- This topic has 63 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 4 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
“of course the Gedolim did not object to Socialism per se”
Correct. Because socialism the way it was put into the place in the UK and Israel isn’t really incompatible with Torah. And the socialists supported the efforts to rebuild Torah (partly because most of them thought that religious Judiasm was on its last legs).
A lot of people like to bash socialists.
I have already pointed out that were it not for socialists, there would not be a State of Israel.
Germany is another interesting case study. Every single non-socialist member of the Reichstag had voted to make Hitler a dictator after the Reichstag fire. Every single socialist member had voted against that. By the end of the summer they were all either dead, incarcerated, in hiding or in exile.
Ben Levi, at least as far as the secular world is concerned, there is an alternative to capitalism and socialism. And that’s the sort of system advocated by Foster Gamble (who is heir to Proctor Gamble), and who these past decades has been very much into the secular version of tikkun olam.
Ironically, his Jewish son was the one who had encouraged him to “follow the money” which clued him into lots of stuff he hadn’t previously realized. It’s beyond the scope of this forum (and my cognitive abilities), but you can research it.
Also, just because it’s impressive doesn’t mean it can ever come to fruition because there are too many negative entities which impede positive efforts toward change.
To nomesorah: My remark about the morals of socialist women was comedic, not anthropological. Apparently, it was wrong comedically and anthropologically.
modifiedDear Ben,
My point is, that when BLM activists say “we are trained Marxists”, they mean they are experts in the understanding of class struggle. They were not advocating for socialism in any form.
n0mesorah
Actually if you would read the entire interview they explain exactly what they mean.They are trained in the theology .
To nomesorah: I did respond to your questions to me, but YWN has either taken down my answering posts, or never put them up. Sorry.
Charlie,
Actually Israel was only able to absorb the mass immigration of the 50s because of the “reparations” from former West Germany. Until then it was impoverished and had a strict (and strictly violated) austerity program. Since the Likud revolution of 1977 there has been much privatization, which has resulted in prosperity and much greater efficiently. For example, when the phone company was part of the Ministry of Communications it took years to get a phone – unless someone had an “in” (protektzia). In fact, protektzia was needed for just about anything decent. The middle-class Mizrahi (which later merged with the socialist HaPoel haMizrahi) joined the governments to get a piece of the pie and insure thee rights of the religious public (e.g. kosher food in the IDF). Jo Amar, in fact, had a protest song about this called Lishkat haTaasuka (employment Service). There is no such thing as equality..Not in this world and not in the next. The only difference is the basis of inequality. As George Orwell put it, “all animals are equal but some are more equal than others”.Israel’s experience is not exclusive. Every country that has thrown off socialism for a free enterprise economy has greatly benefited. Unfortunately, many people did not have the foresight to realize this. Prof. Yisrael Aumann, in fact, commented that socialism sounds great but has one problem. It doesn’t work.
Dear Ben,
I could not find the interview in text. I listened to the original interview. She is discussing that BLM does not need to be centrally controlled as a movement. That should dispel any notion of anarchy being their stated goal.The theology of Marxism has nothing to do with revolutions, genocide, or even governments. The entire chiddush of Marx, was that the future is always more about the class struggle, than the will of the rulers. This has been thoroughly played out in the last 150 years. It could now be stated, that today’s political platforms are yesterdays class struggles. And today’s class struggles will be tomorrows platform. The scientific method has found that this applies throughout history without many exceptions. (Yes, I am totally ignoring the Leninist variation of Marxism. Every anybody does.)
N0mesorah, on the contrary, not wanting a central movement shows that they are anarchists. No rules. On the other hand, Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors described herself and fellow co-founder Alicia Garza as “trained Marxists”. Brad Polumbo wrote an interesting article about this called “Is Black Lives Matter Marxist? No and Yes.” whichcan be read online.
Dear Avi,
That is the interview that we have been discussing.
She was answering why she is okay with the possibility that some other leader can take over the BLM movement. Government and civilization are not part of the interview. Therefore, lack of central leadership, has nothing to do with anarchy. Incidentally, one can have Marxist views, and be completely opposed to anarchy.
Marxism has nothing to do with the ‘no rules anarchy’ concept.
just to clarify.
I did not allege that the leaders were anarchists (they may or may not be).
Rather that they are trained Marxists.To state that they admit being trained Marxists is simply foolish.
I meant to state that while they admit to being trained Marxists they are not pro-communism is simply foolish.
Dear Ben,
Maybe foolish on your part. You are missing the entire context. She is an activist. Not an economic theorist.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.