- Capitalism and Alternatives -

ALL 'rights' are decided within history at any given time.

Posted by: bill on November 24, 1999 at 13:34:38:

In Reply to: Ahistorical 'rights' posted by Barry Stoller on November 23, 1999 at 18:48:16:

:In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into
definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real
foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to
which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of
production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life.(1)


Yes, and at one time social relations revolved around the divine "rights" of kings.

ALL "rights" are decided within history at any given time. The reason I cleave to pushing "radical democracy" is that these "rights" will be determined by the greatedt number of peole.

I prefer to use rights in an ethical context relating to a majority decision on a set of (moral) standards. These are majority decisions and have to do with matters of social justice at any given historical period.

I would never underestimate the POWER of ethical considerations. The foundation may be the relations imposed by material production - but Real Movement against those relations, IMO, is first generated through an Ethical perspective outside, and in opposition to, the dominant value paradigm. Because we are deeply imbedded within this system's values, we think in terms of power relationships. This may be an historical perspective as well. After all, how does one relate environmental concern or sensitivity with concepts of power.

That's why the typical union demand for higher wages is not sufficient. It is still part of the fetish game.

That's why the environmental movement is potentially a BIG threat, it challenges the value paradigm.

But if you can't see the VAST difference between Nikhil, Lark, (or myself for that matter) - and StuFrenchyDocPersiflage, et al - well i don't know what to say. The former have what I would call an ethical sensitivity. The latter have...what?

ps. And while you respond to many of their (Stu etc.) posts (admirable I suppose) but I have to wonder...why?

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup