[Platt] Direct contradiction of Arlo's assertion that Marx "never advocated tyranny" from the "Communist Manifesto." Read and judge for yourself (emphasis added):
[Arlo] "BY MEANS OF DESPOTIC INROADS on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionizing the mode of production." Sure, read this carefully and judge, as Platt suggests. Marx is not promoting the establishment of a tyranny, but expressing the anticipated violent struggle with established capistocratic power. There is no doubt Marx envisioned the communist transition to be one of violent struggle (just as the Monarchy of Britain did not respond kindly to those who thought to rebel against her power over them). As such, freeing and holding the means of the production through the revolution was (Marx believed) going to be both difficult and bloody. The transitional government would need to secure and protect the newly liberated means of production, and as such would need the power and ability to do so. So, yes, read that passage carefully. And for context read the entries for Marxism and Communism on Wikipedia. Marx does not advocate tyranny, indeed the only targets of the statement above are those Marx saw as the enslavers of men, and the anticipated resistance they would respond with as their power over the masses was threatened. Don't buy into the talk-radio hype, its just bunk. But I bet that won't stop 'em from squalkin'... 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/
