World Republic

Uniting All People!
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log in  

Share | 
 

 'classless society'

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2  Next
AuthorMessage
Liche
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 4613
Join date : 2008-01-30
Age : 23
Location : USA-Virginia

PostSubject: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:44 am

You know, the more I think about it, socialist isn't a Classless society. Its just a Society in which the middle class rules. And, if you guys where in charge, you would put your selves and other Socialists over your Capitalist counterparts and make them submit to your views.

thoughts?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.epol.forumotion.com
WeiWuWei
World Republic Party Member


Posts : 624
Join date : 2008-04-14
Age : 40

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:50 am

Hence, Anarchism.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://worldrepublic.forumotion.com/groupcp.forum?g=11
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic


Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 28
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:17 am

Liche wrote:
You know, the more I think about it, socialist isn't a Classless society. Its just a Society in which the middle class rules. And, if you guys where in charge, you would put your selves and other Socialists over your Capitalist counterparts and make them submit to your views.

thoughts?

What the hell...

There are three ways to classify classes:

1. By acquisitive power.
2. By relationship towards the ownership on the means of production.
3. By both of the previous ones.

The first division is subdivided in these:

Upper: People with acquisitive powers greater than average.
Middle: People with average acquisitive power.
Lower: People with lower acquisitive power than average.

The second is subdivided in:

Burgeoise: Owners of the means of production. Profit from workers' labour.
Petit-burgeoise: People who work for themselves and have no one working for them.
Proletariat: The workers that work for the Burgeoise.
Lumpenproletariat: People that profit on things like theft.

Therefore, the 3rd classification would encompass these classes:

Upper class Burgeoise
Upper class Petit-Burgeoise
Upper class Proletarians
Upper class Lumpenproletarians (in case theft allows them such a high economic power)

Middle Class Burgeoise
Middle class Petit-burgeoise
Middle class Proletarians
Middle class Lumpenproletarians

Lower class Burgeoise (is this possible? Surprisingly, yes)
Lower class Petit-Burgeoise
Lower-class proletarians
Middle-class proletarians


So for example, you get a succesful construction company.

The CEO and the greatest shareholder and he receives most of the profits. He's part of the upper class Burgeoise.
Then there are like some 10 minor shareholders which do not earn as much as the CEO but still may earn a lot. Depending on the company's earnings, they could either be middle or upper class Burgeoise.

Then, this construction company has a bunch of highly paid managers, chief engineers, financial advisors and so on. They are not owners of the business they're working for, hence they're proletarians, but they have above average salaries making them middle class proletarians.

If the company has high-responsability or high priority workers these may get paid salaries well above the average making them upper class proletarians.

Common examples of upper class proletarians (when they don't venture into having their own enterprise) could be several professional sportsmen.

A man that opened his bookstore and who works there by himself works for no one but himself. If the bookstore's earnings allow him he can be either middle or upper class, but he's a petit-burgeoise.


In socialism NONE of the above exist because everyone are workers and there are no acquisitive powers. So, of course, there's no ruling class, and much less something as a a "middle class".

_________________


Last edited by Zealot_Kommunizma on Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:15 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
Stos
New Party Member


Posts : 546
Join date : 2008-09-14

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:11 am

Liche wrote:
You know, the more I think about it, socialist isn't a Classless society. Its just a Society in which the middle class rules. And, if you guys where in charge, you would put your selves and other Socialists over your Capitalist counterparts and make them submit to your views.

thoughts?
What the fuck are you talking about?

Quote :
Hence, Anarchism.
What the fuck are you talking about?

From Mike Lepore's glossary of Marxist terms:
Class: "A group within the population that has a particular relationship to the means of production, i.e., whether or not one own's them, and whether or not one labors to operate them, and this in turn determines the source of income, and therefore the economic interests, of the members of that class.
A typical arrangement for a class-divided society is that a minority of the population own the means of production but do not operate them, and the majority of the population operate the means of production but do not own them.
Some of the most common errors that many people make when refering to social classes are: (1) to assume that one's class is based on the amount rather than the source of one's income; (2) to assume that classes do not exist since there are no exact boundaries to permit the identification of the class status of every individual; (3) to assume that classes do not exist because some individuals occasionally move from one class to another."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Black_Cross
Chairman of the WR Committee


Posts : 1702
Join date : 2008-04-04
Age : 28
Location : Sisyphean Hell

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:33 pm

Liche wrote:
You know, the more I think about it, socialist isn't a Classless society. Its just a Society in which the middle class rules.

I'll never understand the workings of your mind Liche. You're a complete enigma to me. And why are you conforming to capitalist definitions of class? That's hardly practical for a discussion such as this, considering the term "middle class" encompasses a group of people with very little relation to their material situations.

Quote :
And, if you guys where in charge, you would put your selves and other Socialists over your Capitalist counterparts and make them submit to your views.

thoughts

Well isn't this just bull-shit. I'd appreciate it if you took the time to read and understand socialist ideology before you go around spewing complete nonsense. We wouldn't make them submit to our rule, they can do whatever the fuck they want. If they choose to continue exploiting, they'll have to do it elsewhere. And if you're talking about "capitalists" like Nillerz, then if they'd like to continue being exploited, they'll have to do that elsewhere as well. And we surely wouldn't put ourselves in a place of privelage, that would be quite hypocritical; we'd be like the capitalists.

But we're a little too concerned with the toiling masses to give a shit about the trivial little problems of the capitalist class.

Liche, get your fucking priorities straight.

_________________
"A market economy must comprise all elements of industry including labor, land and money [...] But labor and land are no other than the human beings themselves of which every society consists and the natural surroundings in which it exists. To include them in the market mechanism means to subordinate the substance of society itself."
--Karl Polanyi--
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Liche
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 4613
Join date : 2008-01-30
Age : 23
Location : USA-Virginia

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:02 pm

I agree with WWW.

But I mean, if the workers take over, the bourgeois would be shunned. Its not all of them are bad, they are just ignorant, and don't understand what they are doing isn't necessarily fair.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.epol.forumotion.com
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic


Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 28
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:30 pm

Liche wrote:
I agree with WWW.

I think Wei has got a point to clarify and you to understand before you can agree with him.

Liche wrote:

But I mean, if the workers take over, the bourgeois would be shunned. Its not all of them are bad, they are just ignorant, and don't understand what they are doing isn't necessarily fair.

Socialism is not about "class resentment" or "class hatred". We, as socialists, actually try that said stupidity is eliminated. Class hatred is understandable but is just another product of ignorance. The same ignorance and conditions that keeps workers as slaves makes them experience that class hatred, and we plan to eliminate it.

Now, if you mean Burgeoise that ideologically want to keep burgeoise, then they'll first have to find proletarians that want to ideologically keep proletarian under a capitalist yoke and both find a place away from the healthy human society to keep that BDSM-like economic relationship.

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
Tyrong Kojy
Member of the Supreme Council


Posts : 2142
Join date : 2008-04-11
Age : 29
Location : Canada

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:49 pm

I wonder, would it be possible, or would you settle for, a capitalist society that's Not as capitalist as now?

What I mean is simply that the owner, and I call it that since I can't spell burgious or whatever, treats and pays his workers fairly. He still makes money off the product made and his ownership of the place that makes said product, but less so, whether this is imposed by himself or the governmentis moot to me, and pays the workers significantly more? Sure it still probably wouldn't be perfect, but would it potentially, or something akin to that since I'm too lazy right now to type EVERYTHING for this, be acceptable to you?

And sorry about the ramling sentences. I do that.

_________________
"Jenaveve took everything from me.
My friends,
My family,
Everything!
Her ambitions to dominate the universe are terrifying,
Evil beyond imagining.
I,
Tyrong Kojy,
The one whose power even the creator fears,
Will stop her.
Even if I have to destroy the universe to do it!"
Tyrong Kojy/Jenaveve by Nicholas Rivest
Back to top Go down
View user profile
WeiWuWei
World Republic Party Member


Posts : 624
Join date : 2008-04-14
Age : 40

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:43 pm

Stos wrote:
Quote :
Hence, Anarchism.
What the fuck are you talking about?

Man, I don't even know, I was so tired when I posted that...

---

Tyrong: I should say one very important thing. I would argue that the heart of Socialism lies in this: that the workers own the means of production, and, by extension, have absolute autonomous control over their economic lives. The idea that a boss would still exist but try and act as best as he could in their interest would not be acceptable to most - if not all - genuine Socialists. The fact that the boss is even around is an affront to what Socialists really want.

---

In all fairness to him, I think Liche is making a fairly decent point here:

Liche wrote:
But I mean, if the workers take over, the
bourgeois would be shunned. Its not all of them are bad, they are just
ignorant
, and don't understand what they are doing isn't necessarily
fair.

Perhaps class consciousness goes both ways. Maybe the bourgeois should be shown that what they're doing negatively affects a vast majority of the population.

I really don't think that they're evil; it's just that they have been propagated worst of all. They have accepted the notions of neo-liberalism, free markets, competition, and everything else that comes with the system. I think they need help, just as badly as the proletarian needs help, but it's a different kind of "help".

And exploitation/domination can exist without any kind of economic connotation associated with it.

It's just a thought. I think I'm going to be crucified for making this point, but whatever.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://worldrepublic.forumotion.com/groupcp.forum?g=11
mattabesta
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 3936
Join date : 2007-12-23
Age : 22
Location : Iceland

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:46 pm

class can also be librety.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://Pichunter.com
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic


Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 28
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:16 am

Tyrong Kojy wrote:
I wonder, would it be possible, or would you settle for, a capitalist society that's Not as capitalist as now?

Well, a society can't be "mildly capitalist" or "highly capitalist". It's either capitalist or not, regardless of the regulations it may have or its ethical standards.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

What I mean is simply that the owner, and I call it that since I can't spell burgious or whatever, treats and pays his workers fairly.

The problem here is the subjectivity of the word "fairly". Who determines what's fair treatment and salary? The boss? The workers? Both? I'd say it's more like none: the market and most succesful capitalists do.

Tyrong kojy wrote:

He still makes money off the product made and his ownership of the place that makes said product, but less so, whether this is imposed by himself or the governmentis moot to me, and pays the workers significantly more?
One of the problems is that this is not determined by the owner nor the workers but by the market and competition. It's also determined by the motivation to start a business.

Ideally, with this framework, I'd think of a business in which all its workers are shareholders in equitative proportions, that is, everyone would be paid equally in accordance to the profit and each's personal efforts. But of course, such a condition would be determined by an investor ( or set of investors) eager to work within such a framework and the success of that business.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

Sure it still probably wouldn't be perfect, but would it potentially, or something akin to that since I'm too lazy right now to type EVERYTHING for this, be acceptable to you?

While a better form of capitalism than the kind we have now, no. It's absolutely not enough.

I'm against alienation of industries and individuals and things like money, trade and private ownership of economy (not private ownership of goods) are prime factors to sustain it.
I'm absolutely against abstract economics that is, non-scientific thus unplanned and market-trade based economies.

And I'm a complete enemy of economic competition and social and economic survivalism. I'm fully cooperativist. I'm also against individualism (not to confuse with "individuality", which is a very different concept most of us socialists strive to deffend).

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

And sorry about the ramling sentences. I do that.

It's ok. Not a problem for me.

_________________


Last edited by Zealot_Kommunizma on Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:59 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
Stos
New Party Member


Posts : 546
Join date : 2008-09-14

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:01 am

Quote :
hey have accepted the notions of neo-liberalism, free markets, competition, and everything else that comes with the system.
'Accepted' is a mild way to put it.

Quote :
But I mean, if the workers take over, the
bourgeois would be shunned. Its not all of them are bad, they are just
ignorant, and don't understand what they are doing isn't necessarily
fair.
Bourgeois? What bourgeois?
Also, yes, they can often be ignorant, but if they're too nice they'll get fucked over anyways.

Quote :
no one ever says socialism is classless ree-ree. socialism s working class is dominating class communism is classless.
Marx thinks that you are silly.

Quote :
the highest stage of comunism is identical to anarchyism.
Not necessarily. Crud, Marx's 'higher stage of communism' just involved getting rid of labour credits that were used in the 'lower stage', after labour has become 'not a means of life, but life's prime want'. Labour credits are in no way incompatible with anarchy, so basically Marx's 'lower stage of communism' could be anarchy just as much. Of course, there could be hierarchal authority in either, and one would have to be free of that in order for it to constitute anarchy.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Liche
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 4613
Join date : 2008-01-30
Age : 23
Location : USA-Virginia

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:47 pm

I think Marx would like Hoxhaist.


But, I also agree with matt.

Class can be liberty. Class doesn't necessarily mean oppression to those 'lower' than you.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.epol.forumotion.com
Stos
New Party Member


Posts : 546
Join date : 2008-09-14

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:39 pm

Liche wrote:
Class can be liberty. Class doesn't necessarily mean oppression to those 'lower' than you.
...What?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Liche
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 4613
Join date : 2008-01-30
Age : 23
Location : USA-Virginia

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:42 pm

Class is just a way of group together people. "lower class" "upper class" could just apply to the way they live their life.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.epol.forumotion.com
Stos
New Party Member


Posts : 546
Join date : 2008-09-14

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:53 pm

Liche wrote:
Class is just a way of group together people. "lower class" "upper class" could just apply to the way they live their life.
...What?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic


Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 28
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 7:12 pm

Liche wrote:
Class is just a way of group together people. "lower class" "upper class" could just apply to the way they live their life.

Really... what the hell?

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
WeiWuWei
World Republic Party Member


Posts : 624
Join date : 2008-04-14
Age : 40

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 7:42 pm

Liche wrote:
Class is just a way of group together people. "lower class" "upper class" could just apply to the way they live their life.

Alright, now I'll jump on the "WTF" bandwagon. I don't think that's accurate. Yes, there are cultural aspects that can be attributed class, but they are born out of being a member of that class, not the other way around.

And I would say that, yes, having a class system does inherently imply some form of domination, in one way or another. Let me put it like this: do you think any members of the "lower class" are also members of the United States Congress?

Elite opinion is influenced by the wealthy, not the poor. This is a truism that has existed within every dominating political system, dating back to the birth of civilization. It has always been this way. Always.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://worldrepublic.forumotion.com/groupcp.forum?g=11
Black_Cross
Chairman of the WR Committee


Posts : 1702
Join date : 2008-04-04
Age : 28
Location : Sisyphean Hell

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 10:17 pm

Stos wrote:
Quote :
hey have accepted the notions of neo-liberalism, free markets, competition, and everything else that comes with the system.
'Accepted' is a mild way to put it.

"Mild" is a very mitigating way to put it. That's almost entirely bull shit. Thousands upon thousands of people have been killed in order to impose neo-liberalism, "free" markets (Usually meaning American, British, Japanese, or Russian markets, etc), and "competition".

_________________
"A market economy must comprise all elements of industry including labor, land and money [...] But labor and land are no other than the human beings themselves of which every society consists and the natural surroundings in which it exists. To include them in the market mechanism means to subordinate the substance of society itself."
--Karl Polanyi--
Back to top Go down
View user profile
WeiWuWei
World Republic Party Member


Posts : 624
Join date : 2008-04-14
Age : 40

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:59 pm

Black_Cross wrote:
Stos wrote:
Quote :
hey have accepted the notions of neo-liberalism, free markets, competition, and everything else that comes with the system.
'Accepted' is a mild way to put it.

"Mild" is a very mitigating way to put it. That's almost entirely bull shit. Thousands upon thousands of people have been killed in order to impose neo-liberalism, "free" markets (Usually meaning American, British, Japanese, or Russian markets, etc), and "competition".

I'm not referring to people like, say, in Guatemala or Nicaragua who have had it forced down their throats. I'm talking about people here in the States who don't know about the kinds of atrocities that have been committed in the name of free markets and who genuinely think that economic prosperity can only come about through competition rather than cooperation.

I don't see how it is "bull shit" to suggest that there are people who genuinely think that free markets and neo-liberalism and good things. I disagree with the ideas strongly, but that doesn't mean that there aren't people who accept it because it's simply being imposed upon them.

And, in all fairness, people have been killed in the name of every political system, not just the ones that we don't like.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://worldrepublic.forumotion.com/groupcp.forum?g=11
Liche
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 4613
Join date : 2008-01-30
Age : 23
Location : USA-Virginia

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:38 am

WWW,

your gonna be disgraced for saying that Shocked


but yes, if the world became Socialist, there would be Capitalist revolutionaries saying the exact same things.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.epol.forumotion.com
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic


Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 28
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:55 am

WeiWuWei wrote:



I don't see how it is "bull shit" to suggest that there are people who genuinely think that free markets and neo-liberalism and good things. I disagree with the ideas strongly, but that doesn't mean that there aren't people who accept it because it's simply being imposed upon them.

I agree with you WeiWuWei. But now let's discuss not wether they are genuine but legitimate ideas.

Most of the persons that genuinely think free market and competition are the only way towards economic prosperity do so due to ignorance, narrow-mindedness or, more extremely, due to their personal set of moral values.

WeiWuWei wrote:

And, in all fairness, people have been killed in the name of every political system, not just the ones that we don't like.

Well people have been killed in the name of communism, but most of those deaths in the name of communism were not in the struggle for real communism. I can kill someone and claim "I did it for the anarchy" or I could group a bunch of apparent socialists, kill people, and say that I'm killing people in the name of socialism. But that doesn't mean people are being killed in the struggle for socialism.

Now, am I denying that people have been killed geniunely in teh name of socialism or that people won't be killed in the name of geniune socialism? No. I'm not claiming that at all. In fact, I think that there are great chances of revolution being quite bloody. But I'm sure that you agree that we won't be fighting to force anyone but as a mechanism of defense against capitalist aggression and oppression. You ought to repel force with force.


Liche wrote:
WWW,

your gonna be disgraced for saying that Shocked

Really? On which grounds? I wonder.



Liche wrote:
but yes, if the world became Socialist, there would be Capitalist revolutionaries saying the exact same things.

So you're actually stating that the former burgeoise will gather in a post revolutionary world, gather some people that actually agree with their own exploitation and fight alongside with them to try revering the irreversible when they can just go away and keep their BDSM economics away from the majority?

That would be hilarious.

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
Liche
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 4613
Join date : 2008-01-30
Age : 23
Location : USA-Virginia

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Fri Dec 12, 2008 9:36 pm

They would want to be free to make their own business. Its a natural feeling to want to get ahead of your fellow man.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.epol.forumotion.com
Zealot_Kommunizma
Hero of the World Republic


Posts : 5413
Join date : 2007-12-06
Age : 28
Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:04 am

Liche wrote:
They would want to be free to make their own business.





In socialism people are not forced not to have their own business. Sadly, I think I must quote myself:

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:
they can just go away and keep their BDSM economics away from the majority

They can have their business as long as they keep themselves isolated from the majority and find fellow nutjobs. It would be impossible for them to have a business of their own when absolutely everyone controls the economy. It's not like they're gunned down unable to make a business, it's just they don't have a way to do it and people won't accept going back to such an economic relationship.


Liche wrote:
Its a natural feeling to want to get ahead of your fellow man.

So you say that the only way through which a person can become better is through having a business of his own, right? In other words, either being able to excert power over other men or directly have them under his control, right? In your view, apparently it seems like it's the only way for selfsuperation.

I must say I completely disagree with you. There are several ways to become a "better person": learn as much as you can, improve your physique, become admired and beloved for your deeds, be a pleasant companion, be a smart person... many ways... why would you need to have slaves to be a better person? Why would you need to have others below you? Why do you need to be better than others just for the sake of it instead of constantly improve yourself?

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://unitedrevleftfront.forumotion.com/
Liche
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 4613
Join date : 2008-01-30
Age : 23
Location : USA-Virginia

PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:31 am

be a jack of all trades.

best at everything.

I'm not saying all people, just some ignorant westerners, I tend to put my self lower than others.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.epol.forumotion.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: 'classless society'   Today at 7:25 am

Back to top Go down
 
'classless society'
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 2Go to page : 1, 2  Next
 Similar topics
-
» The High Commission of India and the Indian Cultural Society in Jamaica
» Lovefinder Society
» Stuff We Wish Existed
» Sleeping through
» Sharia Law guidelines abandoned as Law Society apologises

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
World Republic :: Capitol of the World Republic :: Red Square-
Jump to: