Was Marx a racist?

[Knowledge 6 6 6]

As I was re-reading a book of mine in my library, Marx and Engel's "Communist Manifesto", I had come across soemthing quite interesting...

During the introduction, (which wasn't written by Marx) the person states, "Anyone who opposed Marx and his ideologies was frowned upon by Marx. In fact, he further stated 'Any European in opposition to my idea is filled with negro's blood."

What do you guys think of this?

Even though I'm a minority (Not African, but of Indian decent) I find this statement very rude, however, probably significant of the times he was living in. The equality of all races had not yet been enforced in his society, thus, would give him reason to make such a racist statement..

What are your thoughts?

[Intifada]

i am a minority aswell (pakistani origin), and also find this remark very rude.

he probably used the racist comment in order to relate to western thinkers, who might have thought that negroes were inferior to them. or maybe he was a racist, like many others in his time.

[Dyst]

I think, and hope, the person who wrote that introduction has misunderstood Marx and, illegally, misquoted him. Or, the writer of the introduction simply had his own meanings on negroes, and again, misquoted him.

[Morpheus]

Every European male of that era harbored some kind of bigotry, including the radicals. Engels was even worse than Marx. That doesn't necessarily mean that ALL their ideas were wrong, it means we have to separate the wheat from the chaff. That's why I'm not a Bakuninist or a Marixst, etc. I prefer to think for myself instead of following some dead guy. When a person I'm reading has a good idea I use it, when they don't I throw it out. Take the good parts of their philosophy but not the bad parts. The prejudices of Marx, Engels, Bakunin & others are obviously part of their philosophies that should be thrown out.

[Jesus Christ]

we are all prejudiced in some way or another, but in Marx's time, it wasnt a crime to say these things, even if they were wrong

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

The idea here is to make progress, not to stall on something said 125 or so years ago, plug your ears, yell lalalalalala, jump up and down, and scream "this is what he said" repeatedly.

[BuyOurEverything]

In my copy of the manifesto it says he calls people something like "Jews of negro blood" or something as an insult. Which is somewhat ironic because he actually was Jewish. Either way, I don't think it's really relevant, I agree with liberAL.

[Bolshevika]

I think it's pretty clear Marx was not really a racist. "Workers of the world unite" ring any bells?

Marx was an internationalist. I do believe he thought white europeans would be the ones to lead the revolution in those times, but that is because during those times they were the most educated. I don't think he harboured any hate towards negroes, I remember reading in a compilation of his works something that defended negroes.

Could it be that Marx was trying to be a silly ass as well? I do believe radicals in the 1800's had sense of humours. Sometimes when I make a mistake, my friend calls me a "lagging negro", and I chuckle at it. It is a nasty habit, but it doesn't mean we harbour any hate at all towards negroes (infact the opposite, I've been looking into joining the Black Panther youth league).

[RedComrade]

Anybody who is familiar with Marx's works on the Civil War knows that he was not racist, especially not against Africans. Marx was one of the few europeans to support the union precisely because of the racist reactionary nature of the south.

[Rastafari]

to the first two posters who called themselves "minorites," remember that on a wordly basis, you two are not minorities at all. It is the white people who are minorities. Don't use our encaging terminologies to describe yourselves when the west's description of non-white people is, as always, inaccurate.

[Al Creed]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2003, 10:37 PM
Could it be that Marx was trying to be a silly ass as well? I do believe radicals in the 1800's had sense of humours.
Thats what I was thinking, that Marx said this tounge-in-cheek, as an insult to capitalist biggots

[max]

I am sorry correct me if I am wrong but who the fuck cares if he had racist thoughts we have some, and to say you don't mean you are a bad liar. Becouse the first rule of lieing is to make it belivable. [QUOTE]All new babie smell like butter.[QUOTE]

[The Feral Underclass]

I am not sure if Marx was a rascist. Something I noticed when reading 'Statism and Anarchy' was the anti-semetic language Bakunin used when refering to Marx. It is possible I suppose that both men had reactionary ideas about black people and jews.

[truthaddict11]

rastafari a minority means the lesser ammount in an area such as if i were to go to China i (being white) would be a minority.

[Intifada]

to the first two posters who called themselves "minorites," remember that on a wordly basis, you two are not minorities at all.

what i meant was that where i live, i am a minority.

[Kez]

does anyone wanna bring a sourcec into this? or are we gonna believe it regardless of it being true or false?

[Knowledge 6 6 6]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 06:04 AM
to the first two posters who called themselves "minorites," remember that on a wordly basis, you two are not minorities at all. It is the white people who are minorities. Don't use our encaging terminologies to describe yourselves when the west's description of non-white people is, as always, inaccurate.
Respects Rastafari, you're totally right on that point...

but yeah, it pertains to where I live currently, I am a minority in that sense. In the more broad, international sense, I realise that those of european decent are minorities...

Good post nonetheless.

~knowledge

[Rastafari]

excuse my posting, I was in an odder mood

[Xvall]

Hah!

I doubt he was any sort of racist. I'm curious as to where that was taken from. It could have just been fabricated. Nonetheless, I don't think he was a racist. At least that's not what his ideological stance seems to support. As said earlier; he was among the few people of that time to actually stand up against bigotry. I really doubt that he was any type of racialist or bigot, although I suppose it is possible that he may have said the n-word once or twice in his life. He may have also just been trying to piss off the other guy. Nonetheless; neither I nor anyone else on the board is going to take such a small quote very seriously. But if you find out that he wrote a 200 page book denouncing people of a certain ethnic background, be sure to show it to me.

[hazard]

everybody was a racist back in those days
marx was just like everybody else
hell, almost everybody is a racist nowadays
except for us proud enlightened few

LONG LIVE COMMUNISM!

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 03:32 AM
In my copy of the manifesto it says he calls people something like "Jews of negro blood" or something as an insult. Which is somewhat ironic because he actually was Jewish. Either way, I don't think it's really relevant, I agree with liberAL.
Dont most people hate jews because of religon? and at that time wasnt it the christians that hated the jews? If so then marx would not have anything against the jews since he didnt have christian beliefs.

[Mike Fakelastname]

I've heard a lot of stuff about how Marx was racist against the Chinese. Please tell me if this is true!

[Hampton]

Might as well let the man speak for himself:


The Jewish nigger Lassalle who, I'm glad to say, is leaving at the end of this week, has happily lost another 5,000 talers in an ill-judged speculation. The chap would sooner throw money down the drain than lend it to a ‘friend’, even though his interest and capital were guaranteed. In this he bases himself on the view that he ought to live the life of a Jewish baron, or Jew created a baron (no doubt by the countess'). Just imagine!


It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses’ flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a nigger). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow’s importunity is also nigger-like.


One of our nigger’s great discoveries — which, however, he only confides to his ‘closest friends’ — is that the Pelasgians were of Semitic descent. The main evidence: in the Book of Maccabbees, the Jews send emissaries to solicit the help of Greece on grounds of kinship. Furthermore, an Etruscan inscription has been found in Perugia, and this was simultaneously deciphered by Hofrat Stucker in Berlin and an Italian, and both independently converted the Etruscan into the Hebrew alphabet.

Link (http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:nr2cRX0kGwEJ:www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1862/letters/62_07_30a.htm+marx+nigger&hl=en&ie=UTF-8)

[Mike Fakelastname]

Woah woah woah, can you explain to me then, why do we call ourselves Marxists? I always had a deep respect for Marx until coming upon this. What am I now? A anti-Marxist Communist? Does that exist?

[@[email protected]@]

In Marx's time, the understanding world is also more difficult than the present. Even if is today, my translation software package still could not completely convey my meaning. "I Come from the People's Republic of China" therefore, grasped one language on to grasp one understanding world method. I very respectively easy to learn person. Marx is this kind of person.

[Pete]

Communism was around before Marx, don't worry Mark. It only took off after him. He set down the 'basics' in the Manifesto and wrote a lot about capitalist economics in his later works.

[BuyOurEverything]

Dont most people hate jews because of religon? and at that time wasnt it the christians that hated the jews? If so then marx would not have anything against the jews since he didnt have christian beliefs.

Err... Your logic is flawed. True a lot of Christians hated Jews because of their religion but other people hated Jews too for their race and culture etc. I don't think Marx fell into either of these categories, he just made those remarks based on the culture he was living in. Today alot of non-homophobic people say "oh that's gay" without thinking about it, or "I got gyped" even though they don't hate gypsies.

[@[email protected]@]

Marx has said: How "is Approximate Meaning" important expounds the world, but changes the world. I frequently keep firmly in mind this point. I any to person unfair non- just act. The world people unite. The proletariat is a whole family.

[Urban Rubble]

Although I'm sure Marx had racist tendencies, the quotes Hampton provided weren't all that telling. All he did was use the term nigger, a term that was routinely used at the time. I'm sure in a hundred years people will think that when someone calls a black man just that, a black man, it will be looked down upon.

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by Mike [email protected] 4 2003, 02:11 AM
What am I now? A anti-Marxist Communist? Does that exist?
Yes. Communism existed before Marx was born. You might try reading some of Peter Kropotkin's (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/kropotkin/Kropotkinarchive.html), Errico Malatesta's (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/malatesta/Malatestaarchive.html) or Emma Goldman's (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/goldman/Goldmanarchive.html) writings. They were all non-Marxist Communists. Marx's racism wasn't the only thing he was wrong about, IMO.

Urban Rubble, just because racism is common doesn't change the fact that it's racism.

[Urban Rubble]

No, I'm not excusing rascism by any means, I was just saying those quotes don't show all that much, just common terms for the time. It's still wrong of course.

[Hiero]

You can still a marxist and not be a rasicts. Karl Marx wasnt completely about rascism he just seems to have rascist tendeancies. Ghandi said not think of him as perfect because then people will see his faults not as faulst but as something perfect. That is what we need to do with Marx not see him as being perfect so we can see his evils and and take note of them and praise his good. If we all now say then karl marx was a evil man and everything he said was evil then all he wrote about capitalist and communism will be lost.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2003, 03:53 AM
Err... Your logic is flawed. True a lot of Christians hated Jews because of their religion but other people hated Jews too for their race and culture etc. I don't think Marx fell into either of these categories, he just made those remarks based on the culture he was living in. Today alot of non-homophobic people say "oh that's gay" without thinking about it, or "I got gyped" even though they don't hate gypsies.
Yeah maybe your right. I was also thinking Marx would of ben a bit of a trouble maker being a communist and all back in those days. Since alot of people were racist back in those days, well to those people being a black jewish person was a disgrace so maybe when he was saying that comment he knew that it would offend them and actually didnt think about who else it offended. Like say if you saw a kkk nazi guy, to piss him off you may say to him "your mother had sex with a filthy jewish nigger" or "you look like a filthy nigger jew" although you say filthy jewish and nigger your not actually trying to offend Jewish people and people of dark skin you are offending the nazi by using the words he uses to offended those people and saying that his mother had sex with thoose people or that he looks like the people he hates so much. Now that would piss him off, so maybe that was what marx was trying to do.

[Hooverfox]

Back in those days the words Negro and Nigger didnt have the same racist connetations they have now. It would be like the word black becoming racist and people in the future looking back and thinking we are racist for saying that a person was black.

Marx was still a result of the times he lived in and that meant he would still have accepted the ideas of the time that black people and generally anyone not caucasion was inferior.

[Viva Fidel]

"* It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses' flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a nigger). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow's importunity is also nigger-like.
o about Ferdinand Lassalle
o London, 30 July 1862; quoted in Marx and Engels Collected Works, Volume 41, p. 388 [1]"


I know nigger wasn't at least that profane in the 19th century, but why would Marx use it at all? Wasn't it still derogotory and recognized as offensive in the 1800s?

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Viva Fidel
....but why would Marx use it at all?

Because, regarding this issue, he was an ignorant prick. Likewise, in a few centuries from now, if someone could read over the threads from this board they would find themselves completely shocked and appalled at the offensive language 21st century revolutionaries used.

The World was a lot more backward back then....and that's why even intelligent revolutionaries like Marx fell for claptrap about the shape and size of heads. The point, of course, is that now we know better. :)

[Ferg]

Also because there was no civil-rights act, blacks were not a big part of German society like they were in America, the word wasen't deemed offencive at the time, nor is he really insulting them.

[More Fire for the People]

"If you are a dialectical materialist, however, Marx's racism does not matter. You do not believe in the conclusions of one person but in the validity of a mode of thought; and we in the Party, as dialectical materialists, recognize Karl Marx as one of the great contributors to that mode of thought. Whether or not Marx was a racist is irrelevant and immaterial to whether or not the system of thinking he helped develop delivers truths about processes in the material world. . . . John B. Watson once stated that his favourite pastime was hunting and hanging niggers, yet he made great forward strides in the analysis and investigation of conditioned responses." — Huey P. Newton

[Entrails Konfetti]

Here this link clarifies some things:
Was Karl Marx a racist? (http://letshavesocialismnow.blogspot.com/2006/06/karl-marx-racist.html)

[Ol' Dirty]

*Sigh* :rolleyes:

'Twas another time, methinks.

Anyway, Marx probably didn't use the term offensively. Nigger/Niggress were common terms in that time, and probably didn't carry that much baggage.

[Year: 1]

The word "nigger" comes from the Latin language---niger (meaning black). You have the Niger river in Africa and the country Nigeria.

In spanish you say "negro"---meaning black.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigger

[Ferg]

Originally posted by Year: [email protected] 29 2006, 10:27 PM
The word "nigger" comes from the Latin language---niger (meaning black). You have the Niger river in Africa and the country Nigeria.

In spanish you say "negro"---meaning black.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigger
Hahahaha, My history teacher said that, pretty much word for word when he taught our evolution unit. Indeed, it was only recently, that the term Nigger was considered racist. Also, the term Nigger, first became rascist in the United States where Black oppression was most prevalent. Karl Marx was a German, and was most likely under informed of the situation of the word and the situation of the black people in America as would most Germans at the time. Remember, communication was a bit on the shit side back then. We didn't have Telephones, Internet, or Fax machines so the relay of information was either done through Morse Code or Letter.

[FinnMacCool]

Arguments for Marx being racist is the same kind of argument used by those who say Proudhon was anti semitic. Were they? Maybe. . .Maybe not. But nevertheless, these types of things were common among the people of that time and the fact is they had revolutionary thinking which pushed these types of boundaries.

Considering the fact that these men paved the way for more progressive development, I think we can forgive them of any perceived, be it true or not, racism.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by FinnMacCool+Jun 30 2006, 12:38 AM--> (FinnMacCool @ Jun 30 2006, 12:38 AM) Arguments for Marx being racist is the same kind of argument used by those who say Proudhon was anti semitic. Were they? Maybe. . .Maybe not. But nevertheless, these types of things were common among the people of that time and the fact is they had revolutionary thinking which pushed these types of boundaries. [/b]

This is just a "copy & paste" of something I wrote about Proudhon and Marx's prejudices and the difference between the two.


Originally posted by [email protected]
However, nearly all of this evidence [of Marx's prejudices] is from his personal correspondence; which makes Marx's prejudices slightly different from Proudhon's, which were aired in major works and led to him to reject "the emancipation of woman" instead favouring "to exclude her from society". Marx, for all his faults, never advocated the "exclusion from society" of the "niggers", "gays" and so on. Which makes the prejudices, as I said, different.

I mean saying, "The Jew is the enemy of mankind. It is necessary to send this race back to Asia, or exterminate it...By fire or fusion, or by expulsion, the Jew must disappear..." is a touch different from saying someone is "nigger-like". Why? Well, Marx was airing an ignorant and prejudiced view where as Proudhon was almost expressing a practical programme to "deal with the Jews". To use an analogy, the difference is like your average Joe saying he doesn't like smoking compared to Jeff the puritan proposing persecution of smokers and propagandising for that persecution.

So, whilst, as I said, Marx was an ignorant prick who probably deserved a slap, Proudhon really did deserve the arms of criticism. You know, the type that involves a bat, a head and some blood. <_<


Year: 1
You have the Niger river in Africa and the country Nigeria.

Yeah, but you pronounce the word Niger differently from the word nigger, which suggests a different root or a double meaning to me. It just doesn&#39;t seem like a tomatoe tomato type thing.

Plus, after using the spell check, I just found out that they are even spelt differently. So....

[afrikaNOW]

Originally posted by Ferg+Jun 29 2006, 11:52 PM--> (Ferg @ Jun 29 2006, 11:52 PM)
Year: [email protected] 29 2006, 10:27 PM
The word "nigger" comes from the Latin language---niger (meaning black). You have the Niger river in Africa and the country Nigeria.

In spanish you say "negro"---meaning black.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigger
Hahahaha, My history teacher said that, pretty much word for word when he taught our evolution unit. Indeed, it was only recently, that the term Nigger was considered racist. Also, the term Nigger, first became rascist in the United States where Black oppression was most prevalent. Karl Marx was a German, and was most likely under informed of the situation of the word and the situation of the black people in America as would most Germans at the time. Remember, communication was a bit on the shit side back then. We didn&#39;t have Telephones, Internet, or Fax machines so the relay of information was either done through Morse Code or Letter. [/b]
Oh please, Marx analyzed history. He knew about the American Revolution and about slave labor in america. To say he didn&#39;t know about the situation of blacks is an ignorant statement.

[Janus]

He knew about the American Revolution and about slave labor in america.
I&#39;m sure he knew about it but he wasn&#39;t all that informed about it. Many Northerners were somewhat ignorant about the slavery system as well.

[FinnMacCool]

I mean saying, "The Jew is the enemy of mankind. It is necessary to send this race back to Asia, or exterminate it...By fire or fusion, or by expulsion, the Jew must disappear..." is a touch different from saying someone is "nigger-like". Why? Well, Marx was airing an ignorant and prejudiced view where as Proudhon was almost expressing a practical programme to "deal with the Jews". To use an analogy, the difference is like your average Joe saying he doesn&#39;t like smoking compared to Jeff the puritan proposing persecution of smokers and propagandising for that persecution.

So, whilst, as I said, Marx was an ignorant prick who probably deserved a slap, Proudhon really did deserve the arms of criticism. You know, the type that involves a bat, a head and some blood.

Just for clarification, do you mind giving me the link to Proudhons quote?

In any case, I can see why if Proudhon actually was advocating for the murder of the jews, you could make an argujment that his remarks would call for action. Certainly this would be true.

However, I do think that Marx and Proudhon were both equal in terms of ignorance. Therefore, as men of their times, they were ignorant among ignorant men. So its quite possible we may have had the same view of jews and blacks as they did.

But none of this, as I have argued, makes any difference in their theorys.

Proudhons anti semitism doesn&#39;t have a lasting affect on his legacy. Neither does Marx&#39;s racism. You should think about their theorys as opposed to their prejudices. Proudhons anti semitism wasn&#39;t central in his mutalist theory nor was Marx&#39;s prejudices central towards his theorys on capitalism.

[Marion]

Perhaps slightly tangential (but not too much):

Marx&#39;s view of historical development saw the "Asiatic mode of production" as less advanced than that of Western Europe. Was this:

1) Right?
2) Wrong but not necessarily racist?
3) Wrong and racist?

See http://www.bloomsbury.com/ARC/detail.asp?E...ID=101881&bid=2 (http://www.bloomsbury.com/ARC/detail.asp?EntryID=101881&bid=2) for one view on this issue.

[Si Pinto]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 03:03 PM
Marx&#39;s view of historical development saw the "Asiatic mode of production" as less advanced than that of Western Europe.
I certainly don&#39;t think it was meant to infer racial inferiority at all. He was being realistic, the industrialisation in Asia was tiny compared with that going on in Europe at that time.

Interestingly though, I&#39;ve often wondered what Marx would make of the situation in Asia now, with it&#39;s sweat-shops and miniscule wages.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 03:03 PM
Marx&#39;s view of historical development saw the "Asiatic mode of production" as less advanced than that of Western Europe.
What do you expect? Marx did not live in Asia and he was not an expert in Asian history. His materialist conception of history is Euro-centric because that’s where it was first conceptualised.

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2003, 12:02 PM
i am a minority aswell (pakistani origin), and also find this remark very rude.

he probably used the racist comment in order to relate to western thinkers, who might have thought that negroes were inferior to them. or maybe he was a racist, like many others in his time.
No.

My great great great granduncle was NOT a racist.

He had letters to various of his contemporaries in which he voiced his concerns, supporting the "liberation" of the negro in the US from slavery and his subsequent emancipation and consequent proclamation of his liberties.

Karl Marx&#39;s use of the word "negro" was meant to be both rude and crude, but not racist. I.e., today, the word "fag" is often used in reference to a despicable person. Marx used in in virtually the same context, however tasteless. However, I distinctly remember Marx proclaiming that all men of all races, faiths, and creeds, were capable, responsible, and equally entitled to liberation and equality with one another. If anything, I&#39;m more offended by Marx&#39;s lack of emphasis on ending sexism and misogyny, which are terrible problems today.

As well, his anti-semitic remarks were made from fear. Marx was born Jewish, a stigma that provided ammunition for a lot of his West European critics, who would often, during heated arguments, resort to insulting and emphasizing Marx&#39;s Jewish heritage to demean, insult, and disqualify him. Marx went overboard in attempting to distance himself from the Jews, in order to escape the rather strong wrath against Jews in the mid 19th century intelligentsia.

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2003, 12:02 PM
i am a minority aswell (pakistani origin), and also find this remark very rude.

he probably used the racist comment in order to relate to western thinkers, who might have thought that negroes were inferior to them. or maybe he was a racist, like many others in his time.

EDIT: Accidental double post. That&#39;s all, folks.

[Body Count]

Here&#39;s what Huey P Newton had to say : http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/classics...ile=hueymat.txt (http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/classics/text.php?mimfile=hueymat.txt)


"We sometimes have a problem because people do not understand the
ideology that Marx and Engels began to develop. People say, &#39;You claim
to be Marxists, but did you know that Marx was a racist?&#39; . . .


"If you are a dialectical materialist, however, Marx&#39;s racism does not
matter. You do not believe in the conclusions of one person but in the
validity of a mode of thought; and we in the Party, as dialectical
materialists, recognize Karl Marx as one of the great contributors to
that mode of thought. Whether or not Marx was a racist is irrelevant
and immaterial to whether or not the system of thinking he helped
develop delivers truths about processes in the material world. . . .
John B. Watson once stated that his favorite pastime was hunting and
hanging niggers, yet he made great forward strides in the analysis and
investigation of conditioned responses.

Huey P. Newton in In Search of Common Ground: Conversations with Erik
H. Erikson and Huey P. Newton, Kai T. Erikson intro. (NY: W.W. Norton
& Co., 1973, pp. 24-7.

Thats all there is to it as far as I&#39;m concerned.

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by Body [email protected] 30 2006, 04:49 PM
Here&#39;s what Huey P Newton had to say : http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/classics...ile=hueymat.txt (http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/classics/text.php?mimfile=hueymat.txt)


"We sometimes have a problem because people do not understand the
ideology that Marx and Engels began to develop. People say, &#39;You claim
to be Marxists, but did you know that Marx was a racist?&#39; . . .


"If you are a dialectical materialist, however, Marx&#39;s racism does not
matter. You do not believe in the conclusions of one person but in the
validity of a mode of thought; and we in the Party, as dialectical
materialists, recognize Karl Marx as one of the great contributors to
that mode of thought. Whether or not Marx was a racist is irrelevant
and immaterial to whether or not the system of thinking he helped
develop delivers truths about processes in the material world. . . .
John B. Watson once stated that his favorite pastime was hunting and
hanging niggers, yet he made great forward strides in the analysis and
investigation of conditioned responses.

Huey P. Newton in In Search of Common Ground: Conversations with Erik
H. Erikson and Huey P. Newton, Kai T. Erikson intro. (NY: W.W. Norton
& Co., 1973, pp. 24-7.

Thats all there is to it as far as I&#39;m concerned.
Zing.

Well done in citing that sir. Quite relevant, and to the point.

[Marion]

Originally posted by ComradeOm+Jun 30 2006, 03:27 PM--> (ComradeOm &#064; Jun 30 2006, 03:27 PM)
[email protected] 30 2006, 03:03 PM
Marx&#39;s view of historical development saw the "Asiatic mode of production" as less advanced than that of Western Europe.
What do you expect? Marx did not live in Asia and he was not an expert in Asian history. His materialist conception of history is Euro-centric because that’s where it was first conceptualised.[/b]
Cheers Si Pinto and ComradeOm for your replies.

Si - I agree with you totally that Marx&#39;s view was one of levels of development, rather than a racist ranking of societies. However, do you think his view that Asiatic mode of production needed to develop to Western standards (rather than say develop in its own ways in a more non-linear fashion) was one tinged by racism? I guess its probably hard to say (certainly I don&#39;t know enough to answer), apart from agreeing with ComradeOm that his view was Euro-centric.

ComradeOm - agree with what you say about Marx&#39;s view being Euro-centric. However, do you really think that it is to be expected? Was it possible for other people in Europe at the same time to have a more advanced view of Asiatic society? If so, then why couldn&#39;t Marx? Saying he wasn&#39;t an expert in Asian history is not an excuse (certainly he wrote frequently enough about Asia, e.g. India, so I doubt this is true anyway). Besides, if he felt underqualified in it then he why did he talk about it in the first place?

[Janus]

(certainly he wrote frequently enough about Asia, e.g. India, so I doubt this is true anyway).
Not really, he wrote much more concerning European events.

Also, his knowledge of events there was not very good. For example, when he talked about the Taiping revolt, his analysis of it was quite ignorant.


Besides, if he felt underqualified in it then he why did he talk about it in the first place?
Sometimes when the situation was dormant in the West, Marx looked to the East for some type of hope.

[More Fire for the People]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 10:53 AM
Zing.

Well done in citing that sir. Quite relevant, and to the point.
I made the exact same quote earlier on and nobody noticed it.

[Jesus Christ!]

He lived in a different time in a different society, we can&#39;t hold him to our standards. And please stop making the argument that saying nigger wasn&#39;t racist back then, yes thats true but he wasn&#39;t saying " o that nigger man" he was saying someone had negro blood, as a derogatory term.

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by Jesus Christ&#33;@Jun 30 2006, 08:15 PM
He lived in a different time in a different society, we can&#39;t hold him to our standards. And please stop making the argument that saying nigger wasn&#39;t racist back then, yes thats true but he wasn&#39;t saying " o that nigger man" he was saying someone had negro blood, as a derogatory term.
Not saying he wasn&#39;t.

The use of the word "fag" is always homophobic, no matter the context. Same as nigger. However, we know through Marx&#39;s writing on imperialism and slavery that he viewed Africans as of the same potential as their Caucasian brethren.

The use of the word "nigger" was in the same context that people use the offensive but commonly used "gypped", or "fag", or "retard." These all refer to groups with immutable characteristics that shouldn&#39;t be discriminated against or subject to prejudice, and not even tolerance, but acceptance. Regardless, these words have become the tumors of modern vocabulary.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 07:13 PM
Was it possible for other people in Europe at the same time to have a more advanced view of Asiatic society? If so, then why couldn&#39;t Marx?
Look at my quote. Attitudes at the time towards parts of Europe were still uninformed back then. We can&#39;t fault Marx or Engels for this as they were products of their time. I&#39;m sure that today they would reach different conclusions on some matters, particulary Asia, but at the time they simply didn&#39;t know.


Saying he wasn&#39;t an expert in Asian history is not an excuse (certainly he wrote frequently enough about Asia, e.g. India, so I doubt this is true anyway). Besides, if he felt underqualified in it then he why did he talk about it in the first place?
Impossible to really answer really but, for what its worth, Marx probably did regard himself as an expert on Asia. The problem was that he was looking at the region from Europe where really very little was known about that part of the world. He would have been working off second or third hand accounts from European travellers who had visited the Orient. As such you cannot really compare his analysis of events in Europe and those in Asia. Indeed the Asiatic mode of production has always struck me as an awkward addition to historical materialism when compared to the depth of analysis afforded to European events.

[Janus]

Impossible to really answer really but, for what its worth, Marx probably did regard himself as an expert on Asia. The problem was that he was looking at the region from Europe where really very little was known about that part of the world.
Not exactly impossible to answer. For example, Marx&#39;s analysis of the Taiping revolts showed that the information about Asian affairs was not all that good.

[ComradeOm]

Well we know that he didn&#39;t do a good job of it but its still impossible to know why Marx wrote about Asian history or events in the first place. I don&#39;t exactly have a direct line to the man ;)

[Janus]

Well we know that he didn&#39;t do a good job of it but its still impossible to know why Marx wrote about Asian history or events in the first place.
I would think that when the situation in Europe didn&#39;t look all that well or was dormant, he probably looked to the East for an event that would give him hope. For example, the Taiping revolt.

[metalero]

Thanks EL KABLAMO for the link, the article you provided is really clarifying respect to the historical and theoretical context Marx and Engels used some words considered racist in these days:


Now for the hard part.

"Nigger" did not, it seem, have the pejorative meaning that it does today; there are contradictory accounts on the word&#39;s history on the net, here and here . Even now, the word is full of contradiction: a white would be castigated for using it, whereas "the brothers and sisters" - especially in the rap scene, e.g. the famous group NWA - use it quite alot.

Even so, Marx&#39;s use of it in his letter to Engels, in reference to Lassalle, does raise an eyebrow. As does Engels reference to Paul Lafargue being closer to the animal kingdom than others. The latter reference becomes even more mysterious given that Engels was writing to Laura, Paul&#39;s wife&#33; Were those lines written in anger or jest? It is no secret that Marx was not particularly fond of Lassalle.

Marx was against slavery: "Labour cannot emancipate itself in the white skin where in the black it is branded."

The blurb to August Nimtz&#39;s book "Marx, Tocqueville, and Race in America : The Absolute Democracy or Defiled Republic" states:

While Alexis de Tocqueville described America as the absolute democracy, Karl Marx saw the nation as a defiled republic so long as it permitted the enslavement of blacks. August J. Nimtz argues that Marx, unlike Tocqueville, not only recognized that the overthrow of slavery and the cessation of racial oppression were central to democracy&#39;s realization but was willing to act on these convictions. This potent and insightful investigation into the approaches of two major thinkers provides fresh insight into past and present debates about race and democracy in America.

[afrikaNOW]

I think some of you are jogging around the issue at hand by continuing to reiterate that Marx supported emancipation of blacks as if it clears him of any racism. What we are looking at is not racism in that standpoint, but whether or not Marx felt that Blacks were inferior to whites. It does seem true at this point and time that Marx was not in support of the slavery in America. The reason why can be debated. Was it humanitary reasons or he felt that it was contradictory to socialist/communist revolution in America. At the same time, in Marx&#39;s language it does seem that he held a view that blacks were inferior. Saying he wasn&#39;t racist because of his views on slavery is nullified by his language which points to him believing blacks were inferior to whites.

I hope i made my self clear.

A quick example would be there, are plenty of white racists, who prolly think think its inhumane to enslave someone or do not agree with slavery, but on same token belief black&#39;s are inferior. IE, white seperatists/nationalists,random people.

[Red Polak]

Originally posted by afrikaNOW+Jul 1 2006, 09:07 AM--> (afrikaNOW &#064; Jul 1 2006, 09:07 AM)I think some of you are jogging around the issue at hand by continuing to reiterate that Marx supported emancipation of blacks as if it clears him of any racism. What we are looking at is not racism in that standpoint, but whether or not Marx felt that Blacks were inferior to whites. It does seem true at this point and time that Marx was not in support of the slavery in America. The reason why can be debated. Was it humanitary reasons or he felt that it was contradictory to socialist/communist revolution in America. At the same time, in Marx&#39;s language it does seem that he held a view that blacks were inferior. Saying he wasn&#39;t racist because of his views on slavery is nullified by his language which points to him believing blacks were inferior to whites.

I hope i made my self clear.[/b]

(my embolding)

Marx&#39;s language? Use of the word "nigger"?

I don&#39;t think at all that he thinks of them as being inferior. Nigger was a widespread term then which had different connotations to today.

In Europe there was hardly any Africans then; whether slaves or not (UK being the exception), so naturally he would see Africans as being different to whites but this doesn&#39;t mean inferior.

Surely the whole idea of races being equal negates the fact that, by modern terms (not the terms of Marx&#39;s own time), Marx could be seen as racist? Personally I think it&#39;s ridiculous to evaluate whether or not Marx was "racist" in a modern sense, because he wasn&#39;t writing in modern times.



[email protected] 1 2006, 09:07 AM
A quick example would be there, are plenty of white racists, who prolly think think its inhumane to enslave someone or do not agree with slavery, but on same token belief white&#39;s are inferior. IE, white seperatists/nationalists,random people.

er...what? Did you just say some whites are inferior?

[BuyOurEverything]

OK, I have a question. Wasn&#39;t Marx&#39;s correspondance in which he used the word nigger written in German?

[Red Polak]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2006, 12:08 PM
OK, I have a question. Wasn&#39;t Marx&#39;s correspondance in which he used the word nigger written in German?
I&#39;m fairly sure the correspondences were written in German but I think the German word is the same: "der nigger" (which would be understandable because of the Latin "niger" meaning black).

[afrikaNOW]

Why are people continuing to defend Marx&#39;s racist views because of the times he lived in? Call a spade a spade&#33; Was Columbus racist, yes, was Thomas Jefferson racist, yes, was Hitler racist,yes. It doesn&#39;t matter if they were writing in modern times to evaluate whether or not they were racist.

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2006, 07:09 PM
Why are people continuing to defend Marx&#39;s racist views because of the times he lived in? Call a spade a spade&#33; Was Columbus racist, yes, was Thomas Jefferson racist, yes, was Hitler racist,yes. It doesn&#39;t matter if they were writing in modern times to evaluate whether or not they were racist.
Marx was subject to being treated as an intellectual and racial inferior as well.
Remember, he was JEWISH. As well, having read his work, and the things that his sons and daughters passed down, I find it very difficult to see the man as a racist, he was definitely not fond of criticism, but he was not a racist. If he was a racist, plain Marxist theory would stink of it. There is no such thing as "a little bit racist" without it showing in thought.

[Red Polak]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2006, 08:09 PM
Why are people continuing to defend Marx&#39;s racist views because of the times he lived in? Call a spade a spade&#33; Was Columbus racist, yes, was Thomas Jefferson racist, yes, was Hitler racist,yes. It doesn&#39;t matter if they were writing in modern times to evaluate whether or not they were racist.
Well...that&#39;s one way round the points I raised. :rolleyes:

are you going to answer me or not?



I don&#39;t think any one&#39;s "defending" Marx&#39;s racist (in the modern sense) views - I haven&#39;t seen anyone on this thread doing that. Instead, people are approaching it logically and impartially rather than applying irrelevancies to him.

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by Red Polak+Jul 2 2006, 01:50 AM--> (Red Polak @ Jul 2 2006, 01:50 AM)
[email protected] 1 2006, 08:09 PM
Why are people continuing to defend Marx&#39;s racist views because of the times he lived in? Call a spade a spade&#33; Was Columbus racist, yes, was Thomas Jefferson racist, yes, was Hitler racist,yes. It doesn&#39;t matter if they were writing in modern times to evaluate whether or not they were racist.
Well...that&#39;s one way round the points I raised. :rolleyes:

are you going to answer me or not?



I don&#39;t think any one&#39;s "defending" Marx&#39;s racist (in the modern sense) views - I haven&#39;t seen anyone on this thread doing that. Instead, people are approaching it logically and impartially rather than applying irrelevancies to him. [/b]
Well in his defense, while I mostly agree with you, I might not be in the path of being impartial, since I am kind of biased towards Marx, with my inclination towards his philosophy, and my idealizing of him, and, my relation to him.

So with that I&#39;m going to recommend that what I said be looked over, but I&#39;m going to just see what others conclude.

However, I maintain that Karl Marx was not a racist. Had he been one, Communism would never have been conducive to anti-racism; because, as I said, any inclination towards racism, no matter how slight, will be magnified one way or another. And, this hasn&#39;t occurred in the Marxist movement in any significant way. It&#39;s why our color is red; it is the color of blood, which runs through all of our veins.

[Marion]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2006, 07:26 PM

(certainly he wrote frequently enough about Asia, e.g. India, so I doubt this is true anyway).
Not really, he wrote much more concerning European events.

Also, his knowledge of events there was not very good. For example, when he talked about the Taiping revolt, his analysis of it was quite ignorant.

Definitely agree&#33;

My main question is that if we accept Marx&#39;s lack of knowledge about non-Western societies and if we doubt his interpretation of the Asiatic mode of production, then what impact does that have upon historical materialism (certainly at least the more Stalinist interpretation of it)?

PS Was not trying to say Marx wrote more frequently about Asian society than European (clearly false as you state), merely that its not enough, given the amount of time Marx spent writing about Asia to claim that he didn&#39;t really know about it.

[metalero]

Marx used words which implied racism in less than 5 of all his works, including letters; and all of them may be explained by the social and historical context he liven in. He&#39;s explained himself throughout his works, that religion, and subsequently race, are idealist myths to enslave and divide the working class effort to emancipate themselves. There are more than 500 Marx&#39;s known works, ALL OF THEM CLAIM FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE, EMANCIPATION OF WORKING CLASS AND MATERIALIST VIEW OF SOCIETY, and when he used some word with racist meanings in three letters you call him racist? I have used unconsciously some racist words in my short life, and we&#39;ve seen commited revolutionaries fall into racist and sexist traps, does that them makes them racist? how come when Marx was attacked by his enemies during his time, he was never called a racist?, on the contrary, he was persecuted all his life for providing the proletariat a scientific theory for his liberation.

[Marion]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2006, 03:39 AM
However, I maintain that Karl Marx was not a racist. Had he been one, Communism would never have been conducive to anti-racism; because, as I said, any inclination towards racism, no matter how slight, will be magnified one way or another. And, this hasn&#39;t occurred in the Marxist movement in any significant way. It&#39;s why our color is red; it is the color of blood, which runs through all of our veins.
Would disagree very considerably with your assertion that racism has not occurred in the Marxist movement in any significant way. Anti-semitism in the USSR? The history of the anti-indigenous views of many Communist countries?

Don&#39;t get me wrong, I don&#39;t think that this history necessarily invalidates Marxism (well, my interpretation of it anyway&#33;&#33;) and definitely does not prove that Marx was a racist, but I think its wrong to ignore it...

[CubaSocialista]

Originally posted by Marion+Jul 2 2006, 03:29 PM--> (Marion @ Jul 2 2006, 03:29 PM)
[email protected] 2 2006, 03:39 AM
However, I maintain that Karl Marx was not a racist. Had he been one, Communism would never have been conducive to anti-racism; because, as I said, any inclination towards racism, no matter how slight, will be magnified one way or another. And, this hasn&#39;t occurred in the Marxist movement in any significant way. It&#39;s why our color is red; it is the color of blood, which runs through all of our veins.
Would disagree very considerably with your assertion that racism has not occurred in the Marxist movement in any significant way. Anti-semitism in the USSR? The history of the anti-indigenous views of many Communist countries?

Don&#39;t get me wrong, I don&#39;t think that this history necessarily invalidates Marxism (well, my interpretation of it anyway&#33;&#33;) and definitely does not prove that Marx was a racist, but I think its wrong to ignore it... [/b]
Firstly,

Yes, you are right. Originally, the South African Communist movement sought the liberation of "white workingmen." However, they changed this once confronted by European intellectuals, who pointed towards the incompatibility of racialism and Marxism.

As well, as a member of the Jewish ethnicity as well, I will testify that there was a degree of "anti-semitism" in the USSR, but not very high. Israel and Zionism were big problems, viewed in the way the US views IslamoFascism. So basically, Jews in the USSR received treatment that Arab-Americans receive today in the US. However, I have a book, called "the Real Truth", by a Soviet Jewish general, who attempts to smash the claims of Anti-semitism in the USSR. By all ideological foundations and fundamentals, the USSR and Soviet Communism were totally opposed to antisemitism: there were Jews in the USSR government at every point in time. As well, the Israeli Communist Party, headed by a Jew (though a mostly Arab party) always maintained a very strong pro-USSR stance. Only those who clung to culture above all else (which is common among Jewry, as their clannish behavior that resulted from millenia of persecution) faced a lot of troubles.

[Comrade Marcel]

Quotes from 150+ years ago translated from German and taken out of context makes Marx a racist, for sure&#33; :rolleyes:

Also, in those days Marx saw some aspects of colonialism progressive because he thought it would change the mode of production of the colonized countries from fuedal to capitalist; and then they could liberate themselves and eventually join the proletarian revolution. The full consequneces and effects of imperialism/neo-colonialism were not apparent yet.

[Dean]

Chomsky once told me that it was not important to judge someone on their wrongs, simply to learn from them and to focus on what they did right and what they said that was right. I agree with this, and though I am surprised to see a racist remark by Marx I still find most of his words to be very true and helpful in understanding the capitalist economy, colonialism/globalization and what a free society really is.

[bezdomni]

On the subject of anti-semitism in the USSR, Lenin did a lot to fight anti-semitism.

I&#39;m not saying anti-semitism didn&#39;t exist in the USSR, because it certainly did (to an extent, although a lesser one than most other places in the world)..but most of the "old guard" bolsheviks were not anti-semities. Many of them were jewish themselves&#33;

I don&#39;t believe Marx was a racist, on the grounds that he supported black liberation in the United States.

[SocialistGenius]

Originally posted by CubaSocialista+Jul 2 2006, 03:39 AM--> (CubaSocialista @ Jul 2 2006, 03:39 AM)
Originally posted by Red [email protected] 2 2006, 01:50 AM

[email protected] 1 2006, 08:09 PM
Why are people continuing to defend Marx&#39;s racist views because of the times he lived in? Call a spade a spade&#33; Was Columbus racist, yes, was Thomas Jefferson racist, yes, was Hitler racist,yes. It doesn&#39;t matter if they were writing in modern times to evaluate whether or not they were racist.
Well...that&#39;s one way round the points I raised. :rolleyes:

are you going to answer me or not?



I don&#39;t think any one&#39;s "defending" Marx&#39;s racist (in the modern sense) views - I haven&#39;t seen anyone on this thread doing that. Instead, people are approaching it logically and impartially rather than applying irrelevancies to him.
Well in his defense, while I mostly agree with you, I might not be in the path of being impartial, since I am kind of biased towards Marx, with my inclination towards his philosophy, and my idealizing of him, and, my relation to him.

So with that I&#39;m going to recommend that what I said be looked over, but I&#39;m going to just see what others conclude.

However, I maintain that Karl Marx was not a racist. Had he been one, Communism would never have been conducive to anti-racism; because, as I said, any inclination towards racism, no matter how slight, will be magnified one way or another. And, this hasn&#39;t occurred in the Marxist movement in any significant way. It&#39;s why our color is red; it is the color of blood, which runs through all of our veins. [/b]
Is Karl Marx really your great-great-great-grand uncle? How&#39;d you come to trace your lineage and find this out? That&#39;s pretty interesting stuff, CubaSocialista&#33;