michael perelman on Saturday, October 30, 2010 5:29 PM wrote:
<Yes, but keep repeating this, which is am important, but unappreciated idea.
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Miles Jackson <cqmv at pdx.edu> wrote:
> On 10/30/2010 11:03 AM, Barry Brooks wrote:
>>
>> We need a war on selfishness. If that war had the level of impact that
>> the
>> war
>> on drugs has had then greed would no longer be socially acceptable.
>>
>
> I think this is confusing cause and effect. Selfishness is not the cause
> of
> capitalist social relations; capitalist social relations produce and
> intensify selfishness. Conducting a "war on selfishness" in a capitalist
> society is pointless as long as capitalism thrives as a socioeconomic
> system. (LBO old-timers know I've asserted this repeatedly over the years
> here: psychological characteristics are primarily a product of social
> relations, not vice versa.)
>
> Miles
>
>
> ___________________________________
Mark :
That is true that social relations are the bases of which morality stands on top as a part of superstructure. However, morality is not a passive element, being stationary, frothy and useless. It has its important role to play in influencing the relations that gives birth to it in the first place. Capitalist civilizations, while destined to die due to self-inflicted irreconcilable contradictions, try hard to live on for sometime by resorting to its superstructures for survival. One of which that can be enlisted for help is morality of earlier-days like the feudal era or even biblical times. On of the correct ways to deal with the contradiction between the capitalist "morality" like Gecko's maxim - greed is good and its anachronous "greed is bad" is to point it out that both are wrong in the sense of more advanced social relations.
We ought to emphasize as often as possible the dialectical relations. Motional concepts about things are better than isolated and stationary concepts.