Question for the Marxists Here

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Basset Hound, Jan 11, 2020.

  1. Basset Hound

    Basset Hound Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2018
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    133
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    According to Karl Marx, once Communism is established the State will 'wither away.' But in order to establish Socialism, (the predecessor to Communism), the State must be made all powerful. How do you make something 'wither away' by making it all powerful"
     
  2. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,695
    Likes Received:
    21,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    By instituting policy that intentionally breaks the state. Open borders + govt benefits for refugees, for example, will collapse the system into ruin and anarchy. Communists would attempt to guide the collapse and rebuilding towards collectivism.
     
  3. Steady Pie

    Steady Pie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    24,506
    Likes Received:
    7,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Socialism is supposed to lead to communism. Communism is not a form of government, but a society in which class distinctions do not exist.

    It's the same problem all anarchist political philosophies face - to get them going you need force. To enforce the anarchy you need force. Even under anarcho-Capitalism you need some sort of quasi-state (Nozick posits defense organisations) to prevent states from arising.

    I think the progression from socialism to communism has been conclusively debunked at this point. Not to mention it is obsolete. In Marx's time class was a very existential concept as if you were in the lower class you literally starved to death. These days there wouldn't be a single individual in the continental United States who died of acute starvation (excepting emergency situations and the such).

    Indeed I think this is responsible for a lot of the decline in left wing politics worldwide in recent years - the old paradigm simply doesn't apply anymore.

    The bottom line: talk is fine, but power is king and always will be.
     
    Sanskrit likes this.
  4. Anonymous.Professor

    Anonymous.Professor Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2020
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    It is just a mad idea, wrong from many perspectives. Economy under socialism under communist party leadership of course would like create an economic boom, with like the optimization of investment which would be achived by planned economy. And then it would be obvious soon to pretty much all how successful is this new economy and the movement will spread all over the world via revolutions led by communists, plus you would not need the state at the end anymore because all problems will be like solved and all will have a lot goods, be brothers, etc. Of course free market economy is much more opened to inovations than planned economy is. Inovations are making people richer in general but of course also by nature of the process also not equal concerning their money, interests and achivements. Of course the destriction of private property is also against basic human rights.

    In planned economy things are going in this way: big public spending is causing inflation, usually the purchasing power of the people is created by investments in war industry because totalitarian state should be made strong as much as possible and that is encouraging militarism and imperialism of such regimes. To control inflation state starts to control wages and prices of goods, which is leading to rationing of the goods by state. Then state starts to control what should be produced in factories and where money should be invested etc.

    From mismanaged economy = planned economy totalitarianism follows. Destroying of the free market is leading to black market flourishing. To destroy the black market state should impose severe penalties. The politicians which are more ruthless have their oportunity now to climb high in governament structure. Socialist economy enables their ruthleness as an advantage in political struggle with less harsh politicians, maybe more idealistic too.

    It was proven very wrong however many were indeed so fanatical about this that they were ready to commit any crime possible to like achieve this goal. In fact idealism was strong in the beginnings of communist revolutions and movements but later central committies just became groups of megalomanic assassins. They saw idealists in fact as dangerous because they knew they can become very disillusioned realizing what the system really is. So they put their hopes in the power of political police as their mad dog and servant.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2020
  5. Texas Republican

    Texas Republican Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2015
    Messages:
    28,121
    Likes Received:
    19,405
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Communism (and socialism to a lesser extent) run counter to human nature. So brutal, authoritarian regimes are needed to keep the population in line.
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2020
  6. Anonymous.Professor

    Anonymous.Professor Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2020
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
  7. Woolley

    Woolley Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2014
    Messages:
    4,134
    Likes Received:
    962
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In order to understand Marx, you have to somehow transport yourself back to Europe in the mid-1800s. The average person lived a horrible life and monarchies were still very common all across Europe. His ideas were formed by his experiences just as any other philosopher throughout history. I doubt if anyone but a Marxist scholar could really teach us what Marx was truly intending and even then it would be an informed guess.
     
  8. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,751
    Likes Received:
    14,562
    Trophy Points:
    113
    More importantly, why did he think that people would be content not to compete with one another and be content not to get ahead? It is the basic flaw of socielism. A strong government is required to enforce socialism. People will abandon it naturally as soon as they can.
     
  9. Anonymous.Professor

    Anonymous.Professor Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2020
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    For Marx in the centre of all was economy. Yet he mostly did not get it properly. But at his time communist party did not yet exists. Marx himself was not so totalitarian as later communist regimes and he would likely be killed by them. However communists claimed only they can interpret Marx just in the stile of grand inquisitors.

    According to Marx in fact you do not have first socialism and then communism after supposed economic boom caused by planned economy. But first capitalism is destroyed by workers revolution and they then establish so called dictature of proletarians. During this time they destroy political oposition and after this socialism starts.
     

Share This Page