Ten Worst and Best Ideas of Marxism

[heiss93]

From Political Affairs editor's blog
http://paeditorsblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/ten-worst-and-best-ideas-of-marxism.html

Ten Worst and Best Ideas of Marxism

By Joe Sims
I've been thinking about the battle of ideas in the post-Bush era and the great opportunity it will present to the left, socialist and communist sections of the labor movement. These opportunities however may well pass us by unless, we shed some of the ideological baggage we've been carrying around, pretending some of it to somehow consist of “first principles” or foundation stones of political knowledge. Below are in my opinion, the top ten worst and best ideas of Marxism. As I wrote them, I came up with a lot more. Maybe this will be a series.


TEN WORST

1. “Dictatorship of the proletariat.” Probably the worst phrase uttered by a political theorist ever. Who wants to live in a dictatorship? Even if I agreed with it conceptually, (which I don't), the Machiavellian in me has enough sense not to repeat it. Indefensible. And by the way, working-class “hegemony” (whatever the hell that means, sorry Gramsicans), aint much better.

2. “Single party state.” Related to but not necessarily derivative from the “proletarian dictatorship,” the one party state became and remains the model of “existing socialism” (whatever existing socialism means as the old model with one or two exceptions, no longer exists). Created to facilitate a forced march and manage popular consent by controlling the flow of information, it became a substitute for democratic decision-making, ideological struggle by convincing and consent instead of directive and decree. Internet has rendered completely useless. The single party state is doomed.

(Also equally odious was the codification of the “leading role of the party in the constitution of the former “socialist” eastern Europe and USSR.)

3.”Developed socialism” The above shows that working-class humanity was about 5000 light years away from even approaching a developed socialist society, especially those in the “Third World” which led them to attempt a hybrid mixed duck-billed-platypus economy described directly below.

4. “Socialist Market Economy” At best utterly confusing to most and a euphemism for capitalism at worst causing the term “capitalism” to almost disappear from the socialist/capitalist lexicon, replaced by the “market.” It has created a huge ideological fog leaving many to scratch their hands and wonder what were we fighting for anyway? Sweden is not my model!

5. “Listing defense of Soviet Union under the 21 points for joining the Comitern.” The idea of “Defending Socialism” by detachments outside of those countries attempting to build it led to some of the biggest quagmires and mistakes of the 20th century. Still with us in many forms including the defense of the use of death penalty in by some ruling parties for “economic crimes” a practice not even followed in countries practicing Sharia law, who cut off your hand.

6. “Art is a hammer with which to shape reality.” First articulated by Brecht, primitive and almost obscene. Oh when will we learn to appreciate and engage something so gentle and so moving and so profound as our creative selves.

7. “Marxism, Marxism-Leninism.” Very bad idea to name a scientific world-view after individuals. Way too subjective and besides too many bad stories and nightmares associated with it. And, not very working-class sounding: too many syllables and hyphens. Replace it with “scientific socialism” or the “socialist and communist idea.”

8. “Organic intellectual.” Sorry Gramsci people. Great idea, but too much granola.

9. “Negation of Negation.” Most people have no idea what the heck that means, in dire need of reformulation, so people can at least understand it.

10. “Religion is the opium of the people.” Probably the second stupidest phrase ever uttered by a political theorist. Here again indefensible, even if it was taken out of context. Truly, God is not our enemy: capitalism is.

TEN BEST:

1. “From each according to ability, to each according to need.” At once a concept of contribution and distribution, it sums up a moment perhaps beyond “fairness” and “equality” (which is its pre-condition) and toward a new civilization. Utopian as all hell, but I love it.

2. “The history of all society is the history of class struggle.” The opening lines of the Manifesto gripped and grabbed me as teenager and retain all their truth and force.

3. “Labor theory of value.” “Value” arises from different forms – a chief contributor is the worker on the factory floor. It was refreshing to hear a auto worker in Mic hagen say precisely that on NPR this weekend. To paraphrase, “We do all the work, and they take all the profits.” Exactly.

4. “Labor in the white skin cannot be free while labor in the black is branded.” This phrase from Marx's capital captures the dynamic interplay of class and race and remains a foundation stone of the socialist and communist idea.

5. “No nation can be free if it oppresses other nations.” Here again, Marx studying the Irish question in relationship to problems in the labor movement in England sets forth the guiding principle of the working-class movement in relation to democratic struggles, calling on labor to place the struggle for democracy at the forefront of its agenda.

6. “Without a revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary movement.” This idea, largely attributed to Lenin, comes rather from Plekanov. stresses the signal importance of theoretical work, an idea that often seems lost to the non-ideological as well as “ideological” US left.

7. “The educators must be educated.” You can say that again.

8. “The point is to change reality.” A daring and to some dangerous idea. But change it to what? The 19th century idea, much repeated by Marx and Engels of “mastering nature” must give way to a new concept.

9. “An once of action is worth more than a ton of theory.” Engels here seems to diminish theory, however, he actually placed it on equal par with the economic and political struggle. It speaks to the vital, initiating role of the “advanced detachment” of the labor movement, a value that too often seems to get lost.

10. “I am not a Marxist.” This phrase was uttered once by Marx and I read recently also by Engels in relation to some narrow statement by some would be adherent. . However, the latter is unconfirmed. The sentiment, however, is understood, as the reader saw at the top of this list.

Ok folks, let me know what you think. Plenty of space below:

[M-L_Aussie]

Nice reaction there Heiss. Most of your 'worst' ideas are only bad because they are unpleasant to the ears of those brainwashed by bourgeois society. How about this Heiss, stop caressing the ignorance of people.

[trivas7]

'Dictatorship of the proletariat' suits me just fine -- it is accurate and poignant. Lenin made is central to Marxism. If we err, let us err on the side of the causing discomfort to the enemy, which I assume is exactly why Marx chose it. :thumbup1:


If you would coquet with neologisms, check out Jacob Richter's work: 'proletocracy' comes dribbling off his tongue!

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ A few more neologisms, too (per my signature):


3.”Developed socialism” The above shows that working-class humanity was about 5000 light years away from even approaching a developed socialist society, especially those in the “Third World” which led them to attempt a hybrid mixed duck-billed-platypus economy described directly below.

4. “Socialist Market Economy” At best utterly confusing to most and a euphemism for capitalism at worst causing the term “capitalism” to almost disappear from the socialist/capitalist lexicon, replaced by the “market.” It has created a huge ideological fog leaving many to scratch their hands and wonder what were we fighting for anyway? Sweden is not my model!

Those who have proper conceptions of the economic aspects of "socialism" - like "Late Marx" did from 1875 onwards - should call themselves "social-abolitionists."

When "proletocracy" and "social-abolitionism" are combined due to necessity (getting past Lenin on the one hand and Bordiga on the other), they form social proletocracy.


10. “I am not a Marxist.” This phrase was uttered once by Marx and read recently also by Engels in relation to some narrow statement by some would be adherent. However, the latter is unconfirmed. The sentiment, however, is understood, as the reader saw at the top of this list.

Here:

http://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1880/05/parti-ouvrier.htm


After the programme was agreed, however, a clash arose between Marx and his French supporters arose over the purpose of the minimum section. Whereas Marx saw this as a practical means of agitation around demands that were achievable within the framework of capitalism, Guesde took a very different view: “Discounting the possibility of obtaining these reforms from the bourgeoisie, Guesde regarded them not as a practical programme of struggle, but simply ... as bait with which to lure the workers from Radicalism.” The rejection of these reforms would, Guesde believed, “free the proletariat of its last reformist illusions and convince it of the impossibility of avoiding a workers ’89.” Accusing Guesde and Lafargue of “revolutionary phrase-mongering” and of denying the value of reformist struggles, Marx made his famous remark that, if their politics represented Marxism, “ce qu'il y a de certain c'est que moi, je ne suis pas Marxiste” (“what is certain is that I myself am not a Marxist”)

[M-L_Aussie]

^^^ A few more neologisms, too (per my signature):



Those who have proper conceptions of the economic aspects of "socialism" - like "Late Marx" did from 1875 onwards - should call themselves "social-abolitionists."

When "proletocracy" and "social-abolitionism" are combined due to necessity (getting past Lenin on the one hand and Bordiga on the other), they form social proletocracy.
You sound like some theory nut to me, more interested in your ego and churching out meaningless terminology to your personality-cult gang than political activity for the working class.

Marxism-Leninism-Richterism anyone?:rolleyes:

[Winter]

You sound like some theory nut to me, more interested in your ego and churching out meaningless terminology to your personality-cult gang than political activity for the working class.

Marxism-Leninism-Richterism anyone?:rolleyes:

What a dick!!

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Look, phrases like "dictatorship of the proletariat" just sound bad, even if you fully agree with the concept behind them. So it makes perfect sense to change the name of the concept to make it sound better. You don't have to change the concept, just change the name.

The word "dictatorship" isn't used today with the same meaning that it had in the 19th century. Back then it simply meant "power" or "authority". Today it means "tyranny".

[Hyacinth]

Look, phrases like "dictatorship of the proletariat" just sound bad, even if you fully agree with the concept behind them. So it makes perfect sense to change the name of the concept to make it sound better. You don't have to change the concept, just change the name.

The word "dictatorship" isn't used today with the same meaning that it had in the 19th century. Back then it simply meant "power" or "authority". Today it means "tyranny".
I agree. Marx used the expression at a time when the term ‘dictatorship’ had a different meaning, and used it to refer to proletarian democracy and contrast it with bourgeois democracy, i.e. the dictatorship of the bourgeois. As such we should drop the expression ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ altogether and simply use ‘proletarian democracy’ instead.

[Led Zeppelin]

1. “Dictatorship of the proletariat.” Probably the worst phrase uttered by a political theorist ever. Who wants to live in a dictatorship? Even if I agreed with it conceptually, (which I don't), the Machiavellian in me has enough sense not to repeat it. Indefensible. And by the way, working-class “hegemony” (whatever the hell that means, sorry Gramsicans), aint much better.

Wow, this guy is a petty idiot.

I stopped reading at this first point, and never want to read anything written by him or see his name ever again, out of fear of actually remembering it.

Seriously, "the phrase sounds too bad so don't use it!!!"

First of all, dictatorship of the working-class over the exploiters does not sound bad if you're actually part of the working-class, then it actually makes sense.

Secondly, Marxists have used the phrase socialism to describe the political system post-capitalism a lot more than they have "dictatorship of the proletariat", since the latter is a more technical term used to make a distinction between the new system and the old one, the old one being the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, or should I call them "cappies" because it sounds better?

[Hyacinth]

The reason for dropping the expression ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ has nothing to do with anything as flimsy as it “sounding bad”, but rather due to the fact that the term ‘dictatorship’ today carries with it a negative connotation which it did not in Marx’s time. Just as, for instance, the term ‘democracy’ now carries with it a positive connotation whereas it carries with it a negative connotation for the majority of human history, including in Marx’s time. Moreover, it doesn’t help our cause that the expression DotP was also used by the state capitalist Soviet Union. The reason we should drop it, then, has to do with the fact that it doesn’t properly convey what we have in mind, namely, proletarian democracy.

[Led Zeppelin]

The reason for dropping the expression ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ has nothing to do with anything as flimsy as it “sounding bad”, but rather due to the fact that the term ‘dictatorship’ today carries with it a negative connotation which it did not in Marx’s time. Just as, for instance, the term ‘democracy’ now carries with it a positive connotation whereas it carries with it a negative connotation for the majority of human history, including in Marx’s time. Moreover, it doesn’t help our cause that the expression DotP was also used by the state capitalist Soviet Union. The reason we should drop it, then, has to do with the fact that it doesn’t properly convey what we have in mind, namely, proletarian democracy.

If that was addressed to me; I didn't know nor cared (and still don't) why you think the term should not be used, I was replying to the term being used by the writer in the original post.

Also, to say that the term dictatorship did not carry a negative connotation in Marx or Lenin's time is just....not true.

But yeah, you're right, let's stop using terms that have a negative connotation, like socialism, communism, proletariat, and "working-class" doesn't really sound good these days either because of that whole classless society myth, so we better stop using that too. :rolleyes:

Good luck with your "starting new terms for definitions" thing though, I'm sure it'll work out swell.

I can just imagine people proclaiming their belief in social proletocracy, when you search for it on google you already get two pages worth of results, most of them written by the same person, you're well on your way.

[Leo]

First of all, dictatorship of the working-class over the exploiters does not sound bad if you're actually part of the working-class, then it actually makes sense.

Yeah, that was what I was thinking, it makes perfect sense to me.


Who wants to live in a dictatorship?

If it's the dictatorship of my class, than I do.

[RHIZOMES]

I saw the criticisms of "dictatorship of the proletariat" and then stopped reading. That is so weak. He doesn't understand what it means at all or that it's infinitely better to the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie" we're living in now.

[Raúl Duke]

I would say the best are:

Historical Materialism

"The ruling ideas of an epoch are those of its ruling class"

“Religion is the opium of the people.”

“From each according to ability, to each according to need.”

Some stuff Marx mention related to "social determinism" (being precedes consciousness, etc)

(These are from the top of my head.)

[Dimentio]

I am agreeing with it. Every leftist should read Machiavelli.

[Hyacinth]

If that was addressed to me; I didn't know nor cared (and still don't) why you think the term should not be used, I was replying to the term being used by the writer in the original post.

Also, to say that the term dictatorship did not carry a negative connotation in Marx or Lenin's time is just....not true.

But yeah, you're right, let's stop using terms that have a negative connotation, like socialism, communism, proletariat, and "working-class" doesn't really sound good these days either because of that whole classless society myth, so we better stop using that too. :rolleyes:

Good luck with your "starting new terms for definitions" thing though, I'm sure it'll work out swell.

I can just imagine people proclaiming their belief in social proletocracy, when you search for it on google you already get two pages worth of results, most of them written by the same person, you're well on your way.
I think you’re confusing me with Jacob here, I do not, nor have ever, suggested that we replace the entire plethora of terms. I’m simply weary of the possible misunderstanding caused by this expression. Given that Lenin ("“The term, dictatorship of the proletariat’, hence not the dictatorship of a single individual, but of a class, ipso facto precludes the possibility that Marx in this connection had in mind a dictatorship in the literal sense of the term."- V.I. Lenin, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Proletarian_Revolution_and_the _Renegade_Kautsky&action=edit&redlink=1)), Luxemburg ("This dictatorship consists in the manner of applying democracy, not in its elimination, but in energetic, resolute attacks upon the well-entrenched rights and economic relationships of bourgeois society, without which a socialist transformation cannot be accomplished. This dictatorship must be the work of the class and not of a little leading minority in the name of the class – that is, it must proceed step by step out of the active participation of the masses; it must be under their direct influence, subjected to the control of complete public activity; it must arise out of the growing political training of the mass of the people." - Rosa Luxemburg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Luxemburg), The Russian Revolution), and others felt the need to clarify the meaning of the term suggests to me that it is needlessly ambiguous.

[Die Neue Zeit]

If that was addressed to me; I didn't know nor cared (and still don't) why you think the term should not be used, I was replying to the term being used by the writer in the original post.

Also, to say that the term dictatorship did not carry a negative connotation in Marx or Lenin's time is just....not true.

But yeah, you're right, let's stop using terms that have a negative connotation, like socialism, communism, proletariat, and "working-class" doesn't really sound good these days either because of that whole classless society myth, so we better stop using that too. :rolleyes:

Good luck with your "starting new terms for definitions" thing though, I'm sure it'll work out swell.

I can just imagine people proclaiming their belief in social proletocracy, when you search for it on google you already get two pages worth of results, most of them written by the same person, you're well on your way.

I think you’re confusing me with Jacob here, I do not, nor have ever, suggested that we replace the entire plethora of terms. I’m simply weary of the possible misunderstanding caused by this expression. Given that Lenin ("“The term, dictatorship of the proletariat’, hence not the dictatorship of a single individual, but of a class, ipso facto precludes the possibility that Marx in this connection had in mind a dictatorship in the literal sense of the term."- V.I. Lenin, The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Proletarian_Revolution_and_the _Renegade_Kautsky&action=edit&redlink=1)), Luxemburg ("This dictatorship consists in the manner of applying democracy, not in its elimination, but in energetic, resolute attacks upon the well-entrenched rights and economic relationships of bourgeois society, without which a socialist transformation cannot be accomplished. This dictatorship must be the work of the class and not of a little leading minority in the name of the class – that is, it must proceed step by step out of the active participation of the masses; it must be under their direct influence, subjected to the control of complete public activity; it must arise out of the growing political training of the mass of the people." - Rosa Luxemburg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Luxemburg), The Russian Revolution), and others felt the need to clarify the meaning of the term suggests to me that it is needlessly ambiguous.

First, LZ:

1) What about the liberal crap about "dictatorship over the proletariat"?
2) If I wished to be politically correct in terms of connotations, why do you think I used the phrase Der Klassenkampf - particularly in combination with the word "aggravation"? :rolleyes:

Second, Comrade Hyacinth:

1) No, LZ directed his post towards you, given your posted responses in some of my threads. By no means did he confuse you for me. ;)
2) In some ways I'm NOT suggesting that "we replace the entire plethora of terms." I'm OK with "socialism," but only when the masses realize that "socialism" does NOT equal welfare capitalism + commanding heights nationalizations + multiculturalism, much less corporate bailouts. [Granted, this means that there will need to be a distinction between "socialism" (read: worker-owned and worker-controlled "social capitalism" in its various incarnations) and social proletocracy, but still...] The same thing goes for "communism," on the condition of it being purged of reformist (as well as authoritarian) connotations - again, in relation to mass perceptions. The same thing goes even for "dictatorship of the proletariat," but only when applied to a specific form of proletocracy engaged with an ousted but highly resistant bourgeoisie. [mikelopore the DeLeonist talked about this on his board recently, noting that the DOTP would, in his opinion, last for three weeks. ;) ] Ditto with SOME applications of "social democracy" ("classless social democracy," "social-democratic revolution," "revolutionary social democracy," etc.), but mainly on the class nature of past revolutions...
3) What I'm suggesting is that we have an expanded vocabulary.

[Led Zeppelin]

I think you’re confusing me with Jacob here,

No, actually Jacob's right, I just thought you agreed with Jacob on this given your association with him and his threads on this forum.

I apologize for that.


1) What about the liberal crap about "dictatorship over the proletariat"?

Well, of course that changes the entire meaning of it.

It's like the difference in dictatorship of the bourgeoise and dictatorship over the bourgeoisie.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Well, maybe "DOTB" should be used more often, then. :D

[Hyacinth]

Upon further consideration of the subject I’m actually fine with the expression ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’; it can be a useful metaphor, the issue isn’t with the expression itself so much as the ignorance and confusion surrounding its meaning. I’d be hesitant to use it right away with someone who hasn’t been exposed to Marxist thought due to the possible misunderstanding, but with proper explanation it should be fine.

[Os Cangaceiros]

BEST: Historical materialism. The critique of religion. "Commodity fetishism". The general notion that workers should have a more active involvement in their place of work.

WORST: The use of the state as an organ of proletarian force.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Upon further consideration of the subject I’m actually fine with the expression ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’; it can be a useful metaphor, the issue isn’t with the expression itself so much as the ignorance and confusion surrounding its meaning. I’d be hesitant to use it right away with someone who hasn’t been exposed to Marxist thought due to the possible misunderstanding, but with proper explanation it should be fine.

Just remember that the DOTP isn't an "ideology" (either a -cracy or an -ism). ;) Notwithstanding the impermanence issue that I raised, maybe I bent the stick too much at the start of Chapter 5? :confused:

[el_chavista]

The phantom of communism used by the bourgeoisie's massmedia to scare working people. Why do you think the "21st century Socialism" uses words like "direct democracy"?

[Uncle Al]

'God' is not my enemy either. 'Religion', however, most certainly is.

[Asoka89]

Religion is the opium of the people MAKES perfect sense and I'm a softer leftist than most people of RevLeft.

Religion is a RESULT of exploitation, it is the heart of a heartless world, the sad sigh of the opressed creature.... Marx is saying that religion isn't the enemy, it is a symptom of opression/exploitation.

[Pogue]

you sound like some theory nut to me, more interested in your ego and churching out meaningless terminology to your personality-cult gang than political activity for the working class.

Marxism-leninism-richterism anyone?:rolleyes:

qft

[freakazoid]

First of all, dictatorship of the working-class over the exploiters does not sound bad if you're actually part of the working-class, then it actually makes sense.

No, even if you are part of the working class the phrase dictatorship of the proletariat still sounds bad. So if your white the phrase White Power should sound good to you then?

[Philosophical Materialist]

A clumsy article. His article contradicts what he sets out to achieve. He attacks such things like e.g. DOTP and "negation of the negation" not because he disagrees with them, but that he doesn't like how they are explained or worded. Hence surely these can't be "worst ideas..." but merely ideas which he thinks ought to be put a different way.

Regarding religion though he is very wrong. Religion and/or belief in deities are a regressive practice that distracts humanity from achieving its self-consciousness, and emancipation for every being.

[Niccolò Rossi]

If it's the dictatorship of my class, than I do. No, even if you are part of the working class the phrase dictatorship of the proletariat still sounds bad. So if your white the phrase White Power should sound good to you then?

I'm going to have to agree with freakazoid here, albeit on a different basis. The dictatorship of the proletariat, that is the affirmation of the class is not in the interest of the workers. The self-abolition of the proletariat is however in the direct interest of the class.