Marxism: JakeStarky V. Uncensored2008

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Uncensored2008, Oct 5, 2012.

  1. Uncensored2008
    Offline

    Uncensored2008 Libertarian Radical Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    57,274
    Thanks Received:
    7,376
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Ratings:
    +20,757
    The first issue to be resolved when discussing Marxism is, just what is Marxism anyway?

    Let's start with a few things that it is not, Marxism is not the model of Lenin, or Stalin, or Mao Tse Tung, or Pol Pot.

    Marxism is those ideas and philosophies postulated and promoted by Karl Marx. So just who was Karl Marx? Marx was born in the German state of Prussia in 1818. Though Marx is often called German, he was born prior to Bismark forming Germany.

    I hear terms like "Marx was an idiot" or other such statements. No, Marx was not an idiot, and was in fact highly educated. Born to a wealthy Jewish family, Marx followed the path that children of wealth often do, hating their parents and showing teen rebellion through attacking the systems that provided them comfort and advantage. Marx rebelled against his wealth and privilege by developing models that would end wealth.

    Marx based his theories on dialectic materialism. Essentially, Marx believed that a dialectic exists between classes. Marx was a product of 19th Century Europe, where the trappings of feudalism remained strong. Class was a strong feature in life, the aristocracy still enjoyed not only wealth, but status that was denied others. Marx saw this as a natural part of life, that various castes of society were destined to perpetual war. A cycle of poverty which led to rebellion, with successful rebels assuming the role of a new aristocracy, with the cycle repeating. Marx had little problem with this. But a new caste arose, the Bourgeoisie, the middle class, which Marx viewed as the destruction of the cycle. As long as an Aristocracy ran roughshod on the Proletarians, then the cycle of revolution would continue. But the middle class found comfort in the status quo, ending the cycle of rebellion. The merchants, small land owners with farms and ranches, craftsmen and guilds all threatened the cycle.

    Marx speaks fondly of dialectic materialism in Capital, Vol. 1; but does not suggest the restoration of the cycle per se, instead he proposes that society can be reshaped without a dialectic by creating a classless society. To do so, he envisioned placing authoritarian rule in the hands of the lowest caste, the Proletarians. Marx dubbed this the "dictatorship of the Proletariat." Marx postulates that with control of society in the hands of the lowest elements in a socialist state, equality of outcome can be achieved. With equality of outcome, where each is afforded according to their need, and each contributes according to their ability, the need for the state will fade, currency and government will become unneeded and a state of pure community will develop, Communism.

    So Jake, tell us what the flaws in Marx's dialectic materialism are?

    Refrences:

    Economic Manuscripts: Capital: Volume One
    Manifesto of the Communist Party
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. regent
    Offline

    regent Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Messages:
    7,917
    Thanks Received:
    872
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,765
    Ooh, ooh, I know, I know, waving hand. You always call on Jakey first.
     
  3. Uncensored2008
    Offline

    Uncensored2008 Libertarian Radical Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    57,274
    Thanks Received:
    7,376
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Ratings:
    +20,757
    Yeah, this question is for Jake.
     
  4. Newby
    Offline

    Newby Does it get any better? Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,094
    Thanks Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,703
    Good luck with that. :lol:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Steelplate
    Offline

    Steelplate Bluesman

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks Received:
    931
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Central PA
    Ratings:
    +932
    I know too.....I 'll wait though.
     
  6. Intense
    Offline

    Intense Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    44,909
    Thanks Received:
    5,849
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +5,863
    Marxism is the Parasite, Capitalism is the Host. What do I win?
     
  7. Steelplate
    Offline

    Steelplate Bluesman

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks Received:
    931
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Central PA
    Ratings:
    +932
    OK, I've waited long enough. The fatal flaw with any absolute system is simple. You can't trust people. Be it Communism, Socialism, or yes....even Capitalism.

    People are greedy and self centered. In Communism and to a lesser degree, Socialism, working for the common good is the rule of the land. A person doesn't "own" anything and is expected to give up his/her hard earned fruits of their labor to be re-distributed accordingly. This goes against man's basic need to be self driven and reap the rewards of his labor.

    Capitalism has the same problem, but works in reverse. You have a Capitalist class,who control everything, and a labor class who works for the Capitalist class. The shining light of Capitalism is that the labor class, if lightning strikes, can become a member of the Capitalist class. However, greed and power come into play in Capitalism too. The Capitalist class doesn't truly want competition. They want to squash it as much as possible. Because competition and the raising up of more people into the Capitalist class reduces their power and influence....not to mention taking a share of their market.

    So, they fight to keep the labor class down as much as possible. Shitty wages, high consumer costs, being against education, etc.... because all of those things reduce the labor class's chances of acquiring enough Capital to become part of the Capitalist class.

    That's why I personally believe in a hybrid system like ours that promotes both individuality AND community.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  8. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    No government that does not ultimately serve the people lasts.

    Doesn't much matter what economic system you call it, if it doesn't serve the people, sooner or later there's going to be a change in the system.

    When governments go rogue, it is seldom a revolution from the bottom that take it down.

    Rather the elite gain so much control the lower classes are paralized, but various cabals within that power elite begin turning upon themselves.

    And that, folks, is the path we are currently on.
     
  9. Saigon
    Offline

    Saigon Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2012
    Messages:
    11,434
    Thanks Received:
    870
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    Ratings:
    +1,240
    Thi is not true.

    Marxism is a theory.

    What Lenin, in particular, did was to put Marxism into practice. Of course, Marxism-Leninism incorporate ideas of Lenin's own making, some of which Marx may not have agreed with, but if we imagine Marxism in practice on a national scale, then what we imagine is going to look much like the USSR looked in perhaps 1930.

    With Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot I agree with you, but separating Lenin out from the practice of Marxism is not easily done.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. regent
    Offline

    regent Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Messages:
    7,917
    Thanks Received:
    872
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,765
    The biggest flaw of Marx and Hegel's dialectical is that capitalism changed before it reached the next step. Marx believed the next step was inevitable but it didn't happen. Governments stepped in with regulations regarding working conditions, distribution of wealth, labor unions, all the things that conservatives hate yet makes capitalism palatable. With capitalism under control we reaped the many benefits of the capitalistic system but did not let it run amok. We still haven't found the prevention and cure for the business cycles but the most recent recession/depression may be a sign that we are starting to get some understanding of that problem. Perhaps the primary problem with capitalism is that it is managed by politicians, then too maybe the politicial battle is the magic keeper of the flame. Imagine, Marx and his system, from each....
     

Share This Page