Enhance Your Quote Experience
Enjoy ad-free browsing, unlimited collections, and advanced search features with Premium.
Under the influence of Marxism, a sixth form of division of labour also emerged in world history, the nomic technical division of labour. It was firs… - Jean-Pierre Van Rossem
" "Under the influence of Marxism, a sixth form of division of labour also emerged in world history, the nomic technical division of labour. It was first introduced in the Soviet Union in 1917 and disappeared with the fall of the Wall in 1989. Working people were led to believe that it was a form of nomic division of labour that had arisen spontaneously and was not enforced by the government. But in reality, it was not communism; on the contrary, it was state capitalism. On paper, communism still prevails in the People's Republic of China, but only because paper is very willing there (no wonder, since paper was invented in China precisely). Hard forms of communism continued for a short time after the Fall of the Wall in Cuba and Albania, but have since disappeared there too. Only in totally isolated North Korea has the nomic technical division of labour persisted to this day. It certainly did not lead to a death of the state, as Marx predicted, but to a crushing state apparatus controlled by the unscrupulous power clique around the revered Leader.
English
Collect this quote
About Jean-Pierre Van Rossem
Jean-Pierre Van Rossem (29 May 1945 – 13 December 2018) was a Belgian stock market guru, economist, econometrician, author, philosopher, public figure, politician, and member of the Belgian and Flemish Parliaments.
Related quotes. More quotes will automatically load as you scroll down, or you can use the load more buttons.
Additional quotes by Jean-Pierre Van Rossem
No, but i do note that every minute of your life the state is around the corner, you only get into your car, you have to put on your seatbelt, decree of the state, you can only drive 120 km per hour, decree of the state, but you can pay 33% VAT, at the petrol pump you can pay 80% to the state, on every cigarette you have again state, I smoke 7 packs a day so I maintain the state.
How many times did we hear statements along the lines of: "Scientific research showed that ..." or "It has been scientifically proven that ..." In doing so, people assume that science is always true. But how reliable is science? A lot of what we call science, and we accept as true, is neither true nor false, and belongs to metaphysics. For a short time (following the publication of Wittgenstein's Tractatus), it looked like we could make a razor-sharp distinction between reliable scientific statements and unreliable metaphysical statements. But Wittgenstein himself challenged that distinction with the posthumous publication of his Philosophical Investigations. Still later, (predominantly French) postmodern philosophy picked up the proposition that there is less truth contained in general science than in a simple literary poem. The days of reliable general theories seemed hopelessly over. Is that so? Has cognitive thinking become impossible? The following is a reflection. The era we live in, at least in the Western world, is called postmodernity. It is characterised by great uncertainty and a sense of increasing insecurity. Uncertainty surrounds unanswered questions related to the future of the planet, to the sustainability of energy supplies, to job security, to family stability, to declining social control, to the increase in the number of asylum seekers, to the existence of a god, and so on. Insecurity is linked to war, to terrorism, to crime. The idea is to study all these phenomena scientifically. But how sure am I that science is still reliable?
Enhance Your Quote Experience
Enjoy ad-free browsing, unlimited collections, and advanced search features with Premium.
Loading...