[lbo-talk] A Note on Equality was RE: (no subject)

[Carrol Cox]

In the First International the form of address was that introduced by the
French Revolution: _Citizen_, not the later Comrade. _Citizen_ reflects the
radical egalitarianism of bourgeois society, the abolition of all fixed
categories (serf, noble, etc.) It is an abstract equality, the only kind of
equality achievable, and it is the foundation of the deprivation of freedom
in capitalist society. And up to the present revolutionary struggles (those
tht achieved power and those that only achieved major 'reforms') have all
been struggles to _complete_ the French Revolution, the achievement of the
equality of Citizenship. The current struggles for migrant-rights, for gay
marriage, are essentially struggles to gain full citizenship for these
groups. The '60s approached the edge of the struggle for freedom but were
mostly struggles for bourgeois  equality. For example, in California, the
law gave citizens the right to bear arms in public -- but the police, in
practice, regarded any Black Man with a gun as a criminal, just as in
Montgomery a black person sitting in the front of a bus was a de jure as
well as de facto criminal. Hence when the Black Panthers attempted to carry
guns into the California  legislature they were engaged in the _identical_
action that Rosa Parks carried out in refusing to move to the back of the
bus: they wre insisting on full equality as citizens of Blacks.

As Tamas points out, it is hard to be a Marxist, for Marx & full Marxists
reject ethical grounds for socialism, but the reason most people become
socialist is out of moral indignation. That, of course, is one of the
reasons agitation often appeals to some bourgeois 'value' such as justice,
equality, etc. But at some point a movement must leave these reactionary
'ideals' behind and focus on capitalism as _history_, as a history that must
be blocked-- as Benjamin put it, the train of history, which is leading us
to destruction, must be derailed. Capitalism and its various ideals is a
serious threat to human survival.

Carrol

-----Original Message-----
From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
On Behalf Of indigo at ymail.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 9:10 PM
To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] A Note on Equality was RE: (no subject)

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