- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Response to Marcos

Posted by: Stoller on November 17, 1999 at 20:55:11:

In Reply to: Exclusive relationships and social division. posted by Marcos on November 17, 1999 at 10:17:06:

: Parents who wish to see their offspring gain more than others are not acting in the interest of a socialist society.

Yes---and as I understand the word gain---I agree.

Public ownership of the means of production---not to mention job rotation---should preclude the problem of materially and socially gaining more than others automatically.

: Indeed a parent can have no more say in the raising of their child than can the society [as] a whole - to do so is to be in a position of privilege, to do so is to deny others.

Nowhere, to my knowledge, does Engels or Marx---or Lenin---suggest the abolition of the nuclear family as an emotional unit. Only as an economic unit do they suggest the abolition of marriage. As I demonstrated here, Engels was clear about defending monogamy.

Obviously, children of the revolution should receive ample day care, schooling, and social interactions resulting from the rationalization of 'social services.'

But would you deny them the primary care of their biological parents?

If you wish to provide pertinent quotes supporting that position I would be very interested in examining them!

: [E]ven in so fine a socialist brotherhood there may lie the festering poison of privilege, where one person favors another emotionally they may attempt to favor them economically - what checks do we have against this?

You anticipate the possibility that some children may emotionally gain more than others---perhaps by having more attentive, patient, etc. parents---?

That problem, I believe, is outside the scope of the Marxian project---and I would be very careful about treading in such deep waters...

To put the means of production and the spectrum of social tasks equally into the hands of all citizens, I believe, will be all the 'check' required for an egalitarian society.

Until concretely and conclusively proven otherwise...

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup