5 ms·

The most scathing analyses of Bolshevism I have heard have come from the likes of Chomsky and Zinn, who are/were hardly neo-liberals. For all of its faults at l

The most scathing analyses of Bolshevism I have heard have come from the likes of Chomsky and Zinn, who are/were hardly neo-liberals. For all of its faults at least capital aggregation doesn’t have a moral prerogative behind it.

danharaj 9y ago
> For all of its faults at least capital aggregation doesn’t have a moral prerogative behind it. Are you sure? For example, colonialism was a project of capitalist development and it very much involved a moral prerogative to '''civilize''' the inferior races of the world... by plundering them of their resources and subjugating them.
throwaway2048 9y ago
I see a ton of moral prerogative behind ideas like "hard work" and "private property", "they worked hard and deserve it" and "just get a job" myself.
coldtea 9y ago
>The most scathing analyses of Bolshevism I have heard have come from the likes of Chomsky and Zinn Bolshevism yes, the political movement it belongs in general, no. Take Zinn for example: "Let's talk about socialism. I think it's very important to bring back the idea of socialism into the national discussion to where it was at the turn of the [last] century before the Soviet Union gave it a bad name." >For all of its faults at least capital aggregation doesn’t have a moral prerogative behind it. The protestant work ethic? The white man's burden? The various civic-religious views of the free-market and the invisible hand? Or, Dr Bowring, an English economist said it in the 19th century: “Jesus Christ is free trade and free trade is Jesus Christ.” Or maybe it's freedom itself? Friedman: "Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself". -- and tons of such colonial, and neo-liberal moral justifications, from the 16th century to Fukuyama end of history with the triumph of the one true system.

danharaj 9y ago

> For all of its faults at least capital aggregation doesn’t have a moral prerogative behind it. Are you sure? For example, colonialism was a project of capitalist development and it very much involved a moral prerogative to '''civilize''' the inferior races of the world... by plundering them of their resources and subjugating them.

throwaway2048 9y ago

I see a ton of moral prerogative behind ideas like "hard work" and "private property", "they worked hard and deserve it" and "just get a job" myself.

coldtea 9y ago

>The most scathing analyses of Bolshevism I have heard have come from the likes of Chomsky and Zinn Bolshevism yes, the political movement it belongs in general, no. Take Zinn for example: "Let's talk about socialism. I think it's very important to bring back the idea of socialism into the national discussion to where it was at the turn of the [last] century before the Soviet Union gave it a bad name." >For all of its faults at least capital aggregation doesn’t have a moral prerogative behind it. The protestant work ethic? The white man's burden? The various civic-religious views of the free-market and the invisible hand? Or, Dr Bowring, an English economist said it in the 19th century: “Jesus Christ is free trade and free trade is Jesus Christ.” Or maybe it's freedom itself? Friedman: "Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself". -- and tons of such colonial, and neo-liberal moral justifications, from the 16th century to Fukuyama end of history with the triumph of the one true system.