Marx was fond of capitalism?! - That's what my history teach

[Maaja]

Today my history teacher told us that actually Marx really admired the capitalist society and he said that a human being has never been as close to the well being and the capitalism gives to humans the best possibility in the world's history to fight with poverty and famine.

Did he really say so or was my teacher just bluffing?

[jon doe]

G'day

Yes and no. Marx said that Capitalism was the logical step after feudialism and that it was better than feudialism. Marx did not feel that capitialism was good it was just better than having the majoity of the population as serfs (almost slaves).

Marx said the capitalists will get pissed off at the aristoracy and institute a capitalist society and then the workers will get pissed off at the capitalists and institute socialism in which the state will slowly desolve and the society will disolve into communism (not to be mixed up with 'soviet style communism') where there will be no state or other controls on the individual (he also thought that history will change qualitivly at this point and a new stage in society will begin)


it should also be noted that that marxist does not equal socialist does not equal leftwing


*apoligies for my spelling*

thanks
-r.

[Maaja]

Thank you a lot. Now I think also what to tell to my teacher.

[Marxman]

Your teacher abviously didn't thoroughly examine Marx, which I mostly hate nowadays. Everything is true that Jon Doe said, I'd just like to add some things. Marx said that capitalism is needed for the development of the socialist tendency as capitalism creates proletariat and proletariat is the key of the socialist revolution (with an alliance of peasantry, of course). Marx said that capitalism is very good and very very bad. Capitalism develops and develops means of production rapidly. Maybe your teacher misinterpreted Marx or was that her deliberate intention.

[jon doe]

Marx said that capitalism is needed for the development of the socialist tendency as capitalism creates proletariat and proletariat is the key of the socialist revolution (with an alliance of peasantry, of course).


Marx didnt say anything about the peaentry (in fact in the communist manifesto he says that idustrillisation has saved people form rural idleness) it isnt till lennin that the peasents are mentioned


thanks
-r.

[Ian]

Marx descirbed rural life as an 'idiocy' and regarded industrialization as beneficial to the people, especially the peasants who were modernised, he did not, however, like capitalism in the slightest, just what accompanies it, the proletariat, industrialization, and the revolution. However, Marx said that under communism the antithesis between rural and urban life will not be so distinct.

[Revolution Hero]

I am sure that your teacher have never read Marx. He sound as the right opportunist.

[Marxman]

Yeah, they're making Marx like he was fond to burgeois. If anyone has read Capital, which is a very tough book to understand at first, they shall see exactly the destruction of capital.

Marx SAID many times that without an alliance of the peasants-farmers, the proletariat can't win. And it definitely showed in practice that is true. Do you think Marx had in mind the slavery of the peasants? Do you think he wanted peasants to suddenly become industrial workers? No way, communism as he has described it is totally democratic. He said that in communism you can be a fisherman in the morning, a hunter in the afternoon, a critique in lucnhtime without having an occupation of a fisherman, hunter or a critique.

[Revolution Hero]

"Capital" is studied by the bourgeoisie economists, though. So, these guys have to know about their failure since the begining of their job practice.

[Marxman]

Burgeois study Capital? Yeah, right. If they had, they'd pulled a gun. Maybe they do read it but certainly don't get it. Marx definitely pulled their pants off with formulas like C-M-C (commodity, money, commodity) or M-C-M' (Money, commodity, more money). Then there is another formula, which is more complicated. To be honest, I haven't read Capital myself yet because it's still too complicated to comprehend. My frined TURNOVISEOUS read a little of it and understood it quite well, so he told me the summary of it. Did you know that this book wasn't suppressed by the Russian tzar because he felt it was too abstract?

[ArgueEverything]

^lol yeah, the tsarist police thought that it was too complex for anyone to make sense of it.

Anyway, maaja, your teacher doesn't understand the dialectic. Every ideology has its antithesis. Capitalism was the antithesis, and was "better" than, feudalism. In this sense, capitalism is progressive, in that it rids the world of feudal ties, serfdom, religious dogma etc. On the other hand, capitalism itself has an antithesis - communism. As history progresses, the relations of production act as a fetter on society, and therefore society must revolutionalise the means of production, which will effect a corresponding change in the relations of production, and usher in a communist world.

[Ian]

Good luck with such bad teacher Maaja! I want you to tell her she is wrong! Do it!

[Maaja]

Quote: from Ian Rocks on 10:50 am on Sep. 9, 2002
Good luck with such bad teacher Maaja! I want you to tell her she is wrong! Do it!

It's a man;)But I definitely will tell him his wrong.Maybe even today because I think we'll talkabout socialism and Marx again today in civic education class.

[Marxman]

Nowadays it's really hard to find a teacher (even well-educated one) to understand true nature of marxism and communism.

Exactly, comrade ArguEeverything! Capitalism is actually a good step to communism, a very good step - PROLETARIAT. Capitalism invented PROLETARIAT, not Marx or any communist theoretician. Marx emphasized that capitalism, despite its collateral catastrophe, is very good for the development of communism. And the more there is capitalism, the more proletariat there is and more tendency for communism. Like I said, proletariat are the class that have a socialist conscious and this conscious was either forced or learned by capitalism. So you see the contradiction - capitalism destroys itself by (1) making proletariat numerous and (2) by making artificial capital (surplus value). There are more destruction factors but these are main.

[komsomol]

I am reading Capital volume one at the moment, well I have rread the two factors of a commodity and the introduction by Ernest Mandall which is just as complex and takes up 80 pages of the book. My best advice to Marx readers is to take it in small doses. Maybe even take six months to read it, it will go in one ear and out the other if you try to read the first section in one day.

[Marxman]

Exactly. Thats' why I'll read Capital later, much later. First I'm learning history. Ted Grant and Aland Woods are the 21st century marxists who have written many marxist books that are worth reading and understanding. Right now I'm reading their book "Lenin and Trotsky:what they really stood for." Marx was really a smart man and that's why he's totally complicated. I consider Marx to be my best philosopher.

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Marxman on 2:54 am on Sep. 8, 2002
Burgeois study Capital? Yeah, right. If they had, they'd pulled a gun. Maybe they do read it but certainly don't get it. Marx definitely pulled their pants off with formulas like C-M-C (commodity, money, commodity) or M-C-M' (Money, commodity, more money). Then there is another formula, which is more complicated. To be honest, I haven't read Capital myself yet because it's still too complicated to comprehend. My frined TURNOVISEOUS read a little of it and understood it quite well, so he told me the summary of it. Did you know that this book wasn't suppressed by the Russian tzar because he felt it was too abstract?


Believe me, Marxman. They do study it in the american universitites. That is what my friend told me. Marx described the economy of the capitalist system. That is why western professors consider it important to study "Capital".
Believe me, each capitalist have read "Capital". They don't see anything wrong in it. " That is analysis of capitalism ( our sphere of specialization) , well it has to be interesting," - that is what they think.

[Marxman]

Every capitalist studied CAPITAL? I sincerely doubt that because they're playing right into the hands of destruction, which CAPITAL really warns. Are you trying to tell me that cappies also read 3 volumes of Marx's book "Theories of surplus value?" It's sort of adjacent to CAPITAL.

[Revolution Hero]

They don't study all "Capital", but they definitely study some parts of it.

[Marxman]

Capitalists study Capital? Yeah, and I'm Pope John Paul.

[Turnoviseous]

Quote: from MOLOCH on 4:17 pm on Sep. 9, 2002
I am reading Capital volume one at the moment, well I have rread the two factors of a commodity and the introduction by Ernest Mandall which is just as complex and takes up 80 pages of the book. My best advice to Marx readers is to take it in small doses. Maybe even take six months to read it, it will go in one ear and out the other if you try to read the first section in one day.


MOLOCH, I suggest you read "Wage, Labour and Capital", before you continue studying Capital. You can find the book on the link below, it is very short anyway, but it gives you a great overview:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works...abour/index.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/index.htm)

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Marxman on 9:03 am on Sep. 18, 2002
Capitalists study Capital? Yeah, and I'm Pope John Paul.


You are free not to believe me. I hope you will enter univer someday, and you will remember my words.

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Marxman on 9:03 am on Sep. 18, 2002
Capitalists study Capital? Yeah, and I'm Pope John Paul.


You are free not to believe me. I hope you will enter univer someday, and you will remember my words then.

[Marxman]

And you are free to believe such nonsenses.

[Revolution Hero]

It will make sense for you after you will read "Capital", and think about what I have said.

[Marxman]

If I haven't read it, doesn't mean that I don't know nothing about it.

Capitalists are only trying to look for mistakes in Capital and his works and that is all what their efforts do. They think that if Marx made one simple mistake, then the whole Karl Marx is basically nonsense.

They don't actually read it but they hire theoreticians to read for them and then they have a mission to discredit "Capital." It's basically simple. Remember the misdeeds of Stalin's clique against Trotsky.

[Revolution Hero]

Marx analyzed the whole capitalistic system of economy in his work "Capital". He showed how capitalism works. Don't you think that cappies want to learn this. The definitely do. And they respect "Capital".
Oh, no, they don't look for the mistakes, but they try to find their own.

[Marxman]

And they respect "Capital."

Yeah, they so much respect it that they slander it with every line every day. He actually showed how capitalism works to destroy itself (like surplus value). Marx knew exactly the weakest links of capitalism and knew exactly how it will fall.

Cappies know what they're doing wrong and so they make reforms after reforms every day. But these mistakes of capitalism give them cash, money, doe! Do you really think they'll just give it up just because it's destroying the world and making wars. Are you utopian?

[Revolution Hero]

No, I am not. But I have heard about the fact that american students study "Capital" at the university from the person , who actually studied it in the USA. And this person is not even socialist.

Where are you from Marxman? If you are from the states you have to know about it.

[Marxman]

I am from a former stalinist state Slovenia. Slovenia was a former republic of Yugoslavia, maybe now that rings a bell.

I know many schemes of stalinists, including the immediate transmutation to capitalism. Our president was a former member of the gigantic Yugoslavian communist party and then suddenly he turned to capitalism. He's still in his post and soon he'll be replaced by another stalinist. Damn them, I say. And damn anyone who every slanders the enemies of stalinism - MARXISTS.

[pastradamus]

Amen marxman.

Why did everybody turn straight to capitalism when the eastern block countries collasped?

I'll tell you why,because they felt liberated from the grasp of those soviets,& whats more that evil muthafucker stalin gave anything left-wing an undeserving bad name.

He's a left wing hitler,why not just become a nazi alltoghther?


(Edited by pastradamus at 7:47 pm on Sep. 28, 2002)

[Marxman]

Stalin and Hitler, well, they could be as borthers. They had lots of things in common. The first that's on my mind is genocide of nations.

Soviets in the time of Lenin were really Soviets - workers' councils and representatives.
Soviets under stalinism were basically bueracrats and after 1930 (approximately) they had no function at all. So the name Soviet Union is basically a farce, just like everything else under stalinism.

[honest intellectual]

Quote: from Maaja on 1:38 pm on Sep. 6, 2002
Thank you a lot. Now I think also what to tell to my teacher.
TELL YOUR TEACHER TO GO SUCK A LEMON!

[Revolution Hero]

Quote: from Marxman on 5:19 am on Sep. 29, 2002
I am from a former stalinist state Slovenia. Slovenia was a former republic of Yugoslavia, maybe now that rings a bell.

I know many schemes of stalinists, including the immediate transmutation to capitalism. Our president was a former member of the gigantic Yugoslavian communist party and then suddenly he turned to capitalism. He's still in his post and soon he'll be replaced by another stalinist. Damn them, I say. And damn anyone who every slanders the enemies of stalinism - MARXISTS.






They are not Stalinists, but they are renegades of the marxism-leninism. These people deserve to die!

[Marxman]

Renegades of MARXISM-LENINISM (!?)

You're more twisted than I imagined.

[lostone]

in plain terms, your teacher should do what he probably wants you to do all the time, read it again, and if it still isn't clear to him, read it again, and so on...