I think this is the dialectical truth which lies behind neoliberal worries about crisis of motivation, etc.
Of course the slope of this uneven distribution should be relatively shallow; we need to bring up the lowest end substantially and reduce the high end dramatically. The SCALE of material inequality in our contemporary moment is, as I'm sure we all agree, grotesque.
Thoughts?
On Apr 25, 2012, at 7:09 PM, indigo at ymail.com wrote:
> I understand, but I also think that striving for equality...which can't really exist even in a communist society...is miscast, it's better thought of as striving for justice. It is a realizable goal. You can acknowledge and treat with the inevitable inequality in any society by striving for justice, not equality. The fact that so few own so much of everything makes me angry principally because it is so unjust.
>
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 21:40:55 -0400, Jim Farmelant <farmelantj at juno.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:05:16 -0400 indigo at ymail.com writes:
>>> Yes; the human demand for freedom and human demand for equality are
>>>
>>> inherently at odds. The libertarians say the same, then interpret
>>> freedom
>>> as strictly the freedom of the individual. Communism focuses on the
>>>
>>> freedom of the collective. In this way communists make an
>>> additional
>>> demand that libertarians don't: the demand for justice.
>>
>> I would suggest that Isaiah Berlin's distinction betwee negative
>> liberty - that is the absence of coercion, or freedom from, and
>> positive liberty - freedom as self-mastery or self-realization,
>> or the freedom to, is of some relevance here. Berlin himself
>> by and large rejected positive liberty as a social ideal, instead
>> opting for negative liberty, to be balanced by the competing social
>> ideal of equality. However, I think that the Marxist tradition
>> instead has largely insisted upon embracing both negative
>> libery and positive liberty. Libertarians, of course, opt
>> just for negative liberty, and reject both positive liberty
>> and equality as social ideals.
>>
>>
>> Jim Farmelant
>> http://independent.academia.edu/JimFarmelant
>> www.foxymath.com
>> Learn or Review Basic Math
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:55:00 -0400, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Attacks on inequality are, it seems, a crucial element in
>>> political
>>> > agitation. But lets be clear. At least from a Marxist perspective,
>>> the
>>> > demand for equality is quite false. And the formula for communist
>>>
>>> > society
>>> > does _not_ imply equality; in fact it is a call for inequality:
>>> >
>>> >> From each according to his [her] ability:
>>> >
>>> > In other words, humans are unequal in their ability, and it is
>>> wrong to
>>> > call
>>> > for anyone to provide more than his/her abilities provide.
>>> >
>>> > To each according to his [her] needs.
>>> >
>>> > Humans do not have equal needs; many need much more than others.
>>> That
>>> > need
>>> > should be satisfied. Again, communist society is a fundamentally
>>> unequal
>>> > society.
>>> >
>>> > The aim of communist society is human freedom, and human freedom
>>> (however
>>> > defined) is in contradiction to the demand for equality. We demand
>>> much
>>> > more
>>> > medical care for the ill than for the well. That is only one
>>> example.
>>> >
>>> > And I think that even for agitational purposes it would be well to
>>> get
>>> > away
>>> > as much as possible from attacks on inequality and put more
>>> emphasis on
>>> > the
>>> > constraints on human freedom built into capitalist relations of
>>> > production.
>>> >
>>> > Carrol
>>> >
>>> > P.S. And in politics, of course, we demand very unequal effort
>>> from
>>> > various
>>> > sectors of the population or from particular comrades. For
>>> example, we do
>>> > not place political demands on children nor on parents. That is why
>>> the
>>> > suggestion that students should refuse to take the tests
>>> associated with
>>> > No
>>> > Child Left Behind is such an outrageous suggestion. Individual
>>> students
>>> > and
>>> > individual parents must not be asked to stick their necks out. The
>>>
>>> > political
>>> > burden of attacking NCLB must be born by others.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ___________________________________
>>> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Using Opera's revolutionary email client:
>>> http://www.opera.com/mail/
>>> ___________________________________
>>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
>> The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>
> --
> Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk