Freedoms

Freedom, a concept sought after by some many but what actually is it?

For a capitalist, liberal or conservative freedom is the ability to freely pursue one's self interests. Basically meaning you can do what you want, when you want. Now then in order to do this you kinda need money, with money comes power and so the aim of the capitalist is to gain as much power as they can, as in doing that they gain money and so from that the greater ability to be free and follow what they want to do. The capitalist's ability to do this off their own back is thought to be a great achievement.

But even though that is the most common definition of freedom, it is by far the only one. The Marxist, communist and Soavist definition follows as long the lines of a philosopher called Simone de Beauvoir (my current favourite- check out her works if you can, utterly remarkable), her philosophical teachings state that marxist freedom is actually the ability to do what you wish but with help. Co-operation and not money is the key to freedom in this case, the ability to gain what you wish by helping others, and allowing them to help you  is the very core of marxist freedom.

You see its really the way in which its got that is the most important. Capitalists do it by themselves, and although that maybe great- what's the cost? If you're looking out for yourself, the sad truth is you rarely actually look where you're walking, you look forward to a brighter future but what is in your footfalls? Sadly capitalists often stand on people to gain their power and wealth, these may be employees they pay next to nothing so they (the owner) can gain a great profit margin, the owner may also stand on other and smaller competitors (small businesses) and put them out of business, they then start standing on the larger companies, putting their workers on the streets, or forcing their workers to have less wages because the larger companies owners want more profits. Its quite horrible because the workers lose all round- unless they join in on it, making them as bad as the owners.

Whereas through Marxist freedom everyone works together, no owners and no workers- just communes of people carrying out their jobs, helping one another. Sounds so utopic, a dream, a distant wished for fantasy- but is it so hard to grasp? In this day and age- yes. But its not out of our reach entirely. Communes exist, small but they do. If 1 person can change a mindset, then 1 person can change the world- its just whether or not YOU want to. I'm not suggesting some revolution, that's a last resort at the worst of times, simply talk, spread your dreams and from that your ideas; afterall you cannot kill an idea.

To continue with this theme of freedom, I'll discuss revolutionary action and freedom next.

Yours
~Soav

Revolution within Communism

As I said right at the start of this blog, revolution is not desired as many would have people believe.

Communism is considered an ethical and moral philosophy as it puts the needs of the many above the needs of the few, it places the values of people above finances and promotes universal education and health for all, whilst trying to provide as much equality and chance as possible. Due to this ethical and moral belief you would be right to think how stupid revolution sounds as that in-of-itself is quite the opposite, bloodshed of soldier and civilian, war, chaos and the obvious loss of life; but it is still  part of our philosophy.

With Communism being so radically different from Capitalism in both practise and thinking, it is quite clear the two systems are quite incompatible in many areas, but bear in mind not all areas.With this radical difference it is quite clear that change from one to the other won't be a normal everyday thing, many changes in society and the very way we live will without doubt change, but this change can be done one of two ways; democratically and revolutionary. Communism by its natural democratic nature (everyone having a say and being equal) supports the democratic way of doing things, but this isn't always possible and it would be naive to think it is. Sometimes force is required, verbally, mentally and sadly physically. ut that is no true reason for revolution.

Revolution, especially from a Soavist standpoint, is the last act of the desperate, when all is lost it is the last thing we must fall back to, and even within it the bloodshed should be minimised as much as humanly possible. Today if we look across the world you will see civil wars and nation wide riots against governments. These governments are both democratic capitalist nations and those who have dictatorships in place, for many violence is seen as their only option, the people in power (democratic capitalist/dictatorship) enjoy their positions too much and so won't give them up to the people they should serve. And although that maybe a justification for revolution, it is not nor will ever be a good one.

Revolution means war, and that means the loss of life which is something a moral and ethical philosophy shouldn't promote. There are some as with all beliefs who desire bloodshed, but many live in a bubble of their own world, quite out of touch with reality and see things in a way others don't, believing the world to be threatening towards their very survival, as a Communist who believes in rational and logical thought, it shouldn't happen and yet some still appear every now and again. Violence maybe an answer but it is never a good one, as is the same with revolution, Marx understood this, Soavism preaches this and many other Communist beliefs follow this too.

If you can be democratic, do so with courage and wit but if you must be violent, be honourable, loving towards your fellow human and finally precise- as it is never right for the innocent to die, regardless of what they believe.

Next week a post will be on "democratic capitalism vs. democratic communism".
Yours
~Soav

ps. Sorry for the lateness in this blog been doing allot of long walks since being back in the countryside.