Thoughts on how to improve the current system

[FireIceTalon]

Basically, we disagree on just about everything. NO government can tell me to go fight its dirty capitalistic wars, that is MY decision, and mine alone. Now, If YOU want to be a little pawn and go fight wars in the name of being an economic slave and making corporations and politicians richer, which you have been CONDITIONED to think are wars fighting in the name of our warped definition of "Democracy" from the misinformation spread by the propaganda machine, that is your prerogative. But you have absolutely NO right to force it upon others who do not share your same values. Take that authoritarian bullshit out of here, cause it aint happening. You will see a Communist Revolution in this country before you will ever see the likes of me (or my children, if I ever have any) serving a mandated military service for any nation, for any reason whatsoever. That my friend, is a a cold hard FACT. Patriotism IS another word for slavery (albeit a mental form of it), and that is the LAST THING we should be teaching our kids. What we do need to start teaching them is how to think CRITICALLY and not take in all the bullshit that is spoon-fed to us, hook-line-and sinker. If you think serving in the military will solve societies problems, it is you, not I, that lives in a utopian fantasy world.

Why should I support ANY country? I owe allegiance to NO nation, especially not one as hypocritical, selfish, and immature as America is. My only allegiance is to the emancipation of humanity, and nothing else. Patriotism and Nationalism are reactionary and they are just a small step away from racism (my country/nationality is better than yours type thing) and jingoism (the immigrants are stealing all our jobs crap lies). I don't have ideals, I merely analyze the material conditions of the world and form a judgement based on what I see. As a Dialectical Materalist, I reject all forms of idealism - and Nationalism or Patriotism therefore have NO place in my thinking, and in fact it is incompatible with being Marxist - which is fundamentally Internationalist. All Patriotism is, is a plan used by the elites as a divide and conquer tactic to turn the working class against one another, often through ethnocentrism. Besides, why would I support a country that uses propaganda slogans like "war on terror" as a vehicle to use terrorism of its own as a means to enrich the oil companies, politicians, bankers, and such? And to project our ideas of "American Exceptionalism" and warped definition of Democracy onto the rest of the world that wants no part of us? Nope, I despise nationalism in all its forms because it is basically just a short way of saying "send the poor man to fight the rich man's Capitalist war", as well as being just another excuse to allow people to be racist and xenophobic toward others they have been conditioned to hate. If that makes me Un-American, so be it, I make no apologies about it. Again, I owe allegiance to NO nation, and anyone who thinks they do is a puppet in my opinion. Sorry, but I dont buy into all that bullshit that our little "city on the hill" can do no wrong. It has done a HUGE amount of wrong, and when the littler, weaker countries start fighting back, we dont like it. LOL. But if you ask me, Howard Zinn probably said it best: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" - now THAT is a form of patriotism I can get down with!

I think the concept here is more akin to supporting your local high-school football team or college team. As a mediocre example off the top of my head, my son was playing waterpolo (wetball) through the YMCA, but they don't get too competitive - it's all fun and family games... so he never got very good at it! Now he's playing for his school and they are much more competitive based (we WILL beat school "x" today), and the comradeship is evident, as is the will to do better and improve. Nothing like a little healthy competition to really spurn our natural creativity and skills. Your is against the "system", but it does not have to be. What you consider corporate greed, I see as team-work.

There once was a time when each little community in the UK and China was broken into small provinces ran by warlords. Each small province wanted their own rules, traditions, and laws and consequently, they fought constantly. Once headstrong leaders came in and conquered the provinces in the name of peace, they succeeded in unifying these smaller provinces into great nations where trade ran freely and peace prospered. You do understand this concept, don't you? Without war, there couldn't have been peace in the first place because humans are naturally adverse to change, and apparently unification for the sake of peace. It's not a BS plot by money-grabbers to support their nation, but the ideals of the peaceful, everything you propose and suggest is important to you. Without the nations, each country would be in chaos. I'd go a step further and suggest that a one-world nation would be the best way to unify the world with a singular language and currency and really get rid of slavery and low-wage pay to poor third nation workers, but there are too many fearful bible-thumpers out there for that to ever happen in our lifetime.

As far as Unions go, it weren't for them, we'd still be working 14 hour+ days under hazardous conditions, there would be no laws to protect children from being part of the labor force, benefits for workers such as health insurance, and so forth. Unions are not the problem, POLICIES of austerity, put forth mostly by bourgeois politicians to uphold the interests of greedy Capitalist/Corporate CEO's are the problem, and the last 30 years have seen a substantial weakening of Unions. The Neo-cons want to take us back to 19th Century C®apitalism.

The unions were needed alright, but that was a long time ago. I don't see what the unions are doing for the good of our country now other than helping their own. There are plenty of minimum wage jobs out there at the moment. Are you suggesting the government raise the standard minimum wage rate to a "living wage" rate? As for oversight, they have that now. Unions are not needed to keep children from being exploited in the labor force - that's a states job! Health insurance? That's what Obama was trying to do for everyone, and every other country around the world already does it and does it right, but I promise you this should not be part of what unions fight for. You speak of strengthening the many and equalization, but if you in fact unionized every business, every businesses would go bankrupt as they could never support the demands of the unions... ever! That would be madness! So in reality, unions only support a select few - their members; capitalism at it's finest.

If I want competition, I will play a game of some sort, be it sports, a video game or chess. But in economics, this isn't such a great idea, because now people's well being, and lively hood are at stake. It's like saying "survival of the fittest", which is a fundamental aspect of the animal kingdom, is ok among human societies. I cannot agree. And in sports, it is ok to support your favorite team, local or not. But again, comparing sports in the same context as economics or politics is folly, because the stakes are far too great. Nationalism, no matter how innocent it is intended to be, is a slippery slope at best, that can easily lead to racism or xenophobia.

I think the wars you are talking about are more like 'civil wars' rather than wars between nations themselves? Not that I necessarily support these wars either, but in general they are fought on a far different premise than the global wars we see today. You are viewing war in the more traditional manner of one territory protecting its sovereignty from the invasion of another - a Realist perspective. Many of the wars in the past may have been fought due to such circumstances, but contemporary global conflicts, meaning since WWI, have been much more related to Critical Theory and Identity perspectives.

Your desire of a one-nation world with no wage slavery is indeed what Communists want also (though we feel there is some room for multiculturalism to exist in such a society, but we also realize that some aspects of some cultures would not be compatible with a Communist society - the (mis)treatment of women in Iranian culture comes to mind), we are internationalists and view people as people, nothing more and nothing less. This is why we cannot get down with the concept of Nationalism: no nations people are better than anothers. Nationalism and patriotism are social constructs made by man to formulate the outlandish idea that standing by your country of birth, right or wrong, is somehow going to be to societies benefit.

Yes, there would be a lot of resistance from Bible Thumpers to form a one nation world. But I think this is a defeatist excuse in my opinion. There has been resistance to EVERY revolution in the past, yet society has been able to improve over time, because we fought for the changes to take place. Be it the Russian Revolution, the French and American Revolutions, the Cuban Revolution, the 1964 Civil Rights Act...all these things pushed society forward, and to varying degrees, improved the living circumstances of its citizens. No one said it was going to be easy. Social change is a very long and painful process, but if we give up, then change can never take place. From a Marxist perspective, Capitalism for all its atrocities, intrinsic contradictions, and anti-human features, is a vast improvement from all previous systems in history, and it is a necessary stage in the evolution of economics to reach a Communist society. Thus, in that regard I do not hate it - if anything I am indifferent towards it. As a human being though, I do hate it, and do so with the utmost intensity.

People are not adverse to change by nature. Rather, they are conditioned to be this way by the structures of the society they live in, often by fear tactics propelled by mass media or other misinformation that is picked up through social discourse. Material conditions determine human nature and behavior, not the reverse. In other words, the selfishness and greed seen in human nature doesn't produce Capitalism (idealists disagree - but they are wrong). Capitalism produces the selfishness and greed seen in human nature. We are a product of the material conditions and environment around us. We live in a material world (and I'm not talking about the kind Madonna sang about), not an idealist one.

If Unions are only looking out for their own interests now, as you said, that is capitalism at its finest. Which basically proves my point: Under a Socialist society, there would be no need for Unions to begin with (at least not in the long run, in the short run they may be needed to help stabilize the revolution and help to protect from reactionary ideas), because everyone equally shares the means to production and has a say in how the economy and individual work places are ran! Everyone has the same interests economically, eliminating the need for Unions in the long run, and eventually, a political system in general. The goal of Marxist thought is to eliminate the state (over a period of time) so society can be emancipated, but this can only be done if Capitalism is overthrown first. The economy and politics are different things, but they are in fact mutually INCLUSIVE to one another, not exclusive. Being a Marxist is a bit ironic, because the goal for us is to achieve a society where us Marxists don't have to be Marxists anymore, let alone even talk about politics ever again. We are like doctors: we want to cure everybody so we do not have a job anymore. LMAO.