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?
Originally posted by FMFRidiculous. Ultimately Marxism set socialism back a hundred years, but it wasn't because Marx was 'evil.'
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?
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"?
Originally posted by FMFYes, his shameless massacres of the working class were horrible.
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?
Originally posted by FMFMarx... 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.
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?
GRANNY.
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.
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFThere 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.
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?
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
Originally posted by shavixmir.......Sounds like the man was some kind of saint.
He even had Engels doing all the work for him...
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.............