[Craig] Not so--you missed my point. I was not equating the thought/action of Marx with Hitler. My linguistic point was that characterizing Marx as CONCERNED with freedom was like characterizing Hitler as concerned with the health of Jews. Hitler was "concerned" with the health of Jews in the sense that he was concerned they shouldn't have too much.
[Arlo] Again, Criag, that's only from a perspective that equates "property" with "freedom". Marx's aim was to free people from the bonds of commodity fetishism that he saw as the result of just such an association. [Craig] Under Marxism you have one "choice": to do it Marx's way. [Arlo] That's just flat out incorrect. Marx saw the end result of man's liberation as the abolishment of government (no one would make you do anything), but that freed of his "need" to "acquire", man would voluntarily participate in social and local communes aimed at bettering the conditions for all while allowing individuals to strive for their own personal meaning. >From "The German Ideology", cited on Wikipedia: "In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic." Hardly "state coercion to do anything". There would be no need to force anyone from "being a capitalist", because man would see that such a thing was a low quality trap used to ensnare others. Given control over their means of production, there could, in fact, be no "capitalists". In other words, the only thing you couldn't be is an enslaver of men. That's how Marx saw it. [Craig] Being able to choose which you want is being free. That's why the free market is concerned with freedom (hence the name) & Marxism is not. [Arlo] Again, anyone who has read Marx knows this to be wrong. Marxism is about freedom, freedom from the commodity fetishism and property acquisition that props up the modern market, pushing the folk deeper and deeper into debt and so into slavery. Beyond this financial slavery, the modern market enslaves man to his own material desires. Freed from these, people would buy, sell and trade goods based on a philosophy of social participation rather than selfish greed. As I said, you can criticize Marx for being naively optimistic about human nature, and I'd likely be right there with you. [Craig] It does no good to say Marx is concerned with freedom because he wants to avoid workers' alienation. Just as private property is not freedom, neither is avoiding worker alienation (commendable as it is.) [Arlo] No, you're right. But this was just one example of man's enslavement Marx sought to overcome. Or rather, he firmly believed that once exposed, men would everywhere reject their enslavement and regain their freedom. Obviously, he was wrong. moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
