Marxist Theory Thread

What is everyone's opinions about Marx's theories?

There are some things I don't like. And other things I do like.

Hope this helps.

When starting a thread, it's generally polite to add your opinions first.

On a serious note, his theories are somewhat outdated in certain aspects but neo-marxism attempts to rectify that. As with most sociology, it's entirely dependent on your personal perspective.

My opinion of Marxist theory that it's a natrual transition from capitalist modes of production to workers mode of production (like for example, everything would fall into public domain and even this very internet we're using is a small glimpse of socialism which is why the capitalists are desperate trying to privatize it) , you see Marx originally intedended to have the revolution occur in industrialized natiions/countries (like most of the modern world is today) like Germany at the time while Russia was a agricultural feudal society and that's when everything got corrupted from there because it didn't under go the correct transition procedure (Russia should have transitioned from Tsarism to Capitalism then to Communism/Socialism later on).

Interesting – it's time to make break from coding. - This is not a proper logical response
Marx/Engels is sort of a must study in most socioeconomic syllables. In simple terms, listen to Otep – Noose & Nail. It sums up what I think about that theory pretty well. It's a theory, only. The fatal flaw in any theory is human nature. We are predators, not workers. The only time the masses rise is when they get hungry, not if they get overworked. At least I don't know any portion in history where slaves rose to the occasion. The class struggle exists only on CNN and in some lecture halls. If one wishes to move from one class to another one can do so. Classes existed since the dawn of time and there will be the top and the bottom. Today, here too, thou shalt not forget what humans are. We are anything but theoretical testing grounds for social perfezzows, to develop an utopia of a Star Trek Enterprise world. Just give us a place to eat, sleep and have our kids.
As for the history of Russia I think Lenin did a drastic reinterpretation of Marx/Engels to give his overthrow of the Tzar a kind of authority of thought. I see just one clever predator eliminating another. Along came Stalin, a great leader, yes ruthless, a great leader never the less in my books and build an empire. I'm not sure if he even read Marx, and sort of redefined Lenin's Communism. - Right now we have Obama doing what you think Russia should have done, moving towards socialism from capitalism. We'll see if this is the way to go.
Bottom line, Marx is to me a waste of paper. Well, you did ask.

Marx theory essentially lables society, it establishes segregation in the classes. When marx wrote his theory it was an analysis of how the world works now and how he felt it could be brought down and changed to work towards a communist ideal. In doing so he's created essentially the concept of how the old industrial world worked, by classifying people under Upper, Lower and Middle classes- Communism however changes this to Lower and Middle-- turning the state into the upper "ruling" class. When we refer to "Marxism" we're refering to the fact that he defined pretty clearly how industry works and how society works with industry- then suggesting ways for communism to eventually fix that to benefit the workers.. What unfortunately happened though was corruption on a mass scale. You cannot argue that the Communists were socialist, they were not doing things to benefit the people, maybe Karl Marx did so with the intention of that-- but the movement became corrupt when the Bolsheviks came into power.

However understanding Marxism is a way to understanding how socialism works, the modern socialist ideal though is much superior to the ones that Marx suggested because unlike his theory, modern socialists seek to actually make the world better for everyone where they feel the state should provide all the things people need to survive as a basic human right completely unbaised against class.

Its funny that America has such a strong Capitalist stance because you can see a very Socialist ideal in the founding fathers of America, in fact if they were alived today that'd be very unimpressed with how poorly people at the bottom are treated, America was built on the idea that everyone was free and had every opportunity for survival.. But now with Corporate America all that's happened is they've replaced one Monarchy with another one and the people are in financial chains, forever doomed to working a dead end job to pay off their house. America sounded like a good idea, but much like Communism has fallen into its own form of corruption, and whilst I do feel Obama realized this-- he himself has failed to do anything about it, this is why I doubt he'll be re-elected, its one thing to point out corruption, but its another thing entirely to fix the problems.

Someone wrote: If one wishes to move from one class to another one can do so.

^ I don't agree with this at all. There is soo much stopping you from moving up in the world. It's not that easy and that's why the concept of the "Free Market" is a complete and utter lie. Not everyone is able to just setup a business in a particular industry. I will say though that the Internet has definately helped open up the market, it is a bit more free than what it used to be. Now anyone can get online and sell a product internationally. But as for working, you cannot progress a lot of the time, some companies deliberatly sabotage people's careers to ensure they can never progress up the class system- its because capitalists don't want to have to pay people any more than what they have to- and they want to keep it that way.

If you end up asking for too much money you'll be fired. What America has foolishly pioneered however is the idea of Globalization where it can then exploit third world countries who have dodgy industry laws so they can pay the employees what ever they want- this in turn means a lot of good people will loose their jobs. This is hardly fair on us and its hardly fair on them.

Mr_Cyberpunk wrote:

Someone wrote: If one wishes to move from one class to another one can do so.

^ I don't agree with this at all. There is soo much stopping you from moving up in the world. It's not that easy and that's why the concept of the "Free Market" is a complete and utter lie. Not everyone is able to just setup a business in a particular industry. I will say though that the Internet has definately helped open up the market, it is a bit more free than what it used to be. Now anyone can get online and sell a product internationally. But as for working, you cannot progress a lot of the time, some companies deliberatly sabotage people's careers to ensure they can never progress up the class system- its because capitalists don't want to have to pay people any more than what they have to- and they want to keep it that way.

If you end up asking for too much money you'll be fired. What America has foolishly pioneered however is the idea of Globalization where it can then exploit third world countries who have dodgy industry laws so they can pay the employees what ever they want- this in turn means a lot of good people will loose their jobs. This is hardly fair on us and its hardly fair on them.

Interesting. (As my first post, those are just my thoughts, not logically sorted as a debate )
A – I did switch classes. Low Labour Class in Germany with no education to affluent Canadian. I'm not talking a job, I'm talking free enterprise. The moment you've got a job, you are slave to the one who gave you your job. If you want to escape slavery you can, at least in America.

B – I agree fully with your assessment of Corporate America, though. But even there, I think, unless the Stock Holders are starting to starve their slaves (in my way of thinking I see no difference between a CEO or a Janitor), no one will rise against them. In fact they are quite happy to please their masters right now. The propaganda machine called TV supports Corporate America very well. “We are in a recession.” “We have to be thankful for our job.” Bla bla bla bla. And those hired to think, say a professor, forces their students to study Marx, which in turn just sees one way to make a living. I have yet to find one Economist Professor to even glance at the Wall Street Journal. Sad really.

Someone wrote: I did switch classes. Low Labour Class in Germany with no education to affluent Canadian. I'm not talking a job, I'm talking free enterprise.

I think there's a huge difference between Communist Occupied Germany and Liberal Democratic Canada, its not a good example of Marxist progression, rather an example of why Democracy is superior to Communism.. but its not exactly perfect either.

Someone wrote: If you want to escape slavery you can, at least in America.

Slavery has just been replaced by Employment. The only difference is now you're paid to be a slave. You cannot honestly tell me what companies like Nike and The Gap in 3rd world countries is exactly ethical now can you? that is basically as close to slavery as you can get and its propogated by Americans.. whom are considered to be of the best kind of Americans, and those products are being sold to American citizens. The entire process makes me sick- and this is 100% America's fault because it invented this back in the late 1980s to early 1990s. Further more the new banking system that ultimately caused the GFC is another form of slavery, slavery to debt and slavery to the banks- another 1990s American idea. As I said, America sounded like a good idea, but corrupted itself- and its is more apparent than ever before that it is a corrupt nation- the GFC just blew that corruption wide open for everyone to see for themselves.

What I am a huge fan of is pre-Industrial capitalism, the idea that anyone can have a business, run a business and deal with locals. A good economy is where there are 1000s of craftsmen earning a modest living- not 1 craftsman earning the equivilent of 1000. I feel Monopolies cause more problems than they actually fix and we only have to look at Microsoft to see why Monopolies are a bad idea, they do not make people happy.

Edited by: formerlyknownasMrCP

Never, ever take Marxism to the letter. While we may all agree with some of its principles, Marxism has many unconvenient secrets to hide.

I'll give it a shot:

1. what is the question all about ?
What are the "Marxist theories" you are talking about ? In the today's context you should be much more specific, because people either tend to tie Marx or other Philosophers/Economists/Theorists to plain communism and/or socialism, which is totally different, you should really NOT mix the theory and the practice, especially for such an important matter.

2. Society and politic depends on psychology
It is easier to install a system which runs on numbers rather than a system than runs on human values. Nobody can contradict numbers, so it is way better to scheme a society on a model that much simple, rather than a society that works based on principles which can makes good sense. Religion is here to replace our human values and logics, and taint it with "goodness" of all sorts, acting as some kind of substitute to good sense, which is different.
On top of that, opinions are very hard to be bent efficiently (but in a lot of cases, they happen to be), and it will be always be more comfortable to have a system relying on explicit laws and economy rather than some "faith in humanity".

3. We already live in a socialist world
Like it or not, you already live in a socialist world. It's far from being the most socialist you could imagine: taxes act as some kind reverse-capitalist system, where welfare is redistributed somewhat equally. It provides already a lot of things, but it's hard to really know what money goes where, and here it's pinned down: money.

4. Money
Money act as some sort of "hold-it-all" regulator, making everybody able to understand that everything has a value.
What we are currently unable to correctly understand, is how to evaluate welfare fairly for everyone, because nowadays we just don't: do you think normal that the money which everybody uses to eat and sleep decently is the same money people can use to build a private palace, private jets, luxuous cars, or any sort of things.

In fact money forces us to accept that one can work for another person, but at some point, if the former individual has not any money and die of starvation, it's never the fault of the employer, or the owner of the enterprise, or the system, etc. Capitalism is just like a poker game with a Darwinian kind of selection philosophy: if you don't fit, if you can't manage to earn enough money, if you don't have enough ambition, then you just don't deserve it, plain and simple.

Marxist theories are just some tricks to make the system somewhat more fair, and we already use those trick, so even if a stupid government decides that life is just like poker, because only the good players deserves to win, it won't totally be the end of the good sense.

What we can do that Marx thought about but we couldn't apply yet, is a slight better organisation of the city and the enterprise in its general term. We relied on money for a long time just because people weren't teached how to use basic, so currency was a straightforward trick to stabilize the chaos caused by ignorance.

With the appearance of new technologies, better education and other shiny stuff, we are now (normally) able to organize society really well, and I'm not talking about facebook or internet forums or whatsoever. Of course we are doing it wrong mainly because computer sciences are very young, but I'm sure one day we'll be able to organize ourselves better instead of obeying a minority. Communication technologies are all about that: independence and awareness, concepts that are nowadays blooming and evolving very rapidly (as you can see with wikileaks for example).

Marx walks with us almost every day, obviously academic theories take time to penetrate the reality, but I can assure you everybody knows that money and capitalism are dead ends, it's just a matter of time before everything settles up.

Mr_Cyberpunk wrote:

Someone wrote: I did switch classes. Low Labour Class in Germany with no education to affluent Canadian. I'm not talking a job, I'm talking free enterprise.

I think there's a huge difference between Communist Occupied Germany and Liberal Democratic Canada, its not a good example of Marxist progression, rather an example of why Democracy is superior to Communism.. but its not exactly perfect either.

Someone wrote: If you want to escape slavery you can, at least in America.

Slavery has just been replaced by Employment. The only difference is now you're paid to be a slave. You cannot honestly tell me what companies like Nike and The Gap in 3rd world countries is exactly ethical now can you? that is basically as close to slavery as you can get and its propogated by Americans.. whom are considered to be of the best kind of Americans, and those products are being sold to American citizens. The entire process makes me sick- and this is 100% America's fault because it invented this back in the late 1980s to early 1990s. Further more the new banking system that ultimately caused the GFC is another form of slavery, slavery to debt and slavery to the banks- another 1990s American idea. As I said, America sounded like a good idea, but corrupted itself- and its is more apparent than ever before that it is a corrupt nation- the GFC just blew that corruption wide open for everyone to see for themselves.

What I am a huge fan of is pre-Industrial capitalism, the idea that anyone can have a business, run a business and deal with locals. A good economy is where there are 1000s of craftsmen earning a modest living- not 1 craftsman earning the equivilent of 1000. I feel Monopolies cause more problems than they actually fix and we only have to look at Microsoft to see why Monopolies are a bad idea, they do not make people happy.

I'm sorry, but this is a blanket excuse. I have no agenda to defend my country in-fact I think nationalism is a disease. However, the problem you have is with the capitalist institution not with the United States.

I agree that the proletariat have become indentured by capitalism and by consumerism (another device of capitalism). For you to claim that the United States as a nation wants to go to impoverished areas and grossly underpay the laborers there is a profound assertion to make. It comes down to the stability of capitalism, the same pre-industrial capitalism that you are a supporter of, the same capitalism that many developed nations (including your own) cling to.

Now, in your defense I think I understand what point you were getting at. The truth of it is, regardless of what Karl Marx may say, capitalism is not all bad. Wherever capitalism has gone, the relative wealth of a nation has risen faster than with any other economic system. The first generation works hard and earns their money honestly and knows that the second and third generations will have it even better than the first generation. (I think this is what you and I are supporters of). On the surface it is easy for one to look at it and say, well American's are just greedy and over-payed, but we are the victims of capitalism just as much as those laborers in third-world countries. Capitalism is not an American creation, nor is it the creation of any other one nation. The reason the world believes this is because in the late 1940's to early 1970's the United States was the sole benefactor of capitalism. We had no global competition, because every other developed nation and it's infrastructure was left in absolute ruin after World War II. The wealth of our nation skyrocketed until about 1978 when all those nations had finally rebuilt enough to become competitive again.

The problem lies herein that after a (generally brief) period of time the relative wealth rises to the point that the cost of labor begins to become so detrimental that the capitalist can no longer remain competitive. Within capitalism the cost of competition is never felt by the capitalist, but by the labor force in one way or another. That is why you see companies like Nike and The Gap outsourcing their labor because they can't afford to pay Americans. Capitalism has conditioned the American people to live one lifestyle, but is now evacuating our country because we are too expensive to employ essentially leaving us with a bill we cannot pay. That's just the nature of it, capitalism is unable to reach stability in any country, it requires exponentially lower labor costs and higher profit margins the longer it stays in one place.

Marxism is the way to go!

I'm a libertarian - what do you think my oppinion is?
I believe in social and economic freedom and equal rights to everyone - and the minimization of the state. Marx believed in other things...

Edited by: Nightshade

Karl Marx, F. Engels, Nietzche(whatever), etc. are all idiots.

Edited by: Fahim96

Niteshade wrote: I'm a libertarian - what do you think my oppinion is?
I believe in social and economic freedom and equal rights to everyone - and the minimization of the state. Marx believed in other things...

I'm sorry, but Marxism have indeed that very same ideal. Marx is indeed very complex to try to discuss in a forum. Marx stood more in the capability of everybody rather than currency itself, yes it sounds weird, but too discuss this... is a pain, I mean, I'm frikin PhD, do you have idea how many times I read arguments about Marx? They last forever! The best thing is to read him, he proved to be certain of some things.

fdslk wrote:

Niteshade wrote: I'm a libertarian - what do you think my oppinion is?
I believe in social and economic freedom and equal rights to everyone - and the minimization of the state. Marx believed in other things...

I'm sorry, but Marxism have indeed that very same ideal. Marx is indeed very complex to try to discuss in a forum. Marx stood more in the capability of everybody rather than currency itself, yes it sounds weird, but too discuss this... is a pain, I mean, I'm frikin PhD, do you have idea how many times I read arguments about Marx? They last forever! The best thing is to read him, he proved to be certain of some things.

Mr.PhD: Yea I actually have read the communist manifesto.
It hails theft and conflict, the use of force and violence and it polarizes society into groups of people (called classes) that he and Engels think should go to war with each other. The only good thing about it is that he ultimatly wants all governments to cease to exist (or nationstates as he calls them).
Comming here and claiming that he was in ANY way a believer of freedom and held the same ideals as libertarians do is nothing but a joke. Freedom does not mean that you steal from others, force your system upon others or fight others till their death because they do not agree with you.

Edited by: Nightshade

Marx says that everyone is equal in all ways. Therefore, a PhD = Macdonald's employee according to his theory.

Fahim96 wrote: Marx says that everyone is equal in all ways. Therefore, a PhD = Macdonald's employee according to his theory.

Its not like that. for example: someone who has a PhD, is he a better person as a macodnalds employee? are the rich more worth then the poor as humans?
answer is no, people are people. you don't have people that are better then other, thats just the way it is (there are exceptions, but that is more towards the good/evil discussion)

Sigma wrote:

Fahim96 wrote: Marx says that everyone is equal in all ways. Therefore, a PhD = Macdonald's employee according to his theory.

Its not like that. for example: someone who has a PhD, is he a better person as a macodnalds employee? are the rich more worth then the poor as humans?
answer is no, people are people. you don't have people that are better then other, thats just the way it is (there are exceptions, but that is more towards the good/evil discussion)

Well, morally, the PhD or the employee can either be better than the other.
BUT, the Phd is better in this sense:
The PhD can work at the university and at Mcdonald's, while the employee can only work at Mcdonald's and not the university.

Marxist theory says that all people have the same intelligence, thinking capacity, morals, etc. which are not true

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Marxism is idealism at its worst.

Marxism and socialism are to politics what the Perpetuum Mobile is to physics. Something that would be cool to have but impossible to achieve due to fatal conceptual flaws that uninformed people don't take into account. And even though it's common knowledge that they don't work, that doesn't stop greedy individuals from tricking gullible people into giving all their wealth to them so that they can make the dream true.

Also, I totally agree with Fahim96 in that Marx was an idiot, but he proposed a system that allowed idiots to triumph and thrive over the fittest. Heck, if I were an idiot I would want to live in that system, too, because I wouldn't be able to understand why it's doomed to fail in disastrous and tragic ways.

if those of you saying that there are many flaws could actually come up with any genuine flaws to marxist theory, i would gladly respect your opinions (though still debate them). However, for the meantime, all you are saying is that there are many flaws, which is just lazy.