07 May 2006

The Theory and Practice Conundrum, my other problem with Socialists

Well, I have previously posted my problems with the Limits of Socialism, which gives the definitional outlines of Socialism and looks at what it takes to make it come about. I find it wanting from the very start, needless to say, but even if I *agreed* with them, here is the other part that really needs be addressed.

The following quote is either attributed to computer scientist Jan L. A. van de Snepscheut or to Yogi Berra. Take your pick, both work for me:

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is.
At times I feel that I live my entire life by pithy quotes, rules of thumb and mnemonics...they do serve their purpose of encapsulating hard ideas in easy to transmit vocabulary that retains meaning and is hard to scramble.

In this case one of the problems with trying to extend social 'theory' without having good and hard definitions as to how societies respond, is that the application of such 'theory' often ends with results that are extremely at variance with what the 'theory' predicts. Karl Marx did not have Freud, Jung, Taylor, Edison, Ford, Boeing, Gates or a whole host of others to draw upon for understanding Capitalism and societies. Yes, he was 'winging it'.

Socialism, as I looked at previously, is an End State system that arrives naturally from the finality of the Capitalist System. That End State has clearly defined areas that must be true in order for Socialism to come about. The ability to get skills to do jobs must be easy and wide-spread with no disparities between any part of the globe on this. Capitalism will see disparities and make a profit from them until all such disappear. An early split when the Soviet Union stood up happened in the US between Socialists: some thought you could have 'Socialism in One Country' and others held to the Marxist concept for global social capability and equality. Socialism factionated and continued to do so after that basic split, with the pragmatists winning out over the idealists and then getting their precepts distorted so they came to denounce any damn thing against Capitalism. Yes, they tried to impeach anyone who wholeheartedly took part in Capitalism as anti-worker, anti-equality of goods distribution, etc.

In becoming pragmatic they tossed out the basic concept that Socialism may only arise after Capitalism has FINISHED itself and brought equality of labor capability everywhere. And so it comes as a face slapping surprise to many modern Socialists, descended from those pragmatists, when they hear quotes from Marx like the following (and thank you Shucks for compiling these!):
"The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world" - Karl Marx on behalf of the International Workingmen's Association, letter to Abraham Lincoln congratulating him on reelection as President of the United States, January 28, 1865

"From the commencement of the titanic American strife the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the star-spangled banner carried the destiny of their class." - Karl Marx, letter to Abraham Lincoln congratulating him on reelection as President of the United States, January 28, 1865
Yes, direct quotes from Karl Marx on wanting Capitalism to succeed! And, as the wonderful Scientific Socialists that my parents were explained it to me, absolutely consistent with the goal of Socialism: for Socialism to come about, Capitalism MUST succeed!

Today's protesters who wear Red, put up the Hammer and Sickle, and otherwise stage protests AGAINST global free trade and against advancing of industrial society are fighting to actually keep Socialism from EVER COMING ABOUT! By stopping the spread of Capitalism they are stopping the good work of Capitalist advancement by hard work and not fully adequate pay so that it may spread further. In actuality by not getting full recompense for labor, those that do the labor are INVESTING in the global success of Capitalism so that it may spread everywhere and uplift everyone. For once that equality is achieved, then Capitalism will have run its course and Socialism will arise of necessity to replace it.

For the 'theory' of Socialism posits that Capitalism must DO THIS VERY THING. It is inherent in the Capitalist system to do so for it to succeed. And Capitalism requires WORKERS to work *hard* to achieve income enough to support the expansionistic Capitalist system.

That is the LOGIC behind Socialism.

If you protest against the spread of Capitalism and the good that it does, the one thing you absolutely, positively cannot describe yourself as being is a Socialist!

The concept you are looking for is Luddite.

And support to have one, and only one party in a Luddite State is Totalitarianism.

These are what such activities DESCRIBE. By doing the activity of *not* working hard to support the global spread of Capitalism to uplift all of mankind you are a Luddite Totalitarian. Those describe your activities. To be a Socialist you must *work hard* so that Capitalism can *invest* in the spread of industry by exploiting labor differentials until they ALL DISAPPEAR.

In supporting sending illegal aliens home to their own nations to work on their economies, one could indeed say that what I support is Socialist as it provides for the spread of Capitalism and the things it does. In truth I do it to support the much older concept of National Sovereignty and the rights of a People as a Nation to be self-governing without outside interference.

If you are a Socialist and believe that Socialism will come about as a natural End State of Capitalism you should want these illegal aliens draining wealth to no good cause to go home and work HARD at building a Capitalist infrastructure so they may be uplifted in so doing.

If you disagree with THAT, what you support is NOT Socialism.

I not only disagree with the foundational concepts of Socialism but its actual practice by pragmatic people who twist it into something entirely different. By pushing to *give away* every damn thing, they do not encourage people to *work hard* to build up Capitalism so that Socialism may arrive once Capitalism has reached its End State. The practice of modern day Socialists and Communists is that of Luddite Totalitarianism, not liberal Socialism built on the hard work of people to form an industrial global entity.

If you believe in what Karl Marx put forth, the logic is inescapable by the very foundational description of the Socialist State. Once you toss out working towards *that* you are no longer working towards Socialism.

I disagree with the foundational concepts and precepts of Socialism, most of the actual mechanics behind it and how it could ever arise as it does not take *actual* human nature into account. There are some mechanisms in its description of Capitalism that are relatively good, if antiquated. Actually getting it to work requires patience and the knowledge it will NOT ARRIVE IN YOUR LIFETIME. You cannot push an End State to a system that is still working towards it without breaking the entire system and causing chaos.

So those are my positions on Socialism as it is put forth and how it is practiced. You can't agree with the Foundations and then agree that the current practices actually are working to achieve those ends. And you can't say that the current methods being used will actually achieve the ends of Socialism as those ends are fiercely at odds with what is being practiced and worked towards.

Yes, you cannot have it BOTH WAYS.

If you claim to be a Socialist and find yourself protesting Capitalism, you must ask yourself: 'How does this work towards the End State of Capitalism and not Anarchy or Totalitarianism?'

And those quiet Socialists working hard and fervently at their everyday jobs are to be congratulated on their adherence to Marx to work earnestly towards making the good of Capitalism spread quietly to the far ends of the globe. I may disagree with your concepts and precepts, but the work being done in and of itself is necessary and GOOD.

No comments: