Allow me to clear up one last round of distortive propaganda... [Platt] So let's have the German word in the original translated as "despotic." I have a friend who will be glad to translate again. Otherwise, your point is pointless.
[Arlo] No need. The German version is available online. "Es kann dies natürlich zunächst nur geschehen vermittelst despotischer Eingriffe in das Eigentumsrecht und in die bürgerlichen Produktionsverhältnisse, durch Maßregeln also, die ökonomisch unzureichend und unhaltbar erscheinen, die aber im Lauf der Bewegung über sich selbst hinaustreiben und als Mittel zur Umwälzung der ganzen Produktionsweise unvermeidlich sind." Again, as I said the first time, you have to (1) look at the word in context. Marx was specific "despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production". As I said, Marx predicted the wresting of power from the capistocracy would be bloody and violent, and this one phrase points exactly and only to that. Also, (2) a read of Marx in entirety (try The German Ideology) shows clearly that Marx saw nothing tyrannical about the transitional phase towards communism other than the violence from the entrenched capistocracy that he felt must be met with violence. Finally, (3) Marx's use (as was common at the time) of "dictatorship" is more along the lines of simple "rule". Marx advanced what he called "the dictatorship of the proletariat", in contrast to the "dictatorship of the bougeoise". Marx spoke in colorful, emotionally fueled rhetoric as a way of energizing a revolution he felt was necessary to free man from his capistocratic enslavement. [Platt] Quoting from the Communist Manifesto is taken as propaganda? That's "critical thinking" for you as practiced by a self-proclaimed academic. [Arlo] Quoting is not propagandistic. Applying appalling talk-radio "logic" in an effort to deceive people away from any intended meaning and towards your perennial goal of capistocratic masturbation _is_. The funny thing here is that I don't even agree with Marx on this. I think he was way wrong, as history has shown, on both the need for violent revolution and the willingness of people to cast of material enslavement. Instead, I think we ARE in a non-violent transitional state at this time. We have moved beyond the evils of early Industrialization, secured for labor safety regulations, vacation time, insurance, decent wages, termination protections and due process. We are long way from the world Marx wrote in, and for that we should all be thankful. I also believe transitions of this magnitude can only be achieved when a critical mass of people come to see the chains that bind them. Any Marxist revolution, I believe, has to be a bottom-up revolution, it can never be imposed top-down. Such was the mistake Marx made. And it was just such a bottom-up revolution that led to the reforms and labor protections and work laws that we mostly all take for granted. [Platt] Yes, by all means. While you are at it, check out: http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/Communism.htm [Arlo] Oh yes, please check out this site! Try the main page "http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/"; and see how long it takes you to guess what their angle is? (Clue, it begins with "Christ" and ends with "ianity"). For fun, take a look at their "discussion" on creationism. Yes, by all means, you should consider what THEY say about Marxism. Right. [Platt] It sure is, from the voices of the millions murdered under Marxist communism in Russia, China, North Korea, Cambodia and Cuba. [Arlo] Thanks for the final squalk, you make the EIB mic proud. As I said way back in the origins of this thread. The road from Marxism to the brutal dictatorships mentioned went through Lenin, and then Stalin. And this trajectory adopted a neoconservative policy that "man" needs to believe in the Glorious Nation, that unwaivering state patriotism was necessary to control and orient the masses. For Lenin, this adoption was benign (in his view). The population (as Strauss also advanced) needs a strong state myth lest it slide into selfishness. For Stalin, this became the main thing, and lost was anything Marx would ever sanction. There was no "Marxist communism" in Russia (or the other places). What there was was an original Marxist ideology usurped by the same state nationalism advanced by the neocons, which led to a total misdirection and finally to the tyranny where state nationalism can always only lead. And with that final round cleared up, Platt. Squalk away. 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/
