Stop shilling for market socialism

Stop shilling for market socialism.

Other urls found in this thread:

insurgentnotes.com/2013/10/yugoslav-self-management-capitalism-under-the-red-banner/.
youtu.be/l9Ist8i-JlU?t=2m38s

I never did.

Aye Aye captain

everyone hates marcsoc

Council communism is the best

Oops forgot my shitpost flag

You will never silence TitoBroz or the power of glorious sensible transition!

Controversial opinion, but markets are fine for non-essential commodities, like luxury trinkets whatever.

...

No.

Yeah no.

...

No.

Uphold Market Socialism.

Cockshott is a Market Socialist

There is always more space on goli otog, drugaru.

You clearly don't know the first thing about Market Socialism. All businesses would become Cooperatives, so even if Zucc stayed as part of the Facebook team, he'd no longer have the right to claim the majority of the company's profits.

B-but markets are efficient and the only alternative to it is stalinism! Hayek and Mises told me so!

thats the dutch flag though

Not true, there's another alternative, Anarcho-Communism. Which leads to an unstable society of uncoordinated Anarchists pretending they're abolishing the state while using all the governmental institutions that existed before to organise their society and ignoring the essential lessons Marx tried to tell them about the fact that you can't actively abolish the state. While also getting their shit pushed in by Fascists.

Agreed, praise Marxism-Cockshottism

only as a transition phase

was responding to the other poster who said private enterprise is ok for luxury items

Market Socialism is a transitional system.

Dumby.

Guys, I'm a DOTPist. I believe in the dictatorship of the proletariat as a transitional system

Okay then good luck with that :)

...

Market "socialism" was created by Hermann Göring. Coincidence? I think not.

How is cockshott a market socialist?

I'd prefer AES to marksucc tbh: insurgentnotes.com/2013/10/yugoslav-self-management-capitalism-under-the-red-banner/. Marksucc is like what Zizek would call the more postmodern capitalism, where the reality of wage-labour and its exploitative nature is hidden under a different, more humane mask, whereas ML SiOC was directly antagonistic and didn't fuck with your perception by making false promises.

what did he mean by this?

Nope

that you suck at management

Even Cockshott's system advocates for a consumer goods market in which the price of commodities may diverge from their actual labour content due to fluctuations in supply and demand.

Kekalonia

Thats not market socialism you stupid fuck. Having prices in labour vouchers set to clearing price isnt the same as production for exchange, and it certainly isnt market socialism, which is workers cooperatives producing for exchange and profit.

The prices in cockshotts system are set to clearing price to ensure there isnt uneven distribution of products (shortages) or oversupply. This price information can then also be used to plan the economy so as to make sure that product with a much higher clearing price get more production behind it.

Cool it kiddo.
Where in the book does it say that all items are defined by a clearing price? Doing so would defeat the point of Cockshott's consumer goods market in the first place.
Not all Market Socialists advocate for cooperatives.

Towards a new socialism, chapter 8

Cockshott isnt a fucking market socialist, so it doesnt "defeat the point".

Further information on what market-clearing prices are:

Did you actually read the book or did you just read memes?

Yeah yeah I know what market clearing prices are, and I have read the book. Damn you're a disagreeable one aren't you? Do you argue with people with this haughty tone irl too?

I still fail to see how this isn't a market system though. Whether the prices are decided by the distributor or not they're still variable based on the supply and demand of the product and are bought and sold for a currency.

Titofags are and will forever be retard cunts

*I totally know what a clearing price is why are you explaining this to me

Not an argument. And he doesn't say they are "defined" by a market clearing price. He says that they are "set, as far as possible, at market-clearing levels", which can then be altered based on the relative supply and demand of the item.

You're the only one saying they're "defined" by a market clearing price, faggot. The user you're replying to said they're set

Synonyms. "He" failed to mention the fact that the prices of the item can be fluctuate on the market based on supply and demand, as Cockshott stated in the book. Which is what we're arguing about.

The products are not traded in any way, the products are not produced with a market system.
A market socialist system is where all the coopratives or companies or whathaveyou work on their own and produce in accordance to prices and profit, not a planned system that is calculated in natura. Market socialism has capital markets, where firms/cooperatives buy capital goods from the martket.

Cockshotts system has none of that. It is centrally planned, calculated in natura, production is done in accordance to the democratic plan.
To say that the fact that they change prices to prevent shortages at the labour cost or waste from overproduction is somehow a market is fucking stupid. It is not a market
In Cockshotts system, nothing is exchanged in the sense of a market. The store where you "buy" goods does not receive labour vouchers for their sales, those vouchers are destroyed on use. The state also does not "exchange" anything with you, because those labour vouchers are destroyed on use, not accumulated. Its not a market, its a rationing system, and cockshotts "market" is just an analogy to how markets work. The economy does not revolve around a market, the economy is centrally planned. As such, its not market socialism.

Saying that it is market socialism is the same like capitalist saying that everything that involves voluntary exchange is capitalism.


A market clearing price is already set adjusted for supply and demand by its definition.
"As so far as possible" is said because you cannot 100% accurately predict what the demand is going to be.


Nigger I litterally quoted what cockshott said and explained how its not market socialism.

Lastly I want to say that you should stop wearing the yugoslavia flag if youre not going to follow titoism.

No they're fucking not. You yourself quote Cumshott as saying the prices are "set, as far as possible, at market-clearing levels". Stop being such an intellectually dishonest shitstain because I'm running out of things to call you

Anyway yugofag you cant just take the moral highground after you showed you didnt even read the book you claim to have read. You can't just say "oh yeah i knew that no reason to treat me like the child i am".

Piss off.

Have any of you actually read Marx?

We do know there will be a transitional stage. It's called the revolution, and it only ends when we have communism

Marx spoke of "the revolutionary transformation of society", AKA dicatorship of the proletariat which is the revolution (for as long as it is in capitalism and the revolution ends when it is completed and there is the lower phase of communism), in short. Whether you agree with the MLs or not, the notion of a wholly separate transitional society like state socialism is a development from Marx and not something he talked about at all. In this thread we are trying to take the notion of a transitional society within the ML-type framework and seeing how it is superior to a transitional "market socialism", by imagining a cybernetically planned central planning.

and what happens during your revolution? What stages does it likely go through?

that is all well and good, but you aren't going to bring the entire economy under the control of the the central planning committee at one stroke, at the very least logistically, never mind the actual wresting control of it. The transitional stage will maintain some kind of market at least at the very beginning, you cannot centralised production day or one week or even one month or year to the next. It is a gradually process. How is it to be conducted?

Bruh. The transitional stage you're looking for is the proletariat seizing private property

Cockshott spends like 200 pages pondering the question in TaNS. Maybe read it.

I've seen Socialists do this too tbh. Making all these parallels with Central Planning is pointless too btw, even most Market Socialists agree that there will be both Centrally Planned parts of the economy where necessary goods are produced and other freer ones where the Market will be used. This is exactly what Cockshott's system advocates, however the price of goods on the market is just centrally regulated to prevent shortages. It's really just a very centralized Market Socialist system.
If you want further proof that Cockshott is a Market Socialist btw he literally advocates for Titoist style Market Socialism as a transitional phase into his Socialist system, which you can see in this video: youtu.be/l9Ist8i-JlU?t=2m38s

Nah I'm good. Just because I don't follow an ideology to the letter doesn't mean I can't appreciate it.

WRONG, COCKSHOTT DOES NOT ADVOCATE THAT

Gee this sure makes him a fucking titoist. Oh wait no it doesnt, it just means hes not retarded and knows you cannot implement a socialist economic system within a day. He litterally just says "cooperatives are prefferable to private companies while we are constructing a socialist economy".

You are just cherrypicking a two lines and treating them in isolation to validate your own worldview.
Read the book towards a new socialism, instead of just watching videos.

Ah yes, and you actually say that I haven't read the book.

Yes a cooperative based Market Socialist system, lmao

You know Market Socialism is seen as a transitional system right?

You seem to have cherrypicked that entire video tbh.

Give me some fucking quotes then, because I have given you plenty to disprove what you claimed to be in there.

You linked the video, and it doesnt even support your claims.

Page 190
"On the first point, we should stress that we are not proposing that all goods and services be distributed via a market. We recognize the existence of a 'social provision' sector (health, education, child care, etc.) where goods or services are provide as a basic right of citizenship (see chapter 5). Here the level and form of provision are not decidedusing market prices, but through democratic debate and politics. Nonetheless, we make no apology for advocating a market in many items of personal consumption."
That's pretty much exactly what I said before about there being a centrally planned part of the economy and a market part of the economy.

How doesn't it? It demonstrates that Cockshott advocates a Market Socialist Cooperative system (which you initially claimed was what Market Socialism was) as a transitional phase for his system. Practically all Market Socialists see their system as a transitional phase into Communism.

And that still doesnt mean that the consumer goods are created in a market. Those consumer goods are distributed in the price adjusting manner I mentioned and quoted here
The social goods mentioned are things like schools and medicine, which are free and not priced according to supply and demand.

Using a prices that adjust according to supply and demand doesnt make it market socialism, just like how free exchange doesnt make a system capitalistic. Market socialism is a specific mode of production, which cockshotts system is not.

And the fact that cockshott says that we need to transition to socialism doesnt make him a market socialist either, because cockshotts system itself is also a transitioning phase into communism, until all products are free of charge. Thats like saying lenin was a capitalist because he allowed free enterprise to exist until they could collectivise it.

*TRIGGERED*

by what means? You got yourself a well trained, organised and dedicated militant force hiding somewhere? Or at the next crash will it just be occupy 2.0 and another win for the right?


can you explain it tho?

...

and yes, there will be many transitional stages. Have you really only thought about it on this shallow a level? You are assuming that the whole global proletariat is going rise up at once and seize all the property instantly AND centralise it and automate it with no transitional stages? L-U-D-I-C-R-O-U-S

The revolution will begin as it always has as isolated pockets that expand their influence, until such as time as it it within their means to abolish the value form, it will remain. If they are to bring all property under their control, some method of distribution will have to be implemented in the mean time as the market is abolished gradually (this isn't even some theoretical thing, the physical process will be gradual as is the nature of time and construction of physical things, not least, the political back and forth that will go into that) First the proletariat assume control of the market, then they can abolish it. What was the french revolution but the bourgios assume control of the market from the royalty. Now the proletariat must seize it from the bourgeoisie. Seizing the state is useless, it is not from the state that we get capitalism, but from capitalism that we get the state, therefore we should seize the market and all its forces and not the state

good post