tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post6599540422136137867..comments2023-09-25T04:26:51.568-06:00Comments on The Barefoot Bum: The hero and the massesLarry Hamelinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-68171475702273244822013-06-27T12:34:22.678-06:002013-06-27T12:34:22.678-06:00Good point. I'm not entirely convinced myself....Good point. I'm not entirely convinced myself. Still, Robin has an interesting idea.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-35702582548079171052013-06-27T11:51:20.687-06:002013-06-27T11:51:20.687-06:00I didn't really understand this article's ...I didn't really understand this article's central thesis, if there was one. I just want to point out that the ubermensch is an ideal in Nietzsche's philosophy, floated tentatively. The rejection of "slave morality" does not entail the ubermensch, and the ubermensch only rejects "slave morality" insofar as he rejects everything beneath him, including every other human morality as heretofore formulated.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-49756328964927343792013-05-17T20:15:36.799-06:002013-05-17T20:15:36.799-06:00Eh. Some communists really do say that. I don'...Eh. Some communists really do say that. I don't think it's correct, and I don't think it's all that big; I just bring up the concept to dismiss it.<br /><br />I do think most communists are more sensible.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-19179916870377806632013-05-17T14:57:16.171-06:002013-05-17T14:57:16.171-06:00With due respect, Larry, I take issue with this:
...With due respect, Larry, I take issue with this:<br /><br />"One way that some communists view communism is that in communism, the concept of the heroic individual is deprecated rather than extolled."<br /><br />I can't speak for all communists, but the above sounds odd, to me.<br /><br />In reality, there is not much talk about "heroic individuals" in "communism" and I don't think heroic individuals are deprecated at all. Which, if we think about it, is a lucky thing, as many Marxists see Marx, Engels, Luxemburg and others as heroic individuals without deprecating them.<br /><br />At least within Marxist thought what there is, and in abundance, is the notion that the game is essentially, fundamentally, intrinsically, objectively, rigged: people don't win the game because they are heroic (or smart, or thrifty, or visionaries, or risk-takers, or because they contribute more than others to society, or whatever), but because the game is designed that way. <br /><br />Those who lose the game, whatever their virtues or lack thereof, lose the game by design.<br /><br />That's why one may deprecate fake "heroes" until one is blue in the face and it will change nothing. <br /><br />The point is to end the game.Magpiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07528637318288802178noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-38882231359083692792013-05-16T14:44:52.339-06:002013-05-16T14:44:52.339-06:00For a person who condemns personal attacks, you se...For a person who condemns personal attacks, you seems to enjoy using them.<br /><br />I've asked you to leave twice now, and yet you're still here. Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-45272739328549421192013-05-16T14:32:48.530-06:002013-05-16T14:32:48.530-06:00So why blog? To hear yourself speak? There are m...So why blog? To hear yourself speak? There are medications for that. Major Navnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-4348108825213620932013-05-16T13:55:34.187-06:002013-05-16T13:55:34.187-06:00I don't see any point in continuing this discu...I don't see any point in continuing this discussion, Major Nav. You don't have anything that interests me, and, while I can't speak for you, I can't think of anything I have that would interest you.<br /><br />I'm not angry or offended. I just have a limited amount of time, and I don't like wasting it.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-52938218360496919292013-05-16T12:22:08.625-06:002013-05-16T12:22:08.625-06:00Again with the negative vibes, Moriarty.
Boy, y...Again with the negative vibes, Moriarty. <br /><br />Boy, you really are thin-skinned. Or you realize how thin arguements really are. <br /><br />Rod? I prefer the term "stick of learning".<br /><br />When is your Mom going to kick you out of her basement and make you get a real job. <br /><br />No THAT is a personal attack.Major Navnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-64060554886340342302013-05-16T12:13:39.832-06:002013-05-16T12:13:39.832-06:00I am truly trying to understand your viewpoint. S...I am truly trying to understand your viewpoint. Seriously.<br />You think millions read your blog? Just kidding.<br />There are also growing millions attracted to the concept of "new communism" and I want to know the appeal.<br />I have been reading a number of 20th century history books lately and I get the desire to transition from the class societies to one where everyone has an equal chance. Which I think is what the US has or is as close to that ideal as it is possible to be. But forcing everyone to be totally equal is a contradiction in terms.<br /><br />I have read your article several times, doesn't help. The three questions I need answered are:<br />What is YOUR non-literal definition of entrepeneur?<br />It is not clear and maybe this will help me get it.<br />Secondly, How (not why) do you propose to "turn everyone into entrepreneurs?"<br />Most importantly, Explain how capitalist have a RIGHT to subordinate others? In the US, workers can vote with their feet, or strike, or call the cops if it is illegal.<br /><br /> <br /><br /> Major Navnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-39450139246610027792013-05-16T12:09:35.279-06:002013-05-16T12:09:35.279-06:00That was not a personal attack. This is a personal...That was not a personal attack. This is a personal attack: come back when you've removed the rod from your ass.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-71326523378206416952013-05-16T11:48:28.857-06:002013-05-16T11:48:28.857-06:00Calling me naive rather offering a counterpoint or...Calling me naive rather offering a counterpoint or response is a personal attack.<br /><br />For example, if I said you are a dumbass for even contemplating communism has any place in reality. Would you take that as personal attack or a discussion.<br /><br />Major Navnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-73801587393077147672013-05-16T11:07:34.926-06:002013-05-16T11:07:34.926-06:00Second, read the post in its context. I'm usin...Second, read the post in its context. I'm using "entrepreneur" in a non-literal sense, which I explicitly note.<br /><br />Finally, Before you commented, I already knew that millions of people disagreed with me. Knowing that you personally are one of those people helps neither my readers nor myself. If you have anything substantive to add, I'm happy to discuss it, but until then, the best I can do is note your objections.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-47649258683318420832013-05-16T09:33:07.417-06:002013-05-16T09:33:07.417-06:00Only one personal attack vs a reasoned argument, y...<i>Only one personal attack vs a reasoned argument, you're getting better.</i><br /><br />Adjust your attitude, please. Expressing an opinion is not a personal attack.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-81329728287542219212013-05-16T08:12:50.228-06:002013-05-16T08:12:50.228-06:00Only one personal attack vs a reasoned argument, y...Only one personal attack vs a reasoned argument, you're getting better.<br />This is becoming intriguing.<br /><br />I agree that the ideal of communism has never been truly practiced, but I don't see how it can be. Especially, now that the world is so interconnected or "flat". <br /><br />"How do you know that's the only way to do so?"<br />Because you argue: "the goal of communism should be to turn everyone into entrepreneurs." <br /><br />And just so we know where we are starting from. <br />Entrepreneur: an individual who organizes and operates a business or businesses<br />Capitalism: an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production, with the goal of making a profit<br />Kind of go hand and hand, don't you think.<br /><br />How do you go about forcing everyone to be an entrepreneur? They tend to be self-motivating.<br /><br />"We should all be aware that the world is to be shaped, we should all have the will to shape it, and we should all develop the skill, energy, and cleverness to be successful in actually shaping it." This scares me a little, too reminicent of the old world communist dogma. Major Navnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-43670431399592977302013-05-16T04:34:13.954-06:002013-05-16T04:34:13.954-06:00Keep in mind that, if you have read this blog, you...Keep in mind that, if you have read this blog, you will know that I do not hold up Russia and China as paragons of communism, in much the same sense that capitalists do not hold up 18th century England as a paragon of capitalism, even though that century produced Adam Smith and David Ricardo.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-37754137596824807742013-05-16T04:32:02.760-06:002013-05-16T04:32:02.760-06:00Capitalists are not dominators, but inclusionists....<i>Capitalists are not dominators, but inclusionists. Work for me, join me in a partnership, trade with me, and we will build a successful enterprise that benefits all.</i><br /><br />You have a naive view of capitalism.<br /><br /><i>Evil capitalist try to force others out of the market via illegal/immoral means, but that means they are not capitalising.</i><br /><br />Shrugs. There seem to be a lot of evil capitalists in the world who are not capitalizing. A "good" capitalist system would tend to force such people out of business, which does not seem to actually happen.<br /><br />If you're going to say that communism is what communists have done, then you have to say that capitalism is what capitalists have done.<br /><br /><i>Communists want to make every one equal so that noone dominates anyone else. Sounds great, but the only way to achieve this, because you can't bring everyone up is to force the "highly successful individualist entrepeneurs" down. Which is done through domination.</i><br /><br />How do you know that's the only way to do so?<br /><br /><i>I alway wondered how Russia/China invaded all those countries to force communism upon them while calling everyone else empirialists. Then to keep the people from fleeing their efforts to free the masses and make everyone equal, they had to erect walls, fences, and machine gun nests to keep them from fleeing.</i><br /><br />As I've mentioned before, there are a lot of historical issues here that have nothing to do with communism. What outcomes are the results of what causes is a matter of considerable historical controversy.<br /><br />While I don't believe that that communism per se was responsible for most of bad outcomes in Russia and China, I don't assert that I'm <i>certainly</i> correct. I do, however, reject that one can assert without specific historical evidence that communism per se was <i>certainly</i> responsible for those ills.<br /><br />We can go only so far asserting contrary opinions. There are a lot of methods that historians, political scientists, economists, and other social sciences have developed to investigate these kinds of questions. I'm happy to evaluate scientific efforts, even informal scientific efforts (this is just a blog, not an academic journal) with an open mind.Larry Hamelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08788697573946266404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28755195.post-50613451299031299342013-05-15T09:18:51.217-06:002013-05-15T09:18:51.217-06:00I know you will probably swear and call me bad nam...I know you will probably swear and call me bad names again, but I truly am hoping to have a civil discussion about this topic.<br /><br />I see it the other way and I'm not sure modern vs historical precedence is relevant.<br />Capitalists are not dominators, but inclusionists. Work for me, join me in a partnership, trade with me, and we will build a successful enterprise that benefits all. Evil capitalist try to force others out of the market via illegal/immoral means, but that means they are not capitalising.<br />Communists want to make every one equal so that noone dominates anyone else. Sounds great, but the only way to achieve this, because you can't bring everyone up is to force the "highly successful individualist entrepeneurs" down. Which is done through domination.<br />I alway wondered how Russia/China invaded all those countries to force communism upon them while calling everyone else empirialists. Then to keep the people from fleeing their efforts to free the masses and make everyone equal, they had to erect walls, fences, and machine gun nests to keep them from fleeing.<br />Major Navnoreply@blogger.com