Freedoms

Well as promised a blog on different understandings of freedom.

Now freedom seems quite simple doesn't it, if one is free then one is free... But if its that simple and that straightforward, why on Earth would I focus on it? And no, the answer is not because I've a few screws loose.

The definition I gave above, if one is free then one is free is something called Liberal Freedom. Its the idea you've been brought up to believe in and follow, and it is the very foundations that capitalism is based on- one person using their freedom of choice to follow their wanting for more money etc- that's also called greed when it gets excessive. But in capitalism you're told greed is a good thing, something to be looked after and followed, follow your own personal wishes and desires.

But you see that maybe the society we live in today, but Marxism (the main form of Communism) and Soavism (the line of thought I follow) state a type of freedom known as Marxist Freedom. Now this is different to Liberal Freedom as it says you must look out for everyone around you. We say if one is free then ALL are free, we say you can lift yourself up by helping others left themselves up and by letting others help you do the same. Its all a matter of co-operation, not competition.

I mentioned competition because Liberal Freedom promotes greed, greed meaning you desire so much of something, now as is common, many people want many of that thing. Lets call the thing money. Many people want allot of money, and in doing so they compete to get the most money, even when it becomes pointless (by pointless I mean more money than they could ever spend to live comfortably). This competition is exactly what Marxists and Soavists say is completely unnecessary, if a group of people co-operate and work together, we think that is much healthier for humanity as a whole, than everybody out for their own interests and looking out for Number 1.

So that right there is freedom from a Liberal stance and from a Marxist stance. The former being looking out for yourself, the latter being looking out for everyone.

I hope that gives you something to mull over.

Yours
~Soav

Woolwich And The Need To Think Clearly

Now then I know I'm not posting what I said I would, that being a blog on freedom but I will just likely later on this week, or maybe next.

I'm writing now to talk about the recent brutal killing of a British solider. This post is less on the incident but on the social and political repercussions of it.

I watched this 20 minute video about the killing- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7cmijwvpD4

And to the majority of it, this is my response. Now then its not completely in depth as I was just watching and not analysing, yet nonetheless here it is.

"I won't lie I can agree with some aspects of the interview but the vast majority of I dispute for its exaggeration, scaremongering and general hypocrisy. Now granted as has already been put forward, re-wording and ignorance of him and the EDL may be needed, so taking that into consideration you can rule out hypocrisy.

There is one thing I do strongly agree with him on; "we are at war". Now before you go and think on that as a warcry, take into consideration the atrocity he is talking about. Now I'm not condoning it in ANY way shape or form as it is was truly horrific and that cannot be disputed, yet on the same level we are at war and it was a soldier who was the victim here, by the general rules of civilised warfare the act of killing an enemy soldier is justified, not by any means in the way to which it was done, but the actual act itself. Granted I too agree that the government needs to do more about it as we are at war, but who with? Radicalised Islam, in the same way with radicalised religion in general, NOT all of Islam, nor all of religion.

He is creating a common enemy to which he wants a rallying call- that enemy being Islam. That goes against the very nature of a multi-cultural, free, democratic nation; scapegoating an entire religion. It is this behaviour in-of-itself that catalyses radicals, this hatred breeds further radicalism. This speech, himself, the EDL and ANY genuine supporter of all that is said is part of the problem, not the solution because in neglecting your logic you fuel the thing you're trying to attack. If you're going to attack something then attack the threat- radicalised Islam, take away their fuel i.e. British military intervention, take away the actual concept of the war to which we are fighting and then proceed to  take out radicalised Islam through force and education- IF it has not died out in this nation already by then."

Yours 

~Soav

The Means of Production Explained

As per a request by a friend I give you "the Means of Production".

So what are the "means of production"?
They are exactly what you assume, the industries and utilities needed for a company to produce the products it does.
Do you remember what I said about the definitions for communism? Of course you do!

The bourgeois/the owners, evident by name, own companies, businesses and industries in general- and it is these that are the means of production. They produce what you buy in the supermarkets and wherever else it is you shop, they also sell abroad and it is through all this that the companies, employees and government earn money.

Now then, as is commonly seen in companies the vast majority of the employees earn less than the people/person in charge. Those in charge quite often live very comfortable lifestyles due to the money they earn, those who work for them- at least the majority of those who work for them- do not have such lavish lifestyles, they are the workers and as such earn enough to class them as lower middle class; not poor but not well off either.

Communism heavily hates this system, why? Because for a company to work profitably it must have the majority of its workers, working in static (unmovable) positions. It is against a capitalist companies interests to not work for profit, and profit cannot be gained if all the workers in its employ keep getting promoted and moving up the wage ladder. In order to prevent that workers are kept in what is known as "dead end jobs".  They stay in one place and cannot move forward of that position, and so cannot better look after their families or such other needs while the owners continue to increase their salaries for the companies success is their success too.
Workers are given a "competitive wage" meaning a wage just good enough to out do potential competitors but low enough to keep earning plenty of money.
Communism hates this capitalist ideal because it benefits very few people. Communism is all about trying to help everyone or at least as many people as it can, with the majority of people being workers it often puts its emphasis on that, but to do so solely represents a false belief as communism supports everyone, equally this even includes the owners (much to some's protest).

Communism wants to change this system and feels it can do so through a process known as nationalisation. Now then this means putting all industry and the "means of production" under governmental control. Government ministries run the companies and from that take the profits of the companies and put them back into the nation, instead of the owner's pockets. The government can put money back into the nation in many many ways, most evidently in local projects and pay raises for workers.
The Soavist ideology of which this whole blog is about promotes nationalisation in almost everything- we intend to leave charities and social businesses alone. Soavism considers charities can be best handled by themselves and the same with social businesses as both know the local area they're supporting and so know what ways they can help, such a localised understanding cannot be the same by a national government as so we leave them alone knowing they're helping their communities.

Now of course the government I've just described to you is not the present one, and that is because we live in a capitalist system, to take aspects of communism to look at it through the current system is to not give communism a chance as it is a completely different system and so needs to be looked at through different eyes.

Communism is all about the idea of "Marxist Freedom"- building yourself up with the help and co-operation of others. In building yourself you help build others up too as it is all through co-operation. In lifting yourself you lift, equally, all those that help you as you too help them. It is through Marxist Freedom many communist policies are based around, such as nationalisation- the public vote in a government who will nationalise, the government nationalises and so the profits gained benefit the public. You're helping others help yourself- Marxist Freedom.

In my next blog I'll talk about freedom in general, the capitalist viewpoint up against the communist viewpoint. If you have any requests please feel free to comment with them, I'll be happy to help if I can.

Yours
~Soav

Communism in a few words

Communism.

What actually is Communism?

You see in modern day society communism is thought of as quite a dead belief. It had it's hay-day in the Cold War and has seen been vanquished in triumphant splendor by the brave and courageous victors that are the Western powers.

Well forgive me for being blunt, but that's a lot of rubbish. Yes the West are responsible for the massacre of countless communists and yes our name was spoken frequently during the Cold War, BUT we are not dead, we are not defeated and we are not what you saw in the Cold War.

Communism is not what you see over in China, Russia, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba or any other nation you want to mention. Communism has never tried out, ask anyone who knows anything about political theory (and if they say Communism is in any of the above nations then they simply don't know what they're talking about).

So before I go any further, would you like to know why Communism is not practised in those nations? Sure you do or why else are you reading this?

Communism, as advised by Marx, is built on the back of Capitalism- this is arguable one the most fundamental aspects of Communist theory. Not ONE of those nations mentioned were built on a capitalist state, all infact were built on the back of semi-industrialised nations or those of predominantly agricultural based economy.

How many of you reading this knew that? Many of you wouldn't have, and that is because it is Communist ideology.

Another aspect of Communist ideology- revolution is NOT  wished for. Another little shocker for people.
Communism in general quite widely promotes pacifism and non-violence.

So why is revolution linked to Communism so frequently? I'm so glad you asked.
We communist belong to a moral ideology, one of which we want to look after as many people as possible. To do this we want to get rid of the present system and redirect the government's attention from money to the people. Sadly though people who have money often have power. You've heard the saying "power corrupts" , well it's very true. Many people who go into government want power, those wants and desires are their own self-interests, self-interests being the very nature of capitalism. This is why we want to get rid of it.
Though as I said, sadly these types of people enjoy their power and do not want people like us taking it of them, as such one must refer to the use of force and this is our revolution.

As said, we belong to a moral belief and as such war goes wholly against our cause and yet it is considered the lesser of two evils; war or the neglect of the majority for the wants of the few.

In the modern day many communists actually alienate people and it is a terrible shame, and quite frankly I may well be doing it now without my knowledge. So I intend to clarify a few things here-
Proletariat- The working class, the majority of people that work. You're not rich and you're not quite poor. You don't have many treats but you do a few.
Bourgeois- The owners, those that own the mega companies or have high ranking jobs within them. They're very well off, and can afford many of their desires. These can range from the decently paid to those whose worth is in the billions.
Oppression- It is either neglect of people or the abuse of people by means of money. Many working people are kept in a place because they don't have the money to climb the "ladder of success".

How often are you told, if you want something and work hard enough then you'll get it? That is very often utter rubbish. People are kept in one place and not given the money to excel because if they had that money then they could threaten those in power. This is a cruel irony of the capitalist system, it says you can be what you want whilst keeping you trapped because others have got their first and don't want you to take their power off them.

I think that'll be all for now.
~Soav

Soavism

The aim of creating this blog is to try and promote the idea and theories behind Soavism.

Soavism itself is a left wing political theory that tries to address the flaws frequently seen in the left wing whilst providing an alternative to the capitalist system we live in today.

In reading this you may well think I'm another left wing nutjob, some sort of hippy free lovin' kinda guy. Well truth betold I'm not. All I am is a university student who's pretty sure he's got an half decent idea and wants to know what you think.
I'm not promoting revolution, in fact I openly oppose it more often than not.
I'm not a Stalinist or any other type of dogmatic dictatorial communist.
I'm certainly not a hippy as I actually have a cohesive ideology and can see the logic and need of war in given circumstances.

I am on the other hand a bloke from Lancashire who's a member of the modern day left wing. I am a communist and I do feel very strongly about and promote freedom and understanding.

So this is my new blog, think of it what you will.

~Soav