tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post2182221021042795513..comments2024-03-18T17:01:07.165-07:00Comments on The Provocateur: Karl Marx and the Democrats: Why I hate Class Warfaremike volpehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-34542459366414492782010-09-09T04:21:21.239-07:002010-09-09T04:21:21.239-07:00Interesting article you got here. It would be grea...Interesting article you got here. It would be great to read a bit more <br />concerning that matter. Thanx for sharing that data.<br />Joan<br /><a href="http://budgetkievescorts.com/" rel="nofollow">Kiev escort service</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-64041364635949376882010-02-08T03:24:36.221-08:002010-02-08T03:24:36.221-08:00Nice story as for me. I'd like to read somethi...Nice story as for me. I'd like to read something more about that theme. Thanx for giving this information.<br />Joan Stepsen<br /><a href="http://cyprusescortagencies.com/" rel="nofollow">Cyprus escort</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-7885373546992639672008-08-09T09:01:00.000-07:002008-08-09T09:01:00.000-07:00One thing that has not been said here is the preva...One thing that has not been said here is the prevalence of entertainment available to society today. Even the so called poor today has access to more entertainment (that could be translated into happiness - circus for the Romans) than during any other time in human history. We should be a lot happier!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-39171535880488089572008-05-15T17:26:00.000-07:002008-05-15T17:26:00.000-07:00The youth of this country are being indoctrinated ...The youth of this country are being indoctrinated by Marxism in liberal academia. To counteract this here needs to be readily accessible counter education that explains the merits of capitalism to the social whole as opposed to appealling to the youthful sense of victimhood and other psychological handles that Marxist Democrats grab.<BR/>The youth of this country is smart enough to see which economic system is better as long as they have the opportunity to compare the two in an educational and non-political forum.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-40542772400620017812008-03-07T16:53:00.000-08:002008-03-07T16:53:00.000-08:00I am a Conservative and I won't hide that. That sa...I am a Conservative and I won't hide that. That said, I took the conservative establishment to task for their hatred of McCain because he dared not be conservative enough.<BR/><BR/>That said, I haven't found that Reps practice much class warfare and so I focused on the Dems in this piece. <BR/><BR/>As to Tom Paine, I realized after I published the comment he meant the real person. I don't know what specifically Tom Paine did as far as class warfare, but that doesn't change what Marx did and that is why I hate class warfare.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-27254445116562534812008-03-07T16:35:00.000-08:002008-03-07T16:35:00.000-08:00Mike:I can't tell whether or not you were joking w...Mike:<BR/><BR/>I can't tell whether or not you were joking when you alluded to tompaine.com. Just in case, I believe Joshua was referring to Thomas Paine, writer of Common Sense and other pamphlets that were extremely influential in inciting the American Revolution. I don't know anything about the site, though.<BR/><BR/>By the way, this is an interesting post, although I feel that that comes mostly from Joshua's contributions and your rebuttals in the comments section. Although you do have some interesting insights and ideas, your ultra-right viewpoints tend to interfere with the legitimacy of your arguments. If, instead of merely attacking Democratic principles and practices, you recognized (at least perceived) faults in Republican ones as well and sought to defend them, I would find your articles, especially this one, far more interesting and engaging. I cannot say, though, that what you write does not challenge and inspire me to think about such issues.<BR/><BR/>Shane<BR/><BR/>P.S. I realize this site is The Provocateur, and God knows you're doing a good job writing to provoke. In that regard, your articles are extremely impressive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-78911492565426475492008-03-04T17:54:00.000-08:002008-03-04T17:54:00.000-08:00Excellent post Mike. I view capitalism as "equal o...Excellent post Mike. I view capitalism as "equal opportunity" in that everybody has the same equal opportunity to succeed. The appeal of Socialism or Communism is the promise of "equal outcome" which can only be guaranteed by government control. Equal outcome is a very appealing proposition that has been tried over and over through history only to repeatedly fail and prove once again that theory and reality are not always the same.<BR/><BR/>Joshua,<BR/>IMO, the reason socialism works in countries like Scandinavia and Denmark is the population. When there is only a few million people, the implementation and management of socialist agendas is much more feasible than larger numbers like the U.S.A. ABC 20/20 ran a special about a month ago about the "Happiest places on earth" and Denmark ranked the highest. But, the show did point out the smaller population and the fact that nearly all the population shared the same demographical traits such as race, religion, etc. That leads to much less "tension" and baiting from politicians. How many times have we heard from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson stirring up emotions based on difference? Mike also points out the same things happens with Democrats stirring up emotions on economic class status. It's easy and it works. <BR/><BR/>Hey Mike, along with "power in numbers" and "envy", don't forget ignorance which means:<BR/>n. The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed. <BR/><BR/>We can thank our government schools for this and creating the perfect trifecta!<BR/><BR/>Long live Capitalism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-46126402945115377632008-03-03T16:48:00.000-08:002008-03-03T16:48:00.000-08:00Apparently, you just said that I should get my fac...Apparently, you just said that I should get my facts straight and then pointed me to Tompaine.com, the left wing outfit, run by Bill Moyers son. <BR/><BR/>I didn't call Marx a monster, but rather a demagogue. I said he was an effective politician and salesman because he perfected the art of class warfare, and he did. <BR/><BR/>I never said the Democrats are trying to take us to Commnunism though many of their policies are socialistic. I said that the reason that I hate class warfare is that it was used effectively by Marx to sell a flawed economic system. I see the Dems doing the same thing and I gave the examples. You never challenged any of the examples specifically, but rather went on a long rant that defended Marx and talked vaguely about communism.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-91775596546161218372008-03-03T16:34:00.000-08:002008-03-03T16:34:00.000-08:00Look, I'm just trying to put some facts right. Als...Look, I'm just trying to put some facts right. Also, since you are attacking Democrats, I thought I'd take the time to write a word or two about why the D vs. R thing in my opinion is stupid. But main thing is, and this is just an example, you wrote: "Ultimately, what Marx did was practice old school text book class warfare. He pitted the proletariat against bourgeoise. He demonized the bourgeoise and the system that made them successful and he started a revolution. For the most part, his marketing and political strategy worked. His flawed system gained a great deal of popularity for a while. It is for this reason that class warfare is among my biggest political pet peeves. I have seen with Marx the corrossive effect that it has."<BR/><BR/>Practically none of that is true. You're making Marx seam like a monster. He wasn't. You seam to think that he not only invented communism, but plotted and schemed to enact it. Neither is true. No one person put the proletariat up against the capital holders. Dude, look up 1848 - the biggest revolution of all time, cross almost all European countries. Is that because of Marx too? Go back and you'll find a revolution almost every decade to Napoleon and all the way back to the American revolution and beyond. Class war founded America! Have you ever read Tom Paine? How much more revolutionary and class-warlike can you get?<BR/><BR/>I understand your point. Democrats focus on class and sometimes they have a populist rhetoric that favors one class over another. But when you in order to make that point walk like a bear into a glass house smashing everything in your vicinity, the glass house representing facts here and the bear-shape representing your disregard for history, then maybe you should reconsider your arguments. <BR/><BR/>Also, if the Democrats are pitting one class against another in a campaign duel, that doesn't mean that communism is overtaking America. I guess it boils down to me not understanding the resentment between political parties in the US. Weather R or D wins in november, you're going to be fine. Mccain is a nice guy, Obama is a nice guy, Clinton.. Wel, ok maybe Clinton is not so nice but you'd still be just fine. <BR/><BR/>Ps.<BR/>Check out www.politicalcompass.org and make sure you take the test, you might find yourself surprised.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-43310555890437981772008-03-03T15:00:00.000-08:002008-03-03T15:00:00.000-08:00First, there is no reason to apologize for the len...First, there is no reason to apologize for the length of your post.<BR/><BR/>I think we are now getting into wording and terminology that is sort of minutae. <BR/><BR/>Call it what you want, however Marx played the proletariat against the bourgeoise effectively. I can it class warfare. If you think he was doing something else that is fine, however there is no doubt that he sold communism as a system where everyone shared whereas in capitalism the bourgeoise were getting all the gravy at the expense of the proletariat. <BR/><BR/>Those are exactly the sort of tactics that I see the Dems using. I notice no one is challenging me on what the Dems are doing. <BR/><BR/>Marx is a side issue to this discussion because I employed him to explain why I hate class warfare. What Marx did or didn't do is not nearly as important as what is happening now.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-27061387767344895972008-03-03T14:52:00.000-08:002008-03-03T14:52:00.000-08:00I'm not sure that I agree. However, I'm not sure t...I'm not sure that I agree. However, I'm not sure that I disagree either. To say that Marx "used" anything implies that he had a agenda. He did have an agenda, but I get the feeling that you are referring to communism - which is not something Marx invented or even orchestrated. Marx, an economist, was also a political figure, thats true. But more like a union-man or a voice of the "people" than a Lenin type leader and organizer of revolutions and creator of complex and (un)practical political systems. <BR/><BR/>"He blamed the capitalistic system for the travails of the proletariat"<BR/>Thats true, but also Locke did that! Actually, Lock and Marx agreed on a number of things, and a deep distrust in the capitalists (the people with money) was something they shared. The difference is that Locke believed that capitalism was the best of several evils, and was at least democratic in comparison to the monarchic past. While Marx, a strict egalitarian, believed that the workers could do better if organized as a political counter-pole. So one believed in a economical solution, hoping for the best in people, the other believed in a political solution, thinking that otherwise nothing would ever change. They both wanted the same thing, the wellbeing of the common man. But Marx believed in the free marked too. The idea was that one worker is not worth anything on the marked, but a million workers organized can barter with their capital (labor). Just that the "free marked" of Marx and of Locke looked nothing like the marked we have today. And to bring it all home: Thats why the scandinavian model works. And that's why it's not socialism, even though the state provides healthcare and regulates business through taxes (i.e. tax on over-pollution, tax on wages paid that go to secure pensions etc.). The marked is free to do whatever it wants within the borders set by a democratic senate. At the same time, the state must answer to the courts, so something like a patriot act is not possible, even if it has senate majority, and this also makes it possible for business to challenge state directly. A kind of middleground, so to say, between the left and the right. That's why I think america shouldn't be scared to move a little to the left, you'd still be right of center by far. That may explain why business is positive to Obama. Not so much because of his voting-record, but because a carrot to the American people is needed now. If the economy is becoming unstable, a "uniting" (as in someone people like and are not threatened by) charismatic leader can do wonders to quiet unrest, and instill sense of hope and security. Remember, in business terms "Hope" means = people are positive about their future thus they spend more money. Doesn't matter if the Hope is "real" or not, whatever that means, because if people feel secure and spend money, invest and are happy, the economy will better!<BR/>For instance, lowering taxes help business in the short term, but increasing them and investing in the populous may help in the long turn (healthier people, more spending, more working hands, etc.). The wealthiest nations of tomorrow will be the ones who create the best balance.<BR/><BR/>PS.<BR/>I apologize for the way too long post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-40770541278094795872008-03-03T12:14:00.000-08:002008-03-03T12:14:00.000-08:00I doubt that Marx created class wafare, however to...I doubt that Marx created class wafare, however to deny that he used it effectively is to deny reality. He pitted the proletariat against the bourgeoise and he blamed the capitalistic system for the travails of the proletariat. He told them that in his system they would share in the pie that capitalism left them out of. <BR/><BR/>If he wanted to speak out against long working hours that is one thing. You don't need to play class warfare to expose poor working conditions. He painted an entire class with one brush.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-78982742133546498772008-03-03T12:01:00.000-08:002008-03-03T12:01:00.000-08:00As a person with a minor in philosophy, I'm not go...As a person with a minor in philosophy, I'm not going to call myself a expert, I'm not. But this should be said: Marx did not "use class warfare" as a tool to further his evil plans of world domination. Karl Marx didn't "discover", or "think-up" class-struggle at all, he merely pointed to it. Saying, and rightly so, that a society that has children and slaves working in mines for 14 hours a day (as his had) is not a "successful" society, regardless of how much the mine-owner makes or how fancy his house is. The point is that morals apply to the economy as well, and not only to gay marriage and abortion as many would prefer it to. And morals apply collectively, not individually. It's not "be kind unto thyself" and "love thyself", but "love thy neighbor". Easy stuff, "Judge a society by how it treats its weakest" (Ghandi - if I'm not mistaken).<BR/><BR/>In our society we no longer have child labor or deadly working conditions or slave labor. This is a good thing. Might mean that GM is missing out on some revenue, but it's nevertheless a good thing. We do, however, have other issues to solve and address. And maybe 100 years from now people will look back at us and wonder, as we look back at London anno 1900 and ask; How the hell could they condone of children cleaning chimneys?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-28522671777878782412008-03-03T11:54:00.000-08:002008-03-03T11:54:00.000-08:00I never said each class shouldn't fight for what i...I never said each class shouldn't fight for what is theirs. What I said is that I distrust it when a politician appeals to one class by demonizing another. That is the class warfare that I am talking about. Karl Marx effectively used it to sell nothing more than a bill of goods. <BR/><BR/>We can get into a discussing the best and worst systems of economics however that is a topic only loosely related to my piece.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-48000882669789567982008-03-03T11:31:00.000-08:002008-03-03T11:31:00.000-08:00I'm interested in knowing what you people think of...I'm interested in knowing what you people think of the socalled "scandinavian model". Breafly put, it's is a system of government that tries to equalize the demands of the collective and the demands of the individual. It's a system that has been highly praised, that we in scandinavia are fond of, that works and that has the scandinavian countries on the top of every list that mesures standards of living, education, trust in government, lov crime, economy you name it. It is also a system that you would call deeply socialist (i guess it's because you only know wery few words to describe political reality). But just consider this: Our economy is doing WERY well right now. And, something die-hard capitalists don't understand why happens, there is ever increasing investment and return on investment despite our relatively high taxes. Seams that having a "collective parachute" that takes care of the weak and provides support to the people actually helps the economy by making it stable.<BR/><BR/>You yourself admit that there is such a thing as a poorer class or working class, a middle class and - as you put it - "the successful people". Three "classes" that have sometimes opposing interests. Are you saying that the first two classes shouldn't fight for their interests? <BR/><BR/>Also, I would like to comment: <BR/><BR/>"That the POOR in this country have roughly the equivalent standard of living as the lower middle class in most European countries is real world proof that capitalism works"<BR/><BR/>Sir, you need to travel. Or read a book. Or just admit you don't know what you are talking about. I, a Norwegian, have lived in several European countries, including the poorest country in western Europe (look it up), as well as in the states (NY). Take my word for it, in case you are too lazy to look it up yourself, what you're saying is just not true.<BR/><BR/>Also, Romius T makes a excellent pint that you can not simply dismiss.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-77429821526786196522008-03-03T09:18:00.000-08:002008-03-03T09:18:00.000-08:00That's an interesting point, and I want to make it...That's an interesting point, and I want to make it clear that I see the Dems practicing class warfare in much the same way that Marx did. I don't want anyone to think that I see the Dems the way I see Marx, however on this strategy they use it as effectively as he did.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-9774856525549492162008-03-03T09:11:00.000-08:002008-03-03T09:11:00.000-08:00I liked your post, but another thing that might be...I liked your post, but another thing that might be noted is what marxism traditionally does to those who disagree with the philosophy. Class warfare eventually turns to eliminating the structure that provided the economic basis to begin with. They will need another scapegoat when universal healthcare does not work, when curtailing CEO salaries doesn't increase workers wages, ect...<BR/>Marxist dogma usually reverted to silencing voices against it. The lack of incentive to increase productivity stagnated socialist economies. But hey, everyone was equal right? Wrong. Those at the top will always benefit the most no matter what system. But at least capitalism has never had gulags.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16495679368162457124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-65716730571501120842008-03-03T07:54:00.000-08:002008-03-03T07:54:00.000-08:00Let me reply to both at once. First, I agree that ...Let me reply to both at once. <BR/><BR/>First, I agree that capitalism does make everyone's life better, however it does reward the entrepeneur in a way that is quite tilted from the regular worker. If you think that the regular workers at WalMart made out like Sam Walton you are mistaken.<BR/><BR/>What you are talking about is Adam Smith's empty hand theory which I also agree with. That said, in capitalism it pays to be the entrepeneur not the worker, and frankly there is nothing wrong with that.<BR/><BR/>As to the second comment, Marxists may in fact claim that capitalism is in fact class warfare in and of itself. I don't much care, and I would wear as a badge of honor if a Marxist said that. That is frankly beside the point.<BR/><BR/>My point with this article is that the Dems are using the exact same tactics that Marx used to sell his brand of economics, class warfare.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-42274607525540749822008-03-02T15:45:00.000-08:002008-03-02T15:45:00.000-08:00From a Marxist persperctive the "competition" that...From a Marxist persperctive the "competition" that capitalism produces is itselef class warfare. You admit as much when you say that capitalism has winners and losers. If you oppose class warfare you can't be for a class based economic system like capitalism. <BR/><BR/>I'm not suggesting that socialism is the answer, for Marx it was, but he would deny your right to suggest that the winners of capital's games are not themselves ingaged in class warfare. They are and so are the poor and deomocrats. Democrats and Marxists have chosen the side of the majority, you may disagree with that position, because you think it will result in lower productivity, but your choice to allow "winners" is a social choice valueing certain productive values over principles of eqaulity.Romius T.https://www.blogger.com/profile/18043032468436393210noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-2978385998673596242008-03-02T14:06:00.000-08:002008-03-02T14:06:00.000-08:00"in our societies only the entrepeneurs make it. T..."in our societies only the entrepeneurs make it. That is frankly true of every capitalistic society."<BR/><BR/>Gee, with friends like you, why does capitalism need enemies? Capitalism's MORAL superiority over socialism is that it makes everyone better off than they would be otherwise, since in a free society, no producer can make any profits until/unless they offer something that someone wishes to voluntarily part with their dollars to acquire. Sam Wall became a billionaire only by offering millions of workers and millions of customers a better deal than they could otherwise have gotten. Unlike the government, entrepreneurs have no gun they can hold to the head of their workers or their customers. That the POOR in this country have roughly the equivalent standard of living as the lower middle class in most European countries is real world proof that capitalism works: compare S. Korea to N. Korea, Chile to Cuba, pre-1989 W. Germany to E. Germany: socialism in the real world has repeatedly FAILED MISERABLY when put in "head-to-head" competition with capitalism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-64335495819895478962008-03-02T10:57:00.000-08:002008-03-02T10:57:00.000-08:00With free market ideas, and most importantly, by c...With free market ideas, and most importantly, by calling a spade a spade. If someone is trying to get votes through class warfare, then they need to be held to account.<BR/><BR/>The corporate system may not be perfect, but it is certainly better than socialism. <BR/><BR/>You said something very important. You said that in our societies only the entrepeneurs make it. That is frankly true of every capitalistic society. <BR/><BR/>If people are unhappy with where they are at, they need to take matters into their own hands.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-21820386565980616502008-03-01T17:44:00.000-08:002008-03-01T17:44:00.000-08:00Nice post - but how do you propose countering a Ma...Nice post - but how do you propose countering a Marxist strategy?<BR/>The Baby Boomers are the first generation to actually rip our country apart, rather than advancing security and financial freedom for future generations. "Baby" Boomers is, in retrospect, is a surprisingly resounding label. <BR/>The previous generation didn't hold corporations with such contempt.<BR/>Are the Republicans so deeply beholden to the "powers that be" that they can't address the "change" that Obama inspires?<BR/>Of course, he won't deliver. But that's not the issue.<BR/>The problem is that, if the "middle class" continues to evaporate, I'd suggest that we'll actually see real "class warfare" in our lifetime, bloodshed and all.<BR/>Since you seem to have such a firm grasp on the history of all of this, I'd be interested in what solution you'd suggest for ending the "Aristodemocracy" that has taken such a firm hold.<BR/>Socialism is a horrible alternative, but corporate serfdom isn't panning out so well for the middle class either.<BR/>Nepotism and upper-class social networking reward status over talent, rendering corporate management extremely weak. <BR/>In this system, only an entrepreneur can control their own destiny. And these entrepreneurs represent the workers passed over by management in favor of this Aristodemocracy.<BR/>Americans have no faith in corporations, no faith in their leadership, and no faith in their government.<BR/>So, barring a racist verdict, my guess is that change will defeat experience (experience="bad experience" for the middle class).<BR/>Either way, if something doesn't change, we're all doomed.<BR/>Ask not for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.<BR/>Unless you do own a private island :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com