(10-30-2012, 11:37 AM)Jester Wrote: Class antagonism, far from defining politics, has largely receded into the background as a driving social force.I would add that individuals in Western capitalist countries experience class mobility. I have in-laws that struggled, grabbed the brass ring, got it, became millionaires, (briefly) before they returned to their former station due to greed, and their own demons. Children leaving the nest are in one class, while their parents now successful in their careers may be in another class. To me, this is a fundamental flaw in Marxism, the very definition of the struggle is not class. There are no more aristocrats and peasants. We are all aristocrats, and we are all peasants. The struggle is internal. Should I be money focused? Or, should I just endeavor to be happy? What about all the other unhappy people? These are values. These are individuals values.
More food for thought regarding the "religion" of Marxism;
"All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their property and possessions and divide them among all according to each one’s need." (Acts 2:44-45)
It sounds a lot like "From each according to their abilities, and to each according to their need," The difference between the early apostle's communal living, and the expressions of communism we've seen have been the use of guns in the latter case to compel the "converts" to surrender property and possessions. Or, as the Marxists describe it; the capitalist class will not agree to their own liquidation, such that a cooperative commonwealth is not likely to be attained without violence. This is the legacy of Marxism -- a trail of murder, misery, and destruction.
It makes me wonder why the early pacifist apostle approach worked so well. I think it worked because the underlying Christian philosophy views the attachment to "worldly" *real* objects as not only unnecessary, but often as sinful (when they are exhibited as the 7 deadly for example). Their view is that we are provided for (by God), no more, and no less than we need. This is the antithesis of materialism (hey, dialectics! The synthesis? Hypocrite televangelists like Jim Baker). Put another way, the Christians don't surrender their riches, or care (have love) for others because men tell them to do it, they do it because "God" tells them to do it. It is still their choice whether to follow or not.
FIT keeps talking about stateless bliss. Which, then I'm pretty sure quickly devolves into anarchy -- where some group, like the Holnists from "The Postman" (or another example would be warlords in Somalia. or tribal groups in Afghanistan) would use force to take whatever they wanted.
Beyond the careful deconstruction of history, we can look at the other "sciences" Marx actually believed in to gain insight to his propagandistic charlatanism. Such as phrenology; Harold Laski wrote, "A chosen band of helpers, all fellow-exiles used to accompany him and aid in the researches he conducted; though it should perhaps be added that they were not admitted as assistants until they had shown their agreement with Marx and passed certain cranialogical tests.”