Zoroaster
13th June 2014, 14:21
Rethinking Marxism,
Or,
My Synthesis of Marxism and Anarchism
Over the last couple of months, I have been studying countless texts, books and documents from Marxists, Anarchists, even Capitalists, to find out what I believe in, who I am, and who I want to be. However, I have concluded that although some of these ideologies have like able tendencies, I don't agree with them completely. So, I have created my own ideology.
Now, it could be just another "ism" thrown into a dustbin and left in some back corner of the Marxist Internet Archive. Or, I hope, it could begin a new chapter in the history of Marxism, and can help fan the flames of revolution. So, without further ado, I present my ideology, Marxian Anarchism.
1.What is Marxian Anarchism?
My personal philosophy can be summed up in a few bulletins.
1. The study of history, the advancement of technology and the human race, with Historical Materialism, Marxian Economics, a sort-of Marxian-Hegelian dialect, and Existentialist Marxism.
2. Advocating the immediate abolition of the state, private property (while retaining respect for personal property), and the strict organization of all churches, and replacing the old structures with a horizontalidad system of popular assemblies and elected delegates.
3. Handing the means of production over to either the community, guilds, the workers, or syndicates (according to votes), abolishing employment and replacing it with a four-hour workday cycle. Money and capital would be abolished and replaced with a gift economy, along with utilizing smart cards in order to prevent the use of strict quotas, which could danger individuality.
4. Democratic schools across the territory would immediately be created, focusing upon the individual and his or her interests, and allowing for the individual to expand freely and voluntarily, and without the worship of the smart and the preying upon the weak.
5. The creation of an insurrectionary committee, a horizontally-built committee (based upon popular assemblies and elected delegates), would be advocated. This committee would be represent the interest of far-left groups, unions, parties and other associations in order to create a united front with Anarchist’s, Statist Marxists, Marxist-Leninists and branches off of it, and socialists in general.
Now, I think it would only be fair to explain these idea’s that I have in much greater detail. After all, if someone new to Marxism or Anarchism saw this, they’d most likely be lost.
2. The study of society from a materialist perspective.
The reason that I, and many others, call themselves “Marxists” is because we use the same methods of analysing society, history, and other factors, that was created by Karl Marx and his friend, Friedrich Engels.
Historical Materialism is an analysis of society and event in history through examining socio-economic conditions and class. Although Marx never wrote heavily about the topic, Friedrich Engels and many others expanded upon the idea. They had determined that society had very similar patterns in arrangement of class.
For example, in the ancient times of the Greeks and the Romans, society was organized on two main fronts. The landowners and politicians, who were lucky enough to be born into a wealthy family and could participate in government (or in many cases, attempt to overthrow it through a coup). Many of these citizens didn’t work, spending their days eating grapes with their concubines. On the other side, there were slaves, and a lot of them. Their job was to work on the projects and ideas projected by their masters. Their labour would be put into these products, the business would sell the products or services, and the head of the business would gain the majority of profits. The profits would be poured into the military, and it would be used for conquest (for the most part, a few nations, such as Sparta, remained on the defensive).
The same model would follow into feudalism. The knights, kings, bishops and other nobles would use their power and wealth, gained by the labour of serfs and peasants, would expand their power and wealth by exploring the New World, launching the Crusades, and creating new colonies and trade posts in order to expand the power of the upper classes.
And once again, the same can be said for our current system, capitalism. The CEO’s, bosses, politicians and others are able to gather massive wealth and capital from the services and labour of the middle and lower classes, and are able to use that money to, once again, expand their power and wealth. The Invasion of Iraq, for example, was not launched because of some “struggle for American Democracy”, but rather, a way to gain popularity with the brainwashed masses and to steal the massive oil refineries of that nation.
The same could also be said for the Soviet Union and other so-called “socialist” nations. The party members were able to exercise their power through large bureaucracies, and reap upon the labour and services of the poorer classes. The money, and later capital, gained from this was able to be used to fund massive armies and secret services in order to invade nations and keep their people in check.
Marxian Economics is the study of capitalism through the idea’s set out by Marx in books such as “Das Kapital” and the “Economic Manuscripts of 1844”. The labour a worker puts into a job creates alienation on both classes. The worker is forced to devote his life to his work in order to survive, and this money is centralized (even with redistribution and income taxes) to the rich. This market system will always have to rely upon a class divide, between workers and owners, or else it cannot function. Paper money, the currency of choice of capitalist nations, are practically worthless without state decree.
It should also be of note that markets are broken because of their lack of ability to provide for everyone. To quote Redstar2000,
“In bourgeois economic theory, capitalism allocates resources in an efficient manner to supply people's needs and wants in abundance and at affordable prices.
In the real world, it never works that way.
Here's why: in the real world, if a capitalist makes "too much" of something, the price he and his competitors can charge falls to such a low level that he can no longer make a profit...or, at least, a profit that he finds "acceptable".
Therefore, it is greatly to his advantage if there is a real "shortage" of his product...if not from extraneous causes, then from his own decision to "produce less". The worse thing he can do is actually try to "meet the demand" for his product. Only if he has a near or actual monopoly for his product can he produce "as much as people want" and still keep prices at stratospheric levels.
Thus it is that every spring in North America--the beginning of the "driving season"--the oil companies shut down some of their refineries to create a "shortage" of gasoline...duly followed by price increases "at the pump" of 20% or even more.
Every fall, the same thing happens with natural gas--widely used for winter heating in North America. Some natural gas wells are "taken off line" and we have a "shortage"--the price jumps dramatically.
As a result, profits grow by selling less.
This is, in practice, a "delicate" scam, requiring considerable finesse. If you produce "too little", consumers will seek out reasonably acceptable lower-priced substitutes for your product (if they exist). But that is a "small risk" compared to the risk of "over-producing" and ending up actually losing money.”
After that, we come to Hegelian Marxism. Hegelian Marxism is a form of dialectics in which society is analysed through a mixture of the idea’s of Karl Marx and German philosopher G. W. F. Hegel.
This idea is later expanded upon by Marxist Humanist Raya Dunayevskaya in her work “Marxism and Freedom: From 1776 Until Today”. In the book, she discusses how struggles for rights by ordinary people, such as the Montgomery Bus Boycott of 1955, and the West Virginia Miner’s Strike of 1959-1960, who, after they had one, many began asking, “What kind of labour should a man do?”, and “Why should there be a gulf between thinking and doing?”.
And finally, we come to Existentialist Marxism, a philosophy created by Marxist writer Jean-Paul Sartre. This philosophy is mainly based around Sartre’s two main works, “Being and Nothingness” and “Existentialism is a Form of Humanism”. To sum up his philosophy, it’s best to look at the description of the RevLeft group, “Existentialist Marxism”, which reads:
“For those members who follow the teachings of the French existentialist and novelist Jean-Paul Sartre, or sympathize with his views. He was associated with the French Communist Party, the Maoist-inspired Proletarian Left, and the Revolutionary Democratic Rally.
We are a group dedicated to the synthesis of Marxism and existentialism, as put forth in the post-WW2 era in France by Jean-Paul Sartre and influenced by his contemporaries, Simone de Beauvoir and Maurice Merleau-Ponty, as well as by the European communist and anarchist traditions at the time. Existential Marxism is often associated with the libertarian Marxist tradition (although it generally rejects the concept of the libertarian-authoritarian dichotomy, as it does with most structuralist binaries), and situates itself close to both left-communism and class-analysis anarchism. It is generally opposed to Marxist-Leninism ("Stalinism") and it's post-Stalin derivatives (Maoism, Titoism, etc) and considers the Soviet Union to have been state capitalist. It presses for grassroots revolutionary action in industrialized nations, and believes in the illegitimacy of bourgeois morality as a determinist power structure and argues for its replacement by a humanist ethic. It is supportive of militant labor unions, red unionism, and militant peoples' strikes. Although accepting of a vanguard party, it generally rejects the notions of democratic centralism, economic determinism, and / or anything that takes freedom out of the hands of the individual and resigns him or her to a fatalist or pre-determined behavior.
It also places an emphasis on angst, existential nausea, bad faith ("mauvaise foi"), and argues that identity politics have worked to fracture "the" proletariat based on socially-constructed demographics. It is deeply phenomenological and materialist, and can be thought of as "politicized" continental philosophy.
Existential Marxism argues that the lack of a pre-determination leaves humanity the free will and responsibility to construct it for itself, and that individuals gain definition and meaning based on what choices they choose, and in what context that choice is taken. It maintains strong support for democracy, inter-vanguard debate, and inclusive decision-making, and rejects the rule of an élite minority over the laboring majority (be it a bourgeois aristocracy or a party-led bureaucracy). As the political economy sets the stage, the individual is free to design the play.”
Sartre also expanded on theories on atheism, “Bad Faith”, and other theories on existentialism. Although I’m agnostic, I highly recommend reading his works.
3. A “No Compromise” on the state, capital and religion.
Although this should be obvious, so I won’t waste to much time explaining why I believe this, since you most likely already are a Marxist or an Anarchist. If you are new here, however, then I’d recommend reading the works of Marx, Bakunin or other writers.
I advocate the immediate abolition of the state due to analysis of countries like the Soviet Union and Cuba, and how I feel state socialism has run it’s course. in the end, these governments had no desire of “withering away” as Marx put it in “The Communist Manifesto”. Even attempts at republics, like the German Revolution, failed due to a reliance on seizing state power, and a lack of unity among Luxemburgists, Council Communists and Anarcho-Syndicalists.
If we want a shining beacon of freedom and communism, the it must come immediately. Private Ownership will be abolished, the current existing form of the church must become non-hierarchical, and must have little influence over the people, and the state must be replaced with a horizontalidad form of problem-solving, with democratic assemblies and elected delegates.
3. A Redesign of the Economy (or rather, a lack of an economy).
Money has no place in a liberated society. It holds no truth, no faith, nothing that can benefit anyone in any way, shape or form. Rather, money must be replaced immediately with a gift economy. Employment must be abolished and replaced with a four-hour workday network of freely associated producers, and handling of the means of production will be decided through voting and debating, whether it belongs to the workers, the community or collective, a union or a guild. With this, not only can social classes become abolished, but the individual may associated and produce freely.
4. The Creation of Democratic Schools.
Modern schools are the perfect embodiment of a social darwinist dictator. They strip away sexuality, individuality, and force students to obey a party or government. No form of indoctrination like this, or any kind, should occur. In a free society, schools should assist the individual in finding out who they are, what they want to be, not some assembly line of repressed minds, waiting to be released from their cage, but never are!
Rather than forcing a student into area’s of life, the arts. etc, that they don’t feel comfortable with, a student may freely pick what he or she wants, whether that may be politics, history, science, mathematics, sports, whatever. Sexuality would be allowed to be freely expressed, not to be depraved and called “immoral”. If a couple, whether homo or heterosexual, wish to love each other, then so be it. Sure, I, and many on the forum, are heterosexual, but not state, god, corporation, or any form of authority have the right to enslave you, no matter what your sexuality is.
5. The Insurrectionary Committee.
However, none of this could happen if the territory isn’t able to defend itself. After a revolution (violent or nonviolent, although i hope we can refrain from violence), the territory will be open to attack from possible threats, such as China, Russia, and other nations realizing the amount of wealth they could gather (or possibly reactionary forces trying to violently bring back the state). So, in order to counteract the possibility of that, a non-hierarchical “Insurrectionary Committee” will be created.
This committee, made up of popular assemblies and elected delegates, will coordinate democratic armies and militias in order to fight back against the enemy forces. This assembly will be made up of delegates from unions, parties and other groups apart of the far-left coalition.
6. Conclusion
And so, friends, this is my hope for tomorrow. A liberated society, allowing for all men and women to freely express themselves, without gods, kings, masters or anyone forcing them to obey. A society in which currency will have no meaning, and the riches of the earth will belong to all. A society in which humans are not looked upon as cattle, to be trained, beaten, indoctrinated, but rather, as honest, kind, and beautiful people who have been oppressed for far too long. So, ladies and gentlemen, I ask of you, are you a slave, or a human being?:hammersickle:
Or,
My Synthesis of Marxism and Anarchism
Over the last couple of months, I have been studying countless texts, books and documents from Marxists, Anarchists, even Capitalists, to find out what I believe in, who I am, and who I want to be. However, I have concluded that although some of these ideologies have like able tendencies, I don't agree with them completely. So, I have created my own ideology.
Now, it could be just another "ism" thrown into a dustbin and left in some back corner of the Marxist Internet Archive. Or, I hope, it could begin a new chapter in the history of Marxism, and can help fan the flames of revolution. So, without further ado, I present my ideology, Marxian Anarchism.
1.What is Marxian Anarchism?
My personal philosophy can be summed up in a few bulletins.
1. The study of history, the advancement of technology and the human race, with Historical Materialism, Marxian Economics, a sort-of Marxian-Hegelian dialect, and Existentialist Marxism.
2. Advocating the immediate abolition of the state, private property (while retaining respect for personal property), and the strict organization of all churches, and replacing the old structures with a horizontalidad system of popular assemblies and elected delegates.
3. Handing the means of production over to either the community, guilds, the workers, or syndicates (according to votes), abolishing employment and replacing it with a four-hour workday cycle. Money and capital would be abolished and replaced with a gift economy, along with utilizing smart cards in order to prevent the use of strict quotas, which could danger individuality.
4. Democratic schools across the territory would immediately be created, focusing upon the individual and his or her interests, and allowing for the individual to expand freely and voluntarily, and without the worship of the smart and the preying upon the weak.
5. The creation of an insurrectionary committee, a horizontally-built committee (based upon popular assemblies and elected delegates), would be advocated. This committee would be represent the interest of far-left groups, unions, parties and other associations in order to create a united front with Anarchist’s, Statist Marxists, Marxist-Leninists and branches off of it, and socialists in general.
Now, I think it would only be fair to explain these idea’s that I have in much greater detail. After all, if someone new to Marxism or Anarchism saw this, they’d most likely be lost.
2. The study of society from a materialist perspective.
The reason that I, and many others, call themselves “Marxists” is because we use the same methods of analysing society, history, and other factors, that was created by Karl Marx and his friend, Friedrich Engels.
Historical Materialism is an analysis of society and event in history through examining socio-economic conditions and class. Although Marx never wrote heavily about the topic, Friedrich Engels and many others expanded upon the idea. They had determined that society had very similar patterns in arrangement of class.
For example, in the ancient times of the Greeks and the Romans, society was organized on two main fronts. The landowners and politicians, who were lucky enough to be born into a wealthy family and could participate in government (or in many cases, attempt to overthrow it through a coup). Many of these citizens didn’t work, spending their days eating grapes with their concubines. On the other side, there were slaves, and a lot of them. Their job was to work on the projects and ideas projected by their masters. Their labour would be put into these products, the business would sell the products or services, and the head of the business would gain the majority of profits. The profits would be poured into the military, and it would be used for conquest (for the most part, a few nations, such as Sparta, remained on the defensive).
The same model would follow into feudalism. The knights, kings, bishops and other nobles would use their power and wealth, gained by the labour of serfs and peasants, would expand their power and wealth by exploring the New World, launching the Crusades, and creating new colonies and trade posts in order to expand the power of the upper classes.
And once again, the same can be said for our current system, capitalism. The CEO’s, bosses, politicians and others are able to gather massive wealth and capital from the services and labour of the middle and lower classes, and are able to use that money to, once again, expand their power and wealth. The Invasion of Iraq, for example, was not launched because of some “struggle for American Democracy”, but rather, a way to gain popularity with the brainwashed masses and to steal the massive oil refineries of that nation.
The same could also be said for the Soviet Union and other so-called “socialist” nations. The party members were able to exercise their power through large bureaucracies, and reap upon the labour and services of the poorer classes. The money, and later capital, gained from this was able to be used to fund massive armies and secret services in order to invade nations and keep their people in check.
Marxian Economics is the study of capitalism through the idea’s set out by Marx in books such as “Das Kapital” and the “Economic Manuscripts of 1844”. The labour a worker puts into a job creates alienation on both classes. The worker is forced to devote his life to his work in order to survive, and this money is centralized (even with redistribution and income taxes) to the rich. This market system will always have to rely upon a class divide, between workers and owners, or else it cannot function. Paper money, the currency of choice of capitalist nations, are practically worthless without state decree.
It should also be of note that markets are broken because of their lack of ability to provide for everyone. To quote Redstar2000,
“In bourgeois economic theory, capitalism allocates resources in an efficient manner to supply people's needs and wants in abundance and at affordable prices.
In the real world, it never works that way.
Here's why: in the real world, if a capitalist makes "too much" of something, the price he and his competitors can charge falls to such a low level that he can no longer make a profit...or, at least, a profit that he finds "acceptable".
Therefore, it is greatly to his advantage if there is a real "shortage" of his product...if not from extraneous causes, then from his own decision to "produce less". The worse thing he can do is actually try to "meet the demand" for his product. Only if he has a near or actual monopoly for his product can he produce "as much as people want" and still keep prices at stratospheric levels.
Thus it is that every spring in North America--the beginning of the "driving season"--the oil companies shut down some of their refineries to create a "shortage" of gasoline...duly followed by price increases "at the pump" of 20% or even more.
Every fall, the same thing happens with natural gas--widely used for winter heating in North America. Some natural gas wells are "taken off line" and we have a "shortage"--the price jumps dramatically.
As a result, profits grow by selling less.
This is, in practice, a "delicate" scam, requiring considerable finesse. If you produce "too little", consumers will seek out reasonably acceptable lower-priced substitutes for your product (if they exist). But that is a "small risk" compared to the risk of "over-producing" and ending up actually losing money.”
After that, we come to Hegelian Marxism. Hegelian Marxism is a form of dialectics in which society is analysed through a mixture of the idea’s of Karl Marx and German philosopher G. W. F. Hegel.
This idea is later expanded upon by Marxist Humanist Raya Dunayevskaya in her work “Marxism and Freedom: From 1776 Until Today”. In the book, she discusses how struggles for rights by ordinary people, such as the Montgomery Bus Boycott of 1955, and the West Virginia Miner’s Strike of 1959-1960, who, after they had one, many began asking, “What kind of labour should a man do?”, and “Why should there be a gulf between thinking and doing?”.
And finally, we come to Existentialist Marxism, a philosophy created by Marxist writer Jean-Paul Sartre. This philosophy is mainly based around Sartre’s two main works, “Being and Nothingness” and “Existentialism is a Form of Humanism”. To sum up his philosophy, it’s best to look at the description of the RevLeft group, “Existentialist Marxism”, which reads:
“For those members who follow the teachings of the French existentialist and novelist Jean-Paul Sartre, or sympathize with his views. He was associated with the French Communist Party, the Maoist-inspired Proletarian Left, and the Revolutionary Democratic Rally.
We are a group dedicated to the synthesis of Marxism and existentialism, as put forth in the post-WW2 era in France by Jean-Paul Sartre and influenced by his contemporaries, Simone de Beauvoir and Maurice Merleau-Ponty, as well as by the European communist and anarchist traditions at the time. Existential Marxism is often associated with the libertarian Marxist tradition (although it generally rejects the concept of the libertarian-authoritarian dichotomy, as it does with most structuralist binaries), and situates itself close to both left-communism and class-analysis anarchism. It is generally opposed to Marxist-Leninism ("Stalinism") and it's post-Stalin derivatives (Maoism, Titoism, etc) and considers the Soviet Union to have been state capitalist. It presses for grassroots revolutionary action in industrialized nations, and believes in the illegitimacy of bourgeois morality as a determinist power structure and argues for its replacement by a humanist ethic. It is supportive of militant labor unions, red unionism, and militant peoples' strikes. Although accepting of a vanguard party, it generally rejects the notions of democratic centralism, economic determinism, and / or anything that takes freedom out of the hands of the individual and resigns him or her to a fatalist or pre-determined behavior.
It also places an emphasis on angst, existential nausea, bad faith ("mauvaise foi"), and argues that identity politics have worked to fracture "the" proletariat based on socially-constructed demographics. It is deeply phenomenological and materialist, and can be thought of as "politicized" continental philosophy.
Existential Marxism argues that the lack of a pre-determination leaves humanity the free will and responsibility to construct it for itself, and that individuals gain definition and meaning based on what choices they choose, and in what context that choice is taken. It maintains strong support for democracy, inter-vanguard debate, and inclusive decision-making, and rejects the rule of an élite minority over the laboring majority (be it a bourgeois aristocracy or a party-led bureaucracy). As the political economy sets the stage, the individual is free to design the play.”
Sartre also expanded on theories on atheism, “Bad Faith”, and other theories on existentialism. Although I’m agnostic, I highly recommend reading his works.
3. A “No Compromise” on the state, capital and religion.
Although this should be obvious, so I won’t waste to much time explaining why I believe this, since you most likely already are a Marxist or an Anarchist. If you are new here, however, then I’d recommend reading the works of Marx, Bakunin or other writers.
I advocate the immediate abolition of the state due to analysis of countries like the Soviet Union and Cuba, and how I feel state socialism has run it’s course. in the end, these governments had no desire of “withering away” as Marx put it in “The Communist Manifesto”. Even attempts at republics, like the German Revolution, failed due to a reliance on seizing state power, and a lack of unity among Luxemburgists, Council Communists and Anarcho-Syndicalists.
If we want a shining beacon of freedom and communism, the it must come immediately. Private Ownership will be abolished, the current existing form of the church must become non-hierarchical, and must have little influence over the people, and the state must be replaced with a horizontalidad form of problem-solving, with democratic assemblies and elected delegates.
3. A Redesign of the Economy (or rather, a lack of an economy).
Money has no place in a liberated society. It holds no truth, no faith, nothing that can benefit anyone in any way, shape or form. Rather, money must be replaced immediately with a gift economy. Employment must be abolished and replaced with a four-hour workday network of freely associated producers, and handling of the means of production will be decided through voting and debating, whether it belongs to the workers, the community or collective, a union or a guild. With this, not only can social classes become abolished, but the individual may associated and produce freely.
4. The Creation of Democratic Schools.
Modern schools are the perfect embodiment of a social darwinist dictator. They strip away sexuality, individuality, and force students to obey a party or government. No form of indoctrination like this, or any kind, should occur. In a free society, schools should assist the individual in finding out who they are, what they want to be, not some assembly line of repressed minds, waiting to be released from their cage, but never are!
Rather than forcing a student into area’s of life, the arts. etc, that they don’t feel comfortable with, a student may freely pick what he or she wants, whether that may be politics, history, science, mathematics, sports, whatever. Sexuality would be allowed to be freely expressed, not to be depraved and called “immoral”. If a couple, whether homo or heterosexual, wish to love each other, then so be it. Sure, I, and many on the forum, are heterosexual, but not state, god, corporation, or any form of authority have the right to enslave you, no matter what your sexuality is.
5. The Insurrectionary Committee.
However, none of this could happen if the territory isn’t able to defend itself. After a revolution (violent or nonviolent, although i hope we can refrain from violence), the territory will be open to attack from possible threats, such as China, Russia, and other nations realizing the amount of wealth they could gather (or possibly reactionary forces trying to violently bring back the state). So, in order to counteract the possibility of that, a non-hierarchical “Insurrectionary Committee” will be created.
This committee, made up of popular assemblies and elected delegates, will coordinate democratic armies and militias in order to fight back against the enemy forces. This assembly will be made up of delegates from unions, parties and other groups apart of the far-left coalition.
6. Conclusion
And so, friends, this is my hope for tomorrow. A liberated society, allowing for all men and women to freely express themselves, without gods, kings, masters or anyone forcing them to obey. A society in which currency will have no meaning, and the riches of the earth will belong to all. A society in which humans are not looked upon as cattle, to be trained, beaten, indoctrinated, but rather, as honest, kind, and beautiful people who have been oppressed for far too long. So, ladies and gentlemen, I ask of you, are you a slave, or a human being?:hammersickle: