COVID-19 ... how we cope :)

[Sid Belzberg]

Democracy & Diversity

Democratic Marxism Discussion Paper # 4

Original – 20/6/22; Revision – See below

Note: cyclically re-posted for the benefit of new DMGI members, DM-G viewers, and DMGF members/viewers.





The Gamble

Democratic Marxism sets out a platform of self-governance and economics. And it sets up a fundamental structure within which this platform can be implemented. But what happens when ideology meets the local democracy of the Local Political Unit (LPU)?

The problem old-style Communism faced was the revolt of many (Majority?) electors to many of the Communist platforms. Communism's answer? Use the gun; trample human rights of the citizens; suppress all opposition – then implement the ideology & platform without any public opposition. Did it really work?? The jury is still out on Chinese Communism, but it has all the negative features that necessitate its rejection.

What will be Democratic Marxism's answer when an LPU wants to go its own way, differently somehow, democratically? The problem is that DM proudly declares that the LPU's have all power! They have the real control! Democratic Marxism's Global Model LPU can be tweaked by any LPU, or even outright rejected for itself!

This is where Democratic Marxism has to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. It is committed first to “democratic process” and “local power”.

Human society is governed by laws. Laws are passed by the governing authority, whether it be by direct democracy (Citizen voting), or, by the representation circle to which the electors have given power over their lives. And if the system is working, and Dem. Marxism has it right, each LPU, hopefully, will implement laws modelled after the proposals of the Democratic Marxist Vetting Committee (DMVC). But should an LPU, within its borders, decide to revert to Wildwest Capitalism, this will be legal........but, hopefully, the effect of such rogue actions will be limited and minimized and restrained by the general structural governing context within which every LPU exists. Diversity will definitely be the order of the day in a true democracy – and maybe one should support the saying used financially: There is safety in diversity.

A Suitable Test Nation for DM

The DMVC has targeted Canada for the first partisan Democratic Marxist Party......and it will be provincial.

The reason is the possibility of fundamental societal structure change within the existing Canadian Constitutional documents. Canada presents the possibility because constitutionally, municipalities are the “creatures” of a province. It is therefore open to a Canadian province to realign local government as currently existing, into the DM LPU structure. The province also has, constitutionally, full jurisdiction over certain civil powers, as against the federal government (Eg. Health Care, Education, etc.). So.....IF it was determined to do it........any Canadian province could “down-load” all of its powers to the LPU's. Thereafter it would identify itself in two ways:

1. as the hand-maiden of the LPU's, while remaining, as a provincial representative circle of the provincial electors;
2. as the traditional province with which the federal government must deal within the existing constitutional structure of Canada.
   
   The federal government may object to the provincial restructuring, but will be toothless....it is within the provincial power of a Canadian province to do this. And the federal government will have to continue to deal with that province as the valid “Provincial Government”.
   
   Commencement of Partisan Democratic Marxism in Canada

The DMVC will receive applications from those wishing to apply for provincial party status as: The Democratic Marxist Party of (Province). For those ideologically acceptable, the DMVC will grant a formal “Endorsement” - the approval of the ginger group's use of the name.

Thereafter, the provincial party will develop a provincial DM platform suitable to their province, in concert with the DMVC.

Should the Provincial Party at any time stray from adhering to fundamental DM principles/platforms, it risks the DMVC withdrawing the “Endorsement”, and disowning the Provincial Party. Of course, the DMVC may still consider itself an ally of the rogue party, and see it as still the best provincial option, and thus continue to work with the provincial party, should it so desire.

Democratic Marxist Global Institute (DMGI)

Author: Bob Armstrong, Chairperson, DMGI Vetting Committee
Reviser: Bob Armstrong – 20/10/17

Copyright – Democratic Marxist Global Institute - 2020

Why are you polluting the COVID-19 thread with your DM horseshit as you have with NWO and Anthropogenic climate change threads? I have a great solution for all of this BAN any politicians from relationships with the WEF, destroy the WHO, disband the UN, and finally make big pharma liable for any products they sell especially vaccines. 50% of the money spent by governments on big pharma should go to cheap, repurposed drugs for diseases like cancer, Respiratory diseases, etc. Healthcare costs and budgets will go to a fraction of what they are now.
Any political party that proposes violating a country's constitution or charter of rights should not be on the ballot. The abolition of private property violates Article 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights.

[Bob Armstrong]

Democracy & Diversity

Democratic Marxism Discussion Paper # 4

Post Deleted - posted here in error....sorry.....

Bob A

[Dilip Panjwani]

Dilip - Post # 3422 - 23/9/27

Defends Libertarianism (A Variation of Capitalism) against Democratic Marxism

Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?

Response

1. Persecution: No one is "persecuting" the "hard and smart working minority". In current progressive taxation capitalism, the majority view it that the higher the income, the more the individual is winning within "SOCIETY'S" system. So they should pay more to keep the system running, than those benefiting less. And the system, thanks to manipulation by the elite wealthy (Many of whom are neither smart nor hard-working), is skewered towards the wealthy getting many more ways to decrease taxable income than the hard-working, low income majority.

2. Legal Theft: This is internally conflictual. If something is legal, it may be immoral, this is true. But it is the law. Those who don't like it can try to get it changed.......there's a political task for Libertarianism! So the State is NOT "stealing" from the elite....they are simply being asked by the majority of Capitalists to "pay their fair share!".

3. The Lazy Majority (Elitism Unbounded): Dilip re the majority of society: "those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so" - The majority of society, which will be a surprise to your elitist self, is both smart and hard-working. They do develop their talents. But the capitalist system requires a pool of desperate low-income labour to function........and so it is the case in a wealthy country like Canada, that over 50% of Canadians have less than $ 200 of savings to meet any emergency expenditure......they are living paycheque to paycheck........some working two part-time jobs at the same time, and not making it financially. And Capitalism, of necessity, drives the ever-widening gap between the have's and the have-nots.

4. The Libertarian "Fair Society": Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism:

Wikipedia: In the mid-20th century, American right-libertarian^[35] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted^[13] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.^[36] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States.^[34] This new form of libertarianism was a revival of classical liberalism in the United States.

It is because of the exploitation of the masses, under Laissez Fair Capitalism, that even capitalists felt having kids work in sweat shops all day long wasn't such a great idea.

Sooooo........NO.........Libertarian Society will NOT be a "fair society". Libertarianism espouses Capitalist Ways to provide what they call "Fairness" (And non-Capitalists beg to disagree).

5. Democratic Marxism: The elimination of Bourgeois Capitalism, with the retention of small personal property ownership, and ownership of enterprises by the worker, or, the State and worker jointly, WILL, without doubt, implement a "FAIRER SOCIETY", with more equality.

Bob A (DM'er)

1 & 2. 'they should pay more to keep the system running'
a libertarian system would run much better with minimal government (hence minimal taxation) ... as your future PM Pierre Poilievre would attest to. But it appears from your argument that you and Bob G want the current capitalist system running, probably because that gives you guys the sadistic pleasure of taxation on the hard and smart working minority. Can't you decide what is it that you want, and stop acting confused?

3. 'But the capitalist system requires a pool of desperate low-income labour to function'
what you are describing is a capitalistic system... another example of your irrelevant arguments in our discussion on the gutter of DM vs. the utopia of Libertarianism.

4. 'Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism'
another irrelevant statement, as neither me nor Pierre Poilievre are talking about laissez-faire capitalism, but true Libertarianism which I have explained to you several times, and you are free to ask me further clarifications about it if you wish.

5. 'ownership of enterprises by the State'
not a single such enterprise in all of human history has ever worked well, and always ended in disaster, and so Bob A & Bob G, it would be in your best interest if you take your minds out of the gutter of DM...
as far as enterprises owned by workers are concerned, Libertarianism is the only system which would encourage that, not DM or capitalism...

[Bob Gillanders]

Dilip - Post # 3422 - 23/9/27

Defends Libertarianism (A Variation of Capitalism) against Democratic Marxism

Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?

Response

1. Persecution: No one is "persecuting" the "hard and smart working minority". In current progressive taxation capitalism, the majority view it that the higher the income, the more the individual is winning within "SOCIETY'S" system. So they should pay more to keep the system running, than those benefiting less. And the system, thanks to manipulation by the elite wealthy (Many of whom are neither smart nor hard-working), is skewered towards the wealthy getting many more ways to decrease taxable income than the hard-working, low income majority.

2. Legal Theft: This is internally conflictual. If something is legal, it may be immoral, this is true. But it is the law. Those who don't like it can try to get it changed.......there's a political task for Libertarianism! So the State is NOT "stealing" from the elite....they are simply being asked by the majority of Capitalists to "pay their fair share!".

3. The Lazy Majority (Elitism Unbounded): Dilip re the majority of society: "those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so" - The majority of society, which will be a surprise to your elitist self, is both smart and hard-working. They do develop their talents. But the capitalist system requires a pool of desperate low-income labour to function........and so it is the case in a wealthy country like Canada, that over 50% of Canadians have less than $ 200 of savings to meet any emergency expenditure......they are living paycheque to paycheck........some working two part-time jobs at the same time, and not making it financially. And Capitalism, of necessity, drives the ever-widening gap between the have's and the have-nots.

4. The Libertarian "Fair Society": Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism:

Wikipedia: In the mid-20th century, American right-libertarian^[35] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted^[13] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.^[36] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States.^[34] This new form of libertarianism was a revival of classical liberalism in the United States.

It is because of the exploitation of the masses, under Laissez Fair Capitalism, that even capitalists felt having kids work in sweat shops all day long wasn't such a great idea.

Sooooo........NO.........Libertarian Society will NOT be a "fair society". Libertarianism espouses Capitalist Ways to provide what they call "Fairness" (And non-Capitalists beg to disagree).

5. Democratic Marxism: The elimination of Bourgeois Capitalism, with the retention of small personal property ownership, and ownership of enterprises by the worker, or, the State and worker jointly, WILL, without doubt, implement a "FAIRER SOCIETY", with more equality.

Bob A (DM'er)

Great rebuttal Bob A. Thank you.

[Bob Armstrong]

Dilip - Post # 3422 - 23/9/27

Defends Libertarianism (A Variation of Capitalism) against Democratic Marxism

Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?

Response

1. Persecution: No one is "persecuting" the "hard and smart working minority". In current progressive taxation capitalism, the majority view it that the higher the income, the more the individual is winning within "SOCIETY'S" system. So they should pay more to keep the system running, than those benefiting less. And the system, thanks to manipulation by the elite wealthy (Many of whom are neither smart nor hard-working), is skewered towards the wealthy getting many more ways to decrease taxable income than the hard-working, low income majority.

2. Legal Theft: This is internally conflictual. If something is legal, it may be immoral, this is true. But it is the law. Those who don't like it can try to get it changed.......there's a political task for Libertarianism! So the State is NOT "stealing" from the elite....they are simply being asked by the majority of Capitalists to "pay their fair share!".

3. The Lazy Majority (Elitism Unbounded): Dilip re the majority of society: "those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so" - The majority of society, which will be a surprise to your elitist self, is both smart and hard-working. They do develop their talents. But the capitalist system requires a pool of desperate low-income labour to function........and so it is the case in a wealthy country like Canada, that over 50% of Canadians have less than $ 200 of savings to meet any emergency expenditure......they are living paycheque to paycheck........some working two part-time jobs at the same time, and not making it financially. And Capitalism, of necessity, drives the ever-widening gap between the have's and the have-nots.

4. The Libertarian "Fair Society": Current Libertarianism is based on "Laissez Fair (Wild West/Unregulated)" Capitalism:

Wikipedia: In the mid-20th century, American right-libertarian^[35] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted^[13] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.^[36] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States.^[34] This new form of libertarianism was a revival of classical liberalism in the United States.

It is because of the exploitation of the masses, under Laissez Fair Capitalism, that even capitalists felt having kids work in sweat shops all day long wasn't such a great idea.

Sooooo........NO.........Libertarian Society will NOT be a "fair society". Libertarianism espouses Capitalist Ways to provide what they call "Fairness" (And non-Capitalists beg to disagree).

5. Democratic Marxism: The elimination of Bourgeois Capitalism, with the retention of small personal property ownership, and ownership of enterprises by the worker, or, the State and worker jointly, WILL, without doubt, implement a "FAIRER SOCIETY", with more equality.

Bob A (DM'er)

[Dilip Panjwani]

The Hard and Smart Working Minority vs Those [The Majority] who did not make the effort to develop Themselves [The Not-Smart & Lazy]

Libertarianism



Dilip Panjwani - Post # 3413 - 23/9/23

Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?

Question

Anyone want to rip this apart before I do??

Bob A (DM'er)

Hi Bob,
Honest advice from a well-wisher:
It would be better (very helpful to yourself), if you rip apart your DM delusions, instead.

[Neil Frarey]

100%, 99%, 94%, 91%, 88%, 85%, 83%, 80%, 77%, 75%, 71%, 67%, 59%, 55%, 53%, 47%, 40%, 33%, 20% ... effective!

Elon Musk ...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1706676593261785178


..

[Sid Belzberg]

[Bob Armstrong]

The Hard and Smart Working Minority vs Those [The Majority] who did not make the effort to develop Themselves [The Not-Smart & Lazy]

Libertarianism



Dilip Panjwani - Post # 3413 - 23/9/23

Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?

Question

Anyone want to rip this apart before I do??

Bob A (DM'er)

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Neil:

Dead on ......... not enough work........why do menial jobs robots can do.......read Josef Pieper......"Leisure the Basis of Culture (1950)"


Amazon - "In his book, Leisure, the Basis of Culture, Pieper makes the claim that the reconstruction of Western Culture demands a rebirth of the notion of leisure."
Google Books - "One of the most important philosophy titles published in the twentieth century, Josef Pieper's Leisure, the Basis of Culture is more significant, even more crucial, today than it was when it first appeared more than fifty years ago. ..."

Universal basic income (UBI)^{[note 1]} is a social welfare proposal in which all citizens of a given population regularly receive a guaranteed income in the form of an unconditional transfer payment (i.e., without a means test or need to work).^[2][3][4] It would be received independently of any other income. If the level is sufficient to meet a person's basic needs (i.e., at or above the poverty line), it is sometimes called a full basic income; if it is less than that amount, it may be called a partial basic income.^[5] No country has yet introduced either, although there have been numerous pilot projects and the idea is discussed in many countries. Some have labelled UBI as utopian due to its historical origin.<sup>[6][7][8]

In Canada, we refer to it as a GAI (Guaranteed Annual lncome).

This will certainly blow the Libertarian "Smart and Hard Working" vs "Lazy Bums" argument out of the water!

Bob A</sup>

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Pargat:

Presently..........

Bob A

[Pargat Perrer]

I think we are rapidly heading toward guaranteed income for those who qualify.

Very shortly most all warehouse workers will be replaced by robots...

... how many warehouse employees currently earn a living from that occupation?

Too many???

Interesting timing ... I am just finishing reading Asimov's The Robots of Dawn .... all about humanoid robots that are embedded in human society, in the far future.

[Pargat Perrer]

Bob,
It seems you have hired the nasty trolling services of Pargat to not have to yourself respond to posts which expose the stupidity of DM... you need to admit that legal theft is immoral, when there are other fair ways to avoid unfair exploitation of the 'not so wealthy'...

LOL totally off the rails!

Bob A. doesn't need to admit anything. If you won't answer questions, why should he?

[Neil Frarey]

I think we are rapidly heading toward guaranteed income for those who qualify.

Very shortly most all warehouse workers will be replaced by robots...

... how many warehouse employees currently earn a living from that occupation?

Too many???

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Dilip:

Pargat marches to his own drummer.......sometimes we agree.....sometimes not.

Libertarianism



Progressive Taxation is NOT "Legal Theft".....it is the WILL of the Majority. If the obscenely wealthy don't like progressive taxation, then let them try to get more control of the system than they already have, and get it deleted from the law.............and Natural Law is first and foremost "BALANCE".......I happen to know something about "Natural Law"........Natural Law will never allow the current Capitalist Wage Gap!!! And your Libertarianism has given no indication of how it (A Capitalist system from my point of view & Wikipedia's - see below) will prevent the necessary growth of the wage gap without any kind of regulation. Libertarianism and Natural Law are in contradictory modes - there is an internal contradiction in Libertarianism!!

You need to read up on your Libertarianism:

Wikipedia

"Libertarianism (from French: libertaire, 'libertarian'; from Latin: libertas, 'freedom') is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as a core value.^[1][2][3][4] Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and political freedom, and minimize the state's encroachment on and violations of individual liberties; emphasizing the rule of law, pluralism, cosmopolitanism, cooperation, civil and political rights, bodily autonomy, freedom of association, free trade, freedom of expression, freedom of choice, freedom of movement, individualism, and voluntary association.^[4][5] Libertarians are often skeptical of or opposed to authority, state power, warfare, militarism and nationalism, but some libertarians diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing economic and political systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power. Different categorizations have been used to distinguish various forms of Libertarianism.^[6][7] Scholars distinguish libertarian views on the nature of property and capital, usually along left–right or socialist–capitalist lines.^[8] Libertarians of various schools were influenced by liberal ideas.^[9]

In the mid-19th century,^[10] libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists,^[11] especially social anarchists,^[12] but more generally libertarian communists/Marxists and libertarian socialists.^[13][14] These libertarians sought to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects to usufruct property norms, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty.^[19] While all libertarians support some level of individual rights, left-libertarians differ by supporting an egalitarian redistribution of natural resources.^[20] Left-libertarian^[26] ideologies include anarchist schools of thought, alongside many other anti-paternalist and New Left schools of thought centered around economic egalitarianism as well as geolibertarianism, green politics, market-oriented left-libertarianism and the Steiner–Vallentyne school.^[30] After the fall of the Soviet Union, libertarian socialism grew in popularity and influence as part of anti-war, anti-capitalist and anti- and alter-globalisation movements.^[31][32]

In the mid-20th century, American right-libertarian^[35] proponents of anarcho-capitalism and minarchism co-opted^[13] the term libertarian to advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights such as in land, infrastructure and natural resources.^[36] The latter is the dominant form of libertarianism in the United States.^{[34] "}

Bob A (DM'er)

Bob,
I agree that there are wolves in sheep's clothing, who call ultra-capitalism as Libertarianism. But let us concentrate on substance rather than on nomenclature...
Would you please answer the simple question on substance:
Is it not immoral to persecute the hard and smart working minority by implementing legal theft (forced transfer of hard-earned money from those who earned plenty of it by hard and smart work, to those who did not make the effort to develop themselves and work hard and smart to do so) as the only way to have a fair society, instead of supporting your future, to be democratically elected Prime Minister who believes that there are Libertarian (not Capitalistic or Marxist) ways to provide the fairness?