My father's thesis was on Leninism. That was in 1931. Later he was associated with Sen. Wm. Benton and became a target of McCarthy as a way to discredit Benton who was working against McCarthy and eventually was instrumental, with Adlai Stevenson, in bringing him down. This is all old and long-gone history now. But now I should dig out that thesis and read it again. In his maturity, my father never owned a single share of stock but was certainly engaged in capitalist business. A paradoxical position but rather common for those who were informed and sensitive to the economic turmoils of the first half of the 20thC.
Several years ago I had a show of work centered on the Haymarket affair and the so-called great migration of poor southern blacks to Chicago. One of those works, Anarchist, is on the cover of my recent retrospective catalog. I don't know where I stand. Can one stand for morality? I don't have very much faith in any economic system because whatever system there is will always be used, ultimately, to abuse people and destroy freedom. What matters is the accountability --checks and balances-- proper laws, and moral courage and history shows that all systems lead to unaccountable power in the hands of very few. Unaccountable capitalism will always pool money in small but very deep ponds and an oligarchical rule whereas an unaccountable socialism will lead to a destruction of society and innovation due to totalitarian led bureaucracy. It's not the system but the people in charge, and their accountability that matter. As Tocqueville noted, the essential unit is law and the free courts and that's why he thought of lawyers as the real aristocrats, both for good and evil, speaking their own language, and capable of taking over. Everywhere we turn, we find the same human faults, greed and a lust for power, often in the name of "the people". The outstanding great thing about American capitalism and law is the always-present capability to correct abuses and exaggerated excesses -- to keep spreading those deep pools into parched land. I can't agree with those who blame systems instead of the people who run them -- and there's always a tiny group in charge. In America, we have a system that allows for a peaceful revolution every 4 years, as a check of those few in power. If, IF, there is leadership submission to constitutional laws ensuring basic freedoms and the limits of exploitation, and moral aspirations, those gospels of the Founding Fathers are still the best in the world. Call me a solid patriot! WC ________________________________ From: Saul Ostrow <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, May 1, 2009 9:38:04 AM Subject: Re: Transgenerational and transcultural art [was Heidegger and Histor ical Art] Your lack of knowledge is astounding - Marx's biggest complain concerning capitalism is that it is de-humanizing - that it turns us into commodities (labor time) - and in the process alienates us from our-selves and others - and as such destroys our ability to develop to our full capacity as human beings - Marx believed that the means of production as they developed would create a situation that would lead to our emancipation from devoting our lives to subsistence and that Capitalism had to be overthrown because it was a fetter on our ability to realize our full potential as human beings (Marx was a Hegelian) - Lenin understood this and this is the reason he had the support of groups like the constructivists and LEF and could implement the NEP - Stalin on the other hand was a vulgar materialists and did not understand culture in the most mechanistic terms as a tool of social and economic , and Trotsky (whose vision was informed by economism) misconstrued this goal- believing it could be arrived at by formalist means rather than through a planned process of social and cultural transformation. On 5/1/09 9:26 AM, "Chris Miller" <[email protected]> wrote: Now that we know Saul is a Leninist, I have to confess my fondness for so many statues of the famous Bolshevik. Not all of them (and thousands were made) -- but for the few that I have selected for my webmuseum - like this one: http://www.ilovefiguresculpture.com/masters/russian/sov8.jpg (though it might possibly look better if the head were lopped off) I've even selected some statues of his henchman, Felix Dzerzhinsky, founder of the secret police. I realize that together with Mao and Hitler, these are the most catastrophically destructive and murderous men of the 20th Century. What might account for the selections that I have made? The "economic, social, and cultural circumstances" that I share with millions of other Americans who are probably happy to see it all torn down? Even my guru-father dismissed all Soviet sculpture as "too academic". The problem with Saul's Marxist -- oops, I mean Leninist -- ideology is that it reduces the human experience to "economic, social, and cultural circumstances", and has no comprehension of the life of the spirit that is so different in each human being. (which is why this ideology has no problem with killing people -- and lots of them) ____________________________________________ Saul Ostrow | Visual Arts & Technologies Environment Chair, Sculpture Voice: 216-421-7927 | [email protected] | www.cia.edu<http://www.cia.edu/> The Cleveland Institute of Art | 11141 East Boulevard, Cleveland, OH 44106 ____________________________________________________________ Prices, software, charts & analysis. Click here to open your online FX trading account. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxUY6xgWP9DLcpMB0uNbSaFXW qdoT7QqpDdFrJpiOyRPpDnILUNyuc/ --
