A Christian View of Marxism: Difference between revisions

From Karl Polanyi
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{English to type}}
{{English to type}}
# What Marx attempted to do. In how far is his ”whole view” all inclusive, how far fragmentary
# Marx's definition of society (cite references)
# Marx's definition of socialism
# Marx's interpretation of history: the assessment of the importance of the production factor in determining the structure of a society. (Because of the use of the word “materialistic” in translating a whole idea, those cannot face Marx objectively, have completely misrepresented his theorem by saying that philosophical materialism was the basis of Marxism)
# The historical <u>fact</u> of the partition of humans on a classe basis. Not so much a class-society as a class<u>ed</u> society. It could be nothing else under capitalism, so that the reconciliation of classes as a task illusory.
# The rise of capitalism:
## (a) the increase of goods in the world, due to rapid technological improvements, diverted people's minds from the distribution of them. Liberal idea that providence had ordained that lots of goods should be produced and not be limited. The more far-sighted joined in the production, which they found to be profitable if scarcity prevailed.
## (b) Labour became a commodity. In return for it employers gave just enough to induce people to work un order to buy the novelties of the new age; just as the far traders gave the indians worthless intriguing trinkets for valuable furs.
## (c) Capitalism cut loose from all responsible relations with the individuals in society, dropped all concern for living and welfare. The institutions of society underwent a high-pressure transformation, so that in one generation the forms of capitalism became the recognized forms of human society 
## (d) The fetishisation which made the attributed of this colossal racket respectable, and unassailable by professors or by statesmen, on pain of imprisonment for trying to overthrow the constitution (USA). The growth of the idea that capitalists functioned in a domain far more sacred than that in which humans lived. The church paid hush-money to perpetuate this sanctification of organized brigandry. The creation of the myth of “State” as a “neutral” tool of jungle-minded “leaders”. The market as the measure of <u>all</u> values, not just of commodities. The debasing of the social sciences, and the endowment of "safe” fields in the natural sciences.
# The firm establishment of the master-slave relationship in production once capital, as the parasitic pinchings from pay-checks, began to accumulate. In a society whose frontiers had ceased to expand, the challenge “Go west, but take up a gun to “protect your heritage” i.e. bondage. Children born without access to a machine job, treated as trained refuse.
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#


== Text Informations ==
== Text Informations ==
'''Reference''':<br />
'''Reference''':<br />
'''KPA''': 21/19, 6-10
'''KPA''': 21/19, 6-10

Revision as of 18:45, 12 July 2017


Text in English to type

  1. What Marx attempted to do. In how far is his ”whole view” all inclusive, how far fragmentary
  2. Marx's definition of society (cite references)
  3. Marx's definition of socialism
  4. Marx's interpretation of history: the assessment of the importance of the production factor in determining the structure of a society. (Because of the use of the word “materialistic” in translating a whole idea, those cannot face Marx objectively, have completely misrepresented his theorem by saying that philosophical materialism was the basis of Marxism)
  5. The historical fact of the partition of humans on a classe basis. Not so much a class-society as a classed society. It could be nothing else under capitalism, so that the reconciliation of classes as a task illusory.
  6. The rise of capitalism:
    1. (a) the increase of goods in the world, due to rapid technological improvements, diverted people's minds from the distribution of them. Liberal idea that providence had ordained that lots of goods should be produced and not be limited. The more far-sighted joined in the production, which they found to be profitable if scarcity prevailed.
    2. (b) Labour became a commodity. In return for it employers gave just enough to induce people to work un order to buy the novelties of the new age; just as the far traders gave the indians worthless intriguing trinkets for valuable furs.
    3. (c) Capitalism cut loose from all responsible relations with the individuals in society, dropped all concern for living and welfare. The institutions of society underwent a high-pressure transformation, so that in one generation the forms of capitalism became the recognized forms of human society
    4. (d) The fetishisation which made the attributed of this colossal racket respectable, and unassailable by professors or by statesmen, on pain of imprisonment for trying to overthrow the constitution (USA). The growth of the idea that capitalists functioned in a domain far more sacred than that in which humans lived. The church paid hush-money to perpetuate this sanctification of organized brigandry. The creation of the myth of “State” as a “neutral” tool of jungle-minded “leaders”. The market as the measure of all values, not just of commodities. The debasing of the social sciences, and the endowment of "safe” fields in the natural sciences.
  7. The firm establishment of the master-slave relationship in production once capital, as the parasitic pinchings from pay-checks, began to accumulate. In a society whose frontiers had ceased to expand, the challenge “Go west, but take up a gun to “protect your heritage” i.e. bondage. Children born without access to a machine job, treated as trained refuse.


Text Informations

Reference:
KPA: 21/19, 6-10