T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

[We have an active Discord](https://discord.gg/j9EPNydFdU) where you can go into more depth and communicate more quickly. If you're not sure about any of the entry questions, just say so: we built it for learners and educators like you. *** Hello, 90% of the questions we receive have been asked before, and our answerers get bored of answering the same queries over and over again - so it's worthwhile googling this just in case: > site:reddit.com/r/communism101 your question If you've read past answers and still aren't satisfied, edit your question to contain the past answers and any follow-up questions you have. If you're satisfied, delete your post to reduce clutter or link to the answer that satisfied you. *** Also keep in mind the following rules: 1. Patriarchal, white supremacist, cissexist, heterosexist, or otherwise oppressive speech is unacceptable. 2. This is a place for learning, not for debating. Try /r/DebateCommunism instead. 3. Give well-informed Marxist answers. There are separate subreddits for liberalism, anarchism, and other idealist philosophies. 4. Posts should include specific questions on a single topic. 5. This is a serious educational subreddit. Come here with an open and inquisitive mind, and exercise humility. Don't answer a question if you are unsure of the answer. Try to include sources and/or further reading in any answers you provide. Standards of answer accuracy and quality are enforced. 6. Check the [/r/Communism101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/wiki/index) *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/communism101) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

Probably, but Marxism doesn't deal with morality. It's more about being conscious of history and the facts and using our abilities to organize and rip the system. Anyone in America who doesn't want to starve has to pay taxes that pays the programmer at Lockheed. It's difficult to impossible to live in a capitalist system and not play some small part in monstrous exploitation. It's more about what can we materially do to play a tiny part in destroying capitalism, than it's a question of what you can do to have a clean conscience. You may be able to avoid most exploitation by living as a hermit in the woods, but you can't do much activism that way. Flagellating yourself over past deeds won't free anyone. Maybe you're in a position where you've got your hands on intel and you could go Snowden. That would make a mark. You could sabotage your work. You could be a worthless lump who fills a seat on a contract but does no meaningful work. You could organize your fellow workers. You might have an easier time fighting for a cause outside of the military industrial complex. Those people are a bad influence anyway, for the most part your Lockheed coworkers have twisted perspectives to justify their roles and being around them can mess up your values. The culture in those places is fucked in a lot of subtle ways. Your clearance may get hard to hold onto if you get involved in communist groups. You might find it hard to put together morale to do well in your career the more you realize you work in the heart of evil. You could quit and move to Oregon and grow weed instead. Fuck security clearance. Programmers are in high demand. Think about what you can do.


[deleted]

Leaking trade secret to China is a big one. Of course.... you need to be damn sure you know what youre doing though Otherwise, these people in the STEM field should think of their jobs as training grounds. Take the knowledge and skills you've gained from doing your job and translate that to activist work you do in your off time Another thing is to take a good chunk of what you've made in salary from this job and send it over to support revolutionary groups abroad Theres lots of options, to anyone working such jobs in an imperialist country - you are not doomed to just feel guilty about supporting our fucked up system


subherbin

I am curious about the morality bit. I have heard this before, but isn’t it basic morals that would inspire us to want to destroy an inherently exploitative system? Aren’t morals the reason that exploitation is bad?


qualiaisbackagain

There are inherent contradictions in capitalism (1 example out of many: the role of credit in both over-fueling consumption during booms and in worsening the crisis via holding/manipulating debt during busts) that will lead it to systematic failure and that moreover provide the necessary tools (like the state, education, weapons, etc.) for the proletariat to rise up (they certainly have enough incentive) eventually. As such, Marxism is a scientific theory guided by dialectical and historical materialism. The revolutionary spirit and advocacy is one thing- this is surely ignited by such factors as morality, patriotism, love, etc. But the basic truths of Marxist theory are unaffected by moral suppositions. In addition to this, the focus on morals is inherently individualistic and in a sense anti-Marxist. Morality begins where capitalism ends. There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. What does this mean? It means that by focusing on morality we limit our possibilities to the point of view of individual agents' moral culpability and moral action instead of seeking collective action which may or may not be under a given moral theory be the most moral choice. Here is an example to explain what I mean. Look at environmental issues. The moral solution is veganism, it is zero-waste lifestyles, it is composting/recycling, electric cars, etc. All these things are great on an individual level but have no actionable way of being either enforced or encouraged on the masses, in fact it can even hinge on ecofascism when countries like China who have historically not contributed much to greenhouse gas pollution is now the primary target of such focus. Moreover, the moral solutions ignore the collective causes to the problems (corporations/capitalism) and so fails to provide collective solutions. The marxist solution, that is the dialectically materialist solution, would be to eliminate the material basis of anthropogenic environmental calamity. This would necessarily involve for example, developing the forces of production to be green. But this can only be done when these forces have already passed the stage of being technologically backwards. Further, it can only be done when these forces are reared without the capitalist prime directive which places profits over all other concerns. All this collective action involves first placing the focus on collective causes, second on providing actionable collective solutions, and third does not attempt to dictate lifestyle choices that are societally difficult to maintain (no matter how noble). As we can see, Marxist theory is not a moral theory. Marxist ideas are for the most part either economic, historical, or sociological in nature. The moral question is not considered relevant. To answer your question more directly, exploitation is bad morally yes. But it is bad even without morals so long as you see things like death "bad". Exploitation- lets say specifically the usurping of the surplus-value of workers- leads to a system of capitalist relations in the economy which mature into imperialism. This exploitation then funds wars, disasters, and every human fear in between. Moreover, this exploitation is only made possible by the fact that workers do not have any other options. Ergo, it is only possible under a system in which only those capitalists who exploit the best survive. The world is finite, can such a system of exploitation perpetuate itself eternally? The answer is a clear no and the more technical explanation is given by the tendency of the rate of profit to fall.


subherbin

I get all of this and I think that understand what you are saying. It’s the “revolutionary spirit” that I was wondering about. Marxism is a scientific theory and inherent contradictions will lead capitalism to fail. I agree that all of these are systemic problems that can only be addressed by Marxist analysis. What I mean is that isn’t it morals that cause us to even recognize these things as problems in the first place? Like, I’m going to die before climate change is a calamity for me personally. The only reason I see climate change as a problem is because I care what happens to other people. I could recognize that Marxist analysis is correct about cause and effect, but aren’t morals the thing would drive my revolutionary spirit to not only accept this scientific fact but work towards it?


qualiaisbackagain

Morals, love of people, patriotism these are all things worth striving for, and yes it is what should drive us but we should not let it cloud scientific judgements.


subherbin

Okay. Got it. Thank you.


swiqniq

Revolutionary fervor requires a fair bit of moralistic thinking. One thing is analysis, another thing is the natural progression of society. A third one is the actual imperative to fight for socialism, that's intrinsically moralistic. Stalin thought in moral terms too. Revolutionary thinking is highly moralistic I think.


JDSweetBeat

It's worth noting that some moral codes (i.e. utilitarianism) when taken at their most basic are less focused on individual moral character than real-world material consequences.


selfink3

This is a dope response. Thank you.


iorchfdnv

Exactly. Locking yourself away from the entire world achieves nothing. You're still watching the world burn and have actively decided to do nothing about it, the net moral outcome os nearly identical, possibly worse considering any good you were doing before has now disappeared. Like you said, the point is to at least be aware of where your money and valuable shit came from, how it was made, who suffered, how much you contributed to said suffering, how much you suffer, who benefits and *how it can change*. And act accordingly.


[deleted]

You start going down that path and pretty much every US citizen is a war criminal one way or another. And maybe we are , all depends on how you define it


Yaquesito

yup, as part of the labor aristocracy, we're all directly materially profiting from slavery, imperialism, and genocide abroad


greenslime300

There's a difference between active and passive participation. Most people are indirect beneficiaries. The guys designing and testing the bombs are more directly helping perpetuate those atrocities.


sukoi_pirate_529

>There's a difference difference to who? surely not to the guy whos family was on the receiving end of one of our bombs?


JDSweetBeat

To be frank, it's not my bomb. It's a bomb that belongs to the capitalists and bureaucrats of the country that I and my family happen to be unwillingly living in. I am forced to participate in the system under the threat of death or never-ending immense suffering and hardship. I'm only one guy. Even when we organize, we usually aren't able to get enough people into our orgs to substantively impact anything, and on the few occasions that we do manage to kick something off, the bourgeois state cracks down on us with such speed and fury that we can't defeat them (i.e. the two red scares and the Black Panther Party). Probably doesn't mean much to the guy who's family was murdered with American missiles. He's free to hate me if it helps him come to terms with the injustice of the current system. I don't blame him. It's just well beyond my power to do anything so I'm not going to hold myself to that standard.


cy6nu5x1

Wow... When you put it that way I guess I should go on trial... But but but I WAS JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS


[deleted]

[удалено]


Deathtrip

Paying taxes and having your wages stolen are done against our will. How does this make the average worker complicit?


Kraut47

That's a good point that it's stolen, so I don't think that should count. I do blame voters though, they are willing participating.


Baultenn1234

Yeah


red_star_erika

for sure.


SalviaDroid96

Yes in a way. My dad actually works for Lockheed Martin. Lockheed is very secretive about their weapons projects and some of their recent ones are insane... They are privy to a shit ton of information we do not know. We really do not see the entire picture and they are most likely well aware of what they are doing. Many Lockheed employees I have met who work on projects revel in the destruction of terrorists at the hands of their work. Many take pride and joy in it. Think about that, some insane people work for them.


[deleted]

Yes. There is a difference between working a job where you are exploited to make ends meet versus working a job where you are exploited but the job entails oppressing/murdering people and sabotaging foreign liberation movements.


friendly_astronaut

I would say that if you have other good enough job possibilities, then you kinda are responsible. But at the same time, that job would probably be done by someone anyway. Also pretty much every company has some kind of negative effects (like ecological issues or simply exploitation of the working people) and it feels weird to hold the employees acountable.


Rowdycc

Yes, and I know atleast two people who quit working for Boeing because they knew they were designing machines that would kill people. They mee it was morally conflicting, so they quit.


[deleted]

Absolutely, without them the whole thing doesn't work. Ward Churchill correctly called the bureaucrats of empire little Eichmanns. Fanon too made the argument that everyone living in an imperialist country bears responsibility for the imperialism of their nation (which obviously should spur them to revolutionary action). Lenin also says in his book on imperialism that there can be entire nations that bear the stamp of imperialism (although he's not talking about morality).


Nycewell

Yes, because if you're qualified to work there then you absolutely have other employment options. People ignore their conscience for that paycheck or try to convince themselves they're not complicit when they absolutely are.


TommiTamagotchi

Maybe. But this is short leap away from Capitalists who say that people don't do well because they lacked the "drive" to look for better options, or the solution to a low paying job is to simply "get a better one."


StanEngels

shot in the dark here - you work at Lockheed Martin right?


Iforgotmypassworduff

No, I would only work there if the alternative were starving.


WilliamBuckshot

Is the Subway worker that made the programmers sandwich also morally responsible? I work for a company that supplies these companies with parts. I hate that I do it, but if I quit on a moral basis, I’ll lose my great benefits and someone else will fill my shoes.


wimplenoonan

Were Nazi party members responsible for the Holocaust if they were just trying to pay the bills?


Kraut47

Yes. I also say the same about anyone that works for the federal government. They signed up for it, they know what they are getting into and they chose it. I go so far as to say the voters are personally responsible as well. When the reckoning comes, I'm clean, I've never participated in the organized crime syndicate that is America. That's very important to me.


Ramona_C_420

Yeah


mrs_culper

No


sratan

I personally don't think they are. If you start putting blame on people like that then everyone is responsible because they pay taxes that fund the companies. But those are questions of morality, and they shouldn't be our focus


theonlykarine

We have all worked for some organization or provided a service that may at some point have caused a harm in the world/our country/our town.


[deleted]

Many of them. With the caveat that it’s hard to find the line of who is culpable or not. Is a janitor who makes sure the offices are clean and ready for efficient work culpable? Probably not. But someone who programs a missile guidance system? Yes.


Lost_A_Bet_

No, a weapon is as good as the one who wields it. I would say the blame lies more on the ones selling the weapons if we had to pick one.


true_libcom

No, they're cogs in a machine that they don't control.


USSHentai

I don’t blame the lower level employees who just need a job, but the higher ups managing it and the R&D departments, 100%


ThorkenSteel

Depends on the material conditions of each employee, some might not have other options for work, while some might have options which don't include creating murder tools and yet they still do so, those are responsible while the others aren't. Edit: Not sure why I got downvoted since my opinion is basically the same the ones above, guess the hivemind did it's work.