Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    26 Feb '10 01:25
    Was Marx - for want, perhaps, of a better word - evil? The question is prompted by a conversation with a visiting U.S. instructor at a local airforce academy. Several times I asked him to make it clear whether he meant Marxism or the deeds of self-professed Marxists and not Marx himself, but my flier friend was insistent: both, he said. Karl Marx was an "evil" man. Does anyone concurr?
  2. Donation rwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    26 Feb '10 01:34
    Originally posted by FMF
    Was Marx - for want, perhaps, of a better word - evil? The question is prompted by a conversation with a visiting U.S. instructor at a local airforce academy. Several times I asked him to make it clear whether he meant Marxism or the deeds of self-professed Marxists and not Marx himself, but my flier friend was insistent: both, he said. Karl Marx was an "evil" man. Does anyone concurr?
    Ridiculous. Ultimately Marxism set socialism back a hundred years, but it wasn't because Marx was 'evil.'
  3. 26 Feb '10 01:41
    A lot of people just call whatever they believe marxist, even if it's not what Karl Marx ever said.

    It could be that the man thought Marxists are evil, the deeds of people claiming to be marxists are evil, but Karl and his political theories were not.

    You didn't make it totally clear in your initial post: did the prof. say "Both," or did he say "Both. The man was evil"?
  4. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    26 Feb '10 01:47
    Originally posted by The Dude 84
    You didn't make it totally clear in your initial post
    Yes I did.
  5. 26 Feb '10 01:57
    Originally posted by FMF
    Was Marx - for want, perhaps, of a better word - evil? The question is prompted by a conversation with a visiting U.S. instructor at a local airforce academy. Several times I asked him to make it clear whether he meant Marxism or the deeds of self-professed Marxists and not Marx himself, but my flier friend was insistent: both, he said. Karl Marx was an "evil" man. Does anyone concurr?
    Yes, his shameless massacres of the working class were horrible.
  6. 26 Feb '10 02:45
    Originally posted by FMF
    Yes I did.
    By using a colon you made it sound like what came out of his mouth was only the word "both".

    funny grammar.
  7. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    26 Feb '10 02:51
    Originally posted by The Dude 84
    By using a colon you made it sound like what came out of his mouth was only the word "both".

    funny grammar.
    Your contribution is absolutely compelling.

    Was Karl Marx an evil man?
  8. 26 Feb '10 05:02
    Originally posted by FMF
    Your contribution is absolutely compelling.

    Was Karl Marx an evil man?
    Your defination of evil is?
  9. Standard member smw6869
    Granny
    26 Feb '10 05:05
    Originally posted by FMF
    Was Marx - for want, perhaps, of a better word - evil? The question is prompted by a conversation with a visiting U.S. instructor at a local airforce academy. Several times I asked him to make it clear whether he meant Marxism or the deeds of self-professed Marxists and not Marx himself, but my flier friend was insistent: both, he said. Karl Marx was an "evil" man. Does anyone concurr?
    Marx... an evil man !?! Outlandish ! Of all the Marxists, i would say Groucho was the funniest. However, Chico, Harpo, Gummo and Zeppo did provide many hilarious moments.

    GRANNY.
  10. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    26 Feb '10 05:06
    Originally posted by Hugh Glass
    Your defination of evil is?
    Define it as you wish. And then, if you wish, answer the question in the context of your own definition. I don't have one to offer you.
  11. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    26 Feb '10 07:17
    No, I see little reason to believe Marx was evil. He was a hero of the working class, though his politico-economic theories were flawed.
  12. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    26 Feb '10 08:03
    If you want to pronounce on Marx the man, a good biography (such as Francis Wheen's) would be a good place to start. Without an understanding of his life - who he was and what he did - how can you hope to answer the question?

    For what it's worth, his life certainly was not blameless, but the word 'evil' seems misapplied here.
  13. Standard member shavixmir
    Guppy poo
    26 Feb '10 10:45
    Originally posted by scherzo
    Yes, his shameless massacres of the working class were horrible.
    Marx never lifted a finger in his life.
    Hey, I'm not kidding. I mean this literally. He even had Engels doing all the work for him...
  14. Standard member adam warlock
    Baby Gauss
    26 Feb '10 12:15 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by FMF
    Was Marx - for want, perhaps, of a better word - evil? The question is prompted by a conversation with a visiting U.S. instructor at a local airforce academy. Several times I asked him to make it clear whether he meant Marxism or the deeds of self-professed Marxists and not Marx himself, but my flier friend was insistent: both, he said. Karl Marx was an "evil" man. Does anyone concurr?
    There is a documentary called the Soviet Story that is supposed to be about the evils of Marx and socialism. It makes a connection between Marx, Lenin and Hitler. I think that that documentary is pretty interesting since it shows a lot of things that so called marxists, marxists-leninists, and "communists" ignore.
    That being said it also has some mistakes and inaccuracies in it. In my view the main inaccuracy is relating Marx to Socialism. Socialism as a political/social philosophy existed way before Marx and was already spelled out before he came along. Another thing that I consider very important to notice is that Marx wasn't a socialist. The guy was a capital analyst (a pretty damn good one) but he wasn't a socialist. he never wrote much about Socialism (socialism being what was being said way before Marx) and the few times he wrote about it he completley trashed it.

    Then comes the question if Leninist like ideologies are socialist or not. And in my view they are not. These kind of ideologies rest on the notion of a vanguard party and the notion of a vanguard party is as non-socialist as they can be. Socialism is about workers control, free association, direct democracy; yadda, yadda, yadda. And Lenin and Trotsky despised all of that in what they wrote and in what they did.

    I'm not breaking any new ground in this by the way. As early as 1904 Rosa Luxembourg was already saying that the stuff Lenin and trotsky stood for weren't socialist at all. After 1917's October Revolution (the October's coup if one actually bothers to look to was done) Emma Goldman returned to Russia and was extremely disappointment with the lack of Socialism she found there.

    And last but not least during the Spanish Civil War Stalin supported Franco on his attack on the anarcho-syndicalists. If the USSR was a Socialist republic why would Stalin do such a thing?

    http://www.sovietstory.com/
    http://www.george-orwell.org/Homage_to_Catalonia/index.html
    http://diatribesemsoliloqio.blogspot.com/2009/12/pena-e-o-marx-ter-tido-muito-pouco-ver.html
    http://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1918/russian-revolution/ch06.htm
    http://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1918/russian-revolution/index.htm
  15. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    26 Feb '10 12:57
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    He even had Engels doing all the work for him...
    .......Sounds like the man was some kind of saint.

    Its interesting that we, now so post modern, cant find a working definition of 'evil'.

    It seems that the only worldview that could have denounced Marx in this way, is also the very same way of thinking that is largely dismissed as being redundant by the mainstream. The upside of this, from a Marxist point of view is that by and large the general populace does not have a rationale to stop any subtle encroachment of Marxist/Socialist thought on top of traditional consumerist modes. What this might lead to, is a fulfillment of Marx's prophetic vision that will see Capitalism slowly transformed until finally, it sinks without a trace.............