:
:Except here, it's a car accident, a .45 in the head, or missile attacking your
:plane.  (Vinny Foster, Ronny Brown, etc.) :)
:

Yes.  In an odd way the Soviet system was a little more "honest" about it.
We don't do *nearly* as much of it, but we are so careful to deny what
little we do behind double-speak...

:---------------------------- Kaos Keraunos Kybernetos -------------------- 
: + ^ +  Sunder              "Only someone completely distrustful of   /|\ 
:  \|/   [EMAIL PROTECTED]    all government would be opposed to what /\|/\ 
:<--*--> -------------------- we are doing with surveillance cameras" \/|\/ 
:  /|\   You're on the air.   -- NYC Police Commish H. Safir.          \|/ 
: + v +  Say 'Hi' to Echelon  "Privacy is an 'antisocial act'" - The FedZ.
:---------------------------- http://www.sunder.net -----------------------
:I love the smell of Malathion in the morning, it smells like brain cancer.

      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 Gawd I love that sig!!!

Yours, 
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they
should give serious consideration towards setting a better example:
Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of
unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in
the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and 
elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire
populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate...
This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States
as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers,
associates, or others.  Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of
those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the
first place...
--------------------------------------------------------------------