Aditya is Wrong

And here is part two of the ongoing series: Articles From When David Was Actually a Competent Writer.

This posting isn't actually in my Xanga, but a response to somebody’s response to an article I had in it. I know, it's very complicated, but I'm sure you'll be able to handle it. I'm not reproducing the article I wrote, but here's the response that my esteemed colleague, Aditya Dasgupta (Cambridge University) wrote on my Xanga:

Those technical jobs are really just a part of basic production of goods like anything else, except that its kind of a capitalistic streamlined process of being more efficient. So as opposed to everybody performing basic services and producing goods that society depends on, the task is performed by some, and streamlined to be much more efficient by others. Its kind of like an economic production line. That’s why global GDP for example is infinitely higher than say it was back in ancient times when everybody was farming, because of the introduction of technology and specialization.

I'm not saying its the best system, and its somewhat unjust, but all jobs do serve some purpose I think somewhere in a larger scheme of economic production--otherwise they wouldn't exist. Even stock brokers are just making trade between people, between farmers and households just for example, more efficient on the large scale. Yet they don't seem to serve any tangible purpose.

Of course there’s the problem of the unfair reward system for various peoples' jobs, so its not equal. But I do think the system can be fixed without a total system change.

And no I am not being a capitalist tool.....

First of all, I would like to say that Aditya is in fact being a capitalist tool. That being said, he does seem to make some good points. First of all, assuming you could compare the post-industrial global economy to the production of isolated agrarian economies, the global GDP would probably be much (though not infinitely, as Aditya seems to believe) higher now than when it was back in "ancient times". Hell, I might even go so far as to say that the per capita GDP is much higher now than it was "back then". The problem with this clearly capitalist view is that a Ferrari contributes about as much to the GDP as, say, 40,000 loaves of bread. Now, far be it from me to denigrate the contribution of the luxury car industry in making the world a better place, but I think don't think those two commodities should be treated equally.

Aditya also is correct in establishing that in any modern economy (not just capitalist ones) all production is social. Everyone plays a certain part in contributing to the economy. And even if someone may not contribute anything useful or even a tangible object at all, they are still an integral part of the economy. Whether or not this particular method of division of labor, the "capitalistic streamlined process", actually makes production of goods more efficient is debatable. What is clear is that, despite the mainstream capitalist view that "efficiency is the ultimate goal", efficiency doesn't necessarily translate into tangible benefits for society at large. Even assuming this particular system manages to autonomously produce the right stuff, "efficiency" doesn't guarantee that these products will be distributed evenly (or even at all).

The biggest problem in Aditya's little treatise, however, is actually quite a common myth accepted by capitalist apologists. It's contained in the first sentence of his second paragraph, "all jobs do serve some purpose I think somewhere in a larger scheme of economic production--otherwise they wouldn't exist." Aditya seems to accept the bizarre semi-tautology that the existence of a position justifies... its existence. The theory in its more extreme form is that the market left to its own devices will maximize happiness, freedom and equality. However, no rational person with any knowledge of the world would accept that bullshit, so Aditya has adopted the more moderate theory that the organization of the economy is justified by the completely unregulated and unaccountable market, and that the only things that are produced are--if not completely necessary--at least beneficial to the populous at large.

Although I can't successfully refute any of Aditya's points, I feel that explaining the rationale behind his statements is enough to expose the serious flaws in his argument. Interestingly, many of his points don't need to be seriously examined to be shown to be completely false.

This Modern World

The Radical Manual

So I was looking through my xanga the other day and I noticed some good posts that I had, and since I have not managed to write anything even remotely acceptable for this new blog, I've decided to recycle the old posts here (with a few edits here and there).

Here's the first one:


Do you think you're a real liberal? Well, now we have a little manual to help you realize your dream of being the perfect ultra hardcore radical liberal. And here is it:

Every self-respecting liberal must pick 7 issues to support. Because we all know that nothing screams liberal like a bunch of unrelated and ineffectual causes half-heartedly championed by a group of "radicals".

The first 4 issues must be picked from the 12 MAJOR liberal causes:

[ ] black people
[ ] gays
[ ] war
[ ] abortion
[ ] latino people
[ ] political correctness (censorship)
[ ] gun control
[ ] Bush (yes, that's right, hating Bush has somehow become a liberal cause of its own)
[ ] genocide in [who the fuck cares]
[ ] Palestine
[ ] environmentalism
[ ] death penalty

Now, this may seem like a bit too much for the average "radical" liberal to handle, but I can give you some help. Here are a couple of reminders to help lighten the load:

For black people, you really don't have to do anything (notice how it just says black people, not black rights or other such nonsense), all you need to do is talk about their oppression and how awful it is. If you really want, you can bring up affirmative action or even (*gasp*) reparations.

Gays are even easier! Two words: gay marriage. Also, don't ever forget the breathtaking struggle of Matthew Sheppard (RIP 1976-1998).

War is kind of tricky. On the one hand, you have to hope that there are enough wars for you to frequently be able to scream such nice catchphrases as "No blood for oil!" and "BOOKS NOT BOMBS!" but on the other hand you don't want too many wars. If there are, you'll prolly have to put in too much effort, and we all know that blows.

Abortion is probably the easiest. I mean, it's already legal! Nuff sed.

Now, Latino people are probably the hardest to deal with. I'd steer away from them completely.

Political Correctness is easy and fun. Just yell at anyone who says anything that you disagree with in any way. Calling them racist, ignorant, or just plain old stupid always works. Key words to look out for: nigger, fag, dyke, spic, chink, fat, primitive, ugly, black, short, indian, native american, american indian, pretty much whenever anyone refers to a native american, and chair.

If guns didn't exist, people would have absolutely no way to kill each other.

Bush is by far the most important liberal issue in the past 200 years. If you don't hate him, you are evil. Or at least an ignorant redneck. A couple things to remember: he's really stupid (I mean, he did get bad grades and he's not a very good public speaker) and if Kerry was elected instead of him, we would now be in a 700 year reign of peace and happiness, the streets would be made of gold, and we would all jizz champaign.

Genocide is wrong unless the country the US is invading is doing it. I mean, you really wouldn't want to be against something the United States government is also against. Ugh!

You might as well just forget Palestine altogether. I mean, what with the constant accusations of being anti-semetic, the extreme distance of Palestine, and the fact that the struggle is clearly never going to end, Palestine is clearly a lost cause. Of course if you happen to be arab or are frequently accused of being arab, then you're pretty much stuck with this issue.

Evironmentalism is simple. If you're a hippie, then choose this issue. If you're not a hippie, then don't.

Abolish the racist death penalty!

Just remember: If all else fails, put a bumper sticker on your car. If you wanna be really crazy, put two or even more. Common choices are Keryy '04, a rainbow or equal sign sticker, a peace sticker, or a picture of a tree with a circle of (multicultural) kids holding hands around it.

Now you have to pick 3 obscure or unpopular causes to prove you're a true liberal, not just some mainstream conformist. These are perhaps the most important issues, because they prove that you live by your own standards, and you don't rely on other people to determine how you live you or what you do. Here are you choices:

[ ] save some endangered species (not the bald eagle)
[ ] DC Statehood (a must if you live in DC)
[ ] prisons
[ ] WTO/IMF/World Bank (Package Deal!)
[ ] legalize weed (but rememember, only weed)
[ ] third party (cuz that's all we need for the USA to be perfect)
[ ] animal rights (that's different from endangered species)
[ ] communism (Yes, i know communism is a complex political and economic system that takes into account many different ideas and theories, and cannot simply be treated as an inconsequential issue, but that really shouldn't matter to you. Just tell people you're communist)
[ ] fast food restuarants

For these, all you really have to do is join some organization that focuses on these issues, and let it do the thinking for you. You can really just pick your choices out of a hat for this section.

What's that, you say? Nothing about taxes, welfare, the minimum wage, and other economic regulation? That's the beauty of being an extreme liberal "radical". You don't have to care about that shit!!! With this helpful manual that you have just read, you can have no actual effects on standards of living (or really on anything at all) and still be hailed as a progressive thinker!

Well, now that you're done perfecting your degree of liberalness, you may go off into the world and not change it. I'll see you at the next rally.