If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Despite Argentina, I think Libertarians should not hold their breath about their next national breakthrough! In fact, in the longer run, the shortcomings of Miele Libertarianism will be most concerning. Pargat has already noted current issues re the situation of the vulnerable under Miele's austerity.
Also, though Polievre may have Libertarian leanings, he will not replace Canadian Conservatism with some form of Libertarianism - again, don't hold your breath Libertarians!
Kenneth Megill, in his seminal work on Democratic Marxism, The New Democratic Theory, speaks kindly of Lenin, but castigates Stalin for the fall of USSR-style communism into dictatorship, the police state, and using breach of human rights to "keep order".
However, Democratic Marxist Global Institute (DMGI) sees this differently. We blame Lenin for creating the Marxian heresy: USSR-style Communism.
The Leninist “Vanguard of the Proletariat”
The reason DMGI rejects Lenin is his "Elitism".
Lenin, despite much of his writing, disparaged the working class as ignorant, and incapable of revolution. It is Lenin, not Marx, who invented the concept "Vanguard of the Proletariat". Marx is turning over in his grave at Lenin's claim to be elaborating true Marxist thought.
Marx believed in the capacity of the ordinary working person to foment revolution......the anti-democratic and elitist USSR-style Communism is totally against Marx.
Note what Wikipedia says about this deformed concept of the "Vanguard of the Proletariat" (The Elitist and Expert Revolutionaries, whose role it is to "enlighten" the ignorant and deceivable worker, who is not to be trusted with the revolution):
"In its first phase, the vanguard party would exist for two reasons. Firstly, it would protect Marxism from outside corruption from other ideas as well as advance its concepts. Secondly, it would educate the proletariat in Marxism in order to cleanse them of their "false individual consciousness" and instill the revolutionary "class consciousness" in them.
Our task is not to champion the degrading of the revolutionary to the level of an amateur, but to raise the amateurs to the level of revolutionaries.[4]
If the party is successful in this goal, on the eve of revolution, a critical mass of the working class population would be prepared to usher forth the transformation of society. Furthermore, a great number of them, namely their most dedicated members, would belong to the party cadres as professional revolutionaries, and would be elected to leadership positions by the mass party membership. Thus the organization would quickly include the entire working class.[5]"
Based on this concept, after the violent Russian Revolution occurred, "the Vanguard of the Proletariat", in the observations of the DMGI, turned the revolutionary guns on the untrustworthy ordinary worker, who could not be trusted at the ballot box in future, to vote for the Vanguard Party, and implement the goals of the revolution. A Police State was necessary to allow for the "education of the ignorant worker", and use of breach of civil rights was quite fine to keep order in the interim.
This is NOT the implementation of Marxian thought about revolution and the ordinary working person!
So it is the position of our elaboration of Democratic Marxism that the whole USSR-style Communism, starting right with Lenin, though perfected by Stalin, is a gross deformity of "socialism".
DM emphasizes the necessity of a multi-party state and the trust of the worker to re-elect Democratic Marxist Parties across the globe, in order to implement the revolution totally legally!
Of course, should the worker fail in this, at the ballot box, then capitalist degradation of the worker will continue apace, until, as Marx maintained, the oppression is so bad, the worker sees that his/her only way out is violent revolution against the capitalist system.
b. Group: Democratic Marxist Global Forum: https://www.facebook.com/groups/2045...ref=nf&__xts__[0]=68.ARB5MaP7fzlN9ItgmSkMWzv60Rd9mIxsQIkIgIa6_Guh2MGR6mV82GdH-IxgmiiVaJcZ-NLi7Cz46VX0nn78clmPjd-pttzlYPR9dmEubTBnBdnGohd0bl3Fy4k02cb3BVHNVOcfjANvEEUCRw6k1IZDDsZV6l9V1Id5_NomySGWmEpA3Inygttyrt3-jYH1m1M50W3d94tVElUVaZ-SrM-WZ4BkYEj0ZYF5Y5X2d7KRG_MQJtND8fXyDSkU0F1I4FVHkI_eoiyOazUgCRS0lmfetiENOGsaJPb6MfuHzQ92-u7gMI_E8888fus
Also, though Polievre may have Libertarian leanings, he will not replace Canadian Conservatism with some form of Libertarianism - again, don't hold your breath Libertarians!
Bob A
Hi Bob,
This seems more than the usual Canadian conservatism:
It will be an unmitigated disaster if Mr Mini-Trump is able to take over the Conservative Party of Canada, as Majordomo has of the Republican Party of USA.
I do expect more of my Canadian neighbours..........though........at the Ontario level.....Our Progressive (??) Conservative Dougy just won two by-elections (Sigh)!
Bob A
Note: majordomo • \may-jer-DOH-moh\ • noun. -......3 : a person who speaks, makes arrangements, or takes charge for another; broadly : the person who runs an enterprise.
Sid Belzberg (24/5/5): So, I have a question, Bob, based on a true story. An entrepreneur gets a microloan for $300.00 and buys some products that are sold online for $3000.00. Next, the $3000.00 is used to buy more inventory that is promptly sold for $30,000, and so on. Over a year, this person amasses $1,000.0000.00 in the bank. How would DM deal with a formerly poor person who quickly ascended to the top one percent?
Bob Armstrong (24/5/5): Hi Sid:
Question many have of DM: DM will have both an Income, Goods and Services, and Wealth tax, as now, only on a more progressive scale.
Successful entrepreneurs will still be monetarily rewarded, as now, though less extensively and grotesquely. They will have an appropriate "success" reputation, as now. As intelligent electors, I would expect their opinion to be respected and considered re societal issues......I know this will surprise those busy trying to smear Democratic Marxism.
DM is not overturning all of society norms; it is set on tweaking the system to make it more just and equal.
In this sense, Democratic Marxism is, I guess, less radical that old-style USSR Communism (Hate to admit DM is not very radical). But it is a step left from Democratic Socialism.
It will be an unmitigated disaster if Mr Mini-Trump is able to take over the Conservative Party of Canada, as Majordomo has of the Republican Party of USA.
I do expect more of my Canadian neighbours..........though........at the Ontario level.....Our Progressive (??) Conservative Dougy just won two by-elections (Sigh)!
Bob A
Note: majordomo • \may-jer-DOH-moh\ • noun. -......3 : a person who speaks, makes arrangements, or takes charge for another; broadly : the person who runs an enterprise.
The post above is Bob's response to: Pierre Poilievre: Memo to corporate Canada - fire your lobbyist. Ignore politicians. Go to the people. (msn.com)
So according to Bob, who calls himself the defender of democracy and the masses, it is wrong to stop licking the a..es of politicians and it is wrong to have a discourse directly with the masses! Bob, I fear you are just a good-for-yourself-only politician cum liar-lawyer who calls, in another CT thread, someone who wants freedom from politicians' tyranny, as 'elitist, demeaning and dismissive Libertarian... '
Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Sunday, 5th May, 2024, 11:12 AM.
It is Dilip's characterization of many hard-working, low-income Canadians - he referred to them as:
"while those who can lick the a..es of their government appointed superiors and politicians, and can play around with the myriad of contradictory laws, can enjoy life without ever being productive..." - Dilip's Post # 158 (24/5/4) in the CT thread, "Life - How Should it be Viewed".
Obviously most hard-working low-income Canadians are not "a...es lickers", nor is anybody saying they are......except Dilip.
It is Dilip's characterization of many hard-working, low-income Canadians - he referred to them as:
"while those who can lick the a..es of their government appointed superiors and politicians, and can play around with the myriad of contradictory laws, can enjoy life without ever being productive..." - Dilip's Post # 158 (24/5/4) in the CT thread, "Life - How Should it be Viewed".
Obviously most hard-working low-income Canadians are not "a...es lickers", nor is anybody saying they are......except Dilip.
Bob A
Why are you resorting to lies (or are you just trolling)? I never referred to the many hard working, low income Canadians negatively at all...in fact I have said that these are to be applauded. As Sid has said, you comment on posts without actually reading them...
It is Dilip's characterization of many hard-working, low-income Canadians - he referred to them as:
"while those who can lick the a..es of their government appointed superiors and politicians, and can play around with the myriad of contradictory laws, can enjoy life without ever being productive..." - Dilip's Post # 158 (24/5/4) in the CT thread, "Life - How Should it be Viewed".
Obviously most hard-working low-income Canadians are not "a...es lickers", nor is anybody saying they are......except Dilip.
Bob A
Even if we give Dilip the benefit of the doubt and say he was only referring to a MINORITY of low-income Canadians as ass-lickers, there is still a problem about that.
Because in the same breath, Dilip will say that ALL of the entrepreneurs in Canada are hard-working and productive and doing good things for everyone else. This is why Dilip chooses Libertarianism over any form of socialism. He thinks his "upper" class of people are SUPERIOR to the "lower" class of people.
In post after post Dilip has mentioned this attitude of his.
Entrepreneurs: all good, all hard working, all pure of heart, all want to EARN their living and provide valuable goods and services. LOL
Low-income workers: huge numbers of them are lazy, ass-lickers, want something for nothing.
Everything Dilip writes here is based on this bias. Perhaps this comes from a background related to the caste system in India. In any event, it is wrong. Yes, some low-income earners are lazy. But YES, at least an equal number of entrepreneurs are EQUALLY lazy and want to make money off of other people with the least effort ... and they don't actually CARE whether their product or service is of any value or not. If it makes money .... YES!
If we eliminate the bias, we see that Libertarianism doesn't get to the truth of the matter and offers no solution to the greed of humanity. In fact, by appealing to the innate greed, LIbertarianism only exacerbates the problems.
Just look around. We live in a world increasingly controlled by entrepreneurs and corporations. None of the problems are getting solved, and the number of problems is only increasing.
Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Monday, 6th May, 2024, 07:35 AM.
Question many have of DM: DM will have both an Income, Goods and Services, and Wealth tax, as now, only on a more progressive scale.
Bob A (Democratic Marxism)
Bob apparently admires Sweden...so let us look at what Sweden is doing (from an article in BBC today):
Sweden scrapped wealth and inheritance taxes in the 2000s, and tax rates on money made from stocks and pay outs to company shareholders are much lower than taxes on salaries. The corporate tax rate has also dropped from around 30% in the 1990s to around 20% - slightly lower than the European average...
Thus taxes are much less 'progressive' than in Canada... that is why Sweden seems to be doing better...
Also, for the first time in ages, Sweden suddenly has had a rise in extreme right wing politics.
It is unclear what is going on in Swedish politics in the last while...........the Sweden of "social democracy/ Capitalism with a human face" of yesteryear may have to now be jettisoned as a part of history.
Has any CT'er got a good grasp on Sweden's recent evolution?
1. The “Weekly Overview” of the topic is posted for the benefit of new members who may have come in between the “Weekly Overviews”. It provides an executive summary of the issue for new viewers.
2. The Stats of participation are important to allow all to determine the extent of continuing interest. For thread originators/responders, they are important to see if the interest no longer warrants the labour. Or alternatively, they show that those of us discussing it are drawing in more participants, because they have begun to see the importance of our topic
A. Statistics
1. Weekly Stats:
Week # 18 of 2024 (4/29 – 5/5 [7 days])
(Sometimes Adjusted for no. of days)
.....................................................2024 Average
Last Week's......Prior Week's........Views/Day Views/Day........Views/Day.............(18 wks.)
Last week's stats are consistent with those of 2024 so far.
More discussion/increased participation does happen when a current controversial issue is brought into the thread. The thread involves discussion of current political affairs from the different perspectives of the various participants, so current issues do arise.
Fundamentally, though, this thread is an “educational” thread about something that may not be that attractive to some CT'ers. Nonetheless, the stats for this thread (Per day: Views – 28; Responses - 3) are good, and not that far below many other active threads in the Non-chess forum.
The stats do show that CT'ers are interested in learning more about DM, and about government from the DM perspective. This thread is an opportunity to learn something about the political system known as “Democratic Marxism”! It is also an opportunity to question DM in a good and safe forum, where we try to respect the right of all CT'ers to have their own analysis, and to be entitled to put it forward for consideration, even if differing from DM.
Note: I, as originator/main poster, am now just posting about 1 DM discussion paper per week, near the start of the week. But I do try to respond to response questions, and introduce new current topics when they seem appropriate. So, overall, the stats should be expected to slowly come down a bit.
B. Goal of this Thread
To make clear what Democratic Marxism is, and what it is not (Old-style USSR Communism)
To provide materials that help CT'ers analyze the pluses and minuses of DM.
Additional Notes:
1. The goal of this thread is not to try to beat opposing views into oblivion. Political economy spans the spectrum. Every position is entitled to post as it sees fit, regardless of the kind of, and amount of, postings by other positions. What is wanted is serious consideration of all posts........then you decide among the many competing political philosophies.
2. CT'ers are welcome to post responses here regularly, in addition to our core group of very active responders.
It is good that Dilip and I have come to some agreement on a few things:
1. Decentralization is good (My Local Political Units & Dilip's "circles within circles") - same concept that local is better than mega.
2. Low-income working Canadians who are generally employees are valued in society (I say the minimum wage is too low).
3. "Hard-working, productive entrepreneurs, many of whom provide society's jobs, are valued in society (But under current capitalism, and Libertarianism if it ever should come to power in Canada via the back door, the financial reward to capital is out of balance with the contribution of the worker).
Is this accurate Dilip (You needn't agree yet to my asides)?
It is good that Dilip and I have come to some agreement on a few things:
1. Decentralization is good (My Local Political Units & Dilip's "circles within circles") - same concept that local is better than mega.
2. Low-income working Canadians who are generally employees are valued in society (I say the minimum wage is too low).
3. "Hard-working, productive entrepreneurs, many of whom provide society's jobs, are valued in society (But under current capitalism, and Libertarianism if it ever should come to power in Canada via the back door, the financial reward to capital is out of balance with the contribution of the worker).
Is this accurate Dilip (You needn't agree yet to my asides)?
Bob A
Let me give this some more clarity:
1. Our global society is all inter-connected, though some (inner circles) are closer than others (outer circles).
2. We agree that many hard-working Canadians are not earning a decent wage; and to correct this, we need to reduce the demand for such jobs, by enabling such workers, perhaps by forming co-operatives, to make their own 'business' out of what they can do best. That will also increase the 'supply' side of such jobs as there will be more businesses creating more jobs. On the other hand by just arbitrarily enforcing a higher minimum wage, we are creating more unemployment, as the demand for such jobs increases and the supply of such jobs reduces, as businesses in the high taxes cum high minimum wages environment may not be able to afford hiring people...
3. We also agree that Capitalism has created some insanely wealthy individuals, instead of wealth production and ownership being more broad-based. The solution lies in scrapping the laws that these oligarchs have created through the corrupt politicians to make it very difficult for competitors to gain a fair share. In fact these oligarchs, given their vulgar financial prowess, can use unfair means to subdue competing businesses, and hence enforcement of the Natural Law is critical in achieving a fairer distribution of wealth, besides there being an easy access to capital...
You just need to ponder over the more pragmatic and less oppressive option of Libertarianism as compared to Marxism, Bob, to achieve even more agreement between us!
Tweet
Comment