“Karl Marx may have been wrong about communism but he was right about much of capitalism, John Gray writes.
As a side-effect of the financial crisis, more and more people are starting to think Karl Marx was right. The great 19th Century German philosopher, economist and revolutionary believed that capitalism was radically unstable.”
This article, though a change of pace from the typical, still makes me rather angry. The author writes as if he is coming from a position of knowledge in the Marxist field of thinking. To the layman, this assumption may seem correct. However, any one who has read the Communist Manifesto could quickly point out many flaws in his point of view. Like this one, for example:
“Capitalism has led to a revolution but not the one that Marx expected. The fiery German thinker hated the bourgeois life and looked to communism to destroy it. And just as he predicted, the bourgeois world has been destroyed. But it wasn’t communism that did the deed. It’s capitalism that has killed off the bourgeoisie.”
This author quoted the Manifesto, but did he read it? Marx never said communism would be the end of capitalism. He said that the proletariat (an inherent feature of capitalism) would eventually revolt and abolish capitalism. To rephrase it, capitalism would destroy itself because the oppressed proletariat is a permanent feature of the system. Then would come socialism, then communism, and so on… The author seems to misunderstand, or purposely distort the Marxist theory of communism. Communism isn’t just imposed or created out of thin air to destroy capitalism— it’s an evolution.
Okay, maybe I’m too picky. Yes the article has some good things to say, so I’m not going to pick through and find/argue all the flaws. This just made me think of something that I find I ask myself quite a lot when reading things like this— are some authors that tell half-truths just afraid of ridicule or persecution? Do they really not fully understand what they’re writing about? Or are they catering to the ‘petty-bourgeoisie’? I see things written all the time that are along the same lines as what this author wrote:
“Marx was wrong about communism. Where he was prophetically right was in his grasp of the revolution of capitalism. It’s not just capitalism’s endemic instability that he understood, though in this regard he was far more perceptive than most economists in his day and ours.”
The author starts on the defensive (for lack of a better word) and continues with acknowledging truth in Marx’s theories. This is a pattern I often see repeated in the social democratic-bourgeois news cycle. Is it that the author thinks the audience will feel more comfortable if at first they deny the validity of something in the socialist/communist/Marxist field of thought, and then swoop in and accept some validity? I don’t know if this helps or not. I think in the end it just helps to continue and rationalize peoples irrational fears.
</rant>
What are your thoughts?
religion
psychology
beer
....these are a few of my favorite things.
![I wore this shirt out last night. An older gentleman (late 60s/early 70s) who’s business I solicited asked me, “Why would you wear a shirt like that?” Living in central Kentucky, I played it safe and responded, “It makes fun of communists, are you a communist and have I offended you?”
He muttered and responded, “Well this is a capitalist endeavour [referring to his business]. I think communism will end up in the graveyard. But the way things are looking capitalism may end up there as well.”
Agreed.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lqbchq6IXi1qaqjf2o1_1280.gif)
I wore this shirt out last night. An older gentleman (late 60s/early 70s) who’s business I solicited asked me, “Why would you wear a shirt like that?” Living in central Kentucky, I played it safe and responded, “It makes fun of communists, are you a communist and have I offended you?”
He muttered and responded, “Well this is a capitalist endeavour [referring to his business]. I think communism will end up in the graveyard. But the way things are looking capitalism may end up there as well.”
Agreed.
An interesting article on the state of the Communist, Socialist and Social Democratic parties in New York. I found this quote particularly relevant:
“Socialism won’t come to this country until tens of millions decide capitalism doesn’t work for them,” Mr. Webb said. “If you’re a revolutionary, if you’re a socialist, you have to have patience.”
(via rethinksocialism)
A young protester chants slogans in front of a banner with images of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak during a sit-in organised by hundreds of Lebanese activists in front of the Egyptian embassy in Beirut, 29 January 2011.
I thought this picture was particularly interesting. I can’t wait to see Egypt win its peace.
When social justice is forfeited and equality is trifled in this country, another person is denied health care, another mother works for 10 cents an hour sewing our clothes in Haiti, or when another homeless person dies in the street, how can this be pleasing to God?
Glenn Beck amounted social justice initiatives in churches to communism and Nazi agendas. Being a Christian calls us to monitor the state, certainly few churches would advocate for a fascist or communist state.
As Jesus said, “Take up your cross and follow me” it meant more than simply believing that his death has alleviated us from responsibility toward human suffering in this world. The phrase to “Take up” implies some sort of action response is needed to follow Christ’s lead.
If following Christ takes us to a more sharing global community, rather than a competing global community, does this fly in the face of Jesus’ teachings? After all, He fed thousands of people with a few fish. Does this story promote a communist government? Probably not. The call is to that of responsibility to take care of one’s neighbor. To love your neighbor as yourself takes an action.
In the age of globalization, our neighbors are the people who make our clothes, the gay man next door, the homeless man in the major city and the low income earners who are denied health care. Holding the system accountable to God’s will for justice on Earth is the responsibility of a progressive Christian who promotes social justice.
———-
God works through the family, education, the economy, the state, and other structures necessary for life in the present age. God institutes governing authorities, for example, to serve the good of society. The church respects the God-given integrity and tasks of governing authorities and other worldly structures, while holding them accountable to God.
~A portion of the social teaching statement, “The Church in Society: A Lutheran Perspective,” was the first social statement adopted at the second biennial Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, August 28-September 4, 1991. It was adopted by a more than two- thirds majority vote.
While political correctness seems to be in vogue….
The sickle and hammer was a symbol of unity originally designed to represent the cooperation of the industrial and agricultural industries. Certainly it was demonized during the Cold War after the Bolshevik Revolution into something terrible as Stalin took control of communism and used it as a symbol of intolerance.
Certainly it should never be politically correct to use this symbol to divide a nation into the liberals and conservatives. And certainly it is disgusting to see this symbol of original unity for one nation, used to demonize the leaders of another nation by that leader’s own people. How disgusting and shameful.
