at parallel sides of the same nth dimensional space we have the bible saying that it is the love of money, not just money itself that is the root of all evil and you have Karl Marx who does not label it as evil but definitely identifies it as one of the greatest impediments to the evolution of a fair society and that is the ownership of property creates a divide between those who eventually control the means of production and those who are then forced to offer their labour as a commodity in the market place, such that the profit in any commodity produced is not shared with the person whose labour transforms the raw material into an object of value
Originally posted by kmax87marx clearly has the superior analysis. So, is evil embodied in these structures of capital ownership, or does it come from the people who create them?
at parallel sides of the same nth dimensional space we have the bible saying that it is the [b]love of money, not just money itself that is the root of all evil and you have Karl Marx who does not label it as evil but definitely identifies it as one of the greatest impediments to the evolution of a fair society and that is the ownership of prope ...[text shortened]... ] with the person whose labour [b]transforms the raw material into an object of value[/b]
Originally posted by TomPMarx was a blooming dunce. He predicted the fall of capitalism but the social structure he (and Engels) thought was so perfect failed miserably. I would say he knew very little.
marx clearly has the superior analysis. So, is evil embodied in these structures of capital ownership, or does it come from the people who create them?
And whats wrong with capitalism .. not theoretical capitalism but the format in which it exists in the world today .. with a pinch of socialism ? That system is what generates the bulk of the production, it creates means for research and development, it provides the vehicle for investment, provides jobs and standard of living that the world has never yet seen. How can that be evil ?
This is a capitalist world. China can talk all it wants about socalism and communism but they are captalist. Cuba and North Korea are the only 2 countries that can still claim non-capitalist status and citizens of both countries are poor by any standard.
Originally posted by chancremechanicSuprised nobody has mentioned Bush.
Satan.....is who rules the world and it's billions of followers.....
Here's another suggestion - fundamentalism, both Neoliberal Economics in the West and Religious fervour in the Middle East. Does one cause the other? Neoliberal fundamentalism seems to be a reaction to Communism, and since Communism was 'evil', the persuance of accellerated neoliberal policies through the inexorable WTO was easily justifiable to the mass psychology of the 90's. Four and a half years ago some people decided that the American hegemony propagated by economics via two large buildings in New York was evil and decided to destroy the two buildings. However, they failed to impact on the hegemonic system, whilst murdering thousands of innocents. (and one or two guilty as charged profiteers I will add). This was an evil act, but it is being used to justify more consumerist brainwashing in westernised nations/anywhere with sky tv...
Again I believe it comes down to a comparison of individual versus systemic evil. The people in the Trade Centres were innocent individuals, but guilty (maybe) in the a-moral nature of their profit hungry job descriptions.
Originally posted by TomPYou are making an assumption that the 'profit motive' that exists in all societies communist or capitalist or socialist is evil. The profit motive is less prevalent in purely comminist societies like Cuba but you are very wrong to imply it does not exist.
Suprised nobody has mentioned Bush.
Here's another suggestion - fundamentalism, both Neoliberal Economics in the West and Religious fervour in the Middle East. Does one cause the other? Neoliberal fundamentalism seems to be a reaction to Communism, and since Communism was 'evil', the persuance of accellerated neoliberal policies through the inexorable WTO was ...[text shortened]... dividuals, but guilty (maybe) in the a-moral nature of their profit hungry job descriptions.
I suggest you first disuss that assumption as your conclusions that follow will be incorrect.
What I am not saying is that money is the root of all evil. What is up for discussion is whether the way profit motive is built into legal and institutional structures - and embedded in our developmental psychologies - can be damaging. If we also discuss what we define profit motive as, can I suggest that the 'requirement to abandon all other interests', is apt: also legally correct if you are a public limited company. Does this not negate any possibility of morality and thus open the door for......... EVIL.......... *insert spooky music*
Originally posted by TomPyou are obviously new here. STANG is..... how does one describe STANG? go onto nearly any public forum in the debates or the spirttuality threads, and just look for the name STANG. you wont have to look far.
expand on that please, who are, what is STANG?
Originally posted by i am scientistsWell tell stang to come find me in a debate forum somewhere... I'll be waiting downtown, outside the saloon...Theres a new Sheriff in town! *insert 'the good the bad and the ugly' theme*
you are obviously new here. STANG is..... how does one describe STANG? go onto nearly any public forum in the debates or the spirttuality threads, and just look for the name STANG. you wont have to look far.
Originally posted by TomPNice ... I like this new guy in town already.
Well tell stang to come find me in a debate forum somewhere... I'll be waiting downtown, outside the saloon...Theres a new Sheriff in town! *insert 'the good the bad and the ugly' theme*
While youre taking on Stang, anwswer a couple of my questions, please.
Originally posted by TomPJust to clarify.. this means that PLCs are prone to be EVIL because they seek the interests of the shareholdes, compared to public corporations who seek the interests of the public ?
'requirement to abandon all other interests', is apt: also legally correct if you are a public limited company. *
If yes.. can you define what you call 'EVIL' ?
Originally posted by Rajk999The structural inability of institutions who are profit motivated to do good as a priority would seem to fit as a root cause. Maybe we should say evil is a lack of goodness in deed or intent, then.
Just to clarify.. this means that PLCs are prone to be EVIL because they seek the interests of the shareholdes, compared to public corporations who seek the interests of the public ?
If yes.. can you define what you call 'EVIL' ?
Don't anyone get smart now, if you want goodness defined look it up in the dictionary on your own time. If you have no concept of what goodness is then you probably hang out with this STANG guy or something....
Originally posted by TomPYou are saying the if the prime aim (priority) is profit, the enterprise is by definition 'evil'. By that definition virtually all businesses in the west are 'evil'. If we relax your assumption and include secondary goals and 'by-products' of the 'evil' enterprise, you will find that they are good - they provide jobs, make products, provide services, donate funds to worthy causes in society, etc.
The structural inability of institutions who are profit motivated to do good as a priority would seem to fit as a root cause. Maybe we should say evil is a lack of goodness in deed or intent, then.
Don't anyone get smart now, if you want goodness defined look it up in the dictionary on your own time. If you have no concept of what goodness is then you probably hang out with this STANG guy or something....
The most important point is that if you remove the 'evil' incentive for profit and excess profit there will be no risk taking and without PROFIT and RISK TAKING society becomes a bunch of lazy bums laying on the beach drinking Coronas.
Potty training.
You spend your first few years happily discharging whatever you need to whenever and wherever you want. It's a blissful state to be in. Your parents are even rather excited about it, particularly the first few times.
Suddenly, after a particularly nasty soiling of mummies best rug you are declared dirty. You are rushed to a small room and told that you should shut the door and not let people see that you actually do that kind of thing. That thing you can't help doing is so dirty you have to wash your hands afterwards too and you better clean up properly or faces will screw up in disgust. Poor you. Can't help feeling a bit inadequate after that assault can you.
So you grow up trying to prove you're not a weird creature that everyone else laughs at. You aim for money, power and anything that can make you feel superior to all those smart people who probably never needed a potty. Even if it's only a better mobile phone than they have, it all helps. If you're lucky, you'll get your power and you'll get your money but it's funny how you still feel a little inadequate. Best thing would be to get even more money and even more power and perhaps see what you can do to stop other people from getting it just in case they discover that you're a no good potty user who is scared as hell of being found out!
Regards