Epoch of the Marxist Youth

For aspiring and studying marxist youth to come together and discuss the true way forward
 
HomeHome  PortalPortal  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Anti communism

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
mattabesta
Studying Revolutionary
avatar

Posts : 154
Join date : 2008-07-04
Location : ICECUBE

PostSubject: Anti communism   Sat Jul 05, 2008 10:17 am

BOOM anti communism:

Eric Hoffer, in his book The True Believer, sees Marxism[1] as one of the chief examples of a mass movement which offers The True Believer a glorious, yet imaginary, future to compensate for the frustrations of his present. Such movements need people to be willing to sacrifice all for that future, including themselves and others. To achieve this aim, such movements need to devalue the past and present. This is not only a criticism of communist tenets specifically; Hoffer's other chief examples are Fascists, Nationalists, and the founding stages of religions.

Arthur Koestler describes Marxism as a closed system, like Catholicism or orthodox Freudianism. Such systems have three peculiarities: they claim to represent a universal truth which explains everything and can cure every ill; they can automatically process and reinterpret all potentially damaging data by methods of casuistry which are emotionally appealing and beyond common logic; and they can invalidate criticisms by deducing what the subjective motivation of the critic must be, and by presenting this motivation as a counterargument. An example of the third feature might be the disregarding of such concepts as the free market or self determination as instances of false consciousness engendered by bourgeois ideology.

BOOM:

Marx's version of the labor theory of value is a major pillar of traditional Marxian economics.[8] This theory, including Marx's version, is rejected for various reasons by the vast majority of economists today in favor of marginalism.

eVEN MORE!!!:

Karl Popper, a former Marxist, argued in The Open Society and Its Enemies that many of Marx's predictions have failed. Marx predicted declining rather than rising wages for the working class and a declining rate of profit for capitalists. He did not believe that state intervention in capitalist societies could affect trends he thought associated with capitalism such as increasing poverty. The socialist revolution would occur first in the most advanced capitalist nations. Once collective ownership had been established then all sources of class conflict would disappear

Professor of Economics David L. Prychitko also argues that Marx's predictions have not withstood the test of time. Although capitalist markets have changed over the past 150 years, competition has not devolved into monopoly with fewer and fewer capitalists as predicted. Real wages have risen and profit rates have not declined. Nor has there been a growing reserve army of the unemployed.[16]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Steel
Radical


Posts : 25
Join date : 2008-07-04

PostSubject: Re: Anti communism   Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:13 am

Since I hate to leave such things unanswered...

Quote :


Such movements need people to be willing to sacrifice all for that future, including themselves and others.



Hoffer is clearly bullshitting. I don't remember the old Social Democracy demanding that workers lay down their lives in order to establish a socialist society, in fact the SPD used to have a saying along the lines of “not one man nor one penny for this system”. And IIRC my AS history correctly party members could be involved in sports and such like with their 'comrades'. I don't see an army of spartan socialist warrior-fanatics growing out of that, thanks.

Quote :


glorious, yet imaginary, future to compensate for the frustrations of his present.



Which is why socialists maintain that a communist society could be brought about immediately if only the majority of people wanted it is it? Cause that doesn't sound like a glorious imaginary future, but a real future within our grasp. If such a criticism is to be brought about then it would be necessary to prove that socialism is unrealisable and thus imaginary. Socialists claim that a post scarcity society will be superior to the present one, in order to prove socialism impossible then they need only prove that scarcity is inevitable (and it would be necessary to do so without relying on assumptions or childish arguments, because no matter how much you dislike socialism, the fact remains that if you eat or drink too much you die).

Quote :

they claim to represent a universal truth which explains everything and can cure every ill



How so?
Marxist socialism may have been formulated with addressing the problems of industrial capitalism in mind, but this does not necessarily mean that it claims to 'cure every ill'. Nor do I think that any socialist would make that claim if you directly asked them, instead we envision a system in which it will be possible to address such ills, where we are not limited by artificial scarcity, or any of the other problems inflicted upon us by for-profit production and private ownership. Huge difference.

And what is meant by 'they claim to represent a universal truth'? I seriously cannot think of reading or hearing any socialist make such a claim, beyond the fact that socialism promotes a materialist outlook, in other words, that events have real world causes. Saying that this implies claiming to 'represent a universal truth' is complete bollocks since it could equally be applied to a scientist who refuses to believe that an illness is caused by demons. It promotes a way of looking at the past as any halfway decent historian would.


Quote :


they can automatically process and reinterpret all potentially damaging data by methods of casuistry which are emotionally appealing and beyond common logic



I am unaware of any instance where this has been done by socialists, where such thinking has been encouraged by socialists, or that this is something caused by an ideology rather than it being the reaction of an individual to a set of data that disagrees with their views. It is very difficult to defend yourself from such charges since they are so generic that they could be applied to everyone, this statement could be applied to a socialist who offers an alternative explanation for an event. A good thing (in this case thinking for yourself and not accepting everything you are told on faith) can be construed as a bad thing by changing the language used (as I have just demonstrated).
Another example would be calling someone's politics predictable. Change predictable to consistent and the tone of the whole thing is altered

As a socialist I largely get my history from non socialist books etc. especially since socialists are in the minority, not once have I felt it necessary to deny that events played out in the way that they are irrefutably demonstrated to have done. I may not agree with the conclusion of an individual historian, but that is my right as an individual with what you may like to call 'critical thinking', just as it is my right to agree with them if I consider their conclusion to be correct.

As far as I am concerned the last two points have involved twisting the reality through choosing an unflattering set of words to describe traits that should exist in the intellectual life of any healthy human society.

Quote :


they can invalidate criticisms by deducing what the subjective motivation of the critic must be, and by presenting this motivation as a counterargument.



Which is perfectly valid, and I am sure that when a history student studies sources they are encouraged to look at who was behind them and what their motivations are. Time and time again it is impossible to refute criticism because they are irrelevant or invented. It is impossible to refute the claim that we are all in the pocket of an international Jewish conspiracy, so it is legitimate point out that only an anti-Semite would make such a claim (Just as only a rapid anti-communist would use 'holodomor' as an argument against communism). It is as impossible to refute that an event happened when you are provided with no evidence that it did, just as it is impossible for you to refute the existence of the intangible monkey currently sitting on your shoulder.

Of course I do not agree with doing such a thing when the criticism is perfectly legitimate and is not based on anything which is possible to demonstrate as totally false. When this occurs it is once again a problem of the individual not the ideology.

Quote :


Marx's version of the labor theory of value is a major pillar of traditional Marxian economics.[8] This theory, including Marx's version, is rejected for various reasons by the vast majority of economists today in favor of marginalism.



Of course this makes no difference at all to whether or not socialism, that is, a post-scarcity society can function.

Quote :


many of Marx's predictions have failed.



Socialism and a materialist view of the world is not dependent on the ability of an otherwise unremarkable bloke from the 19th century to predict the future. Nor are the failure of such predictions a sufficient reason to abandon Marxist socialism.

Quote :


The socialist revolution would occur first in the most advanced capitalist nations. Once collective ownership had been established then all sources of class conflict would disappear



What are these sentences are they just there for show? IF they are meant to be wrong predictions then:
1.A socialist regime has never been established, nor has a socialist revolution taken place.
2.Following on from that the second sentence is irrelevant. However, taken in context it seeks to imply (as far as I can see) that collective ownership is the same as nationalisation. Nationalisation is not collective ownership and state capitalism is not socialism
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mattabesta
Studying Revolutionary
avatar

Posts : 154
Join date : 2008-07-04
Location : ICECUBE

PostSubject: Re: Anti communism   Thu Jul 10, 2008 12:58 pm

that's just for refrench I am NOT going to go thrugh stuff that I have debated before...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Anti communism   

Back to top Go down
 
Anti communism
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» MILLION - MAN PROTEST OVER ANTI-ISLAM FILM
» Anti-Tank Mines Stolen fromFreight Train
» The Politics of Nationalism under Communism in Bulgaria
» PRO AND ANTI-MCCANNS ON TWITTER
» 4th Light Anti- Aircraft Regiment RCA

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Epoch of the Marxist Youth :: The Opponents :: Polemics and Debates-
Jump to: