[HoniSoit]

I remember this quote from one of David Harvey's talks last year. It is striking that Harvey warned that this economic crisis may not be a time for the demise of neoliberalism as many claimed but a time of class warfare waged by the capitalist ruling class. Several years on, having seen how the capitalist states absorbed - or rather socialised - the costs while privatised profits to corporations and individuals that ultimately contributed to social austerity policies that gravely hurt the population - the latest of which is the Republican Party's assault on American social security systems, are we approaching a critical point where the vast majority of the population in the core capitalist countries are about to strike back? What would be your assessment of the situation now?

[ThePublicOpinions]

Social security is a net transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich; shouldn't the socialist position be to abolish it?

[grassroots1]

I'm not sure where you get that idea, but social services in general are a net transfer of wealth from the wealthy to the poor, which is why Americans in general should be opposing the Republican assault on social services of all kinds.

It does seem like the rhetoric of libertarianism and libertarian propaganda (as evidenced by our friend TPO) has really been ramped up recently, and to me this signals that the elite of this country is attacking social services and the working class in general. That's why we need to win this ideological war and, at the very least, lay the foundation that the state is necessary to ameliorate the failings of the market left to its own devices. I hope that we can win this battle and I hope the American working class begins to wake up, but I don't think this is inevitable by any means and I think it will require a concerted effort on the part of people who can see through the purist ideology of libertarians.

[Vera Politica]

Social security is a net transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich; shouldn't the socialist position be to abolish it?

Marxian Socialists are generally opposed to the welfare state, but not for the reasons you mention.

are we approaching a critical point where the vast majority of the population in the core capitalist countries are about to strike back? What would be your assessment of the situation now?

Unfortunately, no. The crisis may have hurt some people, but the working class in America is still largely well off and has no reason to risk losing their material security. The situation in the United States would have to deteriorate much more in order to spark a harsh reaction from the working classes. However, I do not think this reaction will be a progressive one. The Tea Party and the popularity of libertarianism is, in a sense, the typical reaction from the American working classes to this recession. Americans, as do most people, tend to blame politicians for social woes.

[ThePublicOpinions]

"I'm not sure where you get that idea, "

From noble prize winning economist Milton Friedman. And your source is?

[grassroots1]

Source for what?

I've just never heard the argument before. Would you like to explain it?

but the working class in America is still largely well off and has no reason to risk losing their material security. The situation in the United States would have to deteriorate much more in order to spark a harsh reaction from the working classes. However, I do not think this reaction will be a progressive one. The Tea Party and the popularity of libertarianism is, in a sense, the typical reaction from the American working classes to this recession.

In what way is it typical? It seems to me to be completely atypical because it's a movement that targets social programs and desires a move towards the "free market." Haven't the reactions to worsening conditions in the past been more along the lines of communist and socialist ideology? It's a typical reaction from a working class that has been indoctrinated against Communism. Also I don't know how you can say the American working class is "largely well-off" when the official unemployment is 9.2% and there are reports of black unemployment being closer to 15%.

[ThePublicOpinions]

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/Red ... ncome.html

Social Security payments shift approximately $270 billion of income a year to the elderly regardless of their wealth, and on average the elderly possess about twice the net worth per family as does the general population.

Poor little grannies will starve to death if we abolish payroll taxes right? Hah! This link is great. The whole point of wealth redistribution is to take money from disorganized groups to send it to organized groups.

[Wolfman]

are we approaching a critical point where the vast majority of the population in the core capitalist countries are about to strike back?

I don't think a worker's revolution will ever happen. If it will, this wont be it. This is just political and economic circus. Just a series of actions with no real meaning; just showing for the proletariat.

Social security is a net transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich; shouldn't the socialist position be to abolish it?

To a Marxist, even the act of paying an employee is ultimately a transfer of wealth and power to the rich.

Poor little grannies will starve to death if we abolish payroll taxes right? Hah! This link is great. The whole point of wealth redistribution is to take money from disorganized groups to send it to organized groups.

That's actually not a big deal. A decent amount of that wealth difference is probably because of SS and earlier savings. In the event of basically any problem for the person, they'd be basically fucked without SS. Besides, the retired have worked long enough to warrant the income.

[ThePublicOpinions]

No one has worked long enough to justify coercing me into giving them my money.

[Wolfman]

I'm going to cut this short, because I don't feel like debating:

Everything you are, know, think, own, and believe is because of your society. Everything. You owe your very life to your society. You society needs certain things from you, like helping old people.

[ThePublicOpinions]

Old people have it too good as it is. I say we go back to the old days, where they just hop onto the ice flows and sail off into the arctic tundra. You realize how much of my dollars go to hip replacements for someone who's going to die in a couple years anyway? It just doesn't make sense.

[HoniSoit]

I don't think a worker's revolution will ever happen.

Though we are not necessarily talking about a worker's revolution - especially a revolution just by workers is a very strange idea in any case - that challenges the capitalist class order. Rather, it could be social protests joined by the middle class, students, immigrants, the poor, elderly people and trade unions. This is happening in other parts of the world so it is not out of the question this can happen in the US.

[Wolfman]

All you're doing in that case is playing your part in the Political and Economic Theater.

You were told the play is interactive, weren't you?

[Vera Politica]

In what way is it typical? It seems to me to be completely atypical because it's a movement that targets social programs and desires a move towards the "free market." Haven't the reactions to worsening conditions in the past been more along the lines of communist and socialist ideology? It's a typical reaction from a working class that has been indoctrinated against Communism. Also I don't know how you can say the American working class is "largely well-off" when the official unemployment is 9.2% and there are reports of black unemployment being closer to 15%.

I did not mean historically typical (sorry I was not clear on this point). I meant that it is typical of American workers today to resort to libertarian nonsense in reaction to the economic situation. This is due mostly to the political climate in America (to some extent its founding history) and, mostly, to the fact that they blame the government for this crisis. Really, the only political movement gaining any momentum in the United States is the libertarian Tea Party movement which, ironically, would present American Workers with the worse outcome of any alternative I can think of.

[Kman]

Everything you are, know, think, own, and believe is because of your society. Everything. You owe your very life to your society. You society needs certain things from you, like helping old people.

You can justify slavery with that kind of argument. It wasnt morally wrong to enslave people because ''society'' needed their help.

[Wolfman]

You can justify slavery with that kind of argument. It wasnt morally wrong to enslave people because ''society'' needed their help.

So can most of your arguments. Big deal.

[Kman]

So can most of your arguments. Big deal.

No you cant because my arguments dont rely on asking other people to work for me, I just want people to leave me alone, I dont demand that strangers give me a pension or that strangers give me healthcare so I have no need to resort to the type of ''you should love the group'' arguments that you use.

[Wolfman]

I still don't feel like having a full discussion. The short version is that your ideology justifies slavery and numerous crimes against humanity. Deal with it.