The question of the working class has been confused by marxist theory and its place in the dynamics of socialist transformation has never been clarified. The idea is central to the left, and should be, but it needs to be put in perspective and seen realistically as one part of a larger analysis of all classes and their path to socialism. Marxist thinking generates immense resistance because it implies the elimination of all classes except the working class, absurd, but seemingly implied. The maoists and bolsheviks simply murdered immense numbers who didn’t fit in their rubrics and the result has totally discredited the basic ideology. The point should be obvious but still hasn’t sunk in with the marxist true believers. Continue reading ” Imaginary working class fantasies, daydreaming marxists…”
The debate over idealism and materialism (which still lingers today, no doubt) is a product of the early nineteenth century when reductionist scientism collided with hegelian idealism (and not only that), the latter a bit extravagant perhaps, and we see the extreme reaction in the generation of marx/engels. But the debate is pointless now, and in an age of quantum mechanics almost ridiculous. The obvious suggestion in general is that both views are right and somehow complementary.
The marxist left is still mired in the morass of that dated argument and needs to move on. Inflicting this one those who wish to move toward socialism is both pointless and highly prejudicial. The prospect of imposing hard-core materialism of the early science era on the whole of thought has alienated so many potential socialists that one has to wonder at the boxed mentation created by the marxist legacy.
The challenge to darwinism has been there all along buried by the establishment writers and academics. The question is confused by the issue of intelligent design, but its proponents have at least produced a lot of criticism of darwinism that is sometimes useful. Continue reading ” Dissent over darwinism is entering mainstream…so long to marxism’s darwin dogma, natural selection and class struggle, etc…”
The hopeless confusion created by bolshevism is made the worse by the rote and kneejerk refusal of many on the left to take a critical stance toward their legacy.
Many fail to see that a new canon must be prepared and this requires a critical marxism and a determination to critique and correct a frozen tradition. The whole subject requires a new terminology, and a failsafed consideration of how socialism might be possible.
The issue of capitalism’s failure has made a new left inevitable, but its way of being stuck in a groove will doom renewal…
The failure of capitalism and the return of socialist failsafes
January 23rd, 2016 · Continue reading “The failure of capitalism…and pseudo-socialism…”
Allende is but one example among the many that given the opportunity leftists have no coherent plan and are confused by the legacy of marxism, and even worse, marxists: there is no reason something like our DMNC couldn’t have slid into realization with relative ease, and the opportunity was there if allende had had more clarity from the leftist canon.
Nearly five decades after the coup that overthrew leftist president Salvador Allende, the Chilean left is starting to rebuild power. But it still wrestles with the legacy of the bloody defeat of Allende’s democratic revolution.
Source: Allende in Chile Today
Our DMNC may well have its own flaws (we used it, again today, scroll down, to critique standard left vacuum models): but the point is that marxists and leftists (viz. alpert and the chomskians) have no real plan for a socialist future: the idea is that if enough people who call themselves socialists, take over with a revolution, then their magic mantra will solve all the problems of socialist construction. Continue reading “DMNC taken critically, but still able to work day one…”
Closed world of marxist cult
January 9th, 2015 · http://darwiniana.com/?s=last+and+first+men
I am often surprised at the failure of many leftists to see the limits of marxism: that is because they cannot easily mix with outsiders, and have a closed view generated by conformity. That creates a situation of naivete: the general public won’t even listen to many of the old jargonized pitches of classic marxism.
The intent in Last and First Men is to change the ‘habits’ of thought that cluster around the ‘dead mass’
of nineteenth century to bolshevik cliches.
At a desperate moment radicals are so turned off they start to reinvent the subject in chaotic fashion. LFM shows a way to do that systematically while still doing justice to the canon.
I think more generally that ‘historical materialism’ is a dead duck in a culture now dominated by as many buddhists as marxists. It is irresponsible at this point to turn off systematically so many in the general public.
The issue of neo-communism can make ample use of the old marxism and yet completely change all the labels, rewrite theory/history and translate the core ideas of class and ideology to a new framework.
As things stand now the old marxist left is blocking any real activist group in the way it dogmatizes stale jargon.
I cannot even subscribe to the main marxist listservs to exchange commentary. Hard to believe