Are Absurdism and Marxism compatible worldviews?

[Lodestar]

I have a question for the more philosophically knowledgeable comrades...

Absurdism, a la Albert Camus, have there been any Marxist critiques?

[spiltteeth]

I doubt it. Camus had some Marxist critiques, but Camus is merely saying without 'God' it is up to us to make meaning, which amounts to pretending that life has a meaning, but we know we're just pretending, and can simply imagine a different meaning at any other point, so - life is absurd.
Really, he was a philosophic lightweight, and he argued himself blue to try to find a way to live an objectively moral, meaningful life without recourse to God, and failed.

Still, he's one of my favorites writers as far as literature goes.

[Lodestar]

I doubt it. Camus had some Marxist critiques, but Camus is merely saying without 'God' it is up to us to make meaning, which amounts to pretending that life has a meaning, but we know we're just pretending, and can simply imagine a different meaning at any other point, so - life is absurd.
Really, he was a philosophic lightweight, and he argued himself blue to try to find a way to live an objectively moral, meaningful life without recourse to God, and failed.

Still, he's one of my favorites writers as far as literature goes.


What is the "meaning of life" according to a Marxist?

[Luís Henrique]

What is the "meaning of life" according to a Marxist?

Changing the world.

Luís Henrique

[The Feral Underclass]

Absurdism is a way to understand your existence and your existential anxiety. It's perfectly compatible with revolutionary theory and practice. Indeed, Camus himself supported revolutionary ideas.

[spiltteeth]

What is the "meaning of life" according to a Marxist?

I believe to a dogmatic Marxist, who will reference only materialist concerns, the question is non-sensical.

That is a question for philosophy, metaphysics, or religion.

Persona;;y, I believe a purely materialistic analysis can lead to a reasonable belief that God exists based on what we know of the universe, but it cannot provide evidence, simply an argument, and if its outside of science, its probably outside of Marxism.

In other word, Marxism is not designed to answer such questions.

[Hit The North]

In other word, Marxism is not designed to answer such questions.

Thus the effort and dedication to organising the class struggle which has been the hallmark of the lives of Marxists from Marx and Engels, through Lenin and on to the current generation of Marxists is meaningless to them?

Of course, Luis is correct when he says that the meaning of our lives is to change the world. It's even inscribed on the grave of Karl Marx:

Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.

[spiltteeth]

Thus the effort and dedication to organising the class struggle which has been the hallmark of the lives of Marxists from Marx and Engels, through Lenin and on to the current generation of Marxists is meaningless to them?

Of course, Luis is correct when he says that the meaning of our lives is to change the world. It's even inscribed on the grave of Karl Marx:

Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.


Marxism cannot provide a reason why organizing a class struggle ought to be meaningful.
The reason must be found elsewhere.

[Parker]

Absurdism is a way to understand your existence and your existential anxiety. It's perfectly compatible with revolutionary theory and practice. Indeed, Camus himself supported revolutionary ideas.

yes. At the end of The Rebel, Camus comes out in favour of revolutionary syndicalism.

[black magick hustla]

Changing the world.

Luís Henrique

if that is just the meaning of life then it is quite sad. so every bone in your being resonates for revolution and nothing else? what about your friends, children and enjoying life in general?

[Hit The North]

Marxism cannot provide a reason why organizing a class struggle ought to be meaningful.
The reason must be found elsewhere.

Where?

[The Feral Underclass]

God as far as Spiltteeth is concerned.

[Hyacinth]

Marxism cannot provide a reason why organizing a class struggle ought to be meaningful.
The reason must be found elsewhere.
That's idiotic on so many levels. Organized class struggle is meaningful (significant) for the proletariat insofar as it is the best, and possibly only viable, means by which the proletariat can end their oppression and secure a better material standard of living for themselves. Basically, it is meaningful because it is in their interest to do so (more of their desires would be satisfied under a socialist system than under capitalism). What more reason does anyone need?

[spiltteeth]

That's idiotic on so many levels. Organized class struggle is meaningful (significant) for the proletariat insofar as it is the best, and possibly only viable, means by which the proletariat can end their oppression and secure a better material standard of living for themselves. Basically, it is meaningful because it is in their interest to do so (more of their desires would be satisfied under a socialist system than under capitalism). What more reason does anyone need?

Right. And if any of those proletariat get rich, then it is no longer in their interest. It all depends on their circumstances. It is not OBJECTIVELY meaningful.
My morals are objective, so even if my circumstances change, and I am gifted a large business, I can still justify my communism.

[spiltteeth]

Where?

I dunno. Religion or philosophy? Self-interest I guess. God's my man.

[Hyacinth]

Right. And if any of those proletariat get rich, then it is no longer in their interest. It all depends on their circumstances. It is not OBJECTIVELY meaningful.
My morals are objective, so even if my circumstances change, and I am gifted a large business, I can still justify my communism.
Yes, imagine that, what is in your interests depends on who you are and what place you occupy in society.

And of course it isn't "objectively" meaningful, because nothing is.

And Marxism isn't concerned with trying to persuade the ruling class to give up power, as that just won't happen, nor trying to convince them of the rightness of our case. A futile task as morality is a reflection of social relations and material conditions. If some of the ruling class, seeing the tide turning against them, decide to join our case, great. But at the end of the day morality is irrelevant, it is a matter of power.

[spiltteeth]

Yes, imagine that, what is in your interests depends on who you are and what place you occupy in society.

And of course it isn't "objectively" meaningful, because nothing is.

And Marxism isn't concerned with trying to persuade the ruling class to give up power, as that just won't happen, nor trying to convince them of the rightness of our case. A futile task as morality is a reflection of social relations and material conditions. If some of the ruling class, seeing the tide turning against them, decide to join our case, great. But at the end of the day morality is irrelevant, it is a matter of power.

Well, as you say, if you get rich your joining the other side. I'm not. I believe in objective morals. Even if its not in my best interest that child labor is abolished in India, cuz I likes my Nikes cheap, I still can say its wrong. You can't.
I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying.

I never said Marxism was about persuasion. You seem to be answering things I didn't say.

[Hyacinth]

Well, as you say, if you get rich your joining the other side. I'm not. I believe in objective morals. Even if its not in my best interest that child labor is abolished in India, cuz I likes my Nikes cheap, I still can say its wrong. You can't.
I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying.
Of course I can say it is wrong, it is just that my understanding of what "wrong" means is different than yours. I'm not saying anything about the world, nor are you for that matter, rather these terms are expressions of approval or disapproval for things.

And I'm not doubting the sincerity of your belief, but, as Marx said, "[t]he mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness." If you were to all of a sudden become rich chances are your sentiments and intentions would change.

[spiltteeth]

Of course I can say it is wrong, it is just that my understanding of what "wrong" means is different than yours. I'm not saying anything about the world, nor are you for that matter, rather these terms are expressions of approval or disapproval for things.

And I'm not doubting the sincerity of your belief, but, as Marx said, "[t]he mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness." If you were to all of a sudden become rich chances are your sentiments and intentions would change.

Fair enough.
Obviously, I believe in objective morals, so I could say it is objectively wrong, no matter what I personally think of it, that child labor is wrong; plus I'd hope I wouldn't change, and instead be guided by those steady morals, but it is true money is the ultimate mind changer, and many a 'righteous' man has been 'corrupted' by gold and power.

[blake 3:17]

Sartre?

[Luís Henrique]

if that is just the meaning of life then it is quite sad. so every bone in your being resonates for revolution and nothing else? what about your friends, children and enjoying life in general?
Revolution is not the only way to change the world.

Luís Henrique