OK Platt, so hurrah - we agree Marx intents and objectives were indeed freedoms for the many - what you dislike are the means ...
When you say "But you see, that's the whole point. Imposing tyranny to create freedom is a horrible oxymoron, right out of the pages of Orwell. What good are good intentions if they result in millions murdered?" Imposing tyranny is your spin, but you might ask that question of anyone going to "war" - using lethal force - in the name of a "just" cause ? Sometimes the means do seem to justify the ends, no ? Pretty common US case for war-like interventions in living memory. It's a pragmatic matter of degree and intentions. Eggs have to be broken to make an omelette, some might say. Ian On 7/8/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Platt, resorting to the dictionary again, rather that what he actually says > > ... > > > > You distort the picture (as usual) by ignoring that the passage you > > re-quote starts with Marx words "Of course, in the beginning ..." > > > > He is pointing out that there is dirty work to be done, dirty work > > that would be despotic by any standards (yes, even Merriam-Webster), > > to break down establishment barriers to freedoms, BEFORE freedoms can > > be available to all. > > > > There is little doubt that his ideal outcome, his intentions, were on > > liberal conditions for the maximum number of people. He was simply > > prepared to preach "revolution" to get there - creative destruction. > > But you see, that's the whole point. Imposing tyranny to create freedom > is a horrible oxymoron, right out of the pages of Orwell. What good are > good intentions if they result in millions murdered? > > > Personally I'm not prepared to support that line, but it doesn't change > > Marx clear liberal intentions. Part of the reason the word "liberal" > > is deliberately confused with "left" in US neo-con eyes. As if the > > only freedoms that matter are "the free market" and any other > > conception of liberal is a dirty word. > > The freedoms that matters to conservative besides the free market are freedom > of > speech, religion, trial by jury, etc. as described by Pirsig as intellectual > values, guaranteed in the U.S. by the Bill of Rights. "Liberal" in the U.S. > has > come to mean left-wing communism/socialism. > > Platt > > > > On 7/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Quoting ARLO J BENSINGER JR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > [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'... > > > > > > Definition of DESPOTIC from Merriam-Webster: " . . .exercising power > > tyrannically." > > > Another Orwellian obfuscation from the self-proclaimed Critical Thinker. > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ > 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/ > 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/
