national communist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-09-2015, 10:24 AM
RE: national communist
(20-09-2015 05:42 AM)Banjo Wrote:  ...
As I was about to sell the book I found my 300 dollars. Smile

Isn't that capital, dear chap.

Big Grin

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
21-09-2015, 05:23 PM
RE: national communist
I forgot to reply to this.

(20-09-2015 08:52 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Sure, his ideas changed the world. But what was the cost of such change? And, yes it counts, though not necessarily in favour of Marx.

The cost? Is a philosopher's worth measured by what people do based on his ideas? Because, I mean, I'm pretty sure some decent philosophers have inspired utterly evil people.

(20-09-2015 08:52 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Nor it mean that such idea was good. Also unforseen circumstances or just being nothing more than utopia and/or mean to take the wealth and freedom of others away?

That's oversimplifying it. I mean, Jesus, we're talking about a man who lived more than 150 years ago. A philosophical idea may be worthy of praise even if it's not applicable in real life. In fact, that's most often the case with philosophy.

(20-09-2015 08:52 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Without Marx and his writings such horror could not have come to pass. I would not say that he was directly responsible, but in my opinion Marx name never will be clear of the odium of XX century tragedies.

Again, even if you want to blame philosophers for acts of people (which is just silly), know that you won't find anyone in history blameless.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like undergroundp's post
21-09-2015, 06:09 PM
RE: national communist
(20-09-2015 08:22 AM)Banjo Wrote:  
(20-09-2015 08:07 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  Well, just because we disagree with a philosopher it doesn't mean they're stupid. Of course Marx wasn't exactly scientific, but many of his ideas changed the world. That should count for something. You can't even be a politician without having studied Marx.

I'm not a communist and don't take this as a defense of communism, but the fact that something failed due to unforeseen circumstances does not mean that the original idea was faulty. Besides, Marx was only a philosopher. He wasn't responsible for what happened in Russia and China.

Philosophers make mistakes. They're not perfect, but that does not lessen their worth. Marx was a brilliant mind and I don't think the word "idiot" does him justice. That's all.

And it's always nice to find forgotten money Tongue


Of course we are all different and hopefully come to different conclusions. I simply present mine at the time I read it.

I felt that not including human selfishness, after over thousands of years of written history recording it, was a very bad conclusion.

Like I said, the serfdom/landowner relationship was outdated and needed to be changed. It was with murder and slaughter with the murder of Trotsky crowning it followed by communist dictatorships beginning with Stalin. So the system collapsed The world over within a few decades.

That system was faulty from the start. Marx was wrong! Had he included human selfishness in his philosophy, he may have come up with a more useful realistic and effective system.

As it happens he failed.

At least in my opinion.

He definitely included selfishness in his ideas at least in other regards. I don't think that's what was the limiting factor.

He at other points said he thought it would be impossible for democracy and capitalism to work side to side.. because people (being selfish) wouldn't possible vote against their benefiting self interests. That idea was prosperously wrong. It didn't take into account the simple ability to mislead & manipulate masses of people in such easy non-critical manners to their lives.

I don't know why anyone defines themselves with some label of some set view to this particular view in such a case like this. I mean, okay you view yourself as a national communist.. what does that do for you?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2015, 10:23 PM
RE: national communist
(21-09-2015 05:23 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  The cost? Is a philosopher's worth measured by what people do based on his ideas? Because, I mean, I'm pretty sure some decent philosophers have inspired utterly evil people.

Yes, the cost. Paid in human lives. Don't care about Marx but you said that his ideas changed the world and this should count for something. So I ask what was the cost of such change.

(21-09-2015 05:23 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  That's oversimplifying it. I mean, Jesus, we're talking about a man who lived more than 150 years ago. A philosophical idea may be worthy of praise even if it's not applicable in real life. In fact, that's most often the case with philosophy.

If idea can be worthy of praise even if not applicable then it also could be worthy of scorn if used to make millions suffer.

(21-09-2015 05:23 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Again, even if you want to blame philosophers for acts of people (which is just silly), know that you won't find anyone in history blameless.

I blame him for making something apparently easy to coopt by totalitarian regimes. Though in great scheme of things his blame is minor as I think (hope?) he didn't intend it to be used in such way.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-09-2015, 03:27 AM
RE: national communist
(21-09-2015 10:23 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  Yes, the cost. Paid in human lives. Don't care about Marx but you said that his ideas changed the world and this should count for something. So I ask what was the cost of such change.

You're seriously taking it too far. Would it have been better had Marx never existed? Would no wars and exiles and murders have happened for other reasons?

(21-09-2015 10:23 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  I blame him for making something apparently easy to coopt by totalitarian regimes. Though in great scheme of things his blame is minor as I think (hope?) he didn't intend it to be used in such way.

I'm pretty sure Hitler loved Nietzsche but I don't see anyone blaming Nietzsche for WWII.
I'm pretty sure that if Marx lived to see what became of his ideas, he'd be horrified.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-09-2015, 04:26 AM
RE: national communist
(22-09-2015 03:27 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  I'm pretty sure that if Marx lived to see what became of his ideas, he'd be horrified.

And he'd write a sequel: Das Fuck-You All

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
22-09-2015, 06:29 AM (This post was last modified: 22-09-2015 06:34 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: national communist
(22-09-2015 03:27 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  You're seriously taking it too far. Would it have been better had Marx never existed? Would no wars and exiles and murders have happened for other reasons?

I'm taking it too far? How exactly? By reminding that whatever changes you're claiming Marx idea played role in did not came without costs?

As for Marx not existing maybe it would be better, maybe it would be worse I see no reason to speculate.

Did I say that Marx was cause of all suffering or you're trying to make straw man?

(22-09-2015 03:27 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  I'm pretty sure Hitler loved Nietzsche but I don't see anyone blaming Nietzsche for WWII.

I'm not sure if Hitler loved Nietzsche works, nor I particulary care.

I also never heard someone blaming Nietzsche for WWII, but I quite often heard that Nazi ideologues had reasons to be grateful to him.

(22-09-2015 03:27 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  I'm pretty sure that if Marx lived to see what became of his ideas, he'd be horrified.

Maybe. Or maybe not. It's not like Soviet Union didn't have it's supporters even during Great Terror.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-09-2015, 06:50 AM
RE: national communist
(22-09-2015 06:29 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  I'm taking it too far? How exactly? By reminding that whatever changes you're claiming Marx idea played role in did not came without costs?

Almost everything comes with a cost. Besides, would we now know that the dictatorship of the proletariat was a bad idea if it had never happened?

(22-09-2015 06:29 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  As for Marx not existing maybe it would be better, maybe it would be worse I see no reason to speculate.

Did I say that Marx was cause of all suffering or you're trying to make straw man?

Nope, that's not what I said at all. I'm just pointing out that random things affect the way history progresses and you're pointing out Marx as the instigator of things that were caused by other people in his ignorance. You can blame Marx for what happened in the USSR as much as you can blame Plato for the spread of Christianity in Ancient Greece.

(22-09-2015 06:29 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  I'm not sure if Hitler loved Nietzsche works, nor I particulary care.

I also never heard someone blaming Nietzsche for WWII, but I quite often heard that Nazi ideologues had reasons to be grateful to him.

You may not care, but that was my argument right there, which you seem to ignore. Just because you haven't heard someone blame Nietzsche for WWII, it doesn't mean that no one does.

We have a long history with communism here in Greece (not sure about Poland though) and trust me, people of almost all political parties see Marx as an important figure in the history of politics and few are those who blame him for whatever happened in the USSR. Maybe our perspectives are different.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-09-2015, 07:12 AM (This post was last modified: 22-09-2015 07:18 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: national communist
(22-09-2015 06:50 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  Almost everything comes with a cost.

Sure. But this particular cost was damn high I would say.

(22-09-2015 06:50 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  Besides, would we now know that the dictatorship of the proletariat was a bad idea if it had never happened?

I think that word dictatorship is a good clue about what we should have expect. Also I would preffer not knowing than living in country which knew "lovely" embrace of big brother.

Not knowing what dictatorship of the proletariat would entail is much better than rivers of blood that have flown thanks to knowing what it looked like in my opinion.

(22-09-2015 06:50 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  Nope, that's not what I said at all. I'm just pointing out that random things affect the way history progresses and you're pointing out Marx as the instigator of things that were caused by other people in his ignorance.

I blame him cause if not for him there would be not marxism-leninism. Though as I said earlier I don't place much guilt on him.

And yes if not marxism-leninism there could be whoever-leninism (or not) but then I would blame whoever was first name in x-leninism.

(22-09-2015 06:50 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  You can blame Marx for what happened in the USSR as much as you can blame Plato for the spread of Christianity in Ancient Greece.

I don't think so. But if you will claim that Plato was in some however small way guilty of this I won't disagree.

(22-09-2015 06:50 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  You may not care, but that was my argument right there, which you seem to ignore. Just because you haven't heard someone blame Nietzsche for WWII, it doesn't mean that no one does.

I don't care if someone blames Nietzsche, I only said that I've never heard someone blaming him for WWII, only for nazism. I haven't spoken about validity of such I only said that I've never heard such claim to be uttered.

(22-09-2015 06:50 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  We have a long history with communism here in Greece (not sure about Poland though) and trust me, people of almost all political parties see Marx as an important figure in the history of politics and few are those who blame him for whatever happened in the USSR. Maybe our perspectives are different.

Poland too had quite long experience with communism or let's call it soviet style socialism, cause communism as I often heard wasn't achieved. And our perspective is certainly different; Marx isn't seen here in any kind of positive light (in most cases), though he is somewhat important historical figure. Bad but important.

Also I don't exactly blame him for what happened in USSR but rather for making something that could apparently be easilly used by dictators. It's more than possible that I wasn't clear in this.

My main problem was with you saying that Marx ideas changed the world and that should count for something. I think so too, but I think one can't ascribe him only good things (as I assumed such change you have spoken about was positive) without making clear that whatever negative came from his ideas was also thanks to him.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-09-2015, 07:30 AM
RE: national communist
(22-09-2015 07:12 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  My main problem was with you saying that Marx ideas changed the world and that should count for something. I think so too, but I think one can't ascribe him only good things (as I assumed such change you have spoken about was positive) without making clear that whatever negative came from his ideas was also thanks to him.

Einstein's ideas changed the world. Newton's too for that matter. People can't be held responsible for what other people do with their ideas.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: