Thread: Materialism without Dialectics

Results 1 to 20 of 22

  1. #1
    Join Date Jul 2007
    Location sf
    Posts 1,082
    Organisation
    ex-PSL
    Rep Power 13

    Default Materialism without Dialectics

    Apologies for the pretty basic question, but I need an "official" answer to this question I've thought about for a few months.

    How is Dialectical Materialism separable from Historical Materialism?
    [FONT=Arial]
    [/FONT]
  2. #2
    Join Date Apr 2006
    Location UK
    Posts 6,143
    Rep Power 80

    Default

    They shouldn't be. We run into all kinds of trouble when we separate them.
    "Events have their own logic, even when human beings do not." - Rosa Luxemburg

    "There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen." - Lenin

  3. #3
    Join Date May 2007
    Location Africa
    Posts 657
    Rep Power 12

    Default

    They shouldn't be. We run into all kinds of trouble when we separate them.
    And what trouble is that?
    The emancipation of the working class must be the work of the workers themselves. Flora Tristan, 1843.
    Most Kickass Blog
    Zabalaza.Net

    wardhiigley! bang bang muqdisho! xarunta dalka SOOMAALIYA!
  4. #4
    Anarchist-Communist Supporter
    Forum Moderator
    Admin
    Join Date Sep 2003
    Location England
    Posts 14,875
    Rep Power 130

    Default

    *footsteps*

    Its HER!
  5. #5
    Join Date Mar 2006
    Posts 957
    Rep Power 12

    Default

    In b4 Rosa.
  6. #6
    Join Date Jan 2008
    Location East London
    Posts 20
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    [FONT='Times New Roman'][FONT=Calibri]
    *footsteps*Its HER! [/FONT][FONT=Calibri]
    [/FONT][/FONT]

    [FONT=Calibri][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][FONT=Calibri]HA...Jokes [/FONT][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][FONT=Calibri]Marxism is grounded in dialectics....you cannot be truly Marxist if u deny its existence. (That’s my opinion anyway...don't shout at me please [/FONT][/FONT][FONT='Times New Roman'][FONT=Calibri]).[/FONT][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][FONT=Calibri]To answer the question "How is Dialectical Materialism [DM] separable from Historical Materialism[HM]?"...it isn't. Rossa, (I’m speaking of her because I know her from YFIS, and have never read anything written by blackstone,) always claims that Marx differentiated between the two (DM & HM). Well this is incorrect. HM is connected, as with everything else, to dialects. HM does not float unattached to the dialectical world; if you understand HM then you are, in a sense, also understanding dialectics.[/FONT][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][FONT=Calibri]And it doesn’t matter if so called 'Marxists’ want to disagree with dialects...in the words of a great comrade: "you may not recognise dialectics, but comrade, dialectics recognises you." [/FONT][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][FONT=Calibri]And this is just my opinion; as I have said to Rossa I am yet 2 have read and understood enough Marxist works 2 form a concrete opinion. However I have 2 say Rossa...u argue that comrades use Marxism as a crutch, or for emotional support etc. Well it seems 2 me that u use dialectics 2 justify the historical failures in socialism, rather than examining the material reality behind those situations. It also appears that u may simply be unable 2 understand the complexity of dialectics. I don't mean 2 sound confrontational comrade; as I have said b4 I do respect u, and this is yet 2 change, (I also realise that u have not posted on this topic yet...but I’m sure u will, which is why I addressed this 2 u).[/FONT][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][/FONT]
    [FONT='Times New Roman'][FONT=Calibri]Anywayz...later comrades [/FONT][/FONT]
    "The dictatorship of the proletariat opens a wider scope to human genius the more it ceases to be a dictatorship. The socialist culture will flourish only in proportion to the dying away of the state." TROTSKY

    "Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions." EINSTEIN

    http://www.youtube.com/ecoTROTSKYIST
  7. #7
    Join Date Dec 2003
    Location Oakland, California
    Posts 8,009
    Rep Power 162

    Default

    Materialism without dialectics leads to static ways of thinking about the material world. The natural world and capitalist society are always in constant change and what I get from dialectics to a way to understand how things change.
  8. #8
    Join Date May 2006
    Location WESTERN USA
    Posts 2,626
    Rep Power 17

    Default

    Fuck Dialectics.. why? i don't get them, they are a waste of time.. try coming up to a working class person pushing that B.S. see how fast they walk away or slap you. LOL.

    we need more revolutions and less "isms"
  9. #9
    Join Date Dec 2003
    Location Oakland, California
    Posts 8,009
    Rep Power 162

    Default

    Fuck Dialectics.. why? i don't get them, they are a waste of time.. try coming up to a working class person pushing that B.S. see how fast they walk away or slap you. LOL.

    Dialectics are a tool for understanding change. I wouldn't say that you have to understand dialectics to be a revolutionary or a socialist, but it is helpful for understanding how opposing forces play off each other to cause change.

    If anyone goes out to a strike picket and starts a conversation on dialectics or materialism or permanent revolution, then they are probably not going to get much of a response. To say that a working person "can't get it" is just eletism though. I couldn't teach a class on Dialectics, but I can study and I can learn "complicated things" despite the supposed limitations of my class.

    Worker's aren't anti-intellectual; capitalism is just anti-intellectual-workers.

    In fact, for a revolution to be sucessful, most worker are going to learn and understand real things much more complicated than dialectics... things like why did this rebellion win and this one fail.
  10. #10
    Join Date Nov 2005
    Location UK
    Posts 16,778
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Z:

    We run into all kinds of trouble when we separate them.
    Like what?

    The only 'trouble' seems to be that one would have dialecticians (like you) bad-mouthing anyone who tried to 'separate' these two and giving them a hard time for questioning a defective theory.
  11. #11
    Join Date Nov 2005
    Location UK
    Posts 16,778
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Gravedigger:

    Dialectics are a tool for understanding change. I wouldn't say that you have to understand dialectics to be a revolutionary or a socialist, but it is helpful for understanding how opposing forces play off each other to cause change.
    Dialectics is probably the worst theory ever invented to try to explain change.

    Proof?

    Check this out:

    http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...57&postcount=2

    Materialism without dialectics leads to static ways of thinking about the material world. The natural world and capitalist society are always in constant change and what I get from dialectics to a way to understand how things change.
    Not so, ordinary and scientific language contain countless words that allow us to explain change far better than the wooden jargon dialecticians inherited from Hegel.

    Here is a shortened list:

    [FONT=Trebuchet MS]
    [FONT=Trebuchet MS]Vary[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS], alter, adjust, amend, revise, edit, bend, straighten, twist, turn, wrap, pluck, tear, mend, mutate, transmute, sharpen, modify, develop, expand, contract, constrict, swell, flow, differentiate, divide, unite, fast, slow, rapid, hasty, melt, harden, drip, cascade, drop, pick up, fade, wind, unwind, meander, peel, scrape, file, scour, dislodge, is, was, will be, will have been, had, will have had, went, go, going, gone, lost, age, flood, crumble, disintegrate, erode, corrode, rust, flake, percolate, tumble, mix, separate, cut, chop, crush, grind, shred, slice, dice, saw, spread, fall, climb, rise, ascend, descend, slide, slip, roll, spin, oscillate, undulate, rotate, wave, quickly, slowly, instantaneously, suddenly, gradually, snap, join, resign, part, rapidly, sell, buy, lose, find, search, cover, uncover, stretch, compress, lift, put down, win, ripen, germinate, conceive, gestate, die, rot, perish, grow, decay, fold, many, more, less, fewer, steady, steadily, jerkily, smoothly, quickly, very, extremely, exceedingly, intermittent, continuous, continual, push, pull, slide, jump, run, walk, swim, drown, immerse, break, charge, retreat, assault, dismantle, pulverise, disintegrate, dismember, replace, undo, reverse, repeal, enact, quash, hour, minute, second, instant, destroy, annihilate, boil, freeze, thaw, cook, liquefy, solidify, congeal, neutralise, flatten, crimple, evaporate, condense, dissolve, mollify, pacify, calm down, terminate, initiate, instigate, enrage, inflame, protest, challenge, expel, eject, remove, overthrow, expropriate, scatter, gather, assemble, defeat, strike, revolt, overthrow, riot, march, demonstrate, rebel, campaign, agitate, organise…[/FONT]
    [/FONT]

    And, despite what you have been told, Formal Logic can handle change too:

    [FONT=Times New Roman]http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2004.htm[/FONT]


    Summary here:

    [FONT=Times New Roman]http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/Summary_of_Essay_Four_Part_One.htm[/FONT]
  12. #12
    Join Date Nov 2005
    Location UK
    Posts 16,778
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    EcoTrot:

    [FONT=Times New Roman]
    [FONT=Times New Roman]And this is just my opinion; as I have said to Rossa I am yet 2 have read and understood enough Marxist works 2 form a concrete opinion. However I have 2 say Rossa...u argue that comrades use Marxism as a crutch, or for emotional support etc. Well it seems 2 me that u use dialectics 2 justify the historical failures in socialism, rather than examining the material reality behind those situations. It also appears that u may simply be unable 2 understand the complexity of dialectics. I don't mean 2 sound confrontational comrade; as I have said b4 I do respect u, and this is yet 2 change, (I also realise that u have not posted on this topic yet...but I’m sure u will, which is why I addressed this 2 u).[/FONT]
    [/FONT]

    [FONT=Times New Roman]1) I do not blame the failures of Dialectical Marxism on dialectics -- it is merely one of the causes (as I have said many times).[/FONT]

    [FONT=Times New Roman]2) In view of the fact that dialecticians respond almost invaribly in an emotive way to my criticisms, refusing even to read my work (like the priests who would not even look down Galileo's telescope), but still making stuff up about it (like you have just done), leaves one with the question: why do they almost all respond so irrationally?[/FONT]

    [FONT=Times New Roman]I have a theory why this is so, but it could be wrong.[/FONT]

    [FONT=Times New Roman]What is not in dispute is that dialectical mterialism is a failed theory because it is an erroneous theory -- however, you are welcome to try to show where my demolition of dialectics goes wrong, if you disagree with that.[/FONT]

    [FONT=Times New Roman]And it's 'Rosa', not 'Rossa'.[/FONT]
  13. #13
    Join Date Apr 2006
    Location UK
    Posts 6,143
    Rep Power 80

    Default


    A) The metaphysical quagmire of a dialectics of nature.
    Or
    B) The one-sided and over-deterministic version of historical materialism found in the analytical-Marxism of Cohen or the structural-Marxism of Althusser.

    The only 'trouble' seems to be that one would have dialecticians (like you) bad-mouthing anyone who tried to 'separate' these two and giving them a hard time for questioning a defective theory.
    I don't bad mouth your efforts but, and only occasionally, your attitude. You see, you can't even enter this debate without immediately throwing accusations around.
    "Events have their own logic, even when human beings do not." - Rosa Luxemburg

    "There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen." - Lenin

  14. #14
    Join Date Nov 2005
    Location UK
    Posts 16,778
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Z:

    A) The metaphysical quagmire of a dialectics of nature.
    Or
    B) The one-sided and over-deterministic version of historical materialism found in the analytical-Marxism of Cohen or the structural-Marxism of Althusser.
    These can all be avoided, without any of the mysticism you would like to re-introduce.

    I don't bad mouth your efforts but, and only occasionally, your attitude. You see, you can't even enter this debate without immediately throwing accusations around.
    On the contrary, almost from the beginning you have been abusing me, and getting far worse in return.

    And so it will continue...

    I told you that I would treat you with unremitting hostility until you show you are serious in wanting to debate with me.
    Last edited by Rosa Lichtenstein; 30th January 2008 at 23:37.
  15. #15
    Join Date Apr 2006
    Location UK
    Posts 6,143
    Rep Power 80

    Default

    These can all be avoided, without any of the mysticism you would like to re-introduce.
    Well that's good news. Can you elaborate?
    "Events have their own logic, even when human beings do not." - Rosa Luxemburg

    "There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen." - Lenin

  16. #16
    Join Date Nov 2005
    Location UK
    Posts 16,778
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Z:

    Well that's good news. Can you elaborate?
    No.
  17. #17
    Join Date Jan 2008
    Location East London
    Posts 20
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    HA
    "The dictatorship of the proletariat opens a wider scope to human genius the more it ceases to be a dictatorship. The socialist culture will flourish only in proportion to the dying away of the state." TROTSKY

    "Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions." EINSTEIN

    http://www.youtube.com/ecoTROTSKYIST
  18. #18
    Join Date Nov 2005
    Location UK
    Posts 16,778
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Eco, what is that supposed to mean?
  19. #19
    Join Date Jan 2008
    Location East London
    Posts 20
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Eco, what is that supposed to mean?


    I just found your refusal to back up your own statement rather amusing...especially considering that you critise other comrades because you believe their arguments have no validity
    "The dictatorship of the proletariat opens a wider scope to human genius the more it ceases to be a dictatorship. The socialist culture will flourish only in proportion to the dying away of the state." TROTSKY

    "Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions." EINSTEIN

    http://www.youtube.com/ecoTROTSKYIST
  20. #20
    Join Date Nov 2005
    Location UK
    Posts 16,778
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    I only refused to explain this to Z, not to anyone else.

Similar Threads

  1. Beyond anti-dialectics... anti-materialism!
    By Luís Henrique in forum Theory
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 3rd September 2006, 03:51
  2. Why dialectics?
    By ComradeRed in forum Theory
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 7th September 2005, 01:12
  3. Dialectics
    By Karl Marx's Camel in forum Learning
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 7th June 2005, 02:28
  4. Dialectics
    By ComradeRed in forum Learning
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12th October 2004, 14:08
  5. Dialectics
    By ComradeRed in forum Theory
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 9th September 2004, 21:32

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Tags for this Thread

Website Security Test