So yes, I agree with you, the "proof", as they say, is indeed in the "Pudding".
And our Pudding has survived through thick and thin. Your's, not so much. On Oct 9, 6:36 pm, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyway Gaar, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. If Marx was > wrong this meltdown would have been avoided. He proved it could not > and for the third time he is proved right, much to the chargrin of the > philistine capitalist apologists who don't even understan their own > sytem, otherwise this wouldn't be happening now, would it? Asia just > had it's biggest losses ever, Australia the biggest since 1987 and it > ain't over yet.............................................the fat > lady sings. > > "Women and wokers of the world gather under the spotless banner of > the 4th international, it is your road to victory" > > On Oct 10, 12:28 pm, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Who is this Bozo. Form your own opinions and read Marx for yourself > > like I did, instead of relying on the biased opinions of deliberate > > falisfiers. Marx made no such bland stupid claims. > > > This is just a flat out lie. Where are the equations for suplus value > > and the tendency of the rates of profit to fall? This idiot doesn't > > even know what they are. > > > Marx argued that Capitalism was inherently unstable because: > > Workers were abused and disenfranchised. As capitalism developed, > > Marx > > predicted, workers would become increasingly alienated and seek to > > overthrow the capitalist class. > > > Marx examined society and argued that the wealth of capitalists was > > based on paying labour less than their true labour value (underpaid > > labour). This difference between the true labour value and the wages > > paid led to the accumulation of money capital. > > > Capitalists could make bad decisions about what to produce > > Growth was not guaranteed but could become volatile leading to > > periods > > of economic slump. Marxists certainly point to the Great Depression > > of > > a vindication of how capitalism can fail. > > > Failings of Marxism > > > The proletariat mostly became better off. Economic growth did enable > > Capitalists to make more profit, but, ultimately, workers benefited > > from real wage rises. In the nineteenth and twentieth century, labour > > was often exploited with poor conditions and low wages. But, workers > > have become better off. After all, it is in the interests of > > Capitalists to have a workforce who can afford to buy their goods. > > > The elusive 'dictatorship of the Proletariat' in practice tended to > > be > > more about 'dictatorship' and less about the proletariat. In some > > ways > > Marx was a democrat. He was criticising a system which did not extend > > the vote to large sways of the working class; he wanted these > > disenfranchised workers to be enfranchised. But, in practise, Marxism > > is indelibly linked to the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union. > > > On Oct 10, 11:36 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >http://www.economicshelp.org/2008/07/karl-marx-revolutionary-economis... > > > > Karl Marx - The Revolutionary Economist > > > > There are few economists who have become both so reviled, and admired > > > as Marx. Indeed some would even question whether Marx deserves to be > > > called an economist; others would prefer terms like 'bungling and > > > failed revolutionary'. However, there are certainly few economists who > > > read so widely and wrote so much as Marx. Whether you love or loathe > > > Marx, we cannot deny his writings had profound influence on the > > > twentieth century. > > > > What Did Marx Believe? > > > > Marx believed society was an evolving struggle. He believed Capitalism > > > was an evolving structure. However, unlike Adam Smith, Marx did not > > > believe this evolution was always smooth, nor did he believe it > > > evolved for the best. In fact Marx, predicted the collapse of > > > Capitalism. > > > > Marx placed great value on economic forces for explaining social > > > structures. He argued that institutions such as church, education and > > > the state evolved to support the capitalist class. But, Marx, was > > > revolutionary in placing so much emphasis on the power of economic > > > forces to influence society. > > > > Marxist Critique of Capitalism. > > > > Marx examined society and argued that the wealth of capitalists was > > > based on paying labour less than their true labour value (underpaid > > > labour). This difference between the true labour value and the wages > > > paid led to the accumulation of money capital. > > > > Marx argued that Capitalism was inherently unstable because: > > > > Workers were abused and disenfranchised. As capitalism developed, Marx > > > predicted, workers would become increasingly alienated and seek to > > > overthrow the capitalist class. > > > > Capitalists could make bad decisions about what to produce > > > Growth was not guaranteed but could become volatile leading to periods > > > of economic slump. Marxists certainly point to the Great Depression of > > > a vindication of how capitalism can fail. > > > > Failings of Marxism > > > > The proletariat mostly became better off. Economic growth did enable > > > Capitalists to make more profit, but, ultimately, workers benefited > > > from real wage rises. In the nineteenth and twentieth century, labour > > > was often exploited with poor conditions and low wages. But, workers > > > have become better off. After all, it is in the interests of > > > Capitalists to have a workforce who can afford to buy their goods. > > > > The elusive 'dictatorship of the Proletariat' in practice tended to be > > > more about 'dictatorship' and less about the proletariat. In some ways > > > Marx was a democrat. He was criticising a system which did not extend > > > the vote to large sways of the working class; he wanted these > > > disenfranchised workers to be enfranchised. But, in practise, Marxism > > > is indelibly linked to the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union. > > > > Why Mention Marxism - Surely it is all History? > > > > I can imagine some readers (especially in America) thinking why even > > > mention Marx? Surely, he was hopelessly flawed and the inspiration > > > behind the despotic Stalinist regime? It is worth mentioning what John > > > Maynard Keynes says on Marxism (1931) > > > > "How can I accept the [Communist] doctrine, which sets up as its > > > bible, above and beyond criticism, an obsolete textbook which I know > > > not only to be scientifically erroneous but without interest or > > > application to the modern world? How can I adopt a creed which, > > > preferring the mud to the fish, exalts the boorish proletariat above > > > the bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia, who with all their faults, are > > > the quality of life and surely carry the seeds of all human > > > achievement? Even if we need a religion, how can we find it in the > > > turbid rubbish of the red bookshop? It is hard for an educated, > > > decent, intelligent son of Western Europe to find his ideals here, > > > unless he has first suffered some strange and horrid process of > > > conversion which has changed all his values."[13] > > > > Why Marx is Important > > > > Marx was a revolutionary, he enabled a powerful critique of > > > capitalism. This was perhaps essential for more informed criticism to > > > emerge over time. We do not have to agree with a revolutionary to > > > acknowledge that they bring new issues into a different perspective. I > > > do not agree with Plato, but, at the time his work was important for > > > the development for Western thought. > > > > Marx never lived to see the Russian Revolution. I imagine he would > > > have generally supported Lenin and Trotsky, but would have been > > > disgusted with Stalin who was only a Communist out of convenience to > > > achieve his goal of absolute power. > > > > Whether we like it or not, the ideals of the Communist Manifesto did > > > inspire many. At a time of vast inequality and widespread poverty, it > > > is hardly surprising that many were excited by a vision of a society > > > based on equality and fairness rather than the abject poverty and > > > inequality prevalent in nineteenth century society. > > > > On Oct 9, 5:06 pm, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The thing is CW, I have said this meltdown was inevitable based on > > > > what I have learnt. Leaving aside socialism for the moment, Marxism is > > > > a scientific study of socio-economic relations. In other words it is > > > > an objective study of the workings of capitalism. Marx didn't set out > > > > with a vendetta against capitalism, on the contrary, all Marxists > > > > acknowledge that the industrialization of production was a very > > > > positive thing, however these forces of production became so efficient > > > > that the amount they produce exceeds the requirements of individual > > > > nation states forcing them to expand beyond their boarders bringing > > > > them into conflict with other nation states that also needed to expand > > > > their capital. So when the ablility to expand production ran into a > > > > dead end, profit was accured by parasitic speculation divorced from > > > > production. > > > > That is a major factor and contradiction within capitalism that is the > > > > cause unsustainable debt that has been accrued. It has nothing to do > > > > with the individual policies of governments. Did they all of a sudden > > > > indulge in the same parasitic practices by coincidence? Unlikely. Is > > > > it just a few greedy bankers and investors that are responsible for > > > > bringing the world markets to their knees? Don't think so > > > > > I was a labour voter 5 years ago, I didn't know Karl Marx from Grouch > > > > Marx. Upon objective investigation Marxism has proved itself correct, > > > > I can't alter that, its the way it is, whether I like it or not. And > > > > frankly I don't care. I just want the facts, not the unrelated BS and > > > > stupid inane mud slinging between candidates because they have nothing > > > > decent to say and they don't even understand why the system they > > > > support is in such a state of disfunction. One things for sure, > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
