Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Why Isn't the Reaction to this, A Call for Violent Revolution or "Tax the Rich"?

roachboy · 01-03-2007, 04:08 PM

dk:

i dont think you understand the center of the arguments i am making. it makes no sense to think that the world in which you live is made up of an accumulation of separate individuals whose interests pertain only to themselves. you live in a social system. you are of a system. and the people who make up that system have the power to decide what kind of system they want to live in and to institute measures that will tend to bring that system into being. they simply have to take that power. (i have more to say about this, but i'll defer it as this post went another direction and i am having fun writing it...)

you live within capitalism. i posted this before, but i took it down: one of the defining features of capitalism, still (though the distinction is more complex now than it was 150 years ago) is the division between those who control capital--who control the conditions that enable production--and those who sell their labor power for a wage--those who actually do the production. so long as that basic logic is in place, the system itself produces class divisions in terms of income and following from that everything else, at one level or another. redistributon of wealth minimizes these distinctions--reduces them--but does not eliminate them.

your idea of no redistribution wealth, if enacted within this context, would collapse this order almost immediately.
your idea would result in the maximum possible distinctions between the classes.
the only reason that is not clear to you is because you do not seem to have any working sense of capitalism as it actually exists and prefer to dream of some hayek-fantasy of free markets populated by nice small producers who hover together in relations of happyface equilibrium. this is what we call make-believe. fantasy land. capitalism does not and has not EVER worked like this. not in this construct we live in, the one that gets designated reality, so as to avoid complications (complications like the political in the old sense of the term).

you like to talk about tax revolt and so i imagine fancy yourself a kind of potential minuteman and that 2007 is somehow still 1774 and that the america economic system now and some jeffersonian utopia of yeomen farmers still have anything to do with each other.

i can see it's appeal: it lets you like the fact that you dont like taxes and imagine that there is something politically coherent and even radical in liking the fact that you dont like taxes and even more if you dont like taxes a whole lot. i mean, sure, why not?...if you like not liking taxes that much, you can make it the center of anything, really. and if liking not liking taxes is really what politics is about for you--well that and liking that you like guns---then i suppose that fitting what you talk about into anything like a description of capitalism as it actually exists is secondary--hey why bother, you got all the fun stuff without it, you get to like not liking taxes and like liking guns.

but that doesnt mean that what you say about contemporary capitalism is accurate or compelling, simply because you dont seem to take making what you say about capitalism accurate or compelling seriously.
so you dont.

i just hope that folk who think as you do never get anywhere near power.
and ideologically, the only thing that really separates your position from that of any run-o-the-mill american conservative is that you like not liking taxes more than they do.
o they dont like taxes, but they really dont like not liking them as much as you do.

same thing with your positions about socialism.
so far as i can tell, all socialism really means to you is Something Very Bad, and its only coherent content goes back to the same thing---again---this affection for your lack of affection for taxes.

you got to move outside your pet issues and the way they frame everything for you to see other kinds of arguments, dk.

i mean, i think that most right libertarians are reasonable folk who sense real problems but route them through a kind of crazy argumentative framework and land in very strange places because of the frame they use: but i have at least arrived at that conclusion by reading what they have to say and thinking about it.
also, for fun, i used to listen to alot of the far right libertarian movement's
fine radio broadcasts--like that guy saxon, i cant remember his first name, who used to have a survivalist call in shw on world wide christian radio shortwave before it decided, after oklahoma city, to stop broadcasting quite so much of that sort of thing--you know, brought to you by viking international, buy your gold now before paper money starts to collapse. i was quite fond of that station for a while: everyone was so entirely earnest and so wholly insane in what they said, and the station was very powerful wattage-wise so it seemed like these folk were EVERYWHERE--it was like watching a scary movie, particularly as i was in upstate new york and from what i could tell, once if left ithaca these folk WERE everywhere.

anyway, that is a little anecdote and i enjoyed telling it.
i notice that i am starting to use caps again.
strange.

01-03-2007, 04:08 PM	#51 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	dk: i dont think you understand the center of the arguments i am making. it makes no sense to think that the world in which you live is made up of an accumulation of separate individuals whose interests pertain only to themselves. you live in a social system. you are of a system. and the people who make up that system have the power to decide what kind of system they want to live in and to institute measures that will tend to bring that system into being. they simply have to take that power. (i have more to say about this, but i'll defer it as this post went another direction and i am having fun writing it...) you live within capitalism. i posted this before, but i took it down: one of the defining features of capitalism, still (though the distinction is more complex now than it was 150 years ago) is the division between those who control capital--who control the conditions that enable production--and those who sell their labor power for a wage--those who actually do the production. so long as that basic logic is in place, the system itself produces class divisions in terms of income and following from that everything else, at one level or another. redistributon of wealth minimizes these distinctions--reduces them--but does not eliminate them. your idea of no redistribution wealth, if enacted within this context, would collapse this order almost immediately. your idea would result in the maximum possible distinctions between the classes. the only reason that is not clear to you is because you do not seem to have any working sense of capitalism as it actually exists and prefer to dream of some hayek-fantasy of free markets populated by nice small producers who hover together in relations of happyface equilibrium. this is what we call make-believe. fantasy land. capitalism does not and has not EVER worked like this. not in this construct we live in, the one that gets designated reality, so as to avoid complications (complications like the political in the old sense of the term). you like to talk about tax revolt and so i imagine fancy yourself a kind of potential minuteman and that 2007 is somehow still 1774 and that the america economic system now and some jeffersonian utopia of yeomen farmers still have anything to do with each other. i can see it's appeal: it lets you like the fact that you dont like taxes and imagine that there is something politically coherent and even radical in liking the fact that you dont like taxes and even more if you dont like taxes a whole lot. i mean, sure, why not?...if you like not liking taxes that much, you can make it the center of anything, really. and if liking not liking taxes is really what politics is about for you--well that and liking that you like guns---then i suppose that fitting what you talk about into anything like a description of capitalism as it actually exists is secondary--hey why bother, you got all the fun stuff without it, you get to like not liking taxes and like liking guns. but that doesnt mean that what you say about contemporary capitalism is accurate or compelling, simply because you dont seem to take making what you say about capitalism accurate or compelling seriously. so you dont. i just hope that folk who think as you do never get anywhere near power. and ideologically, the only thing that really separates your position from that of any run-o-the-mill american conservative is that you like not liking taxes more than they do. o they dont like taxes, but they really dont like not liking them as much as you do. same thing with your positions about socialism. so far as i can tell, all socialism really means to you is Something Very Bad, and its only coherent content goes back to the same thing---again---this affection for your lack of affection for taxes. you got to move outside your pet issues and the way they frame everything for you to see other kinds of arguments, dk. i mean, i think that most right libertarians are reasonable folk who sense real problems but route them through a kind of crazy argumentative framework and land in very strange places because of the frame they use: but i have at least arrived at that conclusion by reading what they have to say and thinking about it. also, for fun, i used to listen to alot of the far right libertarian movement's fine radio broadcasts--like that guy saxon, i cant remember his first name, who used to have a survivalist call in shw on world wide christian radio shortwave before it decided, after oklahoma city, to stop broadcasting quite so much of that sort of thing--you know, brought to you by viking international, buy your gold now before paper money starts to collapse. i was quite fond of that station for a while: everyone was so entirely earnest and so wholly insane in what they said, and the station was very powerful wattage-wise so it seemed like these folk were EVERYWHERE--it was like watching a scary movie, particularly as i was in upstate new york and from what i could tell, once if left ithaca these folk WERE everywhere. anyway, that is a little anecdote and i enjoyed telling it. i notice that i am starting to use caps again. strange. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite