Tao, you are so bogged down with all these old theories, that
you forget to look at the big picture, as it exists today.

Those lines you draw between capital and labour are becoming
more and more blurred. Fact is that the middle class these
days are in fact quite wealthy. Your millionaire next door
is a plumber, cleaning contractor, small business operator,
you name it, they are there in quite large numbers. These
people usually don't display wealth, doesent mean they
are poor.

A huge number of Australians own their own homes. Something
like 50% have ASX shares, owned directly. The richest
group are the retirees, those grey nomads you see travelling
around the country in their caravans.

If you look at the numbers, there are actually very few
really rich people in Australia, but heaps with quite
a bit. So your old clear lines of 100 years ago are gone.
So down the toilet of history, go your many theories :(

HIV research is being done, by philanthropy, paid for
by some of those evil capitalists :) CO2 emissions
are a global problem, not just a capitalist caused problem.
Fact is everyone who can, uses electricity, drives a car,
no matter where they are.

Tao, time for you to put down those books, get out and
smell the roses :) Heaven is here and now, its too late,
once the worms get ya...

tao: Once again, we get back to the fact that you're convinced there's a monolithic vision and practice of capitalism, and an inevitability about all of that. Yet you won't grant even the remotest possibility of the same flaws to your own theory.

If you're really so convinced of all this, I suggest you go and find Lew Rockwell's e-mail and suggest he and Karl Rove go and hang out together, because you know, they don't really have diametrically opposing world views. Maybe they could shoot some hoops, or take a Latin dance class together or something. Or, I don't know, maybe you could try to set Dick Cheney and Claire Wolfe up on a blind date. I'm sure they'd find they actually have a lot in common over a glass of red wine in a candlelit French (or is that Freedom? Hehe) restaurant.

I will be away for the next few days so will see if anyone is still on this thread when I get back.

Shorbe,

Didn’t you read my post? I said that regardless of what you or anyone says is “capitalist theory”, the fundamental practice of capitalism is to pay workers less than the full value of their labour, with the rest going to the capitalists’ profit. That is capitalism. That is what happens in capitalism wherever it is practiced, under whatever system, and regardless of whatever measures regulate it. Do you deny this is the case?

In capitalism, production is social i.e. done by many people, while ownership of the means of production, and the goods produced is private. It is a contradiction, and cannot be justified rationally. Its unrestrained practice produces polarisation of wealth which is unsustainable and must be resolved in some way. It produces competition between capitalists, and capitalist powers, which leads to war. It’s got nothing to do with “theory” of the gazillions of bourgeois economists – it has its own logic and internal laws (by which I mean laws of motion not legislation).

International socialism will be the resolution of that particular contradiction, and many others produced by it. Production is social, and ownership of the means of production will be social, as will be the goods produced. (Which is not to say that socialism will not produce other contradictions which need resolving).

It is not that I don’t grant the possibility that there are some flaws in “my own theory”, it is that I haven’t yet found them, and none of the things you have said have demonstrated that there are any flaws. Most of your criticisms are superficial and show little understanding of Marxism, capitalism, history, or even basic logic, or a willingness to try to understand them. Yet you cannot deny that I have thought seriously about your comments and addressed them seriously.

I have not always thought this way. I used to accept without question the things you are saying, and say them myself. I even used to vote Liberal. However I gradually became “conscious” that something wasn’t right – particularly the Iraq war and all of the lies that went to justifying it – why would they lie to us? – and began trying to find explanations, and ultimately a solution.

Marxism was a product of the early stages of capitalism – it exposed capitalism’s inherent contradictions which would inevitably require resolving. Capitalism (and all of it its “theorists”) has not resolved its own contradictions because it can’t, and Marx’s work, and the work of those that followed him, are relevant to this day. If you read some of his work you could be forgiven for thinking he was writing today. In fact, some capitalist economists use Marxist economics because it is the best explanation of capitalism.

However, as you have admitted, you have no interest in studying or thinking seriously about any of this, you are happy to rest on your laurels because your “ideology” is “omnipresent”. If every human thought like this, we would never progress. You consider it an “intellectual pissing contest” which only goes to show that you believe that what you think is “intellectual piss”.

"Production is social, and ownership of the means of production will be social, "

Tao, we already have that. In fact we have a potpourri of various
economic theories, but as a whole its working ok, better then
anything else that anyone else has suggested. We also have a
market economy, which is still the most efficient way to do things
and give both consumers and producers freedom to establish values,
without bureaucrats taking over everything.

Around 30% of GDP is spent by Govt. People have education, healthcare,
they don't starve. In Australia, we spend around
90 billion $ just on welfare payments, not exactly chicken feed.

To assume that capitalism is to blame for all wars, or Iraq, is
highly simplistic and suggests to me that you don't have the foggiest
about human nature.

Warring over territory was around a long time before economic theories
appeared. In fact you can trace it right back to our chimp ancestors,
who still do it, as they form war parties to guard their territory.
The only ones who have solved it are bonobos. They just all have
lots of sex together, so the males are too buggered to fight about
anything :)

Putting Iraq down to capitalism is once again simplistic. Fact
is that 911 caused a huge shock in America, they basically thought
that with their huge army, they were safe in this world, especially
within the US. America was shaken to its core, all their theories
were wrong.

Osama was talking that oil should be worth 132$. The neocons realised
that if the Haus of Saud fell over, the West was buggered, as our
economies all have relied on cheap oil. We use 80 million barrels
a day, without it you can close the whole show down overnight.

Given that they had helped convert both Japan and Germany into far
more stable democracies, they figured that they could do the same
in the Middle East, not allowing for religious or cultural differences.
So they convinced a less then smart Bush, that is what
needed doing. The rest is history.

Looks like this thread will become scripture when climate change destroys technological modes of production and those who survive by good genes and location , location , location return to the economy of hunting and gathering.