Why Socialism According to Einstein

[serenesam]

* Modern anthropology has taught us, through comparative investigation of so-called primitive cultures, that the social behavior of human beings may differ greatly, depending upon prevailing cultural patterns and the types of organisation which predominate in society. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man may ground their hopes: human beings are not condemned, because of their biological constitution, to annihilate each other or to be at the mercy of a cruel, self-inflicted fate.

* The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. In so far as the labor contract is free what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists' requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product.

* I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

* The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor

 

[Norton]

The unequivocal reality is that, regardless of its specific manifestation, socialism is a pejorative for the vast majority of people in the United States. It's unlikely to change notwithstanding the hopelessly naive aspirations of a few. Accusing a US politician of being a socialist is just slightly better than accusing him or her of being a pedophile. Nevertheless, there is no economic system that will make all people good. It's not the system that is "evil" but, rather, certain people who, unfortunately, are driven to power.

 

[VH]

The unequivocal reality is that, regardless of its specific manifestation, socialism is a pejorative for the vast majority of people in the United States. It's unlikely to change notwithstanding the hopelessly naive aspirations of a few. Accusing a US politician of being a socialist is just slightly better than accusing him or her of being a pedophile. Nevertheless, there is no economic system that will make all people good. It's not the system that is "evil" but, rather, certain people who, unfortunately, are driven to power.

This ^

 

[Faye]

He also said we should be vegetarian, and he was right; however, very few people care for either, so we wont get the change we need and will be doomed.

 

[Norton]

He also said we should be vegetarian, and he was right; however, very few people care for either, so we wont get the change we need and will be doomed.

Probably not. Artificial, though real, meat is on the way. It is, basically, myoblasts (muscle cells) grown in cell culture with appropriate growth factors and nutrients. It may not sound appetizing, but the processes under development are probably more sterile, cleaner, and safer than farm or ranch animals. It may not sound appetizing now but people define their own normality and this has always been the case with innovation.

 

[Faye]

Probably not. Artificial, though real, meat is on the way. It is, basically, myoblasts (muscle cells) grown in cell culture with appropriate growth factors and nutrients. It may not sound appetizing, but the processes under development are probably more sterile, cleaner, and safer than farm or ranch animals. It may not sound appetizing now but people define their own normality and this has always been the case with innovation.

Can you post links on this please?

 

[Norton]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_meat

Or, for other sites, you can google: "in vitro meat" or "artificial meat" etc.

 

[technics]

The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. ...

That sort of thinking came from Karl Marx, building upon the work of Ricardo. That wasn't Einstein.

I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society.

The relationship of the individual to society is an age-old question. You won't be able to answer it.

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.

If you're really interested in this, you have a lot of reading to do. Basically, all that you have posted now has already been thought over 200 years ago.

 

[arbygil]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_meat

Or, for other sites, you can google: "in vitro meat" or "artificial meat" etc.

Dang...we're only steps away from Soylent Green, ya'll.

*Cancer meat*.

Shudders.

 

[Faye]

The big question is how much energy would it take to produce artificial meat. Well, I'm sure people will have lots of others as well.

 

[InvisibleJim]

 

[Norton]

The big question is how much energy would it take to produce artificial meat. Well, I'm sure people will have lots of others as well.

One can choose to view all the problems we have today as a depressing foreshadowing of ultimate failure and doom. But, focusing on negativity is the best way to stifle innovation. As an inventor, I see these problems as exciting challenges to be met and embraced head on. Just give me a really good, hard, complex problem to work on and I'm happy.

At the very least, producing artificial meat will not add methane to the atmosphere.

 

[Lerxst]

One can choose to view all the problems we have today as a depressing foreshadowing of ultimate failure and doom. But, focusing on negativity is the best way to stifle innovation. As an inventor, I see these problems as exciting challenges to be met and embraced head on. Just give me a really good, hard, complex problem to work on and I'm happy.

At the very least, producing artificial meat will not add methane to the atmosphere.

You can't forget that most of the US power comes from coal plants, so anything requiring power usually requires coal being burned. Besides, "test tube meat" sounds like the next greatest cause of cancer in my books! And where did they get the cells to start production to begin with?

Now, in hopes of not completely derailing this thread...

Socialism has always been great in theory. In reality though, it becomes Communism. It's simple human nature that will never allow a Socialist society to exist. The best thing we can do is watch an ant hill or a bee hive to get our fix

 

[Norton]

"test tube meat" sounds like the next greatest cause of cancer in my books!

Why? Based on what mechanism?

 

[Lerxst]

Why? Based on what mechanism?

Because, historically, when humans start to defy nature, problems arise. There are few, if any, occasions where the benefits of such actions have outweighed the costs.

 

[Norton]

Humans started defying nature the moment they left their caves and developed agriculture, or, even before, when they made stone tools and were hunter-gatherers. Besides, "defying nature" is not a mechanism and the meaning of "natural" is open to interpretation.

 

[magister343]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_meat

Or, for other sites, you can google: "in vitro meat" or "artificial meat" etc.

It is also commonly called shmeat, because we have yet to figure out a way to make it not taste like shit.

 

[VH]

There has been a lot of talk about socialism and even communism on these forums lately. So I've been thinking about it.

Here's what I've come to consider. The problem isn't the form of government, exactly. You can see good and bad examples of nearly every form of government. What do all of the good examples have in common? Ethics, morality, education and a positive attitude on the part of both the leaders and the people. Anarchy and even communism have worked so long as these factors exist. That said, socialism and capitalism seem to be the most successful forms of government due to the fact that they are more likely to survive a people that has few of the success factors, and seem to be able to foster and sustain those factors better than other forms of government.

Capitalism would be the ideal model if employees were paid a percentage of profits according to their value, rather than wages. This would require transparency from the leaders - something that ethical and moral leaders will not have an issue with. If the books and accounting were shared with the employees, then they would all know what was being made. The only real trick would be to settle upon how many shares of the profits each employee is entitled to. Obviously, the guy who cleans the floor shouldn't be entitled to the same number of shares that the president of the company is entitled to because the president's decisions have far more impact on the profits of the company than whether or not they have clean floors. However, this would highly motivate employees to be productive as well as foster a spirit of teamwork much more than the standard 'wage' system.

This would also create a situation where the government could offer welfare programs that had incentives to be productive by using similar share scales. Lay around and do nothing? You won't get much more than you need to survive. Get involved with the government and help out? You'll get more. Bust your ass helping out? You'll get even more.

Most importantly, the government should pay people to get educated. Education is the most important part of any civilization. Ethics, morality, as well as reduced violent crime rates, poverty, and other factors are all easily attributed to education levels. There is almost nothing more valuable to a civilization, and if the government is going to give anything away for free, it should be education. It's more important than medicine.

However, this is just my pie in the sky theory of ideal capitalism, which will never happen unless everyone agrees to it and unfortunately we have two groups of people in America (and a lot of other nations seem to have the same problem) that would be violently opposed to this - those who don't want to work and the rich who don't want to share. At current, it seems like the only options are to ally with one of these two groups, and that's the true injustice because they're both wrong - and are insisting there is no other option but to choose one of their sides.

 

[acd]

Warren Buffet has complained that as one of the richest men in the world, he pays less taxes than his secretary or cleaning people.
And it's not rich people who are complaining most about his remarks.
People would rather the middle class and those less-well-off pay more in taxes and lose benefits or programs than the super rich be taxed a bit more.
The media says that increasing taxes for the rich would not make a dent in the deficit so 'why bother?'
Not that I expect the rich to foot the bill but zut alors something ain't adding up here.

America is built on the fallacy that anyone can become a billionaire.

 

[VH]

This is one of the biggest reasons I'm in support of a Flat Tax. Not only is it fair to everyone, it removes almost all of the hassle of the IRS and unpredictable tax code. Best part? A Flat Tax would drastically increase our government income... now to convince the government not to find new ways to spend it...