Absurdity of Socialist BlatherfareOctober 14 2007, 23:57:00 UTC
Social class is a bunk concept created by socialists too stupid to understand the complexity of society. It is only out-dumbed by the absurd non-concept of "Classless society". Inasmuch as classes are a subjective creation out of the arbitrary criteria of an arbitrary observer, the only possible "classless society" is one where every thinking being has been exterminated -- indeed what all socialist politics tend toward. Caste societies have existed -- and capitalism is what dismantled them, wherever they have been dismantled.
Yes, socialists keep telling me about english land enclosure as something somehow relevant to the history of "capitalism", absurd as the claim might be. And yes, they keep opposing "private property" of "means of production", whatever that means. Finally, yes, presumption of guilt of the rich is explicit in Carson's answer right above here.
The contradictions are not in "society". Society is not a logical statement. Contradictions abound in socialist "theory", or rather "blather", because it's not really logical either, though it purports to be.
Re: Absurdity of Socialist BlatherfareOctober 15 2007, 00:14:39 UTC
The condescention and pretense to knowledge in your post is astounding, this truly is an example of how the blogosphere is a place were people in love with the drone of their own voice go for self-congratulatory affirmation.
I guarantee you that class is not an out moded or bunk concept, class consciousness abounds, the only people who acknowledge it these days are elites, the wealthy and privileged or their political cousins within conservatism.
That's a link to a book available from Amazon on social class written by an eminent conservative who worked in the Thatcher government no less.
Likewise there are plenty of class struggles, they are very popular, they are not against the privileged, the establishment or wealthy, the one percents of every country who pull the strings nationally and internationally but against the subordinate groups nationally and internationally.
I'm not saying that this is wholly unwarranted, when individuals band together as a group become anti-social, consequently anti-individual if you wish to play semantics, it is only right that a reaction occurs, however attention is disproportionately paid to the subordinate groups.
The things you rant about, what socialists have told you before now, are not representative, they cant be because I'm a socialist and I do not hold those views, there are many socialists who feel likewise, as any unbiased and unembittered review of the literature would reveal, however I'm not expecting that honestly you are interested.
Your view that neither socialism nor society are logical is purely subjective, I suggest that you paint yourself purple and run naked into a playground or commit some equal act of indecency and see whether or not society exists, I would equally challenge you to meet all your needs in splendid isolation if you do not believe that society exists.
Posting as you have done for public attention, even replying to my and other socialists posts demonstrates a deep seated need to correspond with others, share your views and perform as a social actor, you betray through your very own actions and discourse that your own thinking is illogical and tantamount to blather.
Re: Absurdity of Socialist BlatherfareOctober 15 2007, 00:45:34 UTC
My condescention is equalled by yours. Only one (at most) is justified. But unlike you, I am not dishonest enough to make a one-sided argument of a symmetrical opposition.
Society is an emerging phenomenon - that, no one denies. What individualists deny are claims that Society is a personal God that has a will, a "public interest" or a "common good", a "voice" as spoken by "representives" either elected or unelected, that it is incarnate in either "the State" or "the revolution" (or both, when the socialist mass-killers have been let to win).
The existence of society in no way justifies the subjugation of people to the self-proclaimed speakers for "Society". The existence of voluntary communities does not justify violence towards its members by armed goons claiming to act in the name of the community.
Yes, socialists keep telling me about english land enclosure as something somehow relevant to the history of "capitalism", absurd as the claim might be. And yes, they keep opposing "private property" of "means of production", whatever that means. Finally, yes, presumption of guilt of the rich is explicit in Carson's answer right above here.
The contradictions are not in "society". Society is not a logical statement. Contradictions abound in socialist "theory", or rather "blather", because it's not really logical either, though it purports to be.
Reply
I guarantee you that class is not an out moded or bunk concept, class consciousness abounds, the only people who acknowledge it these days are elites, the wealthy and privileged or their political cousins within conservatism.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mind-Gap-Class-Divide-Britain/dp/1904977324/ref=sr_1_1/203-5823069-4500704?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1192406536&sr=1-1
That's a link to a book available from Amazon on social class written by an eminent conservative who worked in the Thatcher government no less.
Likewise there are plenty of class struggles, they are very popular, they are not against the privileged, the establishment or wealthy, the one percents of every country who pull the strings nationally and internationally but against the subordinate groups nationally and internationally.
I'm not saying that this is wholly unwarranted, when individuals band together as a group become anti-social, consequently anti-individual if you wish to play semantics, it is only right that a reaction occurs, however attention is disproportionately paid to the subordinate groups.
The things you rant about, what socialists have told you before now, are not representative, they cant be because I'm a socialist and I do not hold those views, there are many socialists who feel likewise, as any unbiased and unembittered review of the literature would reveal, however I'm not expecting that honestly you are interested.
Your view that neither socialism nor society are logical is purely subjective, I suggest that you paint yourself purple and run naked into a playground or commit some equal act of indecency and see whether or not society exists, I would equally challenge you to meet all your needs in splendid isolation if you do not believe that society exists.
Posting as you have done for public attention, even replying to my and other socialists posts demonstrates a deep seated need to correspond with others, share your views and perform as a social actor, you betray through your very own actions and discourse that your own thinking is illogical and tantamount to blather.
Good day from the Gentleman Socialist.
Reply
Society is an emerging phenomenon - that, no one denies. What individualists deny are claims that Society is a personal God that has a will, a "public interest" or a "common good", a "voice" as spoken by "representives" either elected or unelected, that it is incarnate in either "the State" or "the revolution" (or both, when the socialist mass-killers have been let to win).
The existence of society in no way justifies the subjugation of people to the self-proclaimed speakers for "Society". The existence of voluntary communities does not justify violence towards its members by armed goons claiming to act in the name of the community.
The only gentle socialists are dead socialists.
Reply
Leave a comment