Adam: So who should take the money from the middle class? Who should tell the workers that they should make no money now that they are starving?
In your ultraleftist rants you defend the bourgeoisie for making Argentina a cashless society--only because all the cash is now in foreign banks. We want a cashless society, but only when the means
of production are socialized and a means to satisfy human need exist.
Karl: I object to the way in which you subject me to attack by describing what I say as ultraleftist rants. This kind of sectarian bigotry fluently pours from you like bile out of a running sore. You don't even make a feeble attempt to justify the use of such venom. I could just as easily call you a superficial reactionary cretin. However unlike you I don't descend to this kind of vituperation. I have more respect for myself.
Now in response to your criticism.
The point is that the workers under Argentinian conditions cannot, to use your language, make money. This, in a sense, is the problem. Capitalism lacks sufficient variable capital (money wages) to advance in the form of money. Consequently the needs of the working class are left unsatisfied by Argentinian capitalism. Clearly the problem is not more money but the incapacity of capitalism to meet the need of the working class --even apparently at the most basic of levels. These conditions are verification of the historical obsolescence of capitalism and the necessity of a social form that can meet those needs --communist society. Consequently it is absurd for the working class to seek more money when there is no money available. This means that misconceive social being. Capitalism is incapable of producing the money wages that form the basis for the satisfaction of workers' needs. It is absurd for the working class to clamour for the re-establishment of money at a time when history is destroying that very social form as manifested in the growing worthlessness of the peso. Reformists like you, who engage in cheap name calling, want to re-establish money when history is taking the working class in the opposite direction. In short reformists, such as yourself, seek to defend money against the very tide of history --objective movement. Clearly figures such as you play a decisive and indispensable role in the defence of the capitalist system. Who is then is the one out of step --you or me?
Regards
Karl Carlile (Global Communist Group)
Be free to join our communism mailing list
at http://homepage.eircom.net/~kampf/
|