Capitalism, Classism, and Society

Ok, so first of all, I didn't bother to look for the best forum to post this topic in... if anyone cares, feel free to move it.

Kay so I'm not terribly well-edjmercated on the history of human civilization (or anything for that matter) but a few key points:

In general people went from tribal and egalitarian -> slave-owning classist societies

I mean shit, even in ancient society when hardly a thing was made that couldn't be made by anyone that could get their hands on a loom, learn to pound hot metal, or let chickens make babies; there was still poverty. No cars, no ipads, no Prada... yet still poor people.

Basically all developed societies have rich and poor and always have. And the few tribal societies that haven't been 'westernized' remain relatively the same. Not much in the way of progress, none of our 'creature comforts' just day after day of obtaining food...

So is social stratification like REQUISITE for society or what?

Do you smart people have any insights on this?

 

I would say so, to some degree. You have to have stratification otherwise there would be no people on the bottom to want to get to the top. That competition is the whole game of social life. It's the reason and motivation we have for interacting with each other. People at the bottom work to get closer to the top and people at the top work to stay there. And if there were no people working to get to the top, there would be no people to buy designer clothes, attend expensive concerts and drive expensive cars to those people would be unhappy, and they're the ones at the top so they have the power.

Of course, the professions at the top won't admit this. So doctors will claim their primary motivation is to help people (which is probably true to the extent that this kind of exclusive prerogative is self-empowering) but when their remuneration is threatened, strikes occur like recently happened across the UK.

Postscript: It's good to see a thoughtful new thread instead of the typical "how do I make my girlfriend's pussy squirt orange soda" fare that we've been having on HF.

 

Most people are as dumb, if not way dumber than you =P


Anyways; I've often wondered this myself. I don't think they are required, but I think it's a case of there is a natural inclination towards them. Not necessarily even because of society, but the human condition. Self-preservation can lead to some nasty things, and go quite overboard at times.

Water flows towards the easiest path; this is also the case for the worst parts of human nature. Our true beauty is when we strive to overcome this.

 

Interesting, I think it's the opposite. Why do you think that? I don't think I've heard anyone say that before.

 

Which? That our worst natures are the ones we are more inclined to follow?

I reckon that's a major reason of society - trying to keep those things in check.

Humans are very primal when you get down to it. Think about how jealous young lovers tend to be.
How easily we revert back to those baser instincts. Willing to kill to for our own advancement. Or for our next fix.
I dunno if you saw the Matrix, but I think Agent Smith's comparison to humans as a virus is pretty accurate. But really, that's just how life is, in it's basic form.

It's in more advanced animals, like dolphins and humans that you are most likely to see acts of unbiased compassion. Dolphins saving other big creatures from shark and whale attacks. The Red-Cross. Transcendence of that competitive, selfish survival instinct.

 

No, you said our natures which come easiest should be overcome. Unless I misunderstood you. I am of the opinion that these natures cannot express themselves because the striving of culture, so our problems like wars and famine stem from that.

 

So you think war and famine are products of society?
No one starved before we started talking and making trade routes?
No tribes fought over resources?

Frankly, I think your opinion makes no sense; and have to doubt you've even fully (independently) thought it out.

Society does, and can breed suppression, yes. But the powerful will always take advantage of the weak; that's why anarchy is so truly dangerous; without organization and governance, there is no one to interfere with the natural order of survival of the fittest.

 

To take famine as an example - food production, which made possible large population growth, wasn't possible without social organization. When the goals of a society take over the needs of the individual things always seem to go awry. Feeding everyone is no problem when the limits of growth are dictated by nature.

What's wrong with the natural order? You seem to think it's all about war and killing. Go and watch animals in the wild, they get along fine without culture. It's not paradise all the time but they do a hell of a lot better than we do.

As for the power principle, do you really think that it doesn't still exist within organized society?

 

Every society no matter if "civilized " or tribal has been ,is and always will be based on hierarchy . Including tribal societies . Some tribal societies also had slaves too. Most times with warriors , war party societies/clans and military might being at the top of the food chain . And the weaker at the bottom . There has always been rich and poor and will always be .

It's the natural order of ALL life on earth including animals . No matter what one believes in Darwinism or God . Animal communties who live in packs ,prides or bands fall under the same hierarchy with the strongest alpha males at the top , and all others below in degrees from top to botttom . Ranking from first to last . And it doesn't mean they can't be functional loving societies either . Nor does it mean that they have to be . It's what keeps order and function to a society . Without order it breaks down into chaos , and becomes weak to external threats .

And Duck's right it's why Anarchy will never work . As long as their are external threats of other societies and cultures . Who through might and will obtain power over other groups and societies and push its will on , it will never work . It's human nature . There will always be those willing to take more than they need from others . And their will always be those stuck on the bottom . Man is indeed a flawed being , it's one of the biggest truths in the bible I think . When the goal should be to raise the living standard of all cultures and societies as a whole together with love and respect for all . Void of class systems and evil dark greedy hearts . As long as we have been on this earth we have learned nothing in reguards to loving thy neighbor as thy self . We are stuck and doomed in an animalistic might is right state . And never evolve into higher spiritual realms . And of all life on earth I believe man is the only being capable of escaping his inner animal .

 

Nomadic tribes were generally more egalitarian. Tribal societies that learned to farm and therefore stay in one place began to accumulate wealth. The accumulation of wealth of course is what leads to a heirarchy in society.

I think it's possible for humans to evolve past this but it will more than likely come from necessity rather than free will. Currently humans are using resources at an exponential rate and those that own the resources or possess the power to take the resources from their owner are the ones accumulating wealth. Eventually humans will run out of these resources and will be forced to actually work together to survive as a species.

I think humans have come a long way since the beginning of heirarchal society and the optimist in me wants to focus on those that don't give a damn about personal wealth accumulation and live their lives helping others.

The cynic in me thinks the human race is mainly comprised of a bunch of sick greedy bastards

 

That's not a social order in animals though. Animals don't follow a certain model which they aspire towards. Their behavior is an expression of a uniquely functioning body in a natural environment. We are the only ones with ideals.

I disagree. Man isn't flawed, culture is. You don't often see animals taking more than they need and when they do it's a matter of survival - eg hibernation. I have a feeling that if you take away ideals, the "you shall be thus", you will find a natural expression of what the body was truly made for, was built for, was selected for over many thousands of years for, for perfect interaction with his surroundings.

The bible has it upside down with the belief that man is inferior in his natural state. How can what is be wrong? It is the attempt to change what is that creates problems, because it's impossible. I think technology is probably our only savior right now, genetic engineering, artificial appendages, chemically changing the body.

Truth. Something needs to happen for us to realise our neighbours are part of us and their survival is important for our survival. That's not evident right now.

 

The cynic in me thinks the majority of the human race is just not in the smart category. And also consists mainly of gullible followers. This is happily all just seen from a theoretical point of view and when I encounter these gullible suckers they generally have much more to them And on the other hand, if the majority of the people would not be inclined to follow decisions of whatever the organisation is that makes them for them we probably wouldn't be in such a massive big flourishing society. This already started when we mainly had (pretty barbaric) monarchies in the 'western world'.

 

We humans now control the earth and all facets of all life on it and consequently all sentient beings live or die -eat or starve-accumulate or have nothing-according to the whims/desires manifested thru the socialogical systems that have developed over the millenia. Some systems have been self sustaining,such as the native american systems that took from nature what they needed and no more. Some systems(such as we still see today) operate on total religeous beliefs with the concommitant necessary behavior/s (including the slaughtering of innocents)to remain 'themselves' in another,better and necessary life ,commonly known as the "afterlife". Other systems seem to be totally chaotic,murderously insane and completely out of control. And still others claim to be "democratic",such as ours, and yet over and over, those who seek and get power are able to distort and manipulate the accepted rules of behaviour in our capitalist system to enrich themselves and basically have made a mockery of the system itself. To my way of thinking,no one on earth should go hungry--no one should be without proper medical care,shelter and all humans should be able to avail themselves of education in order to finally figure a better,more equatable and fair way to allow everyone to reach their ultimate potential. Thus elevating all life on earth to a higher plane of existance. I don't think we get there as long as the present systems prevail,as obviously thinking outside the systems are mostly done by those of us that can't do a damn thing about them. I'm afraid the Mad Max --a Boy and His Dog-scenarios are inevitably coming down the road.

Well,I personally have had a nice ride. The 40s-50s-60s were the best time to be alive-- here anyway. So,I'm just a dreamer that came and will go (sooner than later!!)without much effect on anything or anyone. Just another flawed being soon to return to the dust from whence I came. So it goes.

 

Flawed?

 

There's pictographs depicting famine. The true problem of society is that the strong individuals take it over. I mean, look at the 1% in America.

Life is competition. If you don't believe me that it's all war, watch the evolution of a patch of forest, or an empty lot over the years. One life-form or population of life-forms grow, the others get hurt or even wiped out; strangled, starved.
Life is a constant cycle of escalation, and death of the weaker breeds.

 

Survival of the fittest.

Evolution is based on this.

 

I know that, but saying life is competition is different from saying it's all about war and killing. Animals realize that if they want to survive they need, to some extent, to get along with each other. This is why you don't see an army of bees waging war day after day on a nearby ant colony. Similarly, for the cells in your body the rules of natural selection apply but they cooperate without fighting.

 

Hmmm... yall are talking about 2 different things imo. Natural selection is as irrelevant to humans as instinct is. We are not the same animals as the rest. We can starve and kill ourselves like we can avoid reproduction like a plague. The rich are not stronger than us, they are not smarter or faster, they are simply richer. There is really no natural order do it. It is just a construct built into our tiny little learning skills.


The thing is, the world we live in is quite like a game. Play by the rules or cheat and get what you can. This has been built for centuries, millennia if you will, and has served to make slaves of the strongest and kings of the megalomaniacs.

So if not by design of nature, which so loves genetic material (be it brains or brawn), why does society seem to grow on the impoverishment of the strongest?

Do you *really* believe that competition for resources NECESSARILY requires poverty and greed?

 

I don't think its necessary but I also think in order for it to become unnecessary all of mankind would have to think along the same lines as you and me.

It would involve a complete change in consciousness in all humans. Unfortunately at this point in human history there are still plenty of humans who are perfectly happy to become wealthy at the expense and suffering of others.

But I don't think this is standard human nature. Not every person in the world is greedy or lacking in compassion and oblivious to human suffering. I think this is a good sign and indicative of the direction in which the human race is heading.

 

1st: What do you think human war is about?
2nd: There are many breeds of animal that kill without pure-bred necessity.
Killer whales attack sharks, and only eat one part of the shark (the liver or kidneys, I forget). It's a delicacy to them.

In an economic world; they are stronger. There is no denying that in the Western world, money is power, and power is worth.