tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post2839521427851730120..comments2024-03-28T22:33:29.066-04:00Comments on The Philosopher's Stone: REFLECTIONS, PART ONERobert Paul Wolffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-42674960586721124082021-08-18T11:26:19.161-04:002021-08-18T11:26:19.161-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Business Leads Worldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06682586770344781777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-37668549494614772432020-08-19T16:54:00.417-04:002020-08-19T16:54:00.417-04:00I follow your first step, but not your second.
Y...I follow your first step, but not your second.<br /><br />Yes, I prefer to be with people "like myself", whatever that means. That involves a long process of self-knowledge and being honest about who and what I am and then maybe I can begin to seek others who have traits I feel good about being around. Probably those traits will be traits I also have, although not always. It's complicated, but I'll accept the idea for the time being. <br /><br />Now from there to see my group (I really don't belong to any group, but let's say people I hang out with) as superior, that's a jump that I can't make. Yes, I know lots of people's minds work that way, but if even someone as dense as myself has realized that I'm not superior to others, just weirder and more perverse, I suppose the rest of humanity can realize that we're all pretty much the same deep down and no one is superior to anyone else. Obviously, I may have thought more than these things than most people have, but that doesn't make me superior. They've done and learned things that I've never done or learned and we're just all different. I don't think that you need Wittgenstein's IQ to realize that. If people are incapable of realizing that, we're probably going to destroy ourselves sooner or later, maybe sooner with global warming, which is a possibility I certainly don't rule out.s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-36657162045902523412020-08-19T16:35:54.214-04:002020-08-19T16:35:54.214-04:00s. wallerstein
I think we are talking about diffe...s. wallerstein<br /><br />I think we are talking about different things. You imply, if I'm reading you correctly, that the kind of hierarchy that I'm talking about is a choice, the way that, say, military rank is a policy chosen by government. I'm suggesting something else. I'm suggesting that we humans generally prefer the company of people like ourselves, and implicit in that is the fact that we see our group--from our own perspective--as superior. If we didn't we wouldn't have chose it. I don't mean superiority in any formal sense, as in the military. I'm thinking of human attitudes and preferences. <br /><br />I'm not sure if I'm doing justice to Hume, but what occurs to me as I think about this are Hume's principles of morals, which he says are founded on human nature. That of which we approve we call moral and vice versa. The connection, I think, between Hume and the point I'm trying to make, is that both are (I contend) founded on human nature.<br /><br /> David Palmeterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895092366685079046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-67940854866246632182020-08-19T14:27:45.158-04:002020-08-19T14:27:45.158-04:00David,
First of all, your references to the Sov...David,<br /><br />First of all, your references to the Soviet Union are simple red-baiting. No one who posts in this blog is a fan of the Soviet Union or Maoist China.<br /><br />As I tried to make clear above, I agree that everybody prefers some activities to others. However, the status hierarchy in contemporary capitalist society depends on a whole list of factors, which I describe above as "brain-washing".<br /><br />There is no necessary reason why doctors and lawyers should have more social status than garbage collectors. Let's imagine a TV series about the heroic men and women who get up early to collect your garbage, starring the usual sexy young things of all known genders. It starts every week with a shot of the locker room as the sexy young things are changing into their uniforms, lots of focus on their muscles, on their beautiful hair, etc. Garbage collecting would go up in status, I assure you.<br /><br />I worked a summer cleaning the Port Authority Bus Terminal in New York. I worked the 4-12 shift, emptied a lot of garbage cans, swept a lot of floors and felt good about myself.<br />The guys I worked with (there no women on the job back then) were great to be with, maybe<br />a lot more interesting than some lawyers I've known.s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-3973322573007954332020-08-19T13:50:06.832-04:002020-08-19T13:50:06.832-04:00s.wallerstein
I don't think societies "n...s.wallerstein<br /><br />I don't think societies "need" a hierarchy; I think humans behave that way. Little kids in school will be more friendly with some classmates than with others. What makes them pick some rather than others? I suspect at first it's simply who they know, but later, say in high school, groups develop--the jocks look down on the non-jocks; then non-jocks think jocks are stupid etc. Some occupations have more prestige than others. Certainly a part of that has to do with the level of pay, but not everything. Anthony Fauci, for example, is a government employee who earns far more than the median income, but he'd be making far, far more if he were working in a Big Pharma company collecting bonuses and stock options. Yet Fauci enjoys far more public prestige than his well-paid, anonymous counterparts in the private sector. I see these phenomena as being derived, in significant part, by human nature and I can't see any reason why it wouldn't be the same in a socialist society. Not everyone in the Soviet Union had a dacha.<br />David Palmeterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895092366685079046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-18823644377135512802020-08-19T09:05:06.083-04:002020-08-19T09:05:06.083-04:00s. wallerstein,
"You're just showing you...s. wallerstein,<br /><br />"You're just showing your class prejudices. They're not pretty."<br /><br />This self re-education will make it more likely that surgeons will find it desirable that their daughters, at least the ones with doctorates in English literature, say, marry garbage collectors, as the latter will then be more likely to be boon companions of an evening in a game of I HAVE NO MOUTH AND I MUST SCREAM or AMERICAN MCGEE'S ALICE. And we shall all eat strawberries and cream.decesseronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-79207644990671283512020-08-19T07:56:31.245-04:002020-08-19T07:56:31.245-04:00David,
I don't see why every society needs a ...David,<br /><br />I don't see why every society needs a fixed social hierarchy.<br /><br />Social status today is based on profession, success and money.<br /><br />In any social group some people are better dancers, others better cooks, others better at fixing cars, others better at interpreting what Kant really meant, others better at reciting poetry. All the above are sources of social recognition and it may be that I appreciate skill at interpreting Kant more than skill at fixing cars, but it is the media and the whole system of mass brainwashing that have convinced almost everyone that you win more social points for being skillful at basketball than you do for being skillful at ironing shirts. People will need to re-educate themselves. I stress self re-education because replacing one form of mass brainwashing by the media with another form of mass brainwashing goes nowhere. It may be a long process and it may not work, but it's worth trying.s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-76099623134557612892020-08-19T02:54:04.118-04:002020-08-19T02:54:04.118-04:00On related note (human rights, movements, etc), al...On related note (human rights, movements, etc), although tangential, there is this:<br /><br />"According to a report in the Independent, a UK newspaper , the powerful toxic ammonia-based chemical made by Spartan Chemical Co. is being sprayed in the occupied detention facility despite company warnings on the label that it only be used near people outdoors, not in confined spaces. Worse yet, there are allegations from detainees that the chemical is being sprayed directly on them, though the company’s label warns that exposure to the eyes can cause “permanent eye damage” while inhaling it can cause lung damage , breathing difficulty and asthma."<br /><br />https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/ice-detention-immigrants-trump-california-toxic-chemicals-covid-a9668716.htmlJerry Fresiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17566575038825699112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-16043504282143599072020-08-18T22:30:29.119-04:002020-08-18T22:30:29.119-04:00"a $15 an hour minimum wage, universal health..."a $15 an hour minimum wage, universal healthcare, perhaps even guaranteed paid parental leave. But year after year, capital would grind on extracting a surplus from the labor of workers."<br /><br />I take the subtext to be that the latter is more morally pressing than the former. But that doesn't seem that plausible to me. I'd rather have a stable livable wage and have my surplus extracted than live hand to mouth without a capitalist in sight (I agree that both are far better than either on it's own, though) Candyflossnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-57782062266656441792020-08-18T22:12:49.959-04:002020-08-18T22:12:49.959-04:00David Palmeter, I think Richard Wolff would point ...David Palmeter, I think Richard Wolff would point you to the example of the Mondragon Corporation. Workers elect supervisors annually, and no manager can earn more than six(?) times what the lowest-paid worker in a unit earns, or something like that. So, yes, in that form of socialism, there is a workplace hierarchy of sorts, but it is a democratically-determined hierarchy, not one based on religious caste, skin color, or birth order and divine right.Eric Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-53584261287154127422020-08-18T21:13:49.181-04:002020-08-18T21:13:49.181-04:00s. wallerstein
I wasn't making a value choice...s. wallerstein<br /><br />I wasn't making a value choice, I was making an observation. That's my perhaps cynical view of human nature. Where hasn't it been the case? Certainly not in any socialist system that's been tried thus far. What society has not produced a social hierarchy?David Palmeterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895092366685079046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-63325892527148490132020-08-18T19:32:47.619-04:002020-08-18T19:32:47.619-04:00'year after year, capital would grind on extra...'year after year, capital would grind on extracting a surplus from the labor of workers'<br /><br />You're way behind, capital no longer needs your labor.<br /><br />s. wallerstein said...<br />I've never really been much interested in Marx's theory of exploitation, simply because I never needed it to see that capitalists are screwing their workers.' <br /><br />I think you have misconstrued the point, actually. The idea here is more beguiling -- Capitalism is the Reason your employer is screwing you over. <br /><br />Robert Paul Wolff said...<br />Capital extracts a surplus but not surplus labor value, and not as a consequence of the distinction between labor and labor power.'<br /><br />got it? ;)Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11915977609430813824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-89454114071531351872020-08-18T19:17:54.167-04:002020-08-18T19:17:54.167-04:00'For several days now, I have been struggling ...'For several days now, I have been struggling to pull together into one coherent narrative a number of themes to which I have devoted many words..'<br /><br />Heh, maybe you have been struggling for longer than that. :)Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11915977609430813824noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-53485231970823876932020-08-18T18:45:09.374-04:002020-08-18T18:45:09.374-04:00What about the other great civil rights movement o...What about the other great civil rights movement of American history--the Workers'/Labor movement? Yes, the neoliberal leaders of the Democratic party and the major corporate media prefer to erase the Workers' Rights movement from memory, but why should we follow their lead? Many would argue that the Workers' Rights movement differs from those other movements because the others are based on what are generally considered, with a few important exceptions, to be immutable characteristics; but the sad reality is that for the vast majority of Americans, whether one is primarily a worker or an owner is, in practical terms, also an immutable characteristic, even if most Americans have been brainwashed into believing that their own status as an easily-disposed-of part in the American economy is just a temporary inconvenience.<br /><br />It was the Workers' Rights movement that won us the 40-hour work week, the minimum wage, collective-bargaining rights, workplace safety protections, and the outlawing of child labor. As Harvey J. Kaye and Richard Wolff frequently point out, there would have been no New Deal had organized labor not joined with progressives, socialists, and communists to back FDR and to then hold his feet to the fire after he and his down-ballot supporters had gotten into office. The middle-class prosperity of the late 1950s and early 1960s that MAGAts yearn for was in large part extracted from corporate owners by the many massive strikes of workers in the post-WWII years, when nearly a third of workers belonged to unions.<br /><br />__<br /><br />"There have been a few voices on the left calling for some amelioration of the inequality, but not many <b>if indeed any</b> challenging the private ownership of the means of production" (my emphasis)<br />— ^ Robert M. La Follette and Eugene V. Debs would take issue with that statement.<br /><br />Here is Senator La Follette circa 1916:<br />"Take Profit Out of War.<br />International agreement for reducing the oppressive expenditures in preparation for war may be remote. But one thing we in America can do and do at once. <i>We can nationalize the manufacture of all munitions of war.</i> We can take away from private interest all incentives to increase army and navy appropriations. We can set a worthy example for all the world. If we could imagine that instead of piling up these enormous profits, these same great combinations of moneyed power were suffering corresponding losses, if instead of inflating their millions into billions the millions were shrinking and dwindling into mere thousands, do you believe there would be a Navy league 'dogging' the public on to an adoption of the frantic haphazard scheme of preparedness...?"<br /><br />It's forgotten today, but in the 1924 presidential election, La Follette, running on the Progressive ticket with the backing of thousands of socialists, won 1 in 6 votes cast nationally and came in second in 11 states, including California.<br /><br />During the late '60s, several figures prominent in the African-American Civil Rights Movement, notably MLK and Malcolm X, were moving in the direction of criticizing capitalism, although not to the point of calling for an outright socialism reorientation. The Black Panthers, on the other hand, were pretty openly anti-capitalist and pro-socialist.<br /><br />If you are only talking about high-profile politicians today, then I agree, there is no one today talking about challenging the primarily capitalistic orientation of our society. The closest a major political figure has recently come was Sanders with his proposals to nationalize the energy industry and parts of the telecommunications industry and to eliminate private health insurance.Eric Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-7246484397992002922020-08-18T17:08:19.413-04:002020-08-18T17:08:19.413-04:00You identify these movements as movements that hav...You identify these movements as movements that have been important for almost 2 centuries. <br /><br />I'm curious as to why you didn't include the labor movement, certainly as explicit a "movement" and as consequential as the others.Jerry Fresiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17566575038825699112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-68247852474380142592020-08-18T16:56:49.846-04:002020-08-18T16:56:49.846-04:00David,
You're just showing your class prejudi...David,<br /><br />You're just showing your class prejudices. They're not pretty.s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-84760231711848931962020-08-18T16:50:27.422-04:002020-08-18T16:50:27.422-04:00s. wallerstein
How could a socialist system avoid...s. wallerstein<br /><br />How could a socialist system avoid most of the same things? People still would have to work hard, be ordered around, and have to follow a schedule not of their making. Even if everyone were being paid equally, some nevertheless would have more authority than others, and a social hierarchy could, and probably would, arise just from the prestige of some jobs vs. others. Some would be brain surgeons, others garbage collectors. The surgeons probably would not want their daughter to marry a garbage collector.David Palmeterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895092366685079046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-61797652342828661872020-08-18T15:21:37.820-04:002020-08-18T15:21:37.820-04:00I've never really been much interested in Marx...I've never really been much interested in Marx's theory of exploitation, simply because I never needed it to see that capitalists are screwing their workers. <br /><br />I just looked at how they lived and saw that workers (of all sort, not just productive workers) labor hard, are ordered around (which is not pleasant I learned from personal experience), have to follow a schedule which does not always correspond to their own biological daily cycle (which is also unpleasant), have lower social status (which mattered to me more when I was younger) and earn a lot less than bosses do. <br /><br />All of the above and much more was and is enough for me to see capitalism as a very unjust state of affairs.s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-26677207513907824692020-08-18T15:06:47.176-04:002020-08-18T15:06:47.176-04:00What do I know since I’m a foreigner, but I guess ...What do I know since I’m a foreigner, but I guess I’m surprised that you begin with the Civil War as the first and greatest of the several liberation movements . . . What about the founding period itself, which was surely fraught with contradictions which quickly found expression in crushed tax rebellions and the consequent conflicts of the federalists and the anti-federalists. Weren’t the future movements—and the need for future movements—all prefigured in those earliest conflicts and the way they were resolved?<br /><br />By the way, Leiter suggests it’s better to go to the source rather than to the NYT’s version of Adolph Reed. So here’s that version which has a bearing on RPW’s description of “proportional inequality” as a spurious goal.<br /><br />https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/08/15/trouble-disparityR McDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-23001322711941738452020-08-18T13:44:29.718-04:002020-08-18T13:44:29.718-04:00Ok got it, thanks.Ok got it, thanks.LFChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13551197682770555147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-70316854437194979992020-08-18T13:14:50.770-04:002020-08-18T13:14:50.770-04:00Capital extracts a surplus but not surplus labor v...Capital extracts a surplus but not surplus labor value, and not as a consequence of the distinction between labor and labor power.Robert Paul Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-22090618270820976592020-08-18T11:58:49.996-04:002020-08-18T11:58:49.996-04:00I thought your position was that capital exploits ...I thought your position was that capital exploits labor but not by extracting a surplus (as Marx outlines it in Capital v.1). So not sure why the post refers to extraction of a surplus.LFChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13551197682770555147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-64688306995787698182020-08-18T11:21:46.022-04:002020-08-18T11:21:46.022-04:00Careful now... Shades of Adolph ReedCareful now... Shades of <b><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/14/us/adolph-reed-controversy.html" rel="nofollow">Adolph Reed</a></b>marcel proustnoreply@blogger.com