Let's just K.I.S.S. -- CAPITAL is the excess of production over consumption. The question then is 'Who rightfully OWNS the excess - the producer or their envious neighbour? COMMUNISM is confiscation (not purchase or trade) of the excess by the covetous commune who would rather seize than produce.
I wish I could. The point I was trying to make, apparently unsuccessfully, is that we should try to get away from the Marxist terminology, the Marxist framing of the debate.
That's a really good point, Zork. The Marxist framing distorts the real advantages of capitalism. Often, it is not capitalism that fails, but rather governments and propagandists who distort the picture. BTW....I note you made Lew Rockwell's daily articles last week. Way to go!
Exactly. Economic theory should be free of moral judgements.
I am thinking of writing something about the pros and cons of industrial vs subsistence farming in light of the Mexican revolution and its agrarian reforms at the beginning of the 20th century.
As for Lew Rockwell, I was hoping for that for a long time. I am a big fan of his work ever since his Katrina lecture https://youtu.be/tlF5RKQsVcw?si=ptk7GuRx7ioDXHLr which I listened to several times.
And how much propaganda and framing is involved in the use of translations involving a narrative hostile to one's own?
Replace "mode' with "means" and "expropriation" with "exploitation" or "appropriation", check their meanings in a dictionary, then ask yourself what Marx was trying to say, and which would better suit that intention. 'Dictionary mechanics' are the scourge of translations and the source of much "Humpty-Dumpty talk", whether accidental or deliberate.
I was thinking about that as I was writing it, I even considered trying to find the German original, etc.. but I gave up on it quickly. Since I do not speak German, it would have been a major task.
I also think that what's there is pretty much what Marx meant. It is consistent with the rest and all my memories of the Hungarian translation I once read. (just don't ask me to quote the Hungarian 😉)
I do not think that there is any deliberate mistranslation. All of Marx's translators were devotees... (I believe)
Quote: "Here we go again with some more Marx bashing"
I think anything I type here is possibly bashing the basher, but here I go.
2020 before lockdowns I was in a group on reddit and someone had posted about 'socialism'. A commentator said, "do you even know what socialism is?"
I thought, "mmm.. I actually don't know myself".
Go forward to 2023 and I am reading Ayn Rand - she is criticised for her belief of Capitalism - Laissez-faire. I read her The Virtue of Unselfishness ... I read one other book and watch and read on line stuff..
I would like to add here that as a teenager and one year of Russian history, I was sold on communism.. now I'm thinking what a horror...
While it might be alright to criticise Capitalism, does anyone really know it and the different variations?? and if you read some of what happened in the Communist countries... killing of thousand of citizens and loss of property... would you really want Socialism - Communism anyway?
I found it also confronting but I can honestly say, I will not look at society, politics, economy, the rich, the poor the same ever again I start to question my own life and motives.
(I am not an American by the way but the above books, videos have helped me to join the dots and this is happening all over the world in what these people say about government)
One thing I didn't mention was that I first heard of Ayn Rand, for instance, in the mid 1990's. I was attending in a Metaphysic course in Australia and the course was about Individuality and Freedom. When I read the course notes I have I realise that it is like Ayn Rand talking. The man that gave the course, he died in 1997 or so, he only mentioned her name in passing and that name stayed in my life. In 2016/17 I tried reading her The Virtue of Selfishness and couldn't. It was to confronting. Yet last year I was ready to read her words and devour them.
Some of this change in me is because I changed countries, learning German and confronted with my own deficiencies in growing up and now I feel more mature and ready to be challenged - a little bit anyway :)
What I notice about my own thinking and beliefs when reading all that I previously mentioned is that I have been thinking about these themes since I was a teenager..
I am also confronted with my own fixed views and of others that are uni educated and how fixed they are in hearing anything out side of the 'normal narrative'.
I'm interested in the idea of Capital and normal life and Zork, you say: When a peasant is tilling his field then sow some seed, it is a multilayer investment of his time, labour, the use of his beast of burden – that needs to be fed - and his capital of seed.
and yet in this sense we, surely, accept that this is 100% alright and yet when it comes to 'money' many immediately think it is 'not fair/good/required/exploitation of others' and yet without these seeds we could not grow more food, perhaps. I think these examples are a good way of connect the dots - for me at least.
It has taken me a long time to connect the idea 'government money is actually citizens money' and this is still in process with me and in the sense of 'printed money'..
There is not much I can do about this, right now.. but knowing about it, despite being frustrating, is enough right now. I don't believe the sh*t dished out from politicians/leaders/finance people so much, anymore.
After I posted my previous comment, I watch this, again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3ZuDrEi0Z4 Dr. Burt Folsom LIVE at the National Conservative Student Conference and it is particularly interesting for 'dot joining' at about 28 minutes and the start of Q & A. Some is a mind stretch but only because I'm so deep in the old 'ideas'...
I'm enjoying my journey of learning about another Freedom on this world of hours.
It's impressive when someone takes the time and hard work to check his beliefs, then alters them when you learn the truth about what you were for and what you were against. It's hard to admit you were wrong and then adopt the better idea based on the evidence you come across by research. Good for you!
I just realised your blog is called 'Politics is Personal'.
When I lived in Sydney, my local Federal Poltiician told me that I was a bit personal... I was sending her 'aggressive' emails about how men were discriminated against too but she insisted that, that didn't matter as females were discriminated against 'more'...
She told me that I was to 'aggressive'.
I went home with my tail between my legs.. then two hours later I thought 'f*ck you lady, it is personal.. very.. you can make decisions that affect my/our lives, so yes, it is very personal'.
Let's just K.I.S.S. -- CAPITAL is the excess of production over consumption. The question then is 'Who rightfully OWNS the excess - the producer or their envious neighbour? COMMUNISM is confiscation (not purchase or trade) of the excess by the covetous commune who would rather seize than produce.
I wish I could. The point I was trying to make, apparently unsuccessfully, is that we should try to get away from the Marxist terminology, the Marxist framing of the debate.
That's a really good point, Zork. The Marxist framing distorts the real advantages of capitalism. Often, it is not capitalism that fails, but rather governments and propagandists who distort the picture. BTW....I note you made Lew Rockwell's daily articles last week. Way to go!
Exactly. Economic theory should be free of moral judgements.
I am thinking of writing something about the pros and cons of industrial vs subsistence farming in light of the Mexican revolution and its agrarian reforms at the beginning of the 20th century.
As for Lew Rockwell, I was hoping for that for a long time. I am a big fan of his work ever since his Katrina lecture https://youtu.be/tlF5RKQsVcw?si=ptk7GuRx7ioDXHLr which I listened to several times.
Actually, capitalism evolves into peonage every time.
It sounds good, but I do not think that there is evidence to support your statement
And how much propaganda and framing is involved in the use of translations involving a narrative hostile to one's own?
Replace "mode' with "means" and "expropriation" with "exploitation" or "appropriation", check their meanings in a dictionary, then ask yourself what Marx was trying to say, and which would better suit that intention. 'Dictionary mechanics' are the scourge of translations and the source of much "Humpty-Dumpty talk", whether accidental or deliberate.
I was thinking about that as I was writing it, I even considered trying to find the German original, etc.. but I gave up on it quickly. Since I do not speak German, it would have been a major task.
I also think that what's there is pretty much what Marx meant. It is consistent with the rest and all my memories of the Hungarian translation I once read. (just don't ask me to quote the Hungarian 😉)
I do not think that there is any deliberate mistranslation. All of Marx's translators were devotees... (I believe)
I came here via the Lew Rockwell newsletter.
Quote: "Here we go again with some more Marx bashing"
I think anything I type here is possibly bashing the basher, but here I go.
2020 before lockdowns I was in a group on reddit and someone had posted about 'socialism'. A commentator said, "do you even know what socialism is?"
I thought, "mmm.. I actually don't know myself".
Go forward to 2023 and I am reading Ayn Rand - she is criticised for her belief of Capitalism - Laissez-faire. I read her The Virtue of Unselfishness ... I read one other book and watch and read on line stuff..
Then comes: what is Capitalism? mmm
Rand talked about Ludwig von Mises https://mises.org/profile/ludwig-von-mises
I am now glad that I have read so much and more of Thomas Lorenzo and in particular : https://store.mises.org/The-Problem-with-Socialism-P11032.aspx
I would like to add here that as a teenager and one year of Russian history, I was sold on communism.. now I'm thinking what a horror...
While it might be alright to criticise Capitalism, does anyone really know it and the different variations?? and if you read some of what happened in the Communist countries... killing of thousand of citizens and loss of property... would you really want Socialism - Communism anyway?
They were not nice people...
Another good book is: https://mises.org/library/book/anatomy-state by Murray N. Rothbard
Rothbard also produced: Egalitarianism As A Revolt Against Nature, And Other Essays https://archive.org/details/EgalitarianismAsARevoltAgainstNatureAndOtherEssays2
I found it also confronting but I can honestly say, I will not look at society, politics, economy, the rich, the poor the same ever again I start to question my own life and motives.
I've also read this: https://cdn.mises.org/thelaw.pdf The Law - by a French man in 1850 or so..
I've realised how brain washed I am.
I was against something that I knew nothing about.
I am not saying everything is perfect but I am so glad that I started with Ayn Rand.. who is mentioned by some of the authors above...
As I read 'the Law' I thought.. this guy is making sense.. it is hard but this could be today?
Loss of freedom.
We pay taxes which is forced out of us - Ayn Rand was born in Russia and totally against Communism and not having freedoms...
I could go on... I'm careful not to put all this on a pedestal as it is hard to 'unlearn, what I have learned for 60+ years'.
I am glad to see your article ZORK (THE) HUN
Edit: damn, I raved and forget about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Vw6uF2LdZw
with a presentation from Burt Folsom
(I am not an American by the way but the above books, videos have helped me to join the dots and this is happening all over the world in what these people say about government)
We all had our journeys through the ideas and it seems that there is quite a bit of an overlap between yours and mine.
I find that interesting...
One thing I didn't mention was that I first heard of Ayn Rand, for instance, in the mid 1990's. I was attending in a Metaphysic course in Australia and the course was about Individuality and Freedom. When I read the course notes I have I realise that it is like Ayn Rand talking. The man that gave the course, he died in 1997 or so, he only mentioned her name in passing and that name stayed in my life. In 2016/17 I tried reading her The Virtue of Selfishness and couldn't. It was to confronting. Yet last year I was ready to read her words and devour them.
Some of this change in me is because I changed countries, learning German and confronted with my own deficiencies in growing up and now I feel more mature and ready to be challenged - a little bit anyway :)
What I notice about my own thinking and beliefs when reading all that I previously mentioned is that I have been thinking about these themes since I was a teenager..
I am also confronted with my own fixed views and of others that are uni educated and how fixed they are in hearing anything out side of the 'normal narrative'.
I'm interested in the idea of Capital and normal life and Zork, you say: When a peasant is tilling his field then sow some seed, it is a multilayer investment of his time, labour, the use of his beast of burden – that needs to be fed - and his capital of seed.
and yet in this sense we, surely, accept that this is 100% alright and yet when it comes to 'money' many immediately think it is 'not fair/good/required/exploitation of others' and yet without these seeds we could not grow more food, perhaps. I think these examples are a good way of connect the dots - for me at least.
It has taken me a long time to connect the idea 'government money is actually citizens money' and this is still in process with me and in the sense of 'printed money'..
There is not much I can do about this, right now.. but knowing about it, despite being frustrating, is enough right now. I don't believe the sh*t dished out from politicians/leaders/finance people so much, anymore.
After I posted my previous comment, I watch this, again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3ZuDrEi0Z4 Dr. Burt Folsom LIVE at the National Conservative Student Conference and it is particularly interesting for 'dot joining' at about 28 minutes and the start of Q & A. Some is a mind stretch but only because I'm so deep in the old 'ideas'...
I'm enjoying my journey of learning about another Freedom on this world of hours.
It's impressive when someone takes the time and hard work to check his beliefs, then alters them when you learn the truth about what you were for and what you were against. It's hard to admit you were wrong and then adopt the better idea based on the evidence you come across by research. Good for you!
Thank you for your comment :)
I just realised your blog is called 'Politics is Personal'.
When I lived in Sydney, my local Federal Poltiician told me that I was a bit personal... I was sending her 'aggressive' emails about how men were discriminated against too but she insisted that, that didn't matter as females were discriminated against 'more'...
She told me that I was to 'aggressive'.
I went home with my tail between my legs.. then two hours later I thought 'f*ck you lady, it is personal.. very.. you can make decisions that affect my/our lives, so yes, it is very personal'.
I stopped voting for her shortly after that....