Questions For Our Russian Friends

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

In your opinion, can Russia ever function well as a mostly free society with genuine democratically elected representatives? What we always hear is that over there the corruption is staggering, no matter what system is running the show.

One might ask a similar question about the United States, which appears in danger of becoming a failed state. Our freedoms have been greatly curtailed in this century and the minority political party (which represents the oligarchs looting the country) seems to have found a way to game the system to keep themselves in power despite consistently garnering a minority of votes.

Make no mistake about it. The political corruption in the United States is staggering as well. Britain doesn't appear to be all that hot, either.

[Brecht]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

My Polish colleague, who is 60 years old, told me that all the Polish schoolchildren had to read "das Kapital" of Karl Marx at school.

Das Kapital is not something you can easily explain to children. It's a thorough and complex analysis of capitalism, industry, science and their historical evolution. If that were the case, the people in Poland would have been a highly educated nation. I bet your Polish colleague doesn't even know what Das Kapital is about.

[haroldeye]

Originally Posted by Brecht

Das Kapital is not something you can easily explain to children. It's a thorough and complex analysis of capitalism, industry, science and their historical evolution. If that were the case, the people in Poland would have been a highly educated nation. I bet your Polish colleague doesn't even know what Das Kapital is about.

Children all over the world have to read very complicated philosophical texts. The Bible, the Koran and Das Capital are three such examples. Of course the broad mass of people are far too stupid to understand what they are about so they all need priests or commissars to interpret the texts for them. Many of these interpreters are deep thinkers with intelligence of the highest order but sadly many are blind zealots who can see nothing beyond the righteousness of their cause.

This is why sensible people often look at these philosophies with a degree of scepticism. The Bible and the Koran have much in them that is out dated, and Das Capital as a product of it's time is pretty much past it too. I should point out that I am far too stupid to understand practical Marxist theory, I just have seen the results of wherever it has been applied in practice and suspect that there are better ways.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

The Bible and the Koran have much in them that is out dated, and Das Capital as a product of it's time is pretty much past it too. I should point out that I am far too stupid to understand practical Marxist theory, I just have seen the results of wherever it has been applied in practice and suspect that there are better ways.

As christened Catholic, I get during 12 years lessons of the New Testament.
If I did not agree about the double language of the Catholic church and these stupid stories written around unbelievable icons, I today observe that the message of Jesus Christ was 99% the same as Karl Marx: "We all are brothers and sisters. Be fair and never fuck them." When Marx asked to the social revolution, Jesus Christ broke all the stuffs of the merchants in front of the Temple. That's why he was crucified.
Sadly the conclusion of Jesus Christ's life seems to be: "as long as you don't disturb the merchants who want to become rich and impose their domination through money, you never get any trouble. But when you touch at their wealth, you will be imprisoned or executed."

Greed was absolved of all sins with Protestants reformers like the Swiss Calvin and the German Lüther who taught that making money was a good thing.
The Catholic ethics was to live poor and redistribute his wealth in the way to reach the paradise.

The main difference between Jesus Christ's and Marx' eras was the evolution of the industry.
That's why Jesus Christ never wrote: das Kapital.

[Brecht]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

Children all over the world have to read very complicated philosophical texts. The Bible, the Koran and Das Capital are three such examples. Of course the broad mass of people are far too stupid to understand what they are about so they all need priests or commissars to interpret the texts for them. Many of these interpreters are deep thinkers with intelligence of the highest order but sadly many are blind zealots who can see nothing beyond the righteousness of their cause.

This is why sensible people often look at these philosophies with a degree of scepticism. The Bible and the Koran have much in them that is out dated, and Das Capital as a product of it's time is pretty much past it too. I should point out that I am far too stupid to understand practical Marxist theory, I just have seen the results of wherever it has been applied in practice and suspect that there are better ways.

You can't compare Das Kapital to the Bible or the Koran, for the latter two were written for children. The main research object in Das Kapital is 19th century industrial capitalism. It's a mix of complex economics, history, sociology and philosophy. Not exactly a bedtime story you read to a 10-year old.

Certainly a lot of what Marx wrote in Das Kapital is outdated today. He was not a prophet. But he recognized the governing laws of capitalism that are still relevant today and left behind the necessary epistemological tools to understand them and analyze the total socioeconomic context.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by Brecht

Certainly a lot of what Marx wrote in Das Kapital is outdated today. He was not a prophet. But he recognized the governing laws of capitalism that are still relevant today and left behind the necessary epistemological tools to understand them and analyze the total socioeconomic context.

Two weeks ago a French analyst of the bank Natixis wrote an analysis telling that Karl Marx was right.
His "secret" analysis was spread in several newspapers.
I've followed the link and downloaded the pdf if you are interested.

You only have to translate it in google translate.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

Two weeks ago a French analyst of the bank Natixis wrote an analysis telling that Karl Marx was right.
He's "secret" analysis was spread in several newspapers.
I've followed the link and downloaded the pdf if you are interested.

You only have to translate it in google translate.

It is really only in the United States that the genius of Marx is downplayed. Even here, most Economics professors will tell you that the "Economics" expounded by "conservative" politicians does not withstand rigorous empirical scrutiny. This is one reason that Ronald Reagan was quick to reduce the budget of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Marx is not the be all and end all. Economics, like all other human forms of knowledge, has advanced a great deal over the past century and a quarter. Computers have made it possible to collate and test vastly larger sets of data with many more variables and the more powerful mathematical tools that have been developed since Marx's day. However, I will repeat that Marx's most inconvenient insight is that economic systems are societal agreements and not inexorably handed down by some all powerful deity.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

It is really only in the United States that the genius of Marx is downplayed. Even here, most Economics professors will tell you that the "Economics" expounded by "conservative" politicians does not withstand rigorous empirical scrutiny. This is one reason that Ronald Reagan was quick to reduce the budget of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

As you wrote yourself, you are runned by an oligarchy that was horrified since their childhood by everything that could come from Marxism.
Marxism strongly came back in Europe because of global warming and 2008 subprime crisis.
When I was a schoolchild or a teenager, our leading conservatist politicians and teachers told us that he was a very dangerous philosopher and we never read or listened more about his theories.
It's surprising to know that French economists and politicians (people born during and after the WWII) who contributed to build the EU, NEVER read one line of Karl Marx or even never heard about him.

That's always funny to see the difference of texts between French and English wikipedia. I'd have to read the German or the Spanish wiki ones.

About the politics of Putin, in the French wikipedia, it's explained that when the Iron curtain fell, immediatly American oils barons tried to suck the Russian oils thanks the Russian oligarchs.
But Putin kicked them out of Russia and immediatly became unpopular in the USA.
We can read the same story about Venezuela today.
American (as French, Dutch, British) oil predators want to spoil people from their local wealth in creating unfair "private" businesses.

Originally Posted by Brian249x

Marx is not the be all and end all. Economics, like all other human forms of knowledge, has advanced a great deal over the past century and a quarter. Computers have made it possible to collate and test vastly larger sets of data with many more variables and the more powerful mathematical tools that have been developed since Marx's day. However, I will repeat that Marx's most inconvenient insight is that economic systems are societal agreements and not inexorably handed down by some all powerful deity.

2008 crisis was runned by differential equations written by mathematicians, calculated by computers and promotted by bankers...
Did they intentionnaly or not forget the following initial condition: "you can't request interests on debts to poor people that they don't even earn enough money to pay the interests".

In Europe it was clear. Capitalism collapsed in 2008 and states through their citizens had to save the banking system own by private societies. Our leaders had to save the bank system, because if they didn't they could have faced a terrible revolution.

Listening sometimes at European TV business programs, I understand that economists have no idea about the future. They try to predict the numbers of a lottery.
We have to protect our societies from these gamblers.

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

One might ask a similar question about the United States, which appears in danger of becoming a failed state. Our freedoms have been greatly curtailed in this century and the minority political party (which represents the oligarchs looting the country) seems to have found a way to game the system to keep themselves in power despite consistently garnering a minority of votes.

Make no mistake about it. The political corruption in the United States is staggering as well. Britain doesn't appear to be all that hot, either.

Yes, we have a fair bit of corruption. The real problem that I see is all of the polarization going on. The rich refuse to see what they are doing to the country and the have-nots are getting angrier and angrier. And there seems to be increasing discord among different social sectors and geographical parts of the country with regard as to what actually constitutes "rights" and "freedom". I could see us having another civil war at some point and the country breaking up into sections a la the old USSR.

I think that in a lot of ways we are no longer the "United" States.

QUOTE: xyzde69
I today observe that the message of Jesus Christ was 99% the same as Karl Marx: "We all are brothers and sisters. Be fair and never fuck them." When Marx asked to the social revolution, Jesus Christ broke all the stuffs of the merchants in front of the Temple. That's why he was crucified.
Sadly the conclusion of Jesus Christ's life seems to be: "as long as you don't disturb the merchants who want to become rich and impose their domination through money, you never get any trouble. But when you touch at their wealth, you will be imprisoned or executed."

I guess Jesus should have brought a couple of Guards divisions armed with AK-47s and T-34s to the temple with him if he was going to vandalize as well as moralize.

But if Jesus had those divisions and avoided martyrdom, would he still have been known as the Son of God, or would he just have become Emperor instead?

[scoundrel]

There are many rather basic conceptual errors in Marxist economic theory. All Marxist economies are up against the economic calculation problem: how do you allocate resources efficiently when the state owns the means of production, distribution and exchange? There is no longer a free market price. A free market price has a rationing function to discourage frivalous use of scarce resources and a signalling function, promoting rational decisions by consumers.

Marxism also values work by inputs rather than by results. Give Estreeter and Scoundrel the same ingredients, the same time and the same oven: Estreeter might well bake an excellent loaf of bread whereas Scoundrel produces a lump of charcoal. The same effort and the same materials did not result in the same value and so were not equally worthy of reward.