(cMailman.Message Message qoq}q(U_headersq]q((U Return-PathUtq(U X-Original-ToUkosar@list.dimnet.hutq(U Delivered-ToUkosar@list.dimnet.hutq(UReceivedUfrom dimnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dimnet.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6030B2BC7B17; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:00:10 +0200 (CEST)tq (UX-Quarantine-IDU<8fb5mjj6PhlS>tq (UX-Virus-ScannedUamavisd-new at dimnet.hutq (U X-Spam-FlagUYEStq (U X-Spam-ScoreU7.199tq (U X-Spam-LevelU*******tq(U X-Spam-StatusU›Yes, score=7.199 tagged_above=2 required=4.31 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.922, RCVD_IN_PSBL=2.7, RDNS_NONE=0.793, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_JP_SURBL=1.25] autolearn=notq(UReceivedUĚfrom dimnet.hu ([127.0.0.1]) by dimnet (dimnet.hu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8fb5mjj6PhlS; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:00:07 +0200 (CEST)tq(UReceivedUņfrom 5xo3v4.oenus.oenus.oenus.oenus.oenus.me.uk (unknown [77.81.108.144]) by dimnet.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AA262BC7B16 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:59:54 +0200 (CEST)tq(UReceivedUĮby 03da3e5d.5xo3v4.oenus.oenus.oenus.oenus.oenus.me.uk (amavisd-new, port 8714) with ESMTP id 03AGNEFDA3EHBFIT5D; for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 08:01:12 -0700tq(UContent-Transfer-EncodingU8bittq(USubjectUr***SPAM*** Compare & Apply for top cards here(Amex/ChaseFreedom/Discover/Citicard/Capital1/BankAmericard/Venture)tq(UDateUFri, 11 Apr 2014 08:01:12 -0700tq(UFromU5"Card Approval Match" tq(UToUkosar@list.dimnet.hutq(UContent-LanguageUen-ustq(U MIME-VersionU1.0tq(U Content-TypeUtext/html; charset=us-asciitq(U Message-IDUJ<37148864630747371499953925534@5xo3v4.oenus.oenus.oenus.oenus.oenus.me.uk>qtqeU_payloadqT







Cant read this Ad at all? simply tap right here to fix.


Compare & Apply for top cards here(Amex/ChaseFreedom/Discover/Citicard/Capital1/BankAmericard/Venture)






community. The community alone disposes of them and decides how to use them in production. The community produces, the products accrue to the



community, and the community decides how those products are to be used. Modern socialists, espcially those of the Marxian persuasion, lay great emphasis on designating the socialist community as Society, and therefore on describing the transfer of the means of production to the control of the community as the ‚ÄúSocialization of the means of production.‚ÄĚ In itself theexpression is unobjectionable but in the connection in which it is used it



is particularly designed to obscure one of the most important problems of Socialism. [85] The word ‚Äúsociety,‚ÄĚ with its corresponding adjective ‚Äúsocial,‚ÄĚ has three separate meanings. It implies, first, the abstract idea of social interrelationships, and secondly, the concrete conception of a union of the individuals themselves. Between these two sharply different meanings, a third has been interposed in ordinary speech: the abstract society is


conceived as personified in such expressions as ‚Äúhuman society,‚ÄĚ ‚Äúcivil society.‚ÄĚNow Marx usesthe term with all these meanings. This would not matter as longas he made the distinction quite clear. But he does just the opposite. He interchanges them witha conjurer‚Äôs skill whenever it appears to suit him. When he talks of the social character of capitalistic production he is using social in its abstract sense. When he speaks of the society which suffers during crises he means the personified society of mankind. But when he speaks of the society which is to expropriate the expropriators and socialize the means of production he means an actual social union. And all the meanings are interchanged in the links of his argument whenever he has to prove the unprovable. The reason for all this is in order to avoid using the term State or its equivalent, since this word has an unpleasant sound to all those lovers of hidom and democracy, whose support the marxian does not wish to alienate at the outset. A programme which would give the State the general responsibility and direction of all production has no prospect of acceptance in these circles. It follows that the Marxist must continually find a phraseology which disguises the essence of the programme, which succeeds in concealing the unbridgeable abyss dividing democracy and Socialism. It does not say much for the perception of men who lived in the decades immediately preceding the World War that they did not



see through this sophistry. The modern doctrine of the state understands by the word ‚ÄúState‚ÄĚ an authoritative unit, an apparatus of compulsion characterized not by its aims but by its form. But Marxism has arbitrarily limited the meaning of the word State, so that it does not include the Socialistic State. Only those states and forms of state organization are called the State which arouse the dislike of the socialist writers. For the future organization to which they aspire the term is rejected indignantly as dishonourable and degrading. It is called ‚ÄúSociety.‚ÄĚ In this way the Marxian social democracy could at one and the same time contemplate the destruction of the existing State machine, fiercely combat all anarchistic movements, and pursue a


align="right" style="font: 14px;">policy which led directly to an all powerful state.14 Now it does notmatter in the least what particular name is given to the coercive apparatus of the socialistic community. If we use the word ‚ÄúState‚ÄĚ we have a term in common use, except in the quite uncritical Marxian .







U_charsetqNUepilogueqNU _default_typeq U text/plainq!U _unixfromq"U