Stoller: Ad hocary?Lark: Just trying different ways to organise production etc. where the consistant and premeditated element is the principles of equality, communism-socialism and liberty.
Equality for WHICH CLASS? Liberty for WHICH CLASS? To suggest that BOTH property owners and non-property owners can be equal---or equally free---is an oxymoron.
Stoller: 'Maximisation'---the language of the capitalist!
Lark: Oh, I'm sorry what type of official newspeak is being operated today. I could say "Best", "Most Perfect", What would you suggest?
You admit in this post that the labor theory of value is important. It is important because it asserts that all useful things originate from the exertions of workers instead of the 'clever ideas' and 'assumed risks' of capitalists.
To adopt the vernacular of the opposing ideology---'maximazation,' marginal utility, scarce resources, et. al---is to deny the labor theory of value and to accept the capitalist's (outrageous) claim that value has sources outside of labor. This weakens the concept of class exploitation greatly---and with it the argument favoring socialism.
Call it dogma if you must---but I maintain with confidence that precise language is an essential tool in overcoming bourgeois obfuscation.
Stoller: Freedom to or freedom from?
Lark: Both, either by themselves is a bit useless but definitely Freedom to, Barry I dont like where this is going....
Not freedom FROM? Not freedom FROM capitalist oppression?
: No, I'd prefer to live in a Communist or Syndicalist region but other people might not want to.
But there is NO SUCH THING as capitalism in one country. Capitalism---as if we hadn't noticed yet!---is GLOBAL CANCER.
Stoller: The market first commodifies labor. That IS capitalism.
Lark: Well I dont think it's perfect, given the choice I dont favour it but it's better than the present system Barry.
Granted.
But why concede defeat? Why accept that capitalism is here to stay? God knows, feudalism sure looked like the end of history, too...
Stoller: Or shall we just fall back on ad hocary?
Lark: [A]d hoc isnt disorder it's organised diversity and prepared spontaneuity.
With capitalists still kicking around (organizing armies, buying spies, bribing weaker elements of the proletariat, etc., etc.)?
Which brings me to...
None.
