Jal,
I think the same is true in Capitalism only difference might be instead of the collective we could insert Capital(ist) concerns dominate human rights.
Karl Marx Genius Of The Modern World
by Brokeback Watchtower 94 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Brokeback Watchtower
-
Brokeback Watchtower
The future of historical materialism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism
Marxist beliefs about history[edit]
"Society does not consist of individuals, but expresses the sum of interrelations, the relations within which these individuals stand."
According to Marxist theorists[which?], history develops in accordance with the following observations:
- Social progress is driven by progress in the material, productive forces a society has at its disposal (technology, labor, capital goods, etc.)
- Humans are inevitably involved in production relations (roughly speaking, economic relationships or institutions), which constitute our most decisive social relations.
- Production relations progress, with a degree of inevitability, following and corresponding to the development of the productive forces.
- Relations of production help determine the degree and types of the development of the forces of production. For example, capitalism tends to increase the rate at which the forces develop and stresses the accumulation of capital.
- Both productive forces and production relations progress independently of mankind's strategic intentions or will.
- The superstructure—the cultural and institutional features of a society, its ideological materials—is ultimately an expression of the mode of production (which combines both the forces and relations of production) on which the society is founded.
- Every type of state is a powerful institution of the ruling class; the state is an instrument which one class uses to secure its rule and enforce its preferred production relations (and its exploitation) onto society.
- State power is usually only transferred from one class to another by social and political upheaval.
- When a given style of production relations no longer supports further progress in the productive forces, either further progress is strangled, or 'revolution' must occur.
- The actual historical process is not predetermined but depends on the class struggle, especially the organization and consciousness of the working class.
Alienation and freedom[edit]
Hunter-gatherer societies were structured so that the economic forces and the political forces were one and the same. The elements of force and relation operated together, harmoniously. In the feudal society, the political forces of the kings and nobility had their relations with the economic forces of the villages through serfdom. The serfs, although not free, were tied to both forces and, thus, not completely alienated. Capitalism, Marx argued, completely separates the economic and political forces, leaving them to have relations through a limiting government. He takes the state to be a sign of this separation—it exists to manage the massive conflicts of interest which arise between classes in all those societies based on property relations.
The future[edit]
In his analysis of the movement of history, Marx predicted the breakdown of capitalism, and the establishment in time of a communist society in which class-based human conflict would be overcome. The means of production would be held in the common ownership and used for the common good. In the mention of "human liberation" one should not neglect that, in the level of production, solely the working class is the most oppressed. But either way in the prediction of the future, one shall first know of the past (i.e. the establishment of capitalism and the transitional part of feudalism).
-
hybridous
In his analysis of the movement of history, Marx predicted the breakdown of capitalism, and the establishment in time of a communist society in which class-based human conflict would be overcome. The means of production would be held in the common ownership and used for the common good. In the mention of "human liberation" one should not neglect that, in the level of production, solely the working class is the most oppressed. But either way in the prediction of the future, one shall first know of the past (i.e. the establishment of capitalism and the transitional part of feudalism).
Well, then the historical record finds Marx to be fantastically wrong. Communist societies, instead of eliminating class-based conflict, ensconced it, and perpetuated it. The upper class being those connected to the powers and levers of government, and the lower class being: everyone else.
What's with the reliance on these very bull-crappy imprecise terms like 'common-good'? This is subjective, and probably very intentionally so, since the only definition that matters is the one wielded by those in power. -
MeanMrMustard
@Brokeback:
I think we need to discuss Marxism and be more specific about what you do or don't know about him. Because I think a lot of this is gut reaction to what we've been indoctrinated by our government to believe.
How about this: let's go to marxists.org, and reference the copy of the Communist Manefesto in PDF. Here is the link. Now I trust this is a reliable source, independent from the government's propaganda, correct?
Under the section "A Communist Confession of Faith" it states:
Question 1: Are you a Communist? Answer: Yes.
Question 2: What is the aim of the Communists?
Answer: To organise society in such a way that every member of it can develop and use all his capabilities and powers in complete freedom and without thereby infringing the basic conditions of this society.
Question 3: How do you wish to achieve this aim?
Answer: By the elimination of private property and its replacement by community of property.Did you catch that last part? As soon as you posit the elimination of private property, the game is over. Your economy from that point forward is doomed. You can argue all you want about rights, fairness, equality, etc.. None of it matters. We can talk about incentives and how communists, real communists, won't let incentives stand in the way of a good society, but it doesn't matter. You can say all you want that real communism hasn't been tried, and if we just could try the real one, the good one, then it would all work out. It doesn't matter. Any economy, any permutation of central planning that you can ever imagine or try, if private property is eliminated, will fail.
Please go back to page 2 of this thread and watch the video I posted by Dr. Joe Salerno. It is a lecture about Mises' paper on socialism from the early 1900s.
MMM
-
Brokeback Watchtower
Hy,
Well, then the historical record finds Marx to be fantastically wrong. Communist societies, instead of eliminating class-based conflict, ensconced it, and perpetuated it.
I don't think he predicted it would happen as soon as you're suggesting but given that soon robots of all sorts will be taking over many jobs and lessen the need for workers things become fully automated and user freindly) so that vast majority of the working class are out of jobs. I think that will be the beginning of adopting a communistic way of life because capitalism just won't have the answers as technology increases exponentially.
-
MeanMrMustard
@brokeback:
Jobs are the means, not the ends in themselves.
The goal of an economy is not to employ everyone. We can create an economy like that easily - simply draft everyone into the army, or dig holes and fill them up again. Everyone would work while they starve to death.
Automation is a good thing. We increase supply and lower the price of production so that everyone's standard of living can rise.
MMM
-
MeanMrMustard
@brokeback:
I think the same is true in Capitalism only difference might be instead of the collective we could insert Capital(ist) concerns dominate human rights.
I don't think this is true at all. Unless, of course, you are operating under the incorrect definition of "human rights".
MMM
-
LoveUniHateExams
@Brokeback - your posts are informative, and I should read them properly when I have the time.
However, I feel my questions really need an answer.
Is there a precedent for Marxism?
Can anyone give an example of a country - past or present - that has adopted Marxism and it really worked out well?
(If Marxism is the best way to live, there should be examples of Marxist countries, of the past or present, that thrived under this way of thinking.)
-
cofty
Communism: Great idea, wrong species. - E.O. Wilson.
-
hybridous
It isn't too hard to see why nations that attempt to implement Marxism have deplorable human rights records....
Property begins with ownership of self. Remove the simple premise that a person owns themselves and all manner of atrocities are justifiable.
Claims of 'common good' don't often bear the scrutiny of just how 'common' the supposed 'good' is.