11 Littlegrey Comments:
Some people are more equal than others.
"Now Steve no longer has too much..."
Wow, red-baiting. Only two decades too late! Otherwise, very timely and amusing.
Two decades too late? Someone's not been paying attention... ;)
Maybe Yakov Smirnoff will be inspired to try to revive his career.
This isn't about communism it's about Marxism. Similar but different. Yakov Smirnoff would have been communist jokes...
Don't get me started on Marxism. I'll just note that Marx didn't believe in equality or equal distribution of wealth. So attaching his name to this parody is silly. But it's true that some "Marxists" do believe in this.
Of course he did, even in his early writings. Though he doesn't use those exact words the result is inevitable if his concepts are followed to their logical conclusion.
The very notion of "...from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs..." (I know that's Marx and Engels)necessitates that those with less ability be given the wealth of those with greater in order to meet their needs.
In the parody above the female contestant had less ability but equal need to the male contestant. She gave according to her ability and received according to her need.
The only way to accomplish what Marx wanted was to take from the Bourgeois and give to the Proletarians. Marx wrote in his early papers (Paris Manuscripts) that the laborer can only take back the product of his labor by taking something away from the capitalist.
But "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" assumes that everyone has different abilities and needs. To distribute wealth equally violates this principle. It's true that Marx wants workers to take the fruits of their own labor back from the capitalists, but he doesn't envision an equal apportioning of this wealth. To put this differently: Marx wants a different distribution of social wealth but not an equal one, which was my only point. And this becomes clearer in the later writings, not the earlier ones. But I commend you, TM, for your knowledge of the Paris Manuscripts!
Equal distribution is not the same as redistribution.
As I stated above, "In the parody above the female contestant had less ability but equal need to the male contestant. She gave according to her ability and received according to her need."
According to Marx she (and in keeping with your statement above) her need could actually have been greater than his. So it would have been accurate for her to have not answered the question because her ability was less and then she gets $75 of the $100 and he gets $25.
Thank you for your commendation. I am not one of those people who shun an opposing view blindly. I think everyone should read Marx so they can understand why Adam Smith was right. ;)
Ah well, a conversation for another day!
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please login or create an account.
ll01oo100 - Grudges.
The Silent Scream - I feel this game is a fairly accurate interpretation of real life. Especially ...
Lobo. - you should stick those beans in the microwave for a few minutes...
Administrator - Cool beans!
Jewtopia - I think I can say, with little to moderate exaggeration, that that was the hippest, ...
Forum Users Online -