- Capitalism and Alternatives -

And speaking of genetic modification...

Posted by: Barry Stoller on November 09, 1999 at 17:11:04:

In Reply to: the hostility isnt at all necessary posted by Lark on November 09, 1999 at 12:04:37:

: As far as my position goes until genetic modification can render the human race entirely equal in physical and mental attributes then the issue of natural and innate inequalities must be dealt with. Now levelling like your philosophy appears to suggest is more than likely going to drive people into anti-collectivist capitalism whereas recognising that relative inequalities that provide a sense of achievement will keep them on our side.

Here's a famous German philosopher on the topic of 'levelling':

What they would fain attain with all their strength, is the universal, green-meadow happiness of the herd, together with security, safety, comfort, and alleviation of life for every one; their two most frequently chanted songs and doctrines are called 'Equality of Rights' and 'Sympathy with all Sufferers'---and suffering itself is looked upon by them as something which must be done away with.(1)

Which led him to:

The essential thing, however, in a good and healthy aristocracy is that...society is not allowed to exist for its own sake, but only as a foundation and scaffolding, by means of which a select class of beings may be able to elevate themselves to their higher duties, and in general to a higher existence: like those sun-seeking climbing plants in Java---they are called Sipo Matador,---which encircle an oak so long and so often with their arms, until at last, high above it, but supported by it, they can unfold their tops in the open light, and exhibit their happiness.(2)

(Of course, the oak symbolizes the entire working class...)

Put simply, Lark---

When the bourgeoisie talk about 'some' inequality I DON'T TRUST THEM.

And, likewise---

When socialists (of whatever stripe) talk about 'some' inequality---I DON'T TRUST THEM.

Which leads directly back to Job Rotation.

The only people who oppose job rotation are either those who ALREADY HAVE or ANTICIPATE HAVING a 'profession' in which 'menial' tasks are omitted because their skills are 'too valuable' to be 'wasted' doing the sort of work MOST people are stuck with for ENTIRE LIFETIMES.

College students---that fortunate 25% of the American population---I am talking to you.

I'd rather have principles than popularity.

If you want to retain 'some' inequality in your socialist utopias, there's no shortage of politicians to vote for.


1. Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, Modern Library Edition, p. 49, contemptuous emphasis in original.
2. Ibid., pp. 198-99.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup