Donald Trump calls everybody he doesn't like corrupt, Marxist, or even communist. I bet, that he has no clue what "Marxist" means except that it is a popular swear word, Beware for Marxists!
This is understandable because we live in a capitalist society and that much we know of Marxists: they are against capitalism. The states based on Marxist theories had little respect for what the Western World regarded as decent government.
We all know more or less history but does this disqualify the basic ideas of Karl Marx. The historical problem with his ideas is, that they were turned into a dogmatic religion of the state in a number of countries. It doesn't differ much from how the Taliban wants to rule Afghanistan.
If we assume that physicalism offers a sound ontological interpretation of our reality, which is evident in many fields of science, we may ask the question: if we accept history to be a science, then shouldn't we interpret our history too from a materialist perspective?
And if the answer is affirmative, where do we have to look for information about such an approach. The answer is "in the works of Karl Marx and his ideas about historical materialism".
But let me first give you my personal view on the historical developments since the end of World War II. After the horror of this war, the Western world wanted to rebuild society which materialized into the Welfare State.
In my youth (1950 -1960s) I learned that Sweden was in Europe the example of how a better world could look like: well-developed child care, equality for men and women, good health, and elderly care and education.
Whether this was actually true or not isn't important here. Fact is that also in the Netherlands and other European countries we could see this development. Maybe it even was stimulated by the fear of communism.
By the 1980s this project had reached an advanced level, especially with regard to the increase of wealth. This development resulted in increased individualism and greed, which was translated into tax reductions.
The great leaders of this movement, neo-liberalism, were Margaret Thatcher, Prime minister of the UK, and Ronald Reagan, president of the USA. It is the early 1980s.
From then on we see a steady deconstruction of the Welfare State. Economists like Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek propagate that the single goal of a company is the maximization of profits.
Reaganomics are characterized as supply-side economics, trickle-down economics, and free-market economics. Supply-side economics is a macroeconomic theory
that postulates economic growth can be most effectively fostered by lowering taxes, decreasing regulation, and allowing free trade. Thatcher followed in his footsteps, as also did Dutch politics.
At his inauguration on January 20, 1981, Ronald Reagan spoke the immortal words: "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem."
His announcement stressed his fundamental principles of tax cuts to stimulate the economy and having both a small government and a strong national defense
What is our present situation in 2023? People begin to feel the pain of the deconstruction of the welfare state, the introduction of free market principles in areas where they don't belong. (See my projects 7 and 8 / 2012)
More and more we begin to realize that neo-liberalism is not the ultimate social blessing. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. The spasms of the Republican party in the US show a minority that realizes that it is losing its grip on power.
On the other hand, due to the unease and uncertainty about the preservation of our individual wealth, we see an increase of right-wing political movements.
Maybe a better understanding of historical materialism can help us to get a better understanding of our present situation and lead to new ideas for a better future.
I can't guarantee you, that this will be the case, but at least we have the intellectual obligation to have a real look at the unjustified discredited ideas of Karl Marx, the philosopher who taught us about historical materialism.
Thank you for your attention....
Main Sources:
MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition
TABLE OF CONTENT -----------------------------------------------------------------
1 - 100 Philosophers 9 May 2009 Start of
2 - 25+ Women Philosophers 10 May 2009 this blog
3 - 25 Adventures in Thinking 10 May 2009
4 - Modern Theories of Ethics 29 Oct 2009
5 - The Ideal State 24 Febr 2010 / 234
6 - The Mystery of the Brain 3 Sept 2010 / 266
7 - The Utopia of the Free Market 16 Febr 2012 / 383
8. - The Aftermath of Neo-liberalism 5 Sept 2012 / 413
9. - The Art Not to Be an Egoist 6 Nov 2012 / 426
10 - Non-Western Philosophy 29 May 2013 / 477
11 - Why Science is Right 2 Sept 2014 / 534
12 - A Philosopher looks at Atheism 1 Jan 2015 / 557
13 - EVIL, a philosophical investigation 17 Apr 2015 / 580
14 - Existentialism and Free Will 2 Sept 2015 / 586
15 - Spinoza 2 Sept 2016 / 615
16 - The Meaning of Life 13 Febr 2017 / 637
17 - In Search of my Self 6 Sept 2017 / 670
18 - The 20th Century Revisited 3 Apr 2018 / 706
19 - The Pessimist 11 Jan 2020 / 819
20 - The Optimist 9 Febr 2020 / 824
21 - Awakening from a Neoliberal Dream 8 Oct 2020 / 872
22 - A World Full of Patterns 1 Apr 2021 / 912
23 - The Concept of Freedom 8 Jan 2022 / 965
24 - Materialism 7 Sept 2022 / 1011
25 - Historical Materialism 5 Oct 2023 / 1088
The Discussion
[13:17] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman
[13:18] Max Chatnoir: I'm looking forward to this. I have to admit that I have never read Das Kapital.
[13:19] herman Bergson: I haven't either, but that is not a problem
[13:19] herman Bergson: He has written also less voluminous books :-)
[13:19] Max Chatnoir: Do these explain the same principles?
[13:20] herman Bergson: Yes
[13:20] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): is he the opposite of Ayen Rand?
[13:21] herman Bergson: Oh yes
[13:21] herman Bergson: She is the queen of selfish individualism
[[13:22] herman Bergson: Marx thinks more in classes, layers in society.... not individualistic
[13:22] herman Bergson: workers, middle class upperclass
[13:22] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): hmm
[13:23] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): sound as bad as the ideas of Rand
[13:23] herman Bergson: and of course the tensions between these classes
[13:23] herman Bergson: I wouldn't say so
[13:24] herman Bergson: It is quite normal to look at society as a collection of several groups if you approach it from a sociological point of view
[13:24] herman Bergson: Rand talks about individual psychology
[13:25] herman Bergson: A Union for instance doesn't primarily look at the well-being of an individual worker, but at the well being of a whole group of workers
[13:27] herman Bergson: Or for instance, the rich 1% in the US is responsible for 17% of the students
[13:27] Max Chatnoir: I was talking to a woman in my neighborhood many years ago and she was talking about her brother. I was asking about what he did, working-wise, and she said, "Well, he doesn't really know how to do anything." And I thought, what a failure of public education.
[13:27] herman Bergson: So the class of rich people benifit much more form the educational system than other classes
[13:28] herman Bergson: Will not happen to a kid from the rich class, Max
[13:30] Max Chatnoir: Yes, I appreciate the advantage that I had just growing up in a house with a lot of books in it.
[13:30] herman Bergson: The how to do anything still could get a jo at the Municipal cleaning for instance.....not too complex work
[13:32] herman Bergson: The "problem"with Marx is, how he sees social changes happen.....
[13:33] herman Bergson: People the always think of bloody revolutions as took place in Russia for instance, or in China
[13:33] bergfrau Apfelbaum: If everyone were well trained, there would probably be no city cleaning... or?
[13:34] herman Bergson: But my goal in this project is to see what ideas Marx has in relation to our present social situation
[13:34] herman Bergson: Yes Bergie....this constant urge to get more and more education sometimes is a problem
[13:34] herman Bergson: Especially the status aspect
[13:35] herman Bergson: People easily look down on young people that study for plummer of electrician or carpenter
[13:36] herman Bergson: And another thing is.....the higher your education the higher your pay often
[13:36] bergfrau Apfelbaum: and there are also enough educated people who fall. or become president and do shit.
[13:36] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): is an education for carpenter not high enough?
[13:37] herman Bergson: Yes Beertje, that is a question we have to ask
[13:37] herman Bergson: But our society is a meritocracy.....
[13:37] Max Chatnoir: But how do we measure merit?
[13:38] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): which means?
[13:39] bergfrau Apfelbaum: without a carpenter, the rich couldn't buy a dining table
[13:39] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): true Bergie
[13:40] herman Bergson: It means that the political system rewards people who have the most merit....abilities and talents
[13:40] herman Bergson: mainly by level of education, Max
[13:40] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): to be a craftsman you have to have a lot of talent
[13:40] Max Chatnoir: I was talking to a young man recently who just took some kind of exam for electricians and he had aced it. So I think there must be levels of skill no matter that you do for a living.
[13:41] herman Bergson: True, but that isn't how the system works
[13:41] bergfrau Apfelbaum: I don't think a carpenter makes as much money as a bank teller. but both are EQUALLY IMPORTANT
[13:41] Max Chatnoir: ...no matter what you do....
[13:42] Max Chatnoir: I would never argue with that.
[13:42] herman Bergson: Take the level of education....there already begins the social inequality
[13:43] bergfrau Apfelbaum: Some people like to do math. the other likes to do something useful
[13:43] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): lol Bergie
[13:43] herman Bergson: Children of rich parents, even when they aren't the smartest ons, still have a greater chance to get higher education than children of less fortunate families
[13:43] bergfrau Apfelbaum: grins
[13:44] herman Bergson: That is a nice oneliner Bergie :-)
[13:44] Max Chatnoir: Probably true!
[13:45] herman Bergson: During this project we may runinto a lot of such social issues of chances aand inequalities...
[13:45] Max Chatnoir: Not the math thing, the children of rich parents thing. '
[13:45] herman Bergson: I got that Max :-)
[13:45] Max Chatnoir: just checking....:-)
[13:46] herman Bergson: Very good :-)
[13:46] herman Bergson: Maybe Marx has some interesting ideas about such situations....we'll see
[13:47] herman Bergson: So..get ready for take off :-))
[13:47] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): often interesting ideas get twisted by persones for their own good
[13:48] Max Chatnoir: No doubt!
[13:48] herman Bergson: that is what happened
[13:48] herman Bergson: In communist countries
[13:48] Max Chatnoir: So Marxism got corrupted?
[13:48] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): yes
[13:49] herman Bergson: I think it was used for specific political reasons to bring a certain group into power
[13:49] Max Chatnoir: A lot of that going around...
[13:49] herman Bergson: And in that process it was converted into a kind of state religion
[13:50] herman Bergson: If you didn't believe or was critical....well Navalney still is experiencing the consequences
[13:50] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): yes, poor man
[13:51] Max Chatnoir: Yes.
[13:52] herman Bergson: Ok then....time to relax and enjoy the coming weekend :-))
[13:52] herman Bergson: Thank you all again....
[13:52] herman Bergson: Class dismissed.....
[13:52] Max Chatnoir: Thanks, Herman.
[13:52] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): Thank you Herman looking forward to the following lectures
[13:53] Max Chatnoir: Me, too!
[13:53] herman Bergson: Me too :-))))
[13:53] .: Beertje :. (beertje.beaumont): ツ
No comments:
Post a Comment