1. #609
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    My primary proposal for criticizing Marx is based on fallacious assumptions of his theory. Because he had an advanced degree in philosophy, one would assume he would have been careful regarding predicates for his theory. For some unknown reason, others have neglected to criticize Marx's assumptions for human societies, it is the key for unravelling Marxism. As I have noted in my assessment of Marx's writings, he proposed social stratification of human societies to be an error, or an evil in need of correction. However, if you study human societies, you find social stratification to be a natural and enduring characteristic. My proposition for this assertion is the unequal nature of humans. Where do you find human equality in the real world? Unfortunately for Marx's legacy, this basic principle of human nature "overturns" Marx's theory for communism. In short, Marxism becomes utopia!

    The best way one can critique Marx is to read his many writings where he makes continuous assertions of human exploitation by capitalists to make profits. Although Marx makes mention of capitalists seeking to achieve efficiencies in the allocation of capital and production of goods, he does not regard it as a primary of factor. Marx exaggerated the harm of social class differences in his critic of capitalism. If one analyzes all human societies since the beginning of civilization, one finds social stratification to be a natural condition.



    For any human activity, compare participants and you'll find different levels of competency, and subsequently, different performance outcomes. Even in ancient societies, when tending to farm land for growing food, people were allocated based on different abilities for plowing land, planting seeds, harvesting, and marketing food products. For efficient allocation of resources, large land plots became more efficient than small farms. With few exceptions, people in all human societies are differentiated according to areas of social activity. In work-related areas, we find work allocation based on individual competencies for efficient outcomes. In a competitive marketplace, it is essential for products to be of good quality and at reasonable prices, therefore allocating labor based on efficient use based on work experience, ability, and effort.


    Marx made good argument for worker exploitation, especially for young men. So, we have good evidence for capitalist abusing young people and making people work long hours at low, or exploitative, wages. However, this is not an issue of social differentiation so much as it is an issue of "social justice." Reducing or eliminating social classes does not eliminate the problem. Social differences based on different abilities or competences is a natural condition for all human societies. As history illustrates, those social injustices which Marx identified have undergone changes by way of new labor laws of more efficient allocation of labor through the introduction of advanced technology.


    The only means by which leaders of a society can achieve a one class social order (communism) is by instituting a strong central government where leaders control most of the capital and resources of society. As I have pointed out on this thread, we have numerous examples of socialism and communism in the world. In all cases, in one way or another, they have all failed! Marx, the radical philosopher, got it wrong. He made incorrect assumptions about human nature, and, therefore, social class conflict. As long as societies are stratified according areas of activity and competency outcomes, there will be social differences and ensuing conflict insofar as humans will strive to maximize their abilities. Competition, in one form or another, is an important means by which people differentiate themselves to fulfill self-esteem maintenance needs. Marx's proposal for a one class communist social order contradicts human nature and the historical record whereby social stratification based on individual differences is found in all human societies.

  2. #610
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Myprimary proposal for criticizing Marx is based on fallacious assumptions of histheory. Because he had an advanced degree in philosophy, one would assume hewould have been careful regarding predicates for his theory. For some unknownreason, others have neglected to criticize Marx's assumptions for humansocieties, it is the key for unravelling Marxism. As I have noted in myassessment of Marx's writings, he proposed social stratification of humansocieties to be an error, or an evil in need of correction. However, if youstudy human societies, you find social stratification to be a natural andenduring characteristic. My proposition for this assertion is the unequalnature of humans. Where do you find human equality in the real world?Unfortunately for Marx's legacy, this basic principle of human nature"overturns" Marx's theory for communism. In short, Marxism becomesutopia!
    Thebest way one can critique Marx is to read his many writings where he makescontinuous assertions of human exploitation by capitalists to make profits.Although Marx makes mention of capitalists seeking to achieve efficiencies inthe allocation of capital and production of goods, he does not regard it as aprimary of factor. Marx exaggerated the harm of social class differences in hiscritic of capitalism. If one analyzes all human societies since the beginningof civilization, one finds social stratification to be a natural condition.
    Forany human activity, compare participants and you'll find different levels ofcompetency, and subsequently, different performance outcomes. Even in ancientsocieties, when tending to farm land for growing food, people were allocatedbased on different abilities for plowing land, planting seeds, harvesting, andmarketing food products. For efficient allocation of resources, large landplots became more efficient than small farms. With few exceptions, people inall human societies are differentiated according to areas of social activity.In work-related areas, we find work allocation based on individual competenciesfor efficient outcomes. In a competitive marketplace, it is essential forproducts to be of good quality and at reasonable prices, therefore allocatinglabor based on efficient use based on work experience, ability, and effort.
    Marxmade good argument for worker exploitation, especially for young men. So, wehave good evidence for capitalist abusing young people and making people worklong hours at low, or exploitative, wages. However, this is not an issue ofsocial differentiation so much as it is an issue of "social justice."Reducing or eliminating social classes does not eliminate the problem. Socialdifferences based on different abilities or competences is a natural conditionfor all human societies. As history illustrates, those social injustices whichMarx identified have undergone changes by way of new labor laws of moreefficient allocation of labor through the introduction of advanced technology.
    Theonly means by which leaders of a society can achieve a one class social order(communism) is by instituting a strong central government where leaders controlmost of the capital and resources of society. As I have pointed out on thisthread, we have numerous examples of socialism and communism in the world. Inall cases, in one way or another, they have all failed! Marx, the radicalphilosopher, got it wrong. He made incorrect assumptions about human nature,and, therefore, social class conflict. As long as societies are stratifiedaccording areas of activity and competency outcomes, there will be socialdifferences and ensuing conflict insofar as humans will strive to maximizetheir abilities. Competition, in one form or another, is an important means bywhich people differentiate themselves to fulfill self-esteem maintenance needs.Marx's proposal for a one class communist social order contradicts human natureand the historical record whereby social stratification based on individualdifferences is found in all human societies.












  3. #611
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Myprimary proposal for criticizing Marx is based on fallacious assumptions of histheory. Because he had an advanced degree in philosophy, one would assume hewould have been careful regarding predicates for his theory. For some unknownreason, others have neglected to criticize Marx's assumptions for humansocieties, it is the key for unravelling Marxism. As I have noted in myassessment of Marx's writings, he proposed social stratification of humansocieties to be an error, or an evil in need of correction. However, if youstudy human societies, you find social stratification to be a natural andenduring characteristic. My proposition for this assertion is the unequalnature of humans. Where do you find human equality in the real world?Unfortunately for Marx's legacy, this basic principle of human nature"overturns" Marx's theory for communism. In short, Marxism becomesutopia!
    Thebest way one can critique Marx is to read his many writings where he makescontinuous assertions of human exploitation by capitalists to make profits.Although Marx makes mention of capitalists seeking to achieve efficiencies inthe allocation of capital and production of goods, he does not regard it as aprimary of factor. Marx exaggerated the harm of social class differences in hiscritic of capitalism. If one analyzes all human societies since the beginningof civilization, one finds social stratification to be a natural condition.
    Forany human activity, compare participants and you'll find different levels ofcompetency, and subsequently, different performance outcomes. Even in ancientsocieties, when tending to farm land for growing food, people were allocatedbased on different abilities for plowing land, planting seeds, harvesting, andmarketing food products. For efficient allocation of resources, large landplots became more efficient than small farms. With few exceptions, people inall human societies are differentiated according to areas of social activity.In work-related areas, we find work allocation based on individual competenciesfor efficient outcomes. In a competitive marketplace, it is essential forproducts to be of good quality and at reasonable prices, therefore allocatinglabor based on efficient use based on work experience, ability, and effort.
    Marxmade good argument for worker exploitation, especially for young men. So, wehave good evidence for capitalist abusing young people and making people worklong hours at low, or exploitative, wages. However, this is not an issue ofsocial differentiation so much as it is an issue of "social justice."Reducing or eliminating social classes does not eliminate the problem. Socialdifferences based on different abilities or competences is a natural conditionfor all human societies. As history illustrates, those social injustices whichMarx identified have undergone changes by way of new labor laws of moreefficient allocation of labor through the introduction of advanced technology.
    Theonly means by which leaders of a society can achieve a one class social order(communism) is by instituting a strong central government where leaders controlmost of the capital and resources of society. As I have pointed out on thisthread, we have numerous examples of socialism and communism in the world. Inall cases, in one way or another, they have all failed! Marx, the radicalphilosopher, got it wrong. He made incorrect assumptions about human nature,and, therefore, social class conflict. As long as societies are stratifiedaccording areas of activity and competency outcomes, there will be socialdifferences and ensuing conflict insofar as humans will strive to maximizetheir abilities. Competition, in one form or another, is an important means bywhich people differentiate themselves to fulfill self-esteem maintenance needs.Marx's proposal for a one class communist social order contradicts human natureand the historical record whereby social stratification based on individualdifferences is found in all human societies.









  4. #612
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    My primary proposal for criticizing Marx is based on fallacious assumptions of his theory. Because he had an advanced degree in philosophy, one would assume he would have been careful regarding predicates for his theory. For some unknown reason, others have neglected to criticize Marx's assumptions for human societies, it is the key for unravelling Marxism. As I have noted in my assessment of Marx's writings, he proposed social stratification of human societies to be an error, or an evil in need of correction. However, if you study human societies, you find social stratification to be a natural and enduring characteristic. My proposition for this assertion is the unequal nature of humans. Where do you find human equality in the real world? Unfortunately for Marx's legacy, this basic principle of human nature "overturns" Marx's theory for communism. In short, Marxism becomes utopia!

    The best way one can critique Marx is to read his many writings where he makes continuous assertions of human exploitation by capitalists to make profits. Although Marx makes mention of capitalists seeking to achieve efficiencies in the allocation of capital and production of goods, he does not regard it as a primary of factor. Marx exaggerated the harm of social class differences in his critic of capitalism. If one analyzes all human societies since the beginning of civilization, one finds social stratification to be a natural condition.



    For any human activity, compare participants and you'll find different levels of competency, and subsequently, different performance outcomes. Even in ancient societies, when tending to farm land for growing food, people were allocated based on different abilities for plowing land, planting seeds, harvesting, and marketing food products. For efficient allocation of resources, large land plots became more efficient than small farms. With few exceptions, people in all human societies are differentiated according to areas of social activity. In work-related areas, we find work allocation based on individual competencies for efficient outcomes. In a competitive marketplace, it is essential for products to be of good quality and at reasonable prices, therefore allocating labor based on efficient use based on work experience, ability, and effort.


    Marx made good argument for worker exploitation, especially for young men. So, we have good evidence for capitalist abusing young people and making people work long hours at low, or exploitative, wages. However, this is not an issue of social differentiation so much as it is an issue of "social justice." Reducing or eliminating social classes does not eliminate the problem. Social differences based on different abilities or competences is a natural condition for all human societies. As history illustrates, those social injustices which Marx identified have undergone changes by way of new labor laws of more efficient allocation of labor through the introduction of advanced technology.


    The only means by which leaders of a society can achieve a one class social order (communism) is by instituting a strong central government where leaders control most of the capital and resources of society. As I have pointed out on this thread, we have numerous examples of socialism and communism in the world. In all cases, in one way or another, they have all failed! Marx, the radical philosopher, got it wrong. He made incorrect assumptions about human nature, and, therefore, social class conflict. As long as societies are stratified according areas of activity and competency outcomes, there will be social differences and ensuing conflict insofar as humans will strive to maximize their abilities. Competition, in one form or another, is an important means by which people differentiate themselves to fulfill self-esteem maintenance needs. Marx's proposal for a one class communist social order contradicts human nature and the historical record whereby social stratification based on individual differences is found in all human societies.

  5. #613
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    My primary proposal for criticizing Marx is based on fallacious assumptions of his theory. Because he had an advanced degree in philosophy, one would assume he would have been careful regarding predicates for his theory. For some unknown reason, others have neglected to criticize Marx's assumptions for human societies, it is the key for unravelling Marxism. As I have noted in my assessment of Marx's writings, he proposed social stratification of human societies to be an error, or an evil in need of correction. However, if you study human societies, you find social stratification to be a natural and enduring characteristic. My proposition for this assertion is the unequal nature of humans. Where do you find human equality in the real world? Unfortunately for Marx's legacy, this basic principle of human nature "overturns" Marx's theory for communism. In short, Marxism becomes utopia!

    The best way one can critique Marx is to read his many writings where he makes continuous assertions of human exploitation by capitalists to make profits. Although Marx makes mention of capitalists seeking to achieve efficiencies in the allocation of capital and production of goods, he does not regard it as a primary of factor. Marx exaggerated the harm of social class differences in his critic of capitalism. If one analyzes all human societies since the beginning of civilization, one finds social stratification to be a natural condition.



    For any human activity, compare participants and you'll find different levels of competency, and subsequently, different performance outcomes. Even in ancient societies, when tending to farm land for growing food, people were allocated based on different abilities for plowing land, planting seeds, harvesting, and marketing food products. For efficient allocation of resources, large land plots became more efficient than small farms. With few exceptions, people in all human societies are differentiated according to areas of social activity. In work-related areas, we find work allocation based on individual competencies for efficient outcomes. In a competitive marketplace, it is essential for products to be of good quality and at reasonable prices, therefore allocating labor based on efficient use based on work experience, ability, and effort.


    Marx made good argument for worker exploitation, especially for young men. So, we have good evidence for capitalist abusing young people and making people work long hours at low, or exploitative, wages. However, this is not an issue of social differentiation so much as it is an issue of "social justice." Reducing or eliminating social classes does not eliminate the problem. Social differences based on different abilities or competences is a natural condition for all human societies. As history illustrates, those social injustices which Marx identified have undergone changes by way of new labor laws of more efficient allocation of labor through the introduction of advanced technology.


    The only means by which leaders of a society can achieve a one class social order (communism) is by instituting a strong central government where leaders control most of the capital and resources of society. As I have pointed out on this thread, we have numerous examples of socialism and communism in the world. In all cases, in one way or another, they have all failed! Marx, the radical philosopher, got it wrong. He made incorrect assumptions about human nature, and, therefore, social class conflict. As long as societies are stratified according areas of activity and competency outcomes, there will be social differences and ensuing conflict insofar as humans will strive to maximize their abilities. Competition, in one form or another, is an important means by which people differentiate themselves to fulfill self-esteem maintenance needs. Marx's proposal for a one class communist social order contradicts human nature and the historical record whereby social stratification based on individual differences is found in all human societies.

  6. #614
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    In China, there appears that the big disconnect between the COMMUNIST government and the CAPITALIST economy has come to an impasse. It appears as if the Trump trade deal might go through, but "communist politics" may derail it. It could be a fatal blow to Chinese communist government leaders, Marxism was never good for economic development.

  7. #615
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Marx’s most egregious error was assuming a one class Communistsociety as the final resolution of social class conflict. It would happen as aresult of capitalist exploitation of the “proletariat,” or working classes. Inthe real world, we don’t find people amenable to the elimination of socialdifferences. It is human nature to seek social recognition for competentoutcomes. As an example, new employees seek jobs where they can excel orsucceed. An efficient factory or workplace is one in which workers have foundjobs to accomplish work tasks necessary to produce a product or service, notnecessarily to just work or consume time on the clock. Therefore, socialstratification based on job duties is essential for efficient productivity.There cannot be a classless society when most people seek recognition forindividual areas of competence, not for the commandments of their superiors inthe workplace, or expectations or dictates of government leaders or persons inauthority in their communities. It is true that workers seek approval andrecognition from superiors, but the end goal for both workers and supervisorsis to produce products or services, not to persevere in the pursuit ofsameness.

    In short, Marx assumed exploitation of workers when, in fact, workers use theirabilities to accomplish work related tasks for wages or income. In the contextof worker’s situation in the workplace, and in the community, Marx assumed workersor the “proletariat” where being exploited, when, in fact, in most cases, theywere about doing their business to fulfill needs to be useful and productiveworkers. In other words, Marx made unproven assumptions about workers or theproletariat class. Marx had not proven his case of capitalist exploitation ofworkers. Moreover, Marx's assumption or workers being alienated because theywere not fulfilling themselves in their work has not been proven.

    Even though we have unproven assumptions, Marx's solution for workerexploitation was emancipation leading to “Communism,” which would give peoplethe freedom that bourgeois society denies them. Communism is, he explains,"the positive transcendence of private property, or humanself-estrangement, and therefore the real appropriation of the human essence byand for man... the complete return of man to himself as a social being..."(Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844) Marx was a very busyprotagonist, he wrote volumes proposing a utopian ideology which continues toinspire and mislead liberals in their views of society.

  8. #616
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    College professors are partly responsible for the insanity of the left wing of the Democratic party. They are not as brilliant, or even as smart, as people believe. Most of these Marxian professors are found in social science disciplines where they perpetuate Marxian propaganda. They tell students Marxism is the solution to almost all of society's problems. They are intelligent, and yet very stupid. They don't realize Marx's basic errors. Mostly, Marx assumed social differences, or social stratification to be an evil which should be reduced, or eliminated, and, yet, it has been found in all human societies since the beginning of civilization! If you follow Marx's logic, people should be eliminated in order to eliminate social differences. ha. ha.

    Yes, capitalism has problems, but, considering it's long period of achievements for a booming US economy, it is not to be dismissed. How about human longevity? In the US, under capitalism, the population has broken records for health care improvements and increasing lifespans. If capitalism is so bad, why do so many people crowd US borders to get in? Demand for capitalist goods and services has not abated, it has continued to increase with product innovation and advanced technology. In addition, capitalists have found solutions to problems plaguing industrial societies, resulting in a better standard of living with increasing health care benefits for the entire population.

    The problem of Marxist penetration of higher education can be documented. As an example, in the discipline of sociology, the primary theoretical orientation is "conflict theory." If you check references for conflict theory you find they are based on Marx. It is a pathetical state of affairs for higher education. It means college graduates enter society with a hostile attitude about "business activities." Sociologists make good socialists, or excellent administrators for communist governments. It is a sad state of affairs for higher education. If one doubts what I have stated about the Marxian influences on higher education, just look at college textbooks and see the large number of references to Karl Marx. Then, read statements by authors about problems of capitalism, and the virtues, or advantages, of Communism.

    As I have repeated stated, Marxism fails because it violates human nature. Where in the "real world" do we find people equal to one another? Competitive races reveal the true nature of humans, they maximize competences, the consequence of which is a stratified society. I am continually amazed at the vulnerability of academics for taking the bait, hook line and sinker, for a "false ideology." It is as if they have never gotten over childhood fairytale stories where everyone merrily dances around enjoying fanciful tales of happiness. Most disturbing for Marxian dreamers is the harshness of "reality winds," it can cause depression and, even hostility, when life fails to deliver on childhood dreams.
    Last edited by Cnance; 03-19-2019 at 09:07 PM.

  9. #617
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Research democracy in China, the largest nation in the world, and you'll find communism, an authoritative system of government, has "eliminated" democracy.

    Modern Chinese leaders state that they run a"socialist democracy" where the Communist Party of China is a central authority that acts in the interest of the people.[1] The Communist Party approves what political parties can run. The Democracy Index scores China a 3.1 out of 10, classifying its government as authoritarian.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_in_China
    Last edited by Cnance; 03-20-2019 at 04:45 PM.

  10. #618
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    The People's Republic of China was initially based on Mao's concept of "New Democracy", not the immediate "dictatorship of the proletariat".Soon, however, Mao called for establishing the people's democratic dictatorship.Starting in the 1980s, in the period of Openingand Reform, the government organized village elections in which several candidates would run. However, each candidate was chosen or approved by the Party. Higher levels of government are indirectly elected, with candidates vetted by the government. As a result, the highest levels of government contain either Communist Party members, their UnitedFront allies, or sympathetic independents. Opposition parties are outlawed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_in_China

  11. #619
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,203

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    you just KEEP repeating yourself in order to put the thread at the TOP!!
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  12. #620
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    you just KEEP repeating yourself in order to put the thread at the TOP!!
    How do you know, you have never read anything, including books, articles, or newspapers about Marx or communism. I ignore stupid comments. Even though you know little about communism, I'll bet you're a commie. Most communist are stupid. ha ha.

    If you knew anything about the subject, you would know it is a very complex subject with many decades of history, and many, many books written about it. So, there is no end to what can be posted about communism. I will continue to post on the topic until the subject becomes irrelevant. When will communist China cease to exist? You see how stupid your reply is?

    Oh, I post what I please. I know it offends you, but everything does, so what! Go back to your Trump hate rant. ha ha. :


    Oh, when will you stop your Trump rants?

    Let's make a deal. You stop posting about Trump and I'll stop posting about communism. ha ha
    Last edited by Cnance; 03-20-2019 at 07:43 PM.

  13. #621
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,203

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    tRUMP is an ONGOING REALTIME threat to DEMOCRACY!! AT HOME!! so i find that more important than your BIASED REPETITIVE RANTS!!
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  14. #622
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    tRUMP is an ONGOING REALTIME threat to DEMOCRACY!! AT HOME!! so i find that more important than your BIASED REPETITIVE RANTS!!
    You got it wrong! Mine are intelligent analysis of communism. Yours is a continual hate rant about Trump. You don't even understand my arguments about communism. I will continue to post what I please! I suspect you don't like my comments about communism because you are a communist. Right? It is a free world, post positive comments about communism. If you love it so much, you must have something nice to say. ha ha.
    Last edited by Cnance; 03-20-2019 at 11:36 PM.

  15. #623
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Here is more of what I will continue to post on this thread.

    Bernstein and other Marxist revisionists addressed a number of issues that focused on the deficiencies of Marx’s economic predictions. One of the first issues addressed was the Marxian prediction that industrial capitalism would lead to concentration and centralization. But Bernstein pointed out that ownership of businesses had become more diffuse, instead of being concentrated in few hands.[14]
    Inhis attempt to prove that industrial concentration was not increasing,Bernstein wrote:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_Marxism


    The issue of concentration of economic power is important, it was one of Marx's major ideas in his Das Capital writings. Of course, lexx has read what Marx wrote, so we expect a reply from lexx. ha. ha.

    Oh, contrary to what lexx expects, this thread will not be abandoned. There is tons of material about Marx and communism. Mostly, I think everyone, except stupid lexx, has got it. MARX GOT IT WRONG. I WILL CONTINUE TO DOCUMENT MY ARGUMENT!
    Last edited by Cnance; 03-20-2019 at 11:33 PM.

  16. #624
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,865

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Marx really got it wrong when he discussed competition in a negative context. How does one realize self worth without competing in role-related activities? It is one of the most important attributes of capitalism, and therefore essential for a prosperous and healthy society. As a critique, it is difficult to envision human nature without competition, it is a key component. By competing, individuals realize their full potential and subsequently experience high self esteem.

    Marx describes competition as an "external coercive law", which imposes capitalistic logic over the individual and the overall society, it regulates the reproduction of class relations and produces a number of economic tendencies. Marx shows that, historically, it develops with capitalism and argues that even the appearance of a competitive is the beginning of the process of "tearing humans from nature."

    https://academic.oup.com/cje/article-abstract/41/6/1559/3057430

    In short, Marx was critical of the idea of competition because it is part of a bourgeois society where capitalist exploit labor for profit. It begins his overall view of capitalism as being repressive, therefore preventing the individual from becoming “authentic.” Marx's view of "authenticity" is to conceive of humans in nature without material constraints or the absence of civilization where they are coerced or exploited.


    Marx claimed to be a realist by proposing his theory of communism, but, in reality, he was an "utopian philosopher."
    Last edited by Cnance; 03-21-2019 at 06:27 AM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •