Listen, Marxist!

[dogwoodlover]

Classic article, which I believe is still extremely relevant today, especially for a lot of people on this board.


http://www.nasalam.org/bkchn06.htm


I'm no Marxist scholar, but I can say that I don't believe Marx would be impressed by the lack of theoretical advancement and progress of his followers. Surely the religious readings of his texts, God-like worship of his ideas, and the inability for revolutionaries to progress past his 160 year-old ideas would leave him astonished.

I believe Marx to have been one of the greatest thinkers in history, and I believe many of his formulations and analyses of capitalism hit the nail on the head. I believe the core of capitalism has not changed, thus many of his theories remain quite relevant. I do however, believe that the morphing of capitalism calls for further examination and refinement of his theories, and a re-analyzation of capitalism in its present stage is in order.

I think discussion of the possibility of a "libertarian Marx" and such is ridiculous. Does it matter whether he took a libertarian or statist view? No. What does matter is what view WE take. I believe the lack of emphasis on the exploitive and repressive nature of the State is a critical flaw in Marxist ideology. I'm aware of autonomous Marxist and Council Communist strains, but I believe a combination of Marxian critique of capitalism and an anarchist/libertarian critique of the State are necessary to produce a political philosophy capable of dealing with the problems of state-capitalism today.

I'm sure I'm bound to receive an assload of insults and flames, but I am bothered by the religiousness of many Marxists.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Thuis was posted here a few months back, and we trashed it then.

[Raúl Duke]

hmm...well, the essay (in the link) will be an interesting read....but


I'm no Marxist scholar, but I can say that I don't believe Marx would be impressed by the lack of theoretical advancement and progress of his followers. Surely the religious readings of his texts, God-like worship of his ideas, and the inability for revolutionaries to progress past his 160 year-old ideas would leave him astonished.

Well....new ideas have been added like cultural hegemony (Gramsci) by Marxist scholars.
That would be considered theoretical advancemenmts, but it is possibly true that there hasn't been much theoretical advancements recently.
Yet, here I mention scholar made these advancements; his followers may or may not (depending on who they are) treat Marx and his text with religious-like admiration or with the simple respect one may have for a great thinker or a different kind of respect.
Some of his folllowers were/became the scholars that added things to theories, others became the "men of action", while others were just followers.


Rosa Lichtenstein: "Thuis was posted here a few months back, and we trashed it then."


Surely the religious readings of his texts, God-like worship of his ideas, and the inability for revolutionaries to progress past his 160 year-old ideas would leave him astonished.

Hmm....I usually expected Rosa to mention that the cause of this failure to progress and maybe of the God-like worship probably lies in dialectics in Marxism; yet instead, she mentions that this post was thrashed :blink:


I believe Marx to have been one of the greatest thinkers in history, and I believe many of his formulations and analyses of capitalism hit the nail on the head. I believe the core of capitalism has not changed, thus many of his theories remain quite relevant. I do however, believe that the morphing of capitalism calls for further examination and refinement of his theories, and a re-analyzation of capitalism in its present stage is in order.

One problem I heard once about the re-analysis was: "Who was going to do a re-analyzation of capitalism?" Well....I don't think it matters who, just that we need people who would want to write new re-analysis/critique of capitalism. But aren't their already people who done this? I really don't know....


I believe the lack of emphasis on the exploitive and repressive nature of the State is a critical flaw in Marxist ideology.

If I'm right (which I may be not).... Marxist view the state repressive as long as the bourgeoisie/oppressor class is in control of the state. If the workers take control of it and eliminate class society; the state will, according to theory, whither away into communism. The first part is, I believe (unless I'm wrong..; If I am I'm willing for someone to clarify) the Marxist critique of the exploitive and repressive state.


Does it matter whether he took a libertarian or statist view? No. What does matter is what view WE take.

I agree on you here; I dismiss Marx's statism, but believe that there is value in his economical/sociological theory (and now thinking about this; I need to get some books/info about his theory, yet don't seem to have the time to get it or to read it...)


I am bothered by the religiousness of many Marxists.

So would I (since people should be not stuck to something like it was the Bible); but that depends on what you consider political religiousness and what I consider political religiousness ;)


I'm sure I'm bound to receive an assload of insults and flames

I hope I don't recieve any :P :unsure: