Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == The Dalai Lama is living proof that the character of a movement or regime (or, in his case, a regime in exile) is not defined by the philosophy of its leader. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == If the Dalai Lama said that he was NOT a Marxist, then he could be the reincarnation of Karl himself! Oooo! spooky! Now we're in for a chewing out... ML Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == The Dalai Lama never said that. He's just a Buddhist isn't he? Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == - Original Message - From: To: Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist <> "When public finance was new and credit was based solely on balance-sheet assets, the German-born Goldman was the first to recognize that "industrial" companies, such as retailers and manufacturers, could be valued on the capitalization of their earning power instead." Business Week. Review of: "When Money Was in Fashion: Henry Goldman, Goldman Sachs, and the Founding of Wall Street" By June Breton Fisher http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_21/b4179082983000.htm Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == In a message dated 5/21/2010 7:20:48 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, l...@panix.com writes: _http://trueslant.com/abytharakan/2010/05/21/as-dalai-lama-embraces-red-will -marxism-help-where-hollywood-failed/_ (http://trueslant.com/abytharakan/2010/05/21/as-dalai-lama-embraces-red-will-marxism-help-where-hollywood-failed/ ) DL: I think the major flaw of the Marxist regimes is that they have placed too much emphasis on the need to destroy the ruling class, on class struggle, and this causes them to encourage hatred and to neglect compassion. Although their initial aim might have been to serve the cause of the majority, when they try to implement it all their energy is deflected into destructive activities. Once the revolution is over and the ruling class is destroyed, there is nor much left to offer the people; at this point the entire country is impoverished and unfortunately it is almost as if the initial aim were to become poor. I think that this is due to the lack of human solidarity and compassion. The principal disadvantage of such a regime is the insistence placed on hatred to the detriment of compassion. Comment The Church has survived more modes of production than Evel Keneivel survived crash landing. Ultimately Evel gave up the flesh in 2007. The value relations has hit the wall of history. This wall of history is the rise of a qualitatively new technology regime calling forth social revolution. A section of every ruling class completes the leap to a new mode of production, while serving as an agent - social force, destroying the old production relations or what is called social relations of production. Nor are the political minion of the bourgeoisie ignorant. The more astute are fully aware that wealth is being generated on a massive planet wide basis outside the production of surplus value, unless one thinks the new non-banking financial architecture is some mirage or bad joke fit for a Hollywood screen play. Ain’t no value being created by this new financial architecture brother. This is not to say the productive capital exists in isolation with zero connection in the sea of modern finance. Show me the surplus value. Aaaahh the money form of wealth is wealth even when there is no surplus value embodied in it. It is wealth, or rather the social power attached to wealth. Remember when an asset was brick and mortar and a labor force rather than a mathematical equation about a "package of potential" that has a potential to return "X" amount of cash flow based on a generalized presumption of default and the value of default if it is insured by some third and fourth mutherfucker? What happened to those good ole day when one went on strike for better wages and conditions and ran the risk of getting the crap kicked out of you by company goons and the police? You remember those day of civil rights and euphoric feelings of emancipation and completing Lincoln’s vision based on proletarian insurgency. You wake up one morning and some clever fellows have combined four chemical in a bottle and enacted a scenario that causes the chemical to pass the threshold - leap, to organic life. The capitalist crying like a mutchfuckers screaming "how do I suppose to make a profit under these conditions?" The proletarians wondering if this new organic life form taste like chicken if you stir fry it and put hot sauce and those eleven secret species, or rather spices on it. "Do that come with biscuits and gravy and a side of mash potatoes." We are undergoing the evolutionary/revolutionary leap to a new mode of production based on the revolutionary leap in the means of production and the battle is over the new forms of wealth in society. The bourgeoisie seeks a form of wealth that preserves its rule as ruling class. These mutherfuckers - a section of the ruling class made manifest in intelligence and the state, will jettison bourgeois property and the wage labor form (commodity form) like a bad habit to preserve themselves as rulers. And I’m stuck trying to figure out some old trade union crap at ground zero. I freaking hate this. Right when you start to get a handle on things, that means it has changed. Yea, yea, yea . . . The first visible phase of a process is its second stage. Or you could not see it. Yea . . . I know. When the Dalai Lama goes over to Marxism or what is the same, a materialist conception of revolution in the mode of production, and speaks of the need for new social relations of production - in his laid back Buddhist manner, it is time to reboot revolutionary Marxism. Something has changed profoundly. WL. _
Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Erik Toren wrote: > > Though...it raises a valid questionwere his previous > incarnationsMarxist? > > ;) > For genuine Tibetan Marxism, see this: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2007/02/28/the-angry-monk/ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Though...it raises a valid questionwere his previous incarnationsMarxist? ;) Erik On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Louis Proyect wrote: > http://trueslant.com/abytharakan/2010/05/21/as-dalai-lama-embraces-red-will-marxism-help-where-hollywood-failed/ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Louis Proyect wrote: > http://trueslant.com/abytharakan/2010/05/21/as-dalai-lama-embraces-red-will-marxism-help-where-hollywood-failed/ HH. DL." Of all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles, while capitalism is concerned only with gain and profitability. Marxism is concerned with the distribution of wealth on an equal basis and the equitable utilization of the means of production. It is also concerned with the fate of the working classes--that is, the majority--as well as with the fate of those who are underprivileged and in need, and Marxism cares about the victims of minority-imposed exploitation. For those reasons the system appeals to me, and it seems fair. I just recently read an article in a paper where His Holiness the Pope also pointed out some positive aspects of Marxism. As for the failure of the Marxist regimes, first of all I do not consider the former USSR, or China, or even Vietnam, to have been true Marxist regimes, for they were far more concerned with their narrow national interests than with the Workers' International; this is why there were conflicts, for example, between China and the USSR, or between China and Vietnam. If those three regimes had truly been based upon Marxist principles, those conflicts would never have occurred. I think the major flaw of the Marxist regimes is that they have placed too much emphasis on the need to destroy the ruling class, on class struggle, and this causes them to encourage hatred and to neglect compassion. Although their initial aim might have been to serve the cause of the majority, when they try to implement it all their energy is deflected into destructive activities. Once the revolution is over and the ruling class is destroyed, there is nor much left to offer the people; at this point the entire country is impoverished and unfortunately it is almost as if the initial aim were to become poor. I think that this is due to the lack of human solidarity and compassion. The principal disadvantage of such a regime is the insistence placed on hatred to the detriment of compassion. The failure of the regime in the former Soviet Union was, for me, not the failure of Marxism but the failure of totalitarianism. For this reason I still think of myself as half-Marxist, half-Buddhist." Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == You believe that you'll believe anything George Anthony Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Dalai Lama: I am a Marxist
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://trueslant.com/abytharakan/2010/05/21/as-dalai-lama-embraces-red-will-marxism-help-where-hollywood-failed/ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
