from Google AI:
Core Daoist Lessons
...Tits on a Bull
"The production of too many useful things results in too many useless people."- Karl Marx
from Google AI:
The exact quote by Karl Marx is: "The production of too many useful things results in too many useless people." Derived from his early 1844 economic writings, this statement is a critique of how industrial mass production and capitalism strip human beings of their purpose, creativity, and economic value. [1, 2, 3]Instead of insulting humanity, Marx is using the word "useless" ironically to attack how a profit-driven economic system views and treats working people. The quote breaks down into three core concepts: [1, 2]1. Dehumanization and AlienationWhen a society becomes entirely obsessed with manufacturing commodities, gadgets, and conveniences, human value is reduced to mere economic output. Marx argued that under capitalism, workers become "alienated" from their labor. Instead of being active creators who find pride and meaning in their work, people are treated like replaceable cogs in a massive industrial machine. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]2. The Shift From Creators to Passive Consumers
- Before mass production: A craftsman intentionally built a shoe from scratch, infusing their own thought and skill into the process.
- After mass production: A machine builds the shoe, and a person is reduced to standing on an assembly line pulling a single lever all day. [1]
3. Machine Automation and UnemploymentThe quote also highlights a fundamental contradiction of capitalism: technological progress. As factories become hyper-efficient at creating abundance ("too many useful things"), fewer human workers are actually needed to run them. Because a worker's survival in a capitalist framework depends entirely on selling their labor, technology that should liberate humanity instead leaves a large portion of the population unemployed, impoverished, and deemed "useless" by the market. [1, 2]Summary of MeaningUltimately, Marx is warning that true societal progress must balance economic efficiency with human dignity. When an economic system prioritizes the value of objects over the value of human life, it successfully creates a world full of wealthy products but completely bankrupt of human purpose. [1, 2, 3, 4]
15 comments:
Yeah. "Walking the bean" is much better. ;-p
While only all that fools from Third World want to became like Ams... same, or even more... useless? ;-p
I spent my youth walking the beans, but probably not in the manner you're using it. My uncle cut his herbicide bills by getting all his nephews (myself included) and other family members to walk his soybean fields and pull weeds by hand/ hoe. The chore was labelled "walking the beans".
He had about 240 acres. Once you finished all 240, you started again.
Walking the beans means "unending labour" to me. He paid us by taking us all out for soft ice cream and putt-putt miniature golf. That probably came to $0.30 an hour wages.
Tales of a mispent youth...
Yeah. Once uppon a time. Plus us shiny childhood memory.
But not as nagging everyday duty (as per kulaks) which you *must* do, or your family would not have to eat.
And then... commies arrive, and declare that ALL your wheat -- is THEIRS.
And you, and your family, may "follow Lessung's son"... like they care.
Yawn.
But. There is no such thing in your family genetic memory.
That's why you talking so easily, about "rekulakization" and etc.
Pity for the camel?
Sincerity of the kulak
Authenticity of the commies
or...
the Profilicity of a new soviet man
Not exactly the white doves borne of a laughing lion.
Isaiah Berlin strongly rejected the commensurability of values, arguing instead for incommensurability as the foundation of his philosophical doctrine of value pluralism. Berlin asserted that ultimate human values—such as liberty, equality, justice, and truth—are distinct, inherently plural, and often clash with one another. Because they are incommensurable, they cannot be measured on a single, universal scale, nor can they be converted into a "common currency" to resolve moral dilemmas.
//Not exactly the white doves borne of a laughing lion.
But is thing that IS.
In real world.
Moving history.
Generating power.
And... "how many divisions he have?"(c) Stalin
Joseph Stalin famously asked, "The Pope? How many divisions has he got?"
to dismiss the military power of the Vatican.
Background of the Quote
The Origin: As recounted by Winston Churchill in his memoirs, Joseph Stalin said this during wartime conferences when someone suggested the Vatican might object to Soviet policies.
The Meaning: Stalin meant that spiritual or moral influence holds no weight without physical military force.
Means...
Today is the time of "big batallions".
Not big ideas.
Yawn
Napoleon Bonaparte did not actually say "God is on the side of the big battalions."It is a common misattribution. The phrase originated earlier as a French proverb and was famously written by writer Voltaire and others before Napoleon's time.Origin of the SayingMadame de Sévigné: First recorded in 1673, she wrote that Marshal Turenne said fortune favored the larger forces.Voltaire: Wrote variations of the line, famously stating that God is not on the side of big battalions, but with the best shooters.Frederick the Great: Also used variants of the phrase regarding large armies before Napoleon.MeaningThe saying means that big armies usually win wars.Sheer size and numbers often beat small groups, no matter how brave they are.
Post a Comment