Intellectuals and Socialism

[Laika]

In the video below Hayek argues that intellectuals are more likely to support Socialism based on the belief that social institutions can be designed to serve human interests. He contrasts this with the spontaneous evolution of market institutions, arguing that government cannot posses the information necessary to make economic decisions, concluding that the "spontaneous" institutions of the market are superior to ones in a "planned" economy.

As the arguments Communists face are usually Libertarian, I've put this in the Communist Only sub-forum because I think it is important for Communists to discuss these ideas to better understand them and to know how to best argue against them.

I wanted to ask whether you agree that intellectuals tend to prefer the designing of social institutions to serve human interests (based on principles of social justice for example)? Would you agree with Hayek that this is a prejudice of sorts? Or is there a way to prove that designed institutions are superior to those market institutions which developed (he claims) "spontaneously"?

Any thoughts Comrades?

**Please Note this is in the Communist Only Sub-forum**

 

[Rival]

I trust the free market like I trust Kim Jong Un. I think Hayek is biased as we all are. I didn't think intellectuals prefer socialism; in fact recently capitalism seems to be making a comeback among some university youth - possibly in backlash against the loud uni left.

 

[Lyndon]

You're a communist now, Rival????

 

[PureX]

This is just more Milton Friedman-esque BS: "greed is good".

Greed is not good. It has totally corrupted the government of the United States and is destroying the nation and it's culture, for all the world to witness. And yet it is still infecting nearly every other modern nation on the planet as we humans just can't seem to get control of it.

Capitalism, the economic systematization of greed, is failing humanity. It serves the wealthy elite at the expense of everyone else, which makes it antithetical and toxic to any culture that engages in it, and especially so as the culture becomes more and more complex and inter-dependent.

Any society that does not practice socialism is auto-destructive by definition because greed exploits and ultimately destroys everything it touches. Mankind is not made better or stronger through competition. Mankind is made better and stronger through unity and cooperation. And we don't have to be an "intellectual" to recognize and understand this. We just have to be willing to see past our own greed.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't get how it can be said markets spontaneously evolved, and he has to be smarter than this, but all of our institutions are designed, including markets (which have become meticulously designed to maximize profit at the expense of worker health and environmental sustainability).
I think why "intellectuals" seem more likely to drift towards socialism (but even many working class, blue collar workers drift that way to varying degrees), is for one I am assuming by intellectual he means those who have went through college meaning they have been exposed to many new ideas they wouldn't have been to otherwise (I drifted that way through work and piecing together how one-sided such arrangements are), and also because it becomes more apparent that no one signed up to be a part of the dog-eat-dog competitive world of Capitalism, no more than one would choose their native tongue.
Rather, I think it appears that "intellectuals" tend go that way because the working class is more expendable and has less of a voice, making it seem intellectuals--who are doctors and teachers and scientists and other "less cog-like" and have more of a voice--are more likely to go towards socialism. I don't know how much experience Hayek had with the working class, but in my experience it's very easy to get even the non-"intellectual" working class standing firmly behind a great deal of socialist ideas and to get them to voice their frustrations with how the Capitalist system has the cards heavily stacked against them. Not that they would be "full blown" socialists, but even among the working class there is support for the idea that the workers should have more control, more power, and are entitled to a more fair share of the profit than they get. So I really don't believe this notion that "intellectuals" are more likely to drift towards socialism, but rather they have more chances and opportunities for their voices to be heard than those who work with sickle and hammer. I'm not sure what percentage of each group would, but I'm sure such an idea would be dispelled and we'd have a better idea of who actually does lean towards socialism rather than trying to say it's something for "intellectuals."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I trust the free market like I trust Kim Jong Un. I think Hayek is biased as we all are. I didn't think intellectuals prefer socialism; in fact recently capitalism seems to be making a comeback among some university youth - possibly in backlash against the loud uni left.

One observation I made when I went back to school, and had to start at community college to establish myself (I did poorly in high school and dropped out of college the first time), and community college most of my peers were working class and were definitely not the Starbucks and trendy restaurant hipsters that my peers at uni were. They came from at least a comfortable amount of money, their parents paved the way for them and gave them a boost in their economic position, and they seemed to not understand what going without actually entails. and never stopped to think others may not have the expendable income they do. One example I'll never forget, it was in an honors colloquium class I was in, and the teacher asked if we wanted to eat out for our last class meeting. I was insisting on somewhere on the cheaper side, but everybody else opted for one of the more pricey places in town. What made it memorable for me was I was doing a paper on the positive morality in South Park in that class, and that discussion left me feeling like the impoverished and muffled Kenny - the voiceless working poor who get trampled on by those with the privilege of money.

 

[idav]

This thread is getting debate posts, I don't know that's why you were intending @Laika?

 

[Rival]

You're a communist now, Rival????

I always have been. I'm an old-school Communist. I believe strongly in collectivisation, nationalised just-about-everything, abolition of private property, workers' unions and a one-party state. I'm conservative in that I oppose elective abortion, gay marriage and so forth. They call me 'Marxist-Leninist'.

One of my latest political compass results

 

[Lyndon]

My apologies, I couldn't have guessed, maybe I'm confusing you with another poster. I'm a socialist, I used to consider myself a God fearing communist,, if there is such a thing. I don't believe people with more abilities and learned skills should necessarily be payed much more than common workers, the bus boys at my restaurant work harder than most doctors IMHO, that's just not fair. I believe God created us equal with different abilities, but treating the common labourers like dirt with low paying minimum wage jobs is akin to slavery IMHO

 

[PureX]

Herding people into work-camps and calling them "communes" is not communism. Neither is dictating to them how they must live nearly every aspect of their lives. What most of the world ends up calling "communism" is not communism at all. It's just totalitarian dictatorship trying to masquerade as communism.

 

[Rival]

Herding people into work-camps and calling them "communes" is not communism. Neither is dictating to them how they must live nearly every aspect of their lives. What most of the world ends up calling "communism" is not communism at all. It's just totalitarian dictatorship trying to masquerade as communism.

There are many styles of Communism; one can't just say this or that is or isn't Communism because it offends one's morality or feelings.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I used to consider myself a God fearing communist,, if there is such a thing.

Yes, it is possible. Marxist-flavors of communism tend to not look upon religion favorably, but Marxism is hardly the only form of communism.

 

[Laika]

This thread is getting debate posts, I don't know that's why you were intending @Laika?

Honestly, the debate/discussion distinction didn't cross my mind. (edit: I was hoping for a lively discussion amongst people of like mind). It was more a search for life signs in the sub-forum.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Herding people into work-camps and calling them "communes" is not communism. Neither is dictating to them how they must live nearly every aspect of their lives. What most of the world ends up calling "communism" is not communism at all. It's just totalitarian dictatorship trying to masquerade as communism.

It depends. At its core, communism is a state/public controlled economy. From there it tends to vary much, such as Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Fidel Castro, and Che. Lenin and Castro lead Revolutions against oppressive regimes, and Stalin went oppressive in a way that resembled what Castro fought against. Che was perhaps the most fanatic, being nearly on par with a Muslim extremist.

 

[Laika]

My apologies, I couldn't have guessed, maybe I'm confusing you with another poster. I'm a socialist, I used to consider myself a God fearing communist,, if there is such a thing. I don't believe people with more abilities and learned skills should necessarily be payed much more than common workers, the bus boys at my restaurant work harder than most doctors IMHO, that's just not fair. I believe God created us equal with different abilities, but treating the common labourers like dirt with low paying minimum wage jobs is akin to slavery IMHO

Religious Communism is a thing and you're more than welcome to the sub-forum.

 

[Lyndon]

thank you, i had resisted posting before because I wasn't quite sure I could call myself a communist.

 

[Rival]

thank you, i had resisted posting before because I wasn't quite sure I could call myself a communist.

If I can qualify as a Communist I'm pretty sure you can lmfao.

 

[Laika]

thank you, i had resisted posting before because I wasn't quite sure I could call myself a communist.

The term does scare people. There are some good reasons for that, but plenty of really weird ones too. There is so much propaganda around it is difficult to think straight.

If I can qualify as a Communist I'm pretty sure you can lmfao.

You might be in National Bolshevik territory maybe? They're Nationalist and Authoritarian but they are still Communist. Its mainly a Russian thing though. Only Russians could decide mixing Nazism and Stalinism was a good idea.

 

[Lyndon]

I'm more positive towards Cuban communism, definitely not into authoritarianism or Nationalistism

 

[Rival]

You might be in National Bolshevik territory maybe? They're Nationalist and Authoritarian but they are still Communist. Its mainly a Russian thing though. Only Russians could decide mixing Nazism and Stalinism was a good idea.

A Nazi-Communist-Wannabe Jew?

Sounds legit.