Posted on 01/30/2006 10:59:01 AM PST by Sonny M
"They don't see themselves as having political persuasions," said David Colander
I wish we could say the same about journalists. People would have had a lot more faith in them if they didn't have an agenda.
Was that post supposed to make sense? If so try again.
That is not a correct summation of Marx's thought. He was totally opposed to using conclusions drawn from ancient Rome for 19th century England for example.
Each society has a consciousness which is developed according to the stage of ecnomic development that society is in. Hence there was NO proletariat until capitalism developed. So the oppression during the 18th century was against the bourgeoise by the feudal rulers. Marx was very much against trying to foment proletarian revolution if the economy was not at a higher stage of development. Recall the debate about "skipping stages of development" to prematurely bring about a proletarian revolution. This meant Russia was not ripe according to Marxian thought. Lenin had to rationalize his revolution to overcome Marx.
Just tell me what in this context the words "rational" and "best interest" mean.
Rational means the same thing it means in other contexts. If a rational man is faced with buying the same product for two prices he will chose the lower as a rational choice. That is an example of seeking his "best interest" as well since it gives a greater value to his money.
The assumption of rationality is the same assumption that democracy builds upon.
However, you must consider that the assumption of both requires that there be complete information available about the alternatives.
Exactly. That is why Lenin developed the theory of the weakest link (the weakest, lest developed imperial power was to be the easiest place to start world revolution), Trotsky promoted export of revolution to the most developed countries and after the later failed, Stalin introduced the building of socialism in one country combined with forced industrialization, then after the idea of peaceful coexistence and competition was introduced, and in the end was perestroika.
But in the classical Marxism the revolution has to be prepared by the globalization, world industrialization, elimination of borders and stratification of mankind into owning class and people who own nothing but have only their labor to sell at or below subsistence level.
That is why classical Marxism had to be opposed to the trade unions, tariffs, national solidarity, local communities, religion, traditional morality, redistribution, anti-trust laws etc ...
Globalists, freetraders, freemarketeers, secularists, libertarians, etc work for the vision of Marx to come true. And they may succeed!
True, its the differance between math and folklore.
Thats why its a math model, not shaking a stick.
"Globalists, freetraders, freemarketeers, secularists, libertarians, etc work for the vision of Marx to come true."
You lost me at libertarians -- seems to me that they're at opposite ends of the spectrum from Marxists. Unless you think that you can get to the far left by heading right.
How often do you see "the same product [sold] for two prices"?
If I chose to buy from a local grocery because I like family owned stores do I act irrational?
If I buy more expensive product because I do not have time to look, do I act irrational?
If I drive around and waste time and money to buy something useless but what I like, do I act irrational?
If I am motivated by the emotions or impulses and not by calculation, , do I act irrational?
If I give money to a bum on a street do I act irrational?
If I chose to work less in order to have more free time do I act irrational?
If I buy expensive caviar instead of cheap gruel do I act irrational?
If I decide to save money and then die leaving them to the inheritors, do I act irrational?
Is my best interest different from the interests of my close relatives or from my friends, or from my country? Which should I chose?
Is my best interest to enjoy money now or to save them to get better return later?
If I spend money on myself instead on my family, do I act irrational?
If I can steal without being caught or punished, do I act irrational?
If I vote for the government which will serve my private interests by handouts, do I act irrational?
I had to go through the pain of reading marx (no, I am not a marxist), his "economic theory" was more or less a philosophy that played class warfare.
Its not viable as a social science, or even as a utopian economic theory (several economic classes don't even seem to exist in his writings, forget simple, either he didn't know where to put them, or he ignored them).
I don't recall him looking for any mechanism to explain phenomena in society, he simply came up with his own conclusions and stated them (hint, see democratic party platform for his conclusions).
It always amazed me, that Marx, more then his partner Engels (who actually knew some economics and finance) was the more well known one, when its clear, what Marx was about, was not even a social science, it was a philosophy of life modeled as a theory, wrapped in populism with a hate the rich rhetoric, and ignorant of even the society he himself lived in.
Mao was one of the few (but still insane) folks who tried to rework marx to apply to an agriculteral society (marx leaves out farming and agriculteral societies in his writings or how his "theory" would have applied to them.....very very ironic when one thinks about it).
Post 39 isn't me.
Just because many economists like to ape physicists by constructing "math models" does not make their concepts more scientific.
Cargo cult members can worship high tech items without being technologically advanced.
"Post 39 isn't me."
Sorry -- my bad -- should have said "paudio".
You can. By dissolving ties between people and by eroding taboos and restrictions you make the job easier for the revolutionaries. That is why Gramsci style Marxists might like libertarians.
The economic models that people should use, should be basic, not social science.
I use models for things such as allocation of resources, and maximization or revenue (i.e. how much to raise rents in a certain area, and how fast an apartment will rent out at a certain rent).
Math is a tool to do that, the model gets revised from time to time (because time changes).
I avoid the whole "sociology" fad that everyone seems to be following.
Math is many things, but witchcraft it is not.....nor is it sociology.
And using a math model is a hell of alot better then what my predecessor did.....trial and error.
LOL.
Let me take a stab at answering your questions:
Every day.
No.
No.
No.
Maybe.
No.
No.
Not unless you're starving.
No -- you're helping to ensure your lineage survives.
Economics can't answer that -- your best interests would consider all those things.
Depends on how much you enjoy having things now, compared to future security.
Maybe.
Not if it doesn't bother you -- this is why we need police and jails.
No -- that's why it's important to show people that the handouts hurt everyone eventually.
Thank you for your answers. You demonstrated that this concept of "rationality" is completely faulty.
Next time, I'll try to be irrational. :-)
More human, you mean?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.