: The ENTIRE CONCEPT of (Marxian) socialism is that labor is the most important thing humans do---therefore it should NEVER be alienated from those who do it.
: : If that were true, why would Marxists hate guys like Gates and Jobs et al. so much?
: Because Gates and Jobs make millions BECAUSE those who do their work FOR THEM make less than what they are worth.
Another Marxist assertion without the slightest bit of proof. Gates etc ., make the bucks they do because enough people like me have made a rational decision to buy the fruit of their labor. The idea of 'surplus labor' deserves only a raised eyebrow, a sardonic smile and a pointed question such as 'Does Marxist theory consider 'surplus oppression'?
: : Surely the message of Marx is that if you do work to your potential you will be penalized for it.
: Nonsense. Ever heard of 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their work'?
Oh? Nonsense? That tells me that since no one in Socialist countries have any chance of becoming wealthy, not a single person has the ability to create anything that his fellow citizens would consider useful enough to buy in sufficient quantity for the originator to become wealthy. It's too bad Socialism engenders creating dolts rather than creative people.
: : Besides, Red Deathy is with me on this one.
: RD was stating that a rational, planned economy that produced for people's NEEDS instead of PROFITS would permit humanity more leisure time. The insinuation that such a state of affairs would lead humanity to laziness is your own (erroneous) interpretation.
Wrongo Bucko, if you re-read my post you'll see that laziness is endorsed by P. Lafargue, son-in-law of Karl Marx, in his brochure The Right to be Lazy. Lafargue, quoting Lessing, says "Let us be lazy in everything, except in loving and drinking, except in being lazy".
And besides, by agreeing that labor ought to be reduced to it's barest necessity, isn't that the same as saying that it shouldn't be valued?