I don't think anybody is talking about absolute equality.

" These people evidently think that socialism calls for equalization, for levelling the requirements and personal, everyday life of the members of society. Needless to say, such an assumption has nothing in common with Marxism, with Leninism. By equality Marxism means, not equalization of personal requirements and everyday life, but the abolition of classes, i.e., a) the equal emancipation of all working people from exploitation after the capitalists have been overthrown and expropriated; b) the equal abolition for all of private property in the means of production after they have been converted into the property of the whole of society; c) the equal duty of all to work according to their ability, and the equal right of all working people to receive in return for this according to the work performed (socialist society); d) the equal duty of all to work according

page 742

to their ability, and the equal right of all working people to receive in return for this according to their needs (communist society). Moreover, Marxism proceeds from the assumption that people's tastes and requirements are not, and cannot be, identical and equal in regard to quality or quantity, whether in the period of socialism or in the period of communism."

@Thucy

Sustainability? I guess I really don't know what it means. I think, just by extending education and opportunity to women, there will be some pull towards sustainability, as reproductive rates seem to be pretty strongly inversely correlated with women's educational and career opportunities. I also think we as a society can prioritize the kinds of technological developments which will tend towards greater sustainability (or additionally offer us a wider base of inputs into the system-think space mining). But is it cost-effective? I don't know.

I guess sustainability ought to be our preeminent goal as a species, but I don't think we're that good of long-term thinkers yet.

As to inequality, I would say a certain amount of inequality is not necessarily necessary, but it's probably inevitable. But I think it's more efficient for us to go a ways towards reducing inequality than it is for us to more or less turn a blind eye towards it.

Wouldn't something inevitable make it necessary? I thought they meant the same thing.

I'm not trying to use them as the same. I guess the point I'm getting at is that "necessary" implies a valuable function in this case, whereas "inevitable" is intended to avoid any such approbative weight to my words.

I'm not sure if this fits into the initial spectrum I suggested. But I suspect it might.

The left is also defined by the degree to which they are critical of property rights in their present incantation.

(Do you think that fits within the broad umbrella of being critical of individualism. I'm leaning towards yes but I think that the ideas the surround property might be important enough to merit separation from the overall trend. )

umm socialism is about WORKER controlled production state controlled is communism. thus (in that proposed model) a worker controlled means of production could work under anarchism

whoa....apparently i had this thread open for a long time....a whole page and a half popped up...

Bitemenow10: I'm not sure what that referred to, but I consider myself a socialist and do not believe either are necessary components of socialism at all.

you dont believe worker control of production is a necessary component? then you arent an upper stage socialist

" the points at which concerns of the radical left converge with those of traditionalist conservatism" http://www.theamericanconservative.com/jacobs/a-radical-defense-of-home-economics/

Bitemenow10: What exactly do you mean by "worker control of production" anyway? It sounds very much like classical Marxism to me. I don't exactly buy "class struggle".

Putin33: Out of curiosity, have you ever heard of the Partido Carlista? Carlism isn't traditionally associated with the left, but they turned leftist during the Franco years.

I have heard of the Carlists, I didn't know they turned left.