SP

NOTE: We will be talking exclusively about Marxist critique of capitalism, and therefore, the basic ideas of communism. We will not be talking about the philosophical implications, but just the economic ideas he discussed in Das Kapital Volume 1. I do not claim my understanding of Marx as absolute, or even anywhere near it. Please feel free to read the original texts and come to your own interpretations. We will proceed in the following way: 1. First, what he proposed. 2. The explanation for his proposals according to the Marxist perspective. PART 1: Firstly, what he proposed: 1. All land, factories, and means of production BELONG TO THE PEOPLE , to all the people and not to the few. 2. That the conversion of capital and hoarding be stopped. 3. Absolute equal rights for all. 4. Profits AS THEFT be stopped. 5. That to each will be given ACCORDING TO WHAT THEY PRODUCE . 6. That renting be banned. Quick clarifications (YOU CAN SKIP THIS IF YOU WANT AND...

PROLOGUE: Propoganda: The use of media to shape the ideas of the viewer/reader/audience/consumer to suit a political agenda. Parable: A short, succinct didactic story, usually with a simple narrative, used to explain a philosophical concept. What I shall be presenting are neo-parables exploring the problems plaguing the world today. They will be presented in an elementary, simple to understand, format that will no doubt have its problems and fallacies. However, it is not propaganda. I shall openly declared I am a left-leaning writer, and a believer of liberal ideas (not to be confused with liberalism). I am intensely anti-right-wing, and my prime belief in life is that all people are equal, and none superior to another. I shall be putting up the idea to be explored at the START of every parable such that one understands its intent before one reads it, thus ensuring one is not unduly influenced by anything the parable says. I have also declared my political inclinations. Theref...

I would like to submit to you a simple structure to every argument, as talked about by Aristotle in Rhetoric. There are two parts to an argument: the premise, and the conclusion. (1) By premise , I mean a preliminary point (an assumption if you will) that is taken as granted, or taken as true (example to follow). By conclusion , I mean the logical derivation or logical follow-up of one or more premises (example to follow). I shall use the Aristotlean syllogism (a certain kind of argument in which there are two premises and a conclusion drawn from them) to demonstrate the reason behind the many, ideological or otherwise, arguments that people tend to have. (2) The famous example for syllogism used by Aristotle is: 1.         All men are mortal. (PREMISE 1) 2.        Socrates is a man. (PREMISE 2) 3.         Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (CONCLUSION) In this, the first two are premises , taken as granted. ...

So, I want to start off by explaining why I crack jokes to all of yous here. You see, I had a thing when I was a child when my mother and father would tell me to crack jokes to lighten up the mood. I always thought jokes were the full-stops to decent conversations, and then everyone went home. So, when I didn’t know what to say, and wanted to go home, I’d crack a joke. But then they’d ask me to crack another one, and I’d try to come up with another. There’d be a strange pause, which would make me so uncomfortable I’d want to take my skin off and rinse it, you know what I mean? I don’t enjoy silences. So, I’d joke. I’d joke about hating silences, and people would laugh. No more silences. Jokes came to me easy because of my fear of the lack of them. I grew to hate, and even fear conversation. Soon as someone would say something real, I’d crack a joke. They told me to do stand-up, but I wasn’t too sure, because I thought, hey, that’s not a conversation. That’s just a person sta...