Class isn’t supernatural, correct. It’s a material relation. Capitalists are interested as a class in retaining private ownership, workers are materially interested in collectivizing production. This isn’t a corruptive force, but pure class interest. As for power supernaturally corrupting, no, it is not well-studied by psychology.
People have definitely tried to prove it, but it doesn’t work that way. People act in their self-interest, but what’s dominant is class outlook and how that fits into the mode of production. False positives.
It’s an interesting theory. But without a study in an other mode of production, it’s wishful thinking… and to hope for a new mode of production to change how the brain works, and in such a deep level, is not a very credible one. Moreover, it’s not relevant for communist organization within capitalism.
How is class an “interesting theory?” Class analysis is the basis of historical materialism, which is agreed upon by modern historiography to be one of the most effective ways of analyzing history. It’s fundamentally correct, the idea that capitalists don’t seek their own interest as capitalists is just basic logic.
Further, class analysis is critical for communist organization, as identifying which classes are revolutionary and which ones are not informs how you organize and what is to be done once taking power and establishing socialism.
That’s not what I said. I said that the fact that a new mode of production will change the way the practice of power change the the biological functioning of the brain is an interesting theory. Of course classes exist.
“Power” does not change the biological functioning of the brain. You are confusing class interest for “power” as a supernatural corruptive force. The mode of production changes what classes exist, and which ones are in power, which changes the way we live and think.
You can repeat “supernatural” as much as you want, I’m still speaking about scientific facts. Different experiences shape the functioning of the brain differently, there’s nothing magical with that.
The way we live influences how we think and how we act. This is basic materialism. However, “power” is not the moving factor, class is. This is why administration has changed dramatically based on modes of production and distribution. Socialist countries simply do not face the same scale of problems with corruption as capitalist countries. This isn’t because socialism is more resistant to corruptive forces like “power,” but instead because the class relations are different.
I call the idea that “power corrupts” supernatural thinking because it erases the actual materialist cause, and injects a vague and nebulous concept of an evil corruptive force. Administration is not the enemy, class is.
Class isn’t supernatural, correct. It’s a material relation. Capitalists are interested as a class in retaining private ownership, workers are materially interested in collectivizing production. This isn’t a corruptive force, but pure class interest. As for power supernaturally corrupting, no, it is not well-studied by psychology.
It is studied and no, it’s not supernatural.
People have definitely tried to prove it, but it doesn’t work that way. People act in their self-interest, but what’s dominant is class outlook and how that fits into the mode of production. False positives.
It’s an interesting theory. But without a study in an other mode of production, it’s wishful thinking… and to hope for a new mode of production to change how the brain works, and in such a deep level, is not a very credible one. Moreover, it’s not relevant for communist organization within capitalism.
Bro we have changed modes of production multiple times throughout history what the fuck are you talking about
Yes, but did that changed how the brain worked?
How is class an “interesting theory?” Class analysis is the basis of historical materialism, which is agreed upon by modern historiography to be one of the most effective ways of analyzing history. It’s fundamentally correct, the idea that capitalists don’t seek their own interest as capitalists is just basic logic.
Further, class analysis is critical for communist organization, as identifying which classes are revolutionary and which ones are not informs how you organize and what is to be done once taking power and establishing socialism.
That’s not what I said. I said that the fact that a new mode of production will change the way the practice of power change the the biological functioning of the brain is an interesting theory. Of course classes exist.
“Power” does not change the biological functioning of the brain. You are confusing class interest for “power” as a supernatural corruptive force. The mode of production changes what classes exist, and which ones are in power, which changes the way we live and think.
You can repeat “supernatural” as much as you want, I’m still speaking about scientific facts. Different experiences shape the functioning of the brain differently, there’s nothing magical with that.
The way we live influences how we think and how we act. This is basic materialism. However, “power” is not the moving factor, class is. This is why administration has changed dramatically based on modes of production and distribution. Socialist countries simply do not face the same scale of problems with corruption as capitalist countries. This isn’t because socialism is more resistant to corruptive forces like “power,” but instead because the class relations are different.
I call the idea that “power corrupts” supernatural thinking because it erases the actual materialist cause, and injects a vague and nebulous concept of an evil corruptive force. Administration is not the enemy, class is.